Rome or Greece?

[Plotinus]

Rome was superior culturally, because they built upon the foundations and the important parts of the Greek culture... its what people do... they take what was good about previous things, and make it BETTER
its how technology advances, its how evolution works.... you deny this, you deny pretty much all of evolution, which is, at this point in time, hardly arguable

Heh, I think we have a new contender for worst argument ever made on this forum, and that's really saying something. That logic's so crooked it's completely backwards.

Speaking of languages, Latin was made popular by the Romans. It is well alive, NOT DEAD! For example: contra means against in Latin. Now name some words that have that phrase, etc. contradict. Latin is alive in Italian, French, Spanish and english. Therefore, Romans had a better influence on the world than the Greeks.

More influence isn't the same thing as better influence. More to the point, all the languages you mention have articles, which Greek does but Latin doesn't. The structure of a language is more fundamental than its vocubulary. Does it therefore follow that Greek has had more influence on modern languages than Latin has, and that the Greeks are therefore better than the Romans?

 

[Taras Bulba]

Heh, I think we have a new contender for worst argument ever made on this forum, and that's really saying something. That logic's so crooked it's completely backwards.

so you're saying that if you take what others learned, and develop it more, that's a BAD thing?

That using the fundamental principles that separate man from ape, that we can use information learned from others, and advance from that, instead of starting all over, is WORSE than trying to completely make up something new?!?!?

THAT seems like backwards logic to me!

More influence isn't the same thing as better influence. More to the point, all the languages you mention have articles, which Greek does but Latin doesn't. The structure of a language is more fundamental than its vocubulary. Does it therefore follow that Greek has had more influence on modern languages than Latin has, and that the Greeks are therefore better than the Romans?

how is more not better? If you took out all Latin roots, then you would destroy more of those languages than if you were to take out Greek roots.

Yes, Greek has its ties to modern nations too, but the amount of Latin used in modern language I think constitutes it as the dominant basis of the language.

 

[Plotinus]

so you're saying that if you take what others learned, and develop it more, that's a BAD thing?

No, I'm not disputing your claim that it's good to improve things. I'm commenting that the argument you presented to support the claim that culture generally gets better does not work. This is not the same thing. Your argument seemed to take this form:

(1) Anyone who claims that culture does not progress is committed to denying that evolution occurs at all.
(2) But evolution clearly does occur.
(3) Therefore the claim that culture does not progress is false.

(1) is so obviously false it's not even worth disputing it, which means that (3) remains unproven. In fact (3) seems obviously false too, since there are many aspects of culture where there doesn't seem to be progress, at least as far as value goes. Novels published today may be rather different from those published a century ago, or two centuries ago, but I doubt you'll find many people prepared to argue that they are, on average, better. Also, no-one ever watched reality TV shows until a decade or two ago, which means there's a pretty good case for saying that culture has moved irretrievably backwards over that period.

how is more not better?

Often! Big Macs are more widely available than poularde truffée aux perles noires du Périgord, but it doesn't follow that American fast food is better than French haute cuisine.

If you took out all Latin roots, then you would destroy more of those languages than if you were to take out Greek roots.

Yes, Greek has its ties to modern nations too, but the amount of Latin used in modern language I think constitutes it as the dominant basis of the language.

Latin may be the "dominant basis" of Romance languages, but neither Greek nor Latin is the basis for other languages such as English, which is Germanic. Obviously there is a lot more vocabulary from Latin than from Greek in English, but vocabulary is not the basis of a language. In fact I think that, grammatically speaking, Greek is rather closer to English than Latin is, but I'm no linguist.

 

[Virote_Considon]

I prefer the ancient Greeks, myself.

 

[scy12]

ts currently the Republic of Macedonia, with naming disputes with Greece... even if you type in FYROM, you still come up with the article entitled "Republic of Macedonia"
and I am ashamed to live in a world where people are too afraid to stand up to arrogant a-holes who think they know things, when LOGICALLY, the answer is right in front of their face, they just refuse to see it
If you're BORN in Macedonia, YOU ARE MACEDONIAN!
I'd like you to tell me otherwise, and pretty much defy the one idea that ALL nations agree on.

