Random Rants: --... ---.. Don't expect others to convert it for you.

Status
Not open for further replies.
There was a post that made the rounds on Tumblr yesterday about how Trump wants to monitor disabled people so they could eliminate benefits for "fakers", and I saw a lot of people really lamenting this possible dystopian reality.

Didn't really have the motivation to tell them that governments already do this and it's not unique to Trump.

Yeah, that's the liberals always wanting to means-test everyone. I think Trump's proposal goes a bit further than most because he's talking about monitoring people's mental health via their social media feeds which is both particularly stupid and particularly potentially-dystopian.
 
Sorry, I just came back from /wallbanging my head. It kind of hurts, but less than the what I read here.

You'd think that a Civilization forum would attract the kind of people who have the ability to understand the importance of culture and history. Guess not.
You'd think that left-winger, used to fight for culture, education and "non-bankable" skills against the "if it's not useful for a company, it's worthless" arguments for the right, would be even more so susceptible to understand these points. Guess not, again.
You'd think that people so obsessed by identity politics would be somewhat consistent between how they put it and its symbols above about anything else, and yet suddenly seem to be blind to, well, built symbols with a thousandfold more importance. Seems, yet again, not.

As such we're down the pit of obscurantism and shortsightedness where the collective memory, with how it allows us to actually build societies, get the lessons we can from the past, kindle a sense of continuity and get an idea of what is the very concept of "large picture", is just considered secondary. Painful to watch.
As far as I can see the main problem with that view is that it's a false choice in the sense that we have the resources to do both, but also in the sense that we preserve these buildings for the sake of people: the people who live near them, the people who travel to see them, etc.
No, we preserve these buildings for mankind as a whole, not just for the few that are living around them.
I mean, you're not actually saying that if you had only the resources to build houses for 200 people or the resources to fix Notre Dame, you'd pick fixing Notre Dame...are you?
It's astounding is that you even think this would be a dilemma.
No, actually, more astounding is that you even consider the opposite to be not only a possibility, but even the better idea.

Simply said, you'd consider building housing for 200 000 people over the world to be "obviously" worth more than... THE EFFING ENTIRE HUMANITY HERITAGE (which is about 1000 sites over the world). That's just completely mental. Yeah, a small city is worth more than the entirety of mankind's history. No problem. Woopsie doopsie.
I mean take "cultural patrimony is intrinsically worthy" to its logical conclusion and you have a society where people spend most of their time building and maintaining giant tombs for rich dead guys.

Relevant quotes here:
I certainly appreciate the irony of you having to dig up the wisdom of dead men to be able to make a case that we shouldn't worry about keeping the heritage of dead men.
I also certainly notice how you seemingly, over the years, made such an habit of proving yourself wrong when arguing with me. Let's hope that you'll get better at finally understanding after a time that you're wrong and should change, because it took several years last time before you finally realize it.
One would hope Akka wouldn't be so morally degraded as to actually believe that old stones have a higher ethical weight than human beings.
I think you're confusign your intellectual degradation and child-like reasoning with my supposed moral degradation. If we followed such shallow lack of intelligence, we would just sell all art as materials to buy commodities (actually we wouldn't have art at all). Yeah, I'm sure society would be better off :rolleyes:
Put differently, it is amazing that you can fix a problem within 48 hours if you sprinkle a little symbolism on it.
Welcome to humanity. Took you seemingly a bit over 40000 years to notice that humans work that way, but better late than never I guess. Though you're right, symbolism sucks, we should do away with arts and metaphysics, that's obviously useless. You'll find plenty of people who agree, usually among the ones you typically despise. Go figure.
We're so quick to solve a problem that amounts to a building and some artifacts, but problems involving hundreds to thousands of people are just kinda ehhh and hand-waved away. It'd be great if the same urgency was applied to the people alive today, long before that urgency is applied to the people dead years ago.
What you short-sighted bunch seem to be completely blind about, is that it's not about "people dead years", but an heritage that IS benefitting people alive right now, and WILL benefit people in the future.
Not that I disagree that we certainly should do much more to fix a lot of dumb stuff happening right now, but pretending collective history and memory is just "a bunch of dead men" is worthy of epithets that would earn me a ban.
I never know you are such a generous person Akka, even though I want nothing from your "generosity" :lol:
Trust me, when I see some answers in this thread, I'm feeling very, very, very STRONGLY GENEROUS right now.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, that's the liberals always wanting to means-test everyone. I think Trump's proposal goes a bit further than most because he's talking about monitoring people's mental health via their social media feeds which is both particularly stupid and particularly potentially-dystopian.
Worker's comp already does that.

