Cyprus-Forum.com

[Piratis]

samarkeolog, is finding the truth your aim, or you have another aim which you are trying to support?

I wish I knew what this other aim might be, and why I might support it.

I don't know that is why I asked. If you are not directly related to Cyprus and you can be independent, and if you care to research history (and it seems you are) then the only thing that could possibly stop you from coming close to the truth is if you have some preconceived notions about Cyprus.

This is what I mean by "another aim". Preconceived notions where you accept the stuff that fit and reject the ones that don't, (regardless of the supporting evidence) trying to come to a conclusion that you already had even before you began researching.

How do you know what you spout out is the gospel truth?

He seems like a person who makes his own research, so I didn't ask him to believe anything just because I say so.

I just wondered if he has some preconceived notions regarding Cyprus because it seemed to me it was very easy for him to accept something just because he read it in a side note of some book, while he didn't seem as willing to consider much more scientific and independent research which pointed to a different direction.

[samarkeolog]

samarkeolog, is finding the truth your aim, or you have another aim which you are trying to support?

I wish I knew what this other aim might be, and why I might support it.

I don't know that is why I asked. If you are not directly related to Cyprus and you can be independent, and if you care to research history (and it seems you are) then the only thing that could possibly stop you from coming close to the truth is if you have some preconceived notions about Cyprus.

This is what I mean by "another aim". Preconceived notions where you accept the stuff that fit and reject the ones that don't, (regardless of the supporting evidence) trying to come to a conclusion that you already had even before you began researching.

I am eternally in your debt. Until now, I didn't know...

If you could and would show me mistakes I've made, I could and would correct them. If you're just going to say I've made mistakes but not say what they are... And if you're going to accuse me of bias, when - as I have said sooo many times it's really getting fucking tiresome - I've talked about the Turkish deep state, TMT's false flag operations, the Turkish/Turkish Cypriot deep state's attacks upon and oppression of the Turkish Cypriot community it claims to protect, destruction of Greek Cypriot churches, destruction of Greek Cypriot homes... It's insulting, but it's only going to show that I do talk about everything and that nationalists who accuse me of bias are either mistaken or malicious.

[Oracle]

samarkeolog, is finding the truth your aim, or you have another aim which you are trying to support?

I wish I knew what this other aim might be, and why I might support it.

I don't know that is why I asked. If you are not directly related to Cyprus and you can be independent, and if you care to research history (and it seems you are) then the only thing that could possibly stop you from coming close to the truth is if you have some preconceived notions about Cyprus.

This is what I mean by "another aim". Preconceived notions where you accept the stuff that fit and reject the ones that don't, (regardless of the supporting evidence) trying to come to a conclusion that you already had even before you began researching.

I am eternally in your debt. Until now, I didn't know...

If you could and would show me mistakes I've made, I could and would correct them. If you're just going to say I've made mistakes but not say what they are... And if you're going to accuse me of bias, when - as I have said sooo many times it's really getting fucking tiresome - I've talked about the Turkish deep state, TMT's false flag operations, the Turkish/Turkish Cypriot deep state's attacks upon and oppression of the Turkish Cypriot community it claims to protect, destruction of Greek Cypriot churches, destruction of Greek Cypriot homes... It's insulting, but it's only going to show that I do talk about everything and that nationalists who accuse me of bias are either mistaken or malicious.

Doing a Ph.D. is about proving you can carry out independent research. Don't expect to be spoon-fed.

I sensed from our discussion this morning, that you possess a certain arrogant streak which will may let you down pre-viva ...

I still wonder why you chose a Turkish term for your nick, and that along with some of your posts, would indicate you are either Turkish, or a Turk-sympathiser. In which case if you want to gain the most from being here, you should be honest

[Piratis]

samarkeolog, is finding the truth your aim, or you have another aim which you are trying to support?

I wish I knew what this other aim might be, and why I might support it.

I don't know that is why I asked. If you are not directly related to Cyprus and you can be independent, and if you care to research history (and it seems you are) then the only thing that could possibly stop you from coming close to the truth is if you have some preconceived notions about Cyprus.

