View Single Post
Old 06-03-2004, 07:01 AM   #65 (permalink)
Kostya
Little known...
 
Kostya's Avatar
 
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Quote:
Originally posted by denim

You want a definitive answer to that?? I could answer this in several ways, but you and other will be able to pick them apart, no problem. It can easily turn into another semantic exercise.

Honor is what you know about yourself. Reputation is what others know about you. Lois Bujold, Memory

That's as good a place to start as any. Arab culture confuses the two concepts of "honor" and "reputation", among other things. It's been a while since I read The Closed Circle, and I've not finished it yet.
Well my response to this would be to say that if this is true, then Arabs would simply reply that Lois Bujold makes a distinction where there is none. Their concept of 'honour' is different from Lois's. Yes, that's right I turned it into a semantics thing kind of. Nevertheless, my point is, honour is entirely subjective. What one person calls honour, another would call stupidity. Which is basically what you kind of did before, though to a lesser degree.


Quote:
Whoa, you're assuming too much. I speak of memes as concepts. You'll note that my comment to what you labeled as "evolutionary theory" of history was just to agree that Moslems didn't seem to have kept up. That is, they hadn't maintained their advantage. They were advanced in medicine, sanitation (IIRC), navigation, and other issues, but they lost the advantage this gave them when they were overrun by the (Christian) barbarians.

Exactly why the "Christians" did this is unclear to me, but I suspect it is related to the thesis I wanted to use as an example. [/B]
You misunderstand me, I wasn't labelling what you were saying as 'evolutionary history'. It's just that the concept of memes is one which is central to the evolutionary theory of history. My objection is against the use of words like 'backward', 'advanced' and phrases like 'keeping up' etc. These refer firstly to some kind of teleological history, and secondly apply value terms to historical developments where there ought not be any. This is not to say we shouldn't make value judgements about history, but they need to be within the context of non-teleological historical theory, moreover, I am not saying that judgements can't be made which make comparitive reference to our own time, only that these are not accurate for assessing the historical reality.
Kostya is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360