I mean, it's true that Trump's idea is worse. Because of course it is. But it's so similar to what already happens that I'm not sure many people affected by it are super shocked about it.

Then again I suppose I can talk big since it isn't happening here. BC's government is improving despite Alberta and Ontario's best efforts.
 
Worker's comp already does that.

Wait, seriously? Can you give an example or link something that talks about this?

I mean, it's true that Trump's idea is worse. Because of course it is. But it's so similar to what already happens that I'm not sure many people affected by it are super shocked about it.

I've been hearing similar stuff out of Australia and Britain for a while. Just today an Australian friend of mine posted about an instance where the Australian government agreed to fund someone's wheelchair...but not the wheels. So I know it isn't too different from what already goes on.
 
Wait, seriously? Can you give an example or link something that talks about this?

A link, probably not. Maybe? I honestly haven't looked. I just have personal experience to draw upon. My dad got a work injury in Ontario that ruined his back, and worker's comp kept employing people to try and take pictures of him doing something that his injury report said he couldn't do. They'd show him bending over to pick something up and then lower his benefits, or send him off to work re-training somewhere. They would have probably loved the opportunity to just scrape his social media instead. :lol:

Our estate won the lawsuit against them after my dad died. Took, I think, around 8 years from start to finish.
 
No, we preserve these buildings for mankind as a whole, not just for the few that are living around them.

Interesting. I'd guess that many people around the world have never even heard of Notre Dame. Billions don't have the money to come see it and never will. In what sense is Notre Dame being preserved for these people?

(at any rate, you clearly agree with my point there because my point was we preserve those buildings for the sake of humans, not for the buildings' own sake)

It's astounding is that you even think this would be a dilemma.
No, actually, more astounding is that you even consider the opposite to be not only a possibility, but even the better idea.

Simply said, you'd consider building housing for 200 000 people over the world to be "obviously" worth more than... THE EFFING ENTIRE HUMANITY HERITAGE (which is about 1000 sites over the world). That's just completely mental. Yeah, a small city is worth more than the entirety of mankind's history. No problem. Woopsie doopsie.

I don't even know where to start with this. First of all the question was about building houses for 200 people, the implication being that these people are homeless. The other option was not THE EFFING ENTIRE HUMANITY HERITAGE but repairing Notre Dame.

Let's take it a little further and emphasize that this is a thought experiment because I don't believe it is in fact a choice between the two, though it's easy to imagine circumstances in which it might be a real choice.
Let's say that a terrible fire burns down half of Paris, leaving much of the city's population homeless and in tent camps on the outskirts of the ruined city. In your view the priority would be repairing Notre Dame rather than rebuilding housing for these people? In time of course we'll repair Notre Dame and everything else, but my question is what your priority would be with the limited resources available right now. And my answer is we use the resources we have right now to help PEOPLE, because buildings aren't as important as people.

Here's another interesting question: if you were a firefighter at Notre Dame, would you be willing to sacrifice your life to save it from burning down completely?

I certainly appreciate the irony of you having to dig up the wisdom of dead men to be able to make a case that we shouldn't worry about keeping the heritage of dead men.

My case isn't that we shouldn't worry about it. Not even that we shouldn't preserve it. You're not understanding the argument at all, evidently.

Let's hope that you'll get better at finally understanding after a time that you're wrong and should change, because it took several years last time before you finally realize it.

Just quoting this because of how mean-spirited it is. And to highlight the irony of you saying this in what has to be one of the most arrogant posts ever made on CFC:OT, by a poster whom I've literally never seen admit he is wrong on any point, ever.