This is what I mean by "another aim". Preconceived notions where you accept the stuff that fit and reject the ones that don't, (regardless of the supporting evidence) trying to come to a conclusion that you already had even before you began researching.

I am eternally in your debt. Until now, I didn't know...

If you could and would show me mistakes I've made, I could and would correct them. If you're just going to say I've made mistakes but not say what they are... And if you're going to accuse me of bias, when - as I have said sooo many times it's really getting fucking tiresome - I've talked about the Turkish deep state, TMT's false flag operations, the Turkish/Turkish Cypriot deep state's attacks upon and oppression of the Turkish Cypriot community it claims to protect, destruction of Greek Cypriot churches, destruction of Greek Cypriot homes... It's insulting, but it's only going to show that I do talk about everything and that nationalists who accuse me of bias are either mistaken or malicious.

Can you show me where I accused you of bias?

I personally didn't detect any bias from you and I never made such accusation! If I thought you were bias then I wouldn't even be telling you this.

What I am talking about is preconceived notions. I say this because of what you said about the Cypriot dialect which you supported with a very weak argument and ignored the scientific evidence I provided.

[insan]

I have never before ventured into this part of the forum before, as the Cyprus problem is for Cypriots IMHO

Could any of you give me a link to UNBIASED opinions on how the UK was involved in your trouble?

I really do mean unbiased as I don't want to spend time reading propaganda.

Some may think this is a strange request, but I would just like to find out how my homeland was involved, as Cyprus is now my home and has been for the last four years.


TIA

Hello Snad,

ROOT CAUSES OF CONFLICT, CHALLENGES AT THE MICRO LEVEL
AND IMPLICATIONS IN POST CONFLICT CYPRUS
Maria Hadjipavlou
Department of Social and Political Sciences
University of Cyprus

The below link will lead u there.


http://www.havenscenter.org/files/hadjipavlou2.pdf


Cheers

[samarkeolog]

samarkeolog, is finding the truth your aim, or you have another aim which you are trying to support?

I wish I knew what this other aim might be, and why I might support it.

I don't know that is why I asked. If you are not directly related to Cyprus and you can be independent, and if you care to research history (and it seems you are) then the only thing that could possibly stop you from coming close to the truth is if you have some preconceived notions about Cyprus.

This is what I mean by "another aim". Preconceived notions where you accept the stuff that fit and reject the ones that don't, (regardless of the supporting evidence) trying to come to a conclusion that you already had even before you began researching.

How do you know what you spout out is the gospel truth?

He seems like a person who makes his own research, so I didn't ask him to believe anything just because I say so.

I just wondered if he has some preconceived notions regarding Cyprus because it seemed to me it was very easy for him to accept something just because he read it in a side note of some book, while he didn't seem as willing to consider much more scientific and independent research which pointed to a different direction.

First, the original point was that, 'like the language, it [the island]'s Cypriot.' So the original point wasn't about language at all; it was about the island being Cyprus, not Greece.

Second, what I said was, 'Well, it was a bit of a joke to make a point, but let's take it seriously...., before they started "cleaning" the dialect to bring it closer to Athenian Greek, Gybriaga was probably at least as far away from [Athenian] Ellinika as Portuguese is from Spanish.... But I didn't say that Gybriaga was further from ancient Greek than Athenian....' So, I didn't say any of the dialects were more or less Greek, and I didn't deny that they were dialects, either; I called them dialects.... 'I said that Gybriaga was very different from Athenian, especially after they "cleaned" it.'

I did read the article you linked to, but where did it disagree with me?

[samarkeolog]

the only thing that could possibly stop you from coming close to the truth is if you have some preconceived notions about Cyprus.

This is what I mean by "another aim". Preconceived notions where you accept the stuff that fit and reject the ones that don't, (regardless of the supporting evidence) trying to come to a conclusion that you already had even before you began researching.

Can you show me where I accused you of bias?

I personally didn't detect any bias from you and I never made such accusation! If I thought you were bias then I wouldn't even be telling you this.