No International organisation recognizes it as Macedonia. The naming dispute does not have to do only with Greece. The name that will come from the negotiations will be final. FYROM was decided to be used by international organisations previously but both sides want to reach a new compromise. International status of FYROM = Fyrom and the one that will come out of the negotiations. Else FYROM will not enter NATO and EU. United states supports the negotiations and pressures FYROM so that it agrees with the Greek suggestion. And what is the Greek suggestion ? Northern Macedonia. Reffering to the geographical area the country is situated. But i guess even when that happens ignorant morons such as your self will still continue to say the same ignorant things on the same subject.

and I am ashamed to live in a world where people are too afraid to stand up to arrogant a-holes who think they know things, when LOGICALLY, the answer is right in front of their face, they just refuse to see it
If you're BORN in Macedonia, YOU ARE MACEDONIAN!
I'd like you to tell me otherwise, and pretty much defy the one idea that ALL nations agree on.

What in earth are you talking about ? Are you talking about the past or present ? Anyway i think that you should also be aware that their is a region in northern Greece that is named Macedonia. Today ? So in that case the Macedonains of Greece what are they ? This is off topic though.

I am also wondering what is your argument actually other than the lowest form of Stupidity ?

I am born in Nicosia ? Am i a Cypriot ? I am born in Cyprus am i a Greek ? Pericles is born in Athens is he a Greek ? ( I actually consider my self both a Cypriot , a Greek , a Nicosian , and as member of my neighborhood.

By your logic, why aren't a lot of other national boundries different, if culture determines national boundaries? Switzerland wouldn't even exist, almost definitely, and would've been split b/w France, Germany, Italy.... etc.... look at Scandinavian countries with very similar cultures.... wouldn't they be morphed? Look at Scotland? It was quite culturally different than England, but now its a part of Great Britain. LOOK AT THE USA, for cryin' out loud!?!?!? Its a mix of ALL KINDS of cultures!!!

By my logic national borders today are decided by a billion different things you . .. .. .. .ing moron.

The way we decide National borders today is not used to decide National borders at the time of Classical Greece. In fact there where no national borders. Their where borders between City states. So we either call them all to be from 12 different Nations although everyone identified each other as a Greek or we don't be Idiots and speak about 21 centuree situation when speaking about the situation 2000 years ago.

so now cultural boundaries shouldn't make national boundaries?!?

Their are no National boundaries. They are Macedonians. They are also Greeks. Or if you would like to give them two Nations . They are Macedonians (in nationality) and also Greek.

I don't see why one should choose only one of the two actually. (The same is applied in the case of Rome and Byzantium and other areas) . What does Fyrom has to do with anything i guess makes sense only in the most ignorant of minds.

stop being arrogant

I have been too kind actually.

Moderator Action: Infraction for flaming. - KD
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Mirc]

Heh, 50 votes for one, 50 votes for the other, 50% votes for one, 50% votes for the other, this is amazingly well balanced.

 

[Taras Bulba]

with the only way I could to shorten this post, in respect of people who don't like these crazy long ones... its spoilered again

Spoiler :

No, I'm not disputing your claim that it's good to improve things. I'm commenting that the argument you presented to support the claim that culture generally gets better does not work. This is not the same thing. Your argument seemed to take this form:

(1) Anyone who claims that culture does not progress is committed to denying that evolution occurs at all.
(2) But evolution clearly does occur.
(3) Therefore the claim that culture does not progress is false.

I wouldn't say committed to denying it, but it is would be the same AS denying evolution

(1) is so obviously false it's not even worth disputing it

exactly

which means that (3) remains unproven.

that doesn't mean (3) is unproven.... some people ignore key elements that prove culture is evolving and advancing....

take any aspect of ancient life (prior to great civilizations) and look at how they expressed themselves, and their outlook on life today.... saying that culture doesn't evolve is pretty much saying that we have the same ideals we did when permanent homes had just been established.