The concerns I've raised are hardly abstract when apparently over 600 million Euros were pledged from just three people in the space of a few hours to fund the reconstruction of Notre Dame. That is a reflection of a global society with staggering levels of inequality and a staggering ethical blindness. We make sure old buildings look good, but if you're homeless on the streets of Paris you're on your own.

A link, probably not. Maybe? I honestly haven't looked. I just have personal experience to draw upon. My dad got a work injury in Ontario that ruined his back, and worker's comp kept employing people to try and take pictures of him doing something that his injury report said he couldn't do. They'd show him bending over to pick something up and then lower his benefits, or send him off to work re-training somewhere. They would have probably loved the opportunity to just scrape his social media instead. :lol:

Our estate won the lawsuit against them after my dad died. Took, I think, around 8 years from start to finish.

Ah, okay. Do you know if worker's comp in Canada is publicly administered? Here in the US worker's comp insurers are private in many states leading to the same sorts of shenanigans. The fact that private insurance is incentivized to deny that people are having health problems that lead them to make insurance claims has been much-discussed.
 
I think it is nice to imagine there is "world heritage", but imo this is false. People care about certain monuments, and usually either because those are local (or close enough) or are culturally important to them.
Case in point, it is logical that parisians would identify the part collapse of this gothic cathedral as very crucial, but i really doubt it means much for (eg) eastern europeans. For myself it is a famous gothic cathedral, but no, i didn't feel any sense of loss cause part of it collapsed; it will be rebuilt anyway, like old cathedrals are rebuilt at times.
Actually i personally am not very tied to specific buildings. I like the large cathedrals here, but doubt i would care that much if they got destroyed. Maybe it has to do with older buildings - not cathedrals but temples or other ancient greek stuff - mostly being in ruins anyway, and some utterly gone (Colossus of Rhodes, Lighthouse and Library of Alexandria etc) so for me a monument isn't lost just cause part of it collapsed.
 
Ah, okay. Do you know if worker's comp in Canada is publicly administered? Here in the US worker's comp insurers are private in many states leading to the same sorts of shenanigans. The fact that private insurance is incentivized to deny that people are having health problems that lead them to make insurance claims has been much-discussed.

Just in case they have alerts set up for when they're mentioned online, I won't mention their name. Each province here has their own.

They're tied to the Ministry of Labour and are considered an agency of the government, but they're distant. I don't think they take public funds through taxation, but since they're mandatory and they're the worker's comp provider for the entire province you could probably argue they're publicly administered. Sorta public, sorta private.

Not a helpful answer, I know.
 
There was a post that made the rounds on Tumblr yesterday about how Trump wants to monitor disabled people so they could eliminate benefits for "fakers", and I saw a lot of people really lamenting this possible dystopian reality.

Didn't really have the motivation to tell them that governments already do this and it's not unique to Trump.
Yep. I haven't noticed anyone nosing around me, but it should be obvious that I'm not faking. I have a small mountain of medical paperwork to back me up, years' worth of pharmacy records, I never leave this apartment without my walker, and I'm not posting photos of myself cavorting around on social media (I haven't had the ability to cavort in about 15 years, and even then I still needed canes to do it).

Yeah, that's the liberals always wanting to means-test everyone. I think Trump's proposal goes a bit further than most because he's talking about monitoring people's mental health via their social media feeds which is both particularly stupid and particularly potentially-dystopian.
Apparently it's whooshed through the empty chamber that's his brain that his own social media feeds show that he himself is BS!C.
 
3.30 am tomorrow is a holiday, but dear Director X want to do skype with me discussing about some document in the morning, and I cannot sleep. Ugh I will drop her a message at 6 in the morning and ask her to start at 7.

Regarding the discussion above, I like Akka personally he is an old school that speaks his mind out loud with a good taste and knowledge about gaming, I take a lot from him, however my take regarding this issue will be both humanity and its heritage are interconnected, because heritage is a symbol that represent humanity itself, however if we fail to distinguish the importance of substance (humanity) over its symbol (heritage) that is a tragedy for the heritage, because the heritage itself is preserved to remind us of the importance of humanity that its suppose to represents, and it is a tragedy when the heritage of human civilization turned to be an idol.