What I am talking about is preconceived notions. I say this because of what you said about the Cypriot dialect which you supported with a very weak argument and ignored the scientific evidence I provided.

Well, apparently we disagree about what I said. I thought repeatedly referring to Cypriot as a dialect showed I accepted it as a dialect, but you thought I needed to be corrected that... it was a dialect? But, ignoring that for one moment...

The Oxford English Dictionary defines bias as 'inclination or prejudice in favour of a particular person, thing, or viewpoint'.

Roget's Thesaurus lists preconception (as in, a preconceived notion) as a synonym for bias.

If that's not what you meant, I apologise.

[samarkeolog]

If we talked about English, unless we specified that we were talking about Cornish, or Geordie, or Glaswegian, we would be talking about "standard", "Queen's" English; we're always talking about one dialect or another, because the "standard" form is just the dialect spoken by the most powerful people. I took courses in "Greek" in Cyprus from a Cretan, and I was still taught Athenian.

You were not taught Athenian. You were taught that "standard Greek". Similarly when I took a course of English I was taught the "standard English". This doesn't mean that the other dialects of English are not English, and that the people that speak those other dialects are not English.

Sorry, I don't know the difference between Athenian and standard Greek. I wasn't referring to the old Athenian that Trudgill speaks about, if that makes any difference.

But certainly, you can see that I did not say that other dialects of English were not English.

As for whether the English-dialect-speakers are English or not, it depends upon the person, and the dialect they're speaking. If you want to tell a Glaswegian Scot that they're English, please do. I shall avoid doing so - but I'm happy to watch you try. An English member of my family moved to Scotland and now speaks natural, thick, fluent Scots - but he's still English. And London Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots may not speak any Greek or Turkish; they may only speak standard English, but they are still Cypriot, not English.

[samarkeolog]

If you could and would show me mistakes I've made, I could and would correct them. If you're just going to say I've made mistakes but not say what they are...

Doing a Ph.D. is about proving you can carry out independent research. Don't expect to be spoon-fed.

I have carried out independent research. It is the library research and the fieldwork research that I present in my work. So no, I have not expected and do not expect to be spoon-fed. But if he, or you, or someone else, is going to tell me I've made a mistake, they should say what that mistake is. Do you think if you post something that I disagree with, I should say only, "you're wrong", and not explain how/why? Presumably, you would like to know what I think is wrong and why. I would too. That's all I'm saying. Is that too much for you?

I sensed from our discussion this morning, that you possess a certain arrogant streak which will may let you down pre-viva ...

I'm not arrogant; I'm exhausted by your desperate attempts to dismiss me as a Turk-lover and a propagandist... And look!

I still wonder why you chose a Turkish term for your nick, and that along with some of your posts, would indicate you are either Turkish, or a Turk-sympathiser. In which case if you want to gain the most from being here, you should be honest

How kind of you to prove my point, yet again. I explained to you in very simple words and sentences before. I'll try again. I chose the Albanian and Serbo-Croat term for my nick, because I was going to work in Kosova/Kosovo. (You can click on the photos on the Kosova/Kosovo: cultural heritage and community photo blog to see some of the places I visited.)

The Albanian, Serbo-Croat and Turkish terms are the same, because they are all derived from the Greek... The English, French, German, Spanish, Russian... blablabla... are all similar, because... they're also all derived from the Greek.

Do you still understand, or are you lost? Please don't mistake this for arrogance. But I explained this to you before, in a very simple way, and you evidently didn't understand then, because you asked again... Of course, maybe you did understand, and you were just looking for a way to put samarkeolog and Turkish in the same sentence again.

So, which was it? Were you unable to understand that I chose the Albanian and Serbo-Croat term; or were you deliberately trying to make people think I was a Turk-loving propagandist, even though you knew I had chosen the Albanian and Serbo-Croat term?

[Snad]

Thanks to all who posted links it is helping me understand the role in which ny country hard a part to play in your conflict and up till now I am not very proud to be British.

If anyone else has more links I will be glad to read them, it has become quite addictive. However after this thread has finished I shal slink back to the part of the forum I feel safest in

Thanks again.