In fact (3) seems obviously false too, since there are many aspects of culture where there doesn't seem to be progress, at least as far as value goes.

yes, certain aspects to remain the same.... as I stated when I said "Rome took what was good from the Greeks" (or something to that effect)

Novels published today may be rather different from those published a century ago, or two centuries ago, but I doubt you'll find many people prepared to argue that they are, on average, better.

I'll admit that novels (and literature in general) are harder to look at, because they're a rather "time-period" type of thing. I doubt there are many people who could read the epic of Gilgamesh and say "oh wow, I'm going to go look for how to reach eternal life"
back then, it seemed more fitting....
and now, if you read, to say To Kill a Mocking-Bird, people can relate to that more (not so much now, as they could've in prior decades) but if you sent that book back to Ancient Sumeria, I doubt they'd care to much about slavery and oppression, and equality of ALL races

so, in that aspect, it is harder to look at, but other aspects, culture has evolved, and as evolution goes, when you evolve, you get better

Also, no-one ever watched reality TV shows until a decade or two ago, which means there's a pretty good case for saying that culture has moved irretrievably backwards over that period.

one, that is a modern case study... not an Ancient Roman example (don't get me wrong, it was a good idea, and there's nothing I can do to deny that w/o just flat out lying)

but, you can't deny that culture does evolve and get BETTER at least most of the time, or else we'd be in a VERY backward society today

I'm not really that knowledgeable in any specific topic of ancient Roman history, but just the power that Rome emanated struck fear into the hearts of other nations (look at how the Barca family felt about Romes rising power)

Often! Big Macs are more widely available than poularde truffée aux perles noires du Périgord, but it doesn't follow that American fast food is better than French haute cuisine.

that's entirely subjective (you can say that about my argument too, but its much less subjective in the fact that there is logic to back it, not just opinion)

frankly, out of all that "fancy" food I've had, I would've much rather had just a hamburger (not from McDonalds.... at least pick a better American fast food place)

Latin may be the "dominant basis" of Romance languages, but neither Greek nor Latin is the basis for other languages such as English, which is Germanic. Obviously there is a lot more vocabulary from Latin than from Greek in English, but vocabulary is not the basis of a language. In fact I think that, grammatically speaking, Greek is rather closer to English than Latin is, but I'm no linguist.

this week, I had summer courses for AP Biology, and we're learning about ecology.

We were learning about how a dominant species in a community is the most abundant and usually has the most biomass of all the organisms (basically saying, it has the biggest effect on all the other organisms)
Lets say you were to take out, or harm, or do something really drastic to the dominant species, it will effect the ENTIRE community drastically.

It is the same concept for Latin and modern languages. I'm no linguist either, but if you were to destroy all Latin roots, you would pretty much cut out most words (just like killing off most organisms)

yeah, you can say those organisms might not have been necessary for the survival of the ecosystem.... but those organisms are VERY important overall

PS-now that its probably too late, and I've probably made it on the ignore list of at least 15 different people, I'm not trying to be mean, and I probably could've handled situations better.... sorry if I came across being very rude (I know I have, I do it all the time)

 

[scy12]

PS-now that its probably too late, and I've probably made it on the ignore list of at least 15 different people, I'm not trying to be mean, and I probably could've handled situations better.... sorry if I came across being very rude (I know I have, I do it all the time)

And in case you start complaining about my insults remember that you are the one who has used words such as "Ass*ole to refer to me. Though your ignorance and persistence to it was an insult by it self.