Of course all of us here agree that it need to be restored, but to use this event as a momentum to remind us about the humanity crisis that we neglected all this time, the one that we should prioritized, it is not a wrong things, with that we actually preserving the meaning of its existence.
 
Last edited:
Not a helpful answer, I know.

Meh, kind of helpful. It varies state to state in the US but I think New Jersey is notable for also having a weird quasi-public but for-profit entity with a legal monopoly.
 
Sorry, I just came back from /wallbanging my head. It kind of hurts, but less than the what I read here.

You'd think that a Civilization forum would attract the kind of people who have the ability to understand the importance of culture and history. Guess not.
You'd think that left-winger, used to fight for culture, education and "non-bankable" skills against the "if it's not useful for a company, it's worthless" arguments for the right, would be even more so susceptible to understand these points. Guess not, again.
You'd think that people so obsessed by identity politics would be somewhat consistent between how they put it and its symbols above about anything else, and yet suddenly seem to be blind to, well, built symbols with a thousandfold more importance. Seems, yet again, not.
Not all left-wingers are a hive mind. :nono:

Yes, culture is important. As someone who studied anthropology and classical history (still do informally), of course culture is important. I have artists in my family. I'm one of them, for all I haven't been able to do much in recent years.

That said, not all culture is important to all people. To me Notre Dame is interesting only for its architecture. I'm not Catholic, nor even religious, so that aspect of it doesn't mean much. And since you're bringing up the game here, I don't even build temples or cathedrals in my games unless I've got serious civil disorder issues. I build J.S. Bach's Cathedral and Michaelangelo's Chapel for the points, not because I think they're actually necessary.

What annoys me about fancy houses of worship (of any religion) is the notion that followers are supposed to give their worldly goods to the poor and embrace a life of poverty because the Kingdom of (whatever religion may be applicable) is where the true riches are... and yet the houses of worship have some of the most expensive, obscenely costly fabrics, gem-encrusted stuff and other doodads ever, and there are people starving in a slum a block away. That is massive hypocrisy, and it's one reason why I don't have a high regard for such places. Yes, they're marvels of architecture in some cases, or show off incredible artistry. But it spits in the face of the people they're supposed to be helping. There's money for fancy stuff, but not for effectively helping the people they're supposed to help.

As such we're down the pit of obscurantism and shortsightedness where the collective memory, with how it allows us to actually build societies, get the lessons we can from the past, kindle a sense of continuity and get an idea of what is the very concept of "large picture", is just considered secondary. Painful to watch.
There is a positive lesson from building things like this. They took a lot of long-term planning and commitment and that's a lesson that modern politicians need to relearn because most of them don't understand it.

No, we preserve these buildings for mankind as a whole, not just for the few that are living around them.
How have I personally benefited from this building? Just curious. I can't even claim to have read the book that the Disney movie was based on.

Simply said, you'd consider building housing for 200 000 people over the world to be "obviously" worth more than... THE EFFING ENTIRE HUMANITY HERITAGE (which is about 1000 sites over the world). That's just completely mental. Yeah, a small city is worth more than the entirety of mankind's history. No problem. Woopsie doopsie.
Nobody said that.

I think you're confusign your intellectual degradation and child-like reasoning with my supposed moral degradation. If we followed such shallow lack of intelligence, we would just sell all art as materials to buy commodities (actually we wouldn't have art at all). Yeah, I'm sure society would be better off :rolleyes:
You should re-read his post. He's defending you in response to my post.

Welcome to humanity. Took you seemingly a bit over 40000 years to notice that humans work that way, but better late than never I guess. Though you're right, symbolism sucks, we should do away with arts and metaphysics, that's obviously useless. You'll find plenty of people who agree, usually among the ones you typically despise. Go figure.
As a writer, Synsensa is considered to be part of the arts community, as am I. But we're also part of a community that looks at fancy buildings and wonder why a fraction of the cost of them couldn't have been put toward really helping people in a practical way. Someone saying to me, "I'll pray for you" is nice (and I politely thank them) but it's of no practical help whatsoever.

What you short-sighted bunch seem to be completely blind about, is that it's not about "people dead years", but an heritage that IS benefitting people alive right now, and WILL benefit people in the future.
Sorry, this cathedral has done exactly what to benefit me? Not a thing I'm aware of. Certainly nothing practical, nor has it even sparked my imagination, as other heritage monuments have (ie. the Pyramids or Stonehenge).

BC's government is improving despite Alberta and Ontario's best efforts.
People there should be ecstatic over Notley's defeat, then.

Oh, wait. Kenney's even more determined to get the oil to Asian markets and anywhere else he can sell it. He's promised funding for aboriginal groups who want the pipeline and don't care as much that it could and probably will cause an environmental disaster somewhere.

I've been hearing similar stuff out of Australia and Britain for a while. Just today an Australian friend of mine posted about an instance where the Australian government agreed to fund someone's wheelchair...but not the wheels. So I know it isn't too different from what already goes on.
That's insane. Why wouldn't they fund the wheels? Are they afraid the disabled person might be able to go somewhere fun?

I know there are a lot of people who think people like me shouldn't be allowed to have takeout food or a TV or computer or even a newspaper ("they can just go read it for free at the library"). There's still a huge bias for handi-bus applicants who intend to use it for medical appointments, rather than shopping or visiting or going to a movie or concert. We're not supposed to do fun activities or have nice things.

I think it is nice to imagine there is "world heritage", but imo this is false. People care about certain monuments, and usually either because those are local (or close enough) or are culturally important to them.
Case in point, it is logical that parisians would identify the part collapse of this gothic cathedral as very crucial, but i really doubt it means much for (eg) eastern europeans. For myself it is a famous gothic cathedral, but no, i didn't feel any sense of loss cause part of it collapsed; it will be rebuilt anyway, like old cathedrals are rebuilt at times.
Actually i personally am not very tied to specific buildings. I like the large cathedrals here, but doubt i would care that much if they got destroyed. Maybe it has to do with older buildings - not cathedrals but temples or other ancient greek stuff - mostly being in ruins anyway, and some utterly gone (Colossus of Rhodes, Lighthouse and Library of Alexandria etc) so for me a monument isn't lost just cause part of it collapsed.
Well, at least I have the Porch of the Maidens preserved as a set of bookends in my china cabinet. :p

(with several of my cat-themed pet rocks lounging around on the steps :love:)
 
Interesting. I'd guess that many people around the world have never even heard of Notre Dame. Billions don't have the money to come see it and never will. In what sense is Notre Dame being preserved for these people?
That argument is just painful to read. You understand what is culture ? Or history ? Or anything that is preserved and available and even when you don't personally know about it, is still doing something for humanity as a whole by its very existence ?
Because that's the basic notion, and we won't be able to go anywhere if you don't even understand what it is in a deeper sense.
I don't even know where to start with this. First of all the question was about building houses for 200 people, the implication being that these people are homeless. The other option was not THE EFFING ENTIRE HUMANITY HERITAGE but repairing Notre Dame.
You're the one who started it, so maybe you got lost in your own argument ? I'll try to keep it simple :

A - You consider that it's better to house 200 people than to keep one of the mankind world heritage.
B - There is about 1000 world heritage (including natural ones, so I'm even inflating your numbers a bit).
C - Conclusion, you consider it better to house 200 000 people than keep all of the most important mankind historical heritage.