 

[Taras Bulba]

Spoiler :

No International organisation recognizes it as Macedonia. The naming dispute does not have to do only with Greece. The name that will come from the negotiations will be final. FYROM was decided to be used by international organisations previously but both sides want to reach a new compromise. International status of FYROM = Fyrom and the one that will come out of the negotiations. Else FYROM will not enter NATO and EU. United states supports the negotiations and pressures FYROM so that it agrees with the Greek suggestion. And what is the Greek suggestion ? Northern Macedonia. Reffering to the geographical area the country is situated. But i guess even when that happens ignorant morons such as your self will still continue to say the same ignorant things on the same subject.

Yes, I know there is a part of Macedonia in Greece, but what I don't get is why people can't accept what Macedonia is proposing its name as (which I accept it as)

What in earth are you talking about ? Are you talking about the past or present ? Anyway i think that you should also be aware that their is a region in northern Greece that is named Macedonia. Today ? So in that case the Macedonains of Greece what are they ? This is off topic though.

I am also wondering what is your argument actually other than the lowest form of Stupidity ?

so you're denying that if you're born in Macedonia, you're not a Macedonian?!?

I am born in Nicosia ? Am i a Cypriot ? I am born in Cyprus am i a Greek ? Pericles is born in Athens is he a Greek ? ( I actually consider my self both a Cypriot , a Greek , a Nicosian , and as member of my neighborhood.

by you're logic, you could be none of those, idk what you are. If you aren't classified as the nation you come from, then idk what you are, frankly

By my logic national borders today are decided by a billion different things you . .. .. .. .ing moron.

then why say that their often made by culture, if there are soo many other factors? if there were so many other factors, culture (unless you're arguing is a large percentage) is a very SMALL factor

The way we decide National borders today is not used to decide National borders at the time of Classical Greece. In fact there where no national borders. Their where borders between City states. So we either call them all to be from 12 different Nations although everyone identified each other as a Greek or we don't be Idiots and speak about 21 centuree situation when speaking about the situation 2000 years ago.

I never said borders were established the same way now as they were then.

I was refuting you're idea that culture makes national boundaries....

Their are no National boundaries. They are Macedonians. They are also Greeks. Or if you would like to give them two Nations . They are Macedonians (in nationality) and also Greek.

if they're born in Macedonia, they're Macedonian, if they're born in Greece (that includes the Macedonia IN Greece) they're Greek

this doesn't mean that is their heritage, that tells you where they're from.... what I've been trying to say for the past 50,000 posts I've made

I don't see why one should choose only one of the two actually. (The same is applied in the case of Rome and Byzantium and other areas) . What does Fyrom has to do with anything i guess makes sense only in the most ignorant of minds.

umm.... so you have a national identity?

by you're logic, if you were asked "where are you from" you could respond with something as random as "Russia, Romania, Moldova, Ukraine, and Hungary.... I couldn't pick which one, so I chose all of them"

I have been too kind actually.

I'll take your word on this one

 

[Taras Bulba]

And in case you start complaining about my insults remember that you are the one who has used words such as "Ass*ole to refer to me. Though your ignorance and persistence to it was an insult by it self.

yes, I know, I deserved all those derogatory things you said to me... I was being an a-hole..... I'm sorry

 

[scy12]

if they're born in Macedonia, they're Macedonian, if they're born in Greece (that includes the Macedonia IN Greece) they're Greek

this doesn't mean that is their heritage, that tells you where they're from.... what I've been trying to say for the past 50,000 posts I've made

Greece is just a geographical region. Hellenism is not bounded by geographical boundaries. Though i wonder that are the geographical boundaries of Greece. Are Greek in South Asia (Modern Turkey) Cyprus , Sicily ,etc. Today Greece is considered to be only the area where the Greek state exists. We have two choices. We either say that Greece is whatever places Greeks exist. or is just the small geographical region of today and the Greeks that live in other Places live in "sicily" , of South Italy for example (Because we use modern geographic terms.

Is an Athenian Greek , Taras ?