Get it ?
Let's take it a little further and emphasize that this is a thought experiment because I don't believe it is in fact a choice between the two, though it's easy to imagine circumstances in which it might be a real choice.
Let's say that a terrible fire burns down half of Paris, leaving much of the city's population homeless and in tent camps on the outskirts of the ruined city. In your view the priority would be repairing Notre Dame rather than rebuilding housing for these people? In time of course we'll repair Notre Dame and everything else, but my question is what your priority would be with the limited resources available right now. And my answer is we use the resources we have right now to help PEOPLE, because buildings aren't as important as people.
We went from 200 to 10 million. I take it you realized just how whacky your first example was. Which went from a tiny house problem to an existential crisis for a whole nation. Duh.
Yeah, IF we were into such a scenario, the priority would be to actually get society on its feet first. Obviously.
Here's another interesting question: if you were a firefighter at Notre Dame, would you be willing to sacrifice your life to save it from burning down completely?
You realize that the firefighters actually DID risk their lives to do so ?

I wouldn't sacrifice mine, because I'm a selfish and cowardly bastard. I would gladly sacrifice yours, though. Nothing personal, I just consider that one life is cheap to keep something that will massively overlast it and affect many more people that it would ever. As long as it's not mine, of course.

Fun fact : even during WW2, there were a lot of cultural treasures which were spared because the Allies understood the importance of it, and considered it was worth the increased risk to not blow them up.
The concerns I've raised are hardly abstract when apparently over 600 million Euros were pledged from just three people in the space of a few hours to fund the reconstruction of Notre Dame. That is a reflection of a global society with staggering levels of inequality and a staggering ethical blindness. We make sure old buildings look good, but if you're homeless on the streets of Paris you're on your own.
Oh yes, you won't see me fight about THAT.
I'm even having some snarky thoughts that this PR operation might blow up in the face of the guys who did it, because it's certainly shocking to see how they can casually pile up one billion euros in 24h from their back pocket while they justify fiscal cheating by whining about how they need it to survive. It's especially egregious after two years of Macron's policies and his arguments about economy and the crumbling of public services and how hard it is to get money to run the state.
So I wonder if this won't have the exact opposite effect than the one intended, with people just noticing the ability of the super-wealthy to throw away enough money to fund a nation just to look good, and in the end making them push harder for even more fiscal control. That would be gloriously ironic indeed.

But that is a completely different debate. I'm speaking of how history and culture are treasures for all mankind and have a huge value because it enrich the whole humanity. There is also the point of artistic beauty, but that opens up a whole philosophical debate.

And yes, I can be pretty mean-spirited when I'm faced with intolerable annoyance. That's the very reason my initial post was in this very thread, because I really, really can't stand this kind of stupidity. And I don't care about being mean-spirited, because the same people who would blame me for it are people who share the same mean-spirited streak, just when it's relevant to their own pet peeves. So basically the only people that I would actually feel schooled by if they told me so, are the ones who don't tend to do it.
Basically, judgemental bastards are the ones calling each other mean-spirited, which kinda make the whole calling out pretty pointless. So hey.
 
Last edited:
That said, not all culture is important to all people. To me Notre Dame is interesting only for its architecture. I'm not Catholic, nor even religious, so that aspect of it doesn't mean much.

How have I personally benefited from this building? Just curious. I can't even claim to have read the book that the Disney movie was based on.
That's the kind of missing the underlying canvas which drives me to the wall.
It's irrelevant if you're not religious. I'm a effing atheist too, remember ? Of course if I were religious, it would have additional value as a very important place of worship, and a spiritual value as the house of my supposed god or whatever. But even as someone who sees religion as fairytale, it's still important, precisely because it WAS and IS important to people, because it's a witness of an era, its a creation (and also due to this a creator) of a culture. It's a part of the big canvas that is mankind.

As how you benefitted, short answer : as with all the lasting cultural and historical artefacts, it did just as much to mold you into who you are, and mold the whole mankind into what mankind is, than society did.

And now the long answer :
Think about all you know of Ancient Egypt. You actually probably know more about it than everything else from Egypt put together. When you hear "Egypt", you think about the name of Pharaohs, you think about the Nile, about sands and temple, about Pyramids and Sphinx, about hieroglyphs and tombs, about sun and flood. You think about how they dressed, about their gods and their religion. About the war chariot and the khopesh.
That's quite a lot, isn't it ? That's part of your collective memory of mankind. What they accomplished, how they viewed the world, how their astronomers were actually quite advanced, how their Pharaoh had absolute power, but yet it was not limitless and could be challenged by a weird system of vote with black and white stones.
And maybe you didn't knew all that, but this knowledge still existed, in book and in library, in specialists minds and in some enthusiast circles.
All this past, all this history, all this culture, played a part into making us - all of us, be it directly because we learned about it, or indirectly because someone else knew about it and it affected him and he affected us by his opinions and his existence.