 

[Taras Bulba]

Greece is just a geographical region. Hellenism is not bounded by geographical boundaries. Though i wonder that are the geographical boundaries of Greece. Are Greek in South Asia (Modern Turkey) Cyprus , Sicily ,etc. Today Greece is considered to be only the area where the Greek state exists. We have two choices. We either say that Greece is whatever places Greeks exist. or is just the small geographical region of today and the Greeks that live in other Places live in "sicily" , of South Italy for example (Because we use modern geographic terms.

Is an Athenian Greek , Taras ?

I get what you're saying, but IMO, you're "Greek" if you are born anywhere in Greece.

If you were born in Turkey, or Cyprus, or Sicily, you're Turkish, Cypriot (idk about that one, I forget it off the top of my head) or Sicilian, respectively

So yes I consider being Athenian Greek

As to what I was saying before, about the "I'm (insert city state name here) first, and Greek second" was just trying to explain division in Ancient Greece, and how Alexander (if you do want to consider that part of Macedonia part of Greece) by the way their oaths fell, would've been more loyal to Pella (or Macedon) before Greece.

 

[scy12]

I get what you're saying, but IMO, you're "Greek" if you are born anywhere in Greece.

If you were born in Turkey, or Cyprus, or Sicily, you're Turkish, Cypriot (idk about that one, I forget it off the top of my head) or Sicilian, respectively

So yes I consider being Athenian Greek

As to what I was saying before, about the "I'm (insert city state name here) first, and Greek second" was just trying to explain division in Ancient Greece, and how Alexander (if you do want to consider that part of Macedonia part of Greece) by the way their oaths fell, would've been more loyal to Pella (or Macedon) before Greece.

Other than the fact that what is understood as Greece now is not understood as Greece then. I consider your opinion absolutely ******** and i would like to fine one historian who agrees with it.

So Archimedes of Syracouse (An Italian Island now) is not a Greek , eh ? Neither am I because that is what YOU think. You are aware what Magna Gracea is ? It was the "Big idea" Greece extends to where Greek speaking population exist. Today Greece borders are so because Greek speaking populations did not achieve to unite under one Country or where killed . We Cypriots fought for Enosis and beated the British empire.

(I wonder what do you think where the Greeks who lived in today Turkey in the times of the Eastern Roman empire)

So If Greece back then was considered to be a much bigger geographical region than you think it is or Hellenism extends beyong Greece then do you realize how stupid what you are saying is ? (And this is not an insult it is among the most stupid things one said in this thread).


I am happy to learn that Archimedes (of Syracuse or Sicily) Was Not a Greek. Thank you. What about The Stoicism from Zinon of Kition of Cyprus. (The area did not change it's name you can visit if you like ?He created a whole different philosophical system all together.

Here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno_of_Citium So you may educate yourself because i have not met anyone with the rate of your ignorance on the subject.


I again have to ask. In the Eastern Roman empire Athens was nothing. The more important cities where Eastern. Far from what is today "Greece". Where they not Greek or more likely you use a stupid definition based on wrong geographic understanding of which area is Greece because you are extremely ignorant on the subject ?

 

[scy12]

Yes Delete all posts other than one of the above. This Forum is extremely buggy.

Edit : Actually it is more buggy than what i thought .It appeared that it was posted 10 times then i refreshed and it appears it has only be just double posted.

 

[scy12]

When Greece won Euro 2004 a big percentage of the population was out in the streets celebrating with the Greek flag singing in Greek (Our language) . Little did we know that we should have not done that because we are not Greek because we are from an Island. Enjoy logic.