And how do we know all that ? Because of what they built. We know jack of about people that were living on our own lands 4000 years ago, and as such nothing they did and nothing they were, does affect us, nor help us grow, nor even exists anymore.
But we know of these guys from 1500 years further in the past, and thousands km away from where we live, and they affect us, and we can draw ideas and lessons and ponder how they lived and get a wealth of points of view on the world. And that's because they left things behind that acted as witnesses.

And of course we are probably making a ton of wrong conclusions, because it's old and weathered and we are left to fill the blank. That's why it's always such a great find when we discover something intact, or well-preserved, or giving us more informations that allows us to get better ideas of who they were and how they lived.

And I've not even spoke of the metaphysical aspect, knowing there is buildings which were already standing when your forefathers were alive. Connecting people to their past and giving them a sense of belonging. That's stability for a society, and a way to draw strength from the past, and maybe for some people to realize the scope of humanity and get an appreciation from things beyond their own little circle of acquaintances.

So yeah, what mankind left behind as time passes IS effing important and DOES serve us. All of us, even those who are too blind to realize it. And each time we lose one of these artifacts, we deprive our children of such connection and such riches. And that sucks much more, in the grand scheme of things, than even the lives of many people that would not be able to provide such link from the humanity of the long past to humanity of the long future.
 
Last edited:
Regarding this Notre Dame thing, of course that one of the reasons it's going to be rebuilt is because a return on the investment is expected to be made. It's a tourist attraction after all, civvers!
 
But they don't charge for it, do they?
 
Erm, hmm… it's free gold per turn.
 
That's the kind of missing the underlying canvas which drives me to the wall.
You should try to calm down. Check your blood pressure. Seriously.

It's irrelevant if you're not religious. I'm a effing atheist too, remember ? Of course if I were religious, it would have additional value as a very important place of worship, and a spiritual value as the house of my supposed god or whatever. But even as someone who sees religion as fairytale, it's still important, precisely because it WAS and IS important to people, because it's a witness of an era, its a creation (and also due to this a creator) of a culture. It's a part of the big canvas that is mankind.
Yes, and there are religious sites and artifacts that would bother me if they were lost or destroyed because of their cultural value to humanity. But this one isn't on my personal list.

As how you benefitted, short answer : as with all the lasting cultural and historical artefacts, it did just as much to mold you into who you are, and mold the whole mankind into what mankind is, than society did.
This site did zip to mold me into who I am, with the exception of an occasional reference I may have heard regarding Victor Hugo's novel or the Disney cartoon. I had no interest in it, never studied it, and can't even recognize a picture of it. I don't say that as something to be proud of, just pointing out that I don't care.

And now the long answer :
Think about all you know of Ancient Egypt. You actually probably know more about it than everything else from Egypt put together. When you hear "Egypt", you think about the name of Pharaohs, you think about the Nile, about sands and temple, about Pyramids and Sphinx, about hieroglyphs and tombs, about sun and flood. You think about how they dressed, about their gods and their religion. About the war chariot and the khopesh.
That's quite a lot, isn't it ? That's part of your collective memory of mankind. What they accomplished, how they viewed the world, how their astronomers were actually quite advanced, how their Pharaoh had absolute power, but yet it was not limitless and could be challenged by a weird system of vote with black and white stones.
And maybe you didn't knew all that, but this knowledge still existed, in book and in library, in specialists minds and in some enthusiast circles.
All this past, all this history, all this culture, played a part into making us - all of us, be it directly because we learned about it, or indirectly because someone else knew about it and it affected him and he affected us by his opinions and his existence.
Yes, I knew most of that, and I hope you understand that ancient Egypt and what we know about it had a far more profound impact on humanity's history and culture than a far more recently-built cathedral did.