 

[Taras Bulba]

Spoiler :

Other than the fact that what is understood as Greece now is not understood as Greece then. I consider your opinion absolutely ******** and i would like to fine one historian who agrees with it.

you don't need a historian... reading what else you wrote, I think you misunderstood me. With modern boundaries NOW is what that last post of mine was referring to

So Archimedes of Syracouse (An Italian Island now) is not a Greek , eh ? Neither am I because that is what YOU think. You are aware what Magna Gracea is ? It was the "Big idea" Greece extends to where Greek speaking population exist. Today Greece borders are so because Greek speaking populations did not achieve to unite under one Country or where killed . We Cypriots fought for Enosis and beated the British empire.

you OBVIOUSLY mis-understood me, because I am not at all implying that today's boundaries is my basis of determining who is or wasn't Greek back then....

using what you THINK I thought, then Alexander the Great WOULD be Greek

Greeks held colonies on those islands, and if you were a part of that colony, you are Greek (because you were born in Greece, or a colony at least)

(I wonder what do you think where the Greeks who lived in today Turkey in the times of the Eastern Roman empire)

depending on where they were born, and what that nation was where they were born at that time, that is their nationality.... that doesn't mean they can't denounce that

So If Greece back then was considered to be a much bigger geographical region than you think it is or Hellenism extends beyong Greece then do you realize how stupid what you are saying is ? (And this is not an insult it is among the most stupid things one said in this thread).

you asked me what I thought Greece was, I answered.... if you actually specified Ancient or Modern, I could've given you a more definitive answer, instead of you making up radical ideas based off of things I said about completely different things.

I am happy to learn that Archimedes (of Syracuse or Sicily) Was Not a Greek. Thank you. What about The Stoicism from Zinon of Kition of Cyprus. (The area did not change it's name you can visit if you like ?He created a whole different philosophical system all together.

Here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno_of_Citium So you may educate yourself because i have not met anyone with the rate of your ignorance on the subject.

this is just a continued argument from before.... where you were born, and in what national boundaries determine your nationality. That is what I have been saying, you just don't seem to think its right.

you're level of arrogance is blinding you to the fact that I'm stating my opinion, you're just pulling words in and out to make me state a lie.

I again have to ask. In the Eastern Roman empire Athens was nothing. The more important cities where Eastern. Far from what is today "Greece". Where they not Greek or more likely you use a stupid definition based on wrong geographic understanding of which area is Greece because you are extremely ignorant on the subject ?

I'm not even sure what you're asking here, that sentence doesn't make any sense at all.

If the Eastern Roman Empire had control of Greece when a person was born in Athens, they are Roman. If they took control of it AFTER that person was born, they are Greek, under Roman control. You can claim your heritage to be Greek (which is clearly true) but IF you were born under Roman control, so you're Roman.

 

[Taras Bulba]

When Greece won Euro 2004 a big percentage of the population was out in the streets celebrating with the Greek flag singing in Greek (Our language) . Little did we know that we should have not done that because we are not Greek because we are from an Island. Enjoy logic.

As I've stated at least twice before, your heritage can be from Greece. You can be proud about your heritage. You can celebrate your heritage, that is just another way of celebrating it.

Nationality and heritage are two COMPLETELY different things



by MY logic, that makes total sense... idiot

 

[scy12]

What makes Macedon different from a random Cypriot City ? (Which you previously said that Cypriots are not Greek because you are an idiot and you contradict yourself.)

 

[scy12]

As I've stated at least twice before, your heritage can be from Greece. You can be proud about your heritage. You can celebrate your heritage, that is just another way of celebrating it.

Nationality and heritage are two COMPLETELY different things



by MY logic, that makes total sense... idiot

Find me one historian who uses the same definition ? I am not calling you Idiot to flame you. I am calling you an idiot because this is the best way to describe your positions.

 

[Taras Bulba]

What makes Macedon different from a random Cypriot City ? (Which you previously said that Cypriots are not Greek because you are an idiot and you contradict yourself.)

DID YOU READ MY POST AT ALL!!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!


I just said, when you asked the question, because you weren't explicit, I assumed you meant the modern nation! SO, if you are born in Cyprus TODAY, you are a CYPRIOT! If you were born in Cyprus when Greece had control of it, you are GREEK!

And when Alexander was born, Pella was under control by MACEDON... that makes him MACEDONIAN!

and like I said, you keep taking logic, and just distorting it into something that makes no sense, and saying that is what I said!