I sometimes take unusual routes to the things I learn about. For my interest in Egypt all it took was immensely enjoying a performance of "Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat". A series of meanderings through the library took me to various authors' historical novels, reading the Old Testament, and finally studying the real history.

I haven't bothered with anything to do with Notre Dame. As mentioned, nothing about that has sparked my imagination to make me want to learn about it. Therefore, this fire, as unfortunate as it was, doesn't affect me emotionally. Please stop acting like I'm dancing on this building's grave.

And how do we know all that ? Because of what they built. We know jack of about people that were living on our own lands 4000 years ago, and as such nothing they did and nothing they were, does affect us, nor help us grow, nor even exists anymore.
But we know of these guys from 1500 years further in the past, and thousands km away from where we live, and they affect us, and we can draw ideas and lessons and ponder how they lived and get a wealth of points of view on the world. And that's because they left things behind that acted as witnesses.


And of course we are probably making a ton of wrong conclusions, because it's old and weathered and we are left to fill the blank. That's why it's always such a great find when we discover something intact, or well-preserved, or giving us more informations that allows us to get better ideas of who they were and how they lived.
You are preaching to the choir on this. In general.

And I've not even spoke of the metaphysical aspect, knowing there is buildings which were already standing when your forefathers were alive. Connecting people to their past and giving them a sense of belonging. That's stability for a society, and a way to draw strength from the past, and maybe for some people to realize the scope of humanity and get an appreciation from things beyond their own little circle of acquaintances.
My family has been traced to part of the region of Norway covered in warpus' travel thread, in the 10th century. That predates Notre Dame by a couple of centuries or so.

So yeah, what mankind left behind as time passes IS effing important and DOES serve us. All of us, even those who are too blind to realize it. And each time we lose one of these artifacts, we deprive our children of such connection and such riches. And that sucks much more, in the grand scheme of things, than even the lives of many people that would not be able to provide such link from the humanity of the long past to humanity of the long future.
A very passionate post. But you're assuming that because I'm not wailing over this fire that I have no passion of my own for old or ancient cultural sites. And I'm for preserving the past. People might ask me, "Valka, why do you hold on to an old Swedish coin from 1740, when it's not worth more than a few dollars in current Canadian currency?" and my answer is "because it's nearly 280 years old, it's the oldest thing I own, it's one of the few things my grandfather gave me, and I wonder who originally owned it and what the subsequent owners bought with it. Most of it would probably be mundane stuff, but there could be an interesting story in there someplace, if I had a time machine to go back and look."

Regarding this Notre Dame thing, of course that one of the reasons it's going to be rebuilt is because a return on the investment is expected to be made. It's a tourist attraction after all, civvers!
Exactly.

But they don't charge for it, do they?
Not the point. It brings in mega-$$$$$$$ to the country from the tourists who go to see it and spend their money on hotels, meals, transportation, souvenirs, and whatever else they decide to spend money seeing and doing in Paris and the rest of the country. So of course it's important to rebuild, because it helps employ so many people there in whatever businesses and industries cater to the people who include it in their itinerary.
 
This site did zip to mold me into who I am, with the exception of an occasional reference I may have heard regarding Victor Hugo's novel or the Disney cartoon. I had no interest in it, never studied it, and can't even recognize a picture of it. I don't say that as something to be proud of, just pointing out that I don't care.
My whole argument is about how the globality of humanity culture mold people, and that each artifact from the past participate into this culture. The whole Ancient Egypt stuff is about illustrating this mechanism. I even explicitely described how all this culture affect people directly or indirectly.

That's about the whole, while you narrow it down to specific example. You miss the point.
 
Last edited:
My whole argument is about how the globality of humanity culture mold people, and that each artifact from the past participate into this culture. The whole Ancient Egypt stuff is about illustrating this mechanism. I even explicitely described how all this culture affect people directly or indirectly.

That's about the whole, while you narrow it down to specific example. You miss the point.
I didn't miss the point. I just don't agree with it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom