Cyprus-Forum.com

[bill cobbett]

Oh but I thought it was the Greeks who "laid the foundation for the West"

Another stolen idea...

Reh Shah, it was the "West" that laid the "foundation" for the "West", by picking and choosing from the past and deciding to glorify ancient things Greek (and Roman) and to not dig deeper and further afield in to other equally rich ancient cultures.

A very blinkered view, one perhaps brought about by the wealthier middle-classes taking the opportunities (a couple of centuries ago) allowed by new found wealth and easier travel to go on their Grand Tours to places like Athens and Rome and no further than say Egypt, and bringing home very selective and self-serving impressions and influences.

Many people know this Bill, never mind the fact that the Greeks love to promote their fabricated history as if they were responsible for the big bang.

People must understand that nothing appears out of nothing and everything is built up on the previous.

OMG! ........ am in agreement with S on something!

.... except for the bit about nothing appears out of nothing, cos there's no such thing as nothing as there are always quantum fluctuations which destroy the certainty in our common sense notion of nothingness as being empty, of being a void.... so it follows the Big Bang came out of a pre-existing something, albeit an exceptionally tiny something which we just just happen to call nothing... but don't start me off by pressing me further on this very important matter........ OMG! ....... just mentioned "matter" !!!!!.... and wouldn't want to remind all of how wrong the Greeks were on the matter of matter ..........

[Oracle]

.. and wouldn't want to remind all of how wrong the Greeks were on the matter of matter ..........

Which Greeks and which 'theories' of matter were wrong?

[Oracle]

This is a great little piece of pottery. Well done the Persians! No wonder they went to battle with us so much -- they had a lot more to learn and live up to.

Shah, you Otto-philistine, how does this diminish the Greek contributions?

It's 6th century.

Do you know when Homer wrote the Iliad? Some 200 to 400 years earlier!

And?

No one denies the contribution, just know whats really yours and whats not.

"laying the foundations" is a little far fetched when so many other civilizations existed before Homer Simpson.

Who used that term with which you are fixated?

BTW ... do you know the criteria for "civilisation"?

[bill cobbett]

.. and wouldn't want to remind all of how wrong the Greeks were on the matter of matter ..........

Which Greeks and which 'theories' of matter were wrong?

The ones espousing their well-known and very wrong theory of indivisible atoms not to mention the ones who were so lamentably wrong about the nature of nothing. ..........

[Oracle]

.. and wouldn't want to remind all of how wrong the Greeks were on the matter of matter ..........

Which Greeks and which 'theories' of matter were wrong?

The ones espousing their well-known and very wrong theory of indivisible atoms not to mention the ones who were so lamentably wrong about the nature of nothing. ..........

I think it's your own failing in basic understanding of how scientific discoveries are made which is in error here. Coming up with the concept of atoms was probably one of the most amazing things a human being could do and Democritus did it some 2,500 years ago. The fact we took the idea of an atom (as we know it) as being the endpoint of divisibility and saying Democritus was wrong, is what's wrong! It was only about 70 years ago that we actually managed to divide (split) what we called the atom into smaller sub-atomic particles. This further shows the enormity of Democritus' postulates. We adopted the term "atom" from him to assign to the smallest indestructible unit. That was our choice. We know now he meant what we term sub-atomic particles -- and on it might go, but he was NOT wrong, or at least has not been proved wrong, yet, on the fact that there is an indestructible unit of matter. Terminology! Have we decided what it is yet? No. We failed to see his vision and called the first level of particles "atoms" instead of the, yet to be discovered, smallest indivisible unit.

[Oracle]

.. and wouldn't want to remind all of how wrong the Greeks were on the matter of matter ..........

Which Greeks and which 'theories' of matter were wrong?

The ones espousing their well-known and very wrong theory of indivisible atoms not to mention the ones who were so lamentably wrong about the nature of nothing. ..........

How?

[Oracle]

Around the same time as this bit of Persian pottery on capturing Babylon; the great Athenian Statesman, Solon, rewrote the Constitution ...

... an extract:

My soul commands me teach the Athenians that a bad constitution brings civic turmoil, but a good one brings order and strengthens community. It shackles wrongdoing and smooths out the rough. It checks greed, tempers arrogance, and withers the fruits of reckless impulse. It takes crooked judgments and makes them straight, halts treasonable acts, and ends the poison of violent conflict. And so under it, everything for mankind becomes whole and wise.

[shahmaran]

This is a great little piece of pottery. Well done the Persians! No wonder they went to battle with us so much -- they had a lot more to learn and live up to.

Shah, you Otto-philistine, how does this diminish the Greek contributions?

It's 6th century.

Do you know when Homer wrote the Iliad? Some 200 to 400 years earlier!

And?

No one denies the contribution, just know whats really yours and whats not.

"laying the foundations" is a little far fetched when so many other civilizations existed before Homer Simpson.

Who used that term with which you are fixated?

BTW ... do you know the criteria for "civilisation"?

You did madam.

No but please do tell me?

Also tell me who decides on what "criteria" should be as well.

[shahmaran]

Oh but I thought it was the Greeks who "laid the foundation for the West"

Another stolen idea...

Reh Shah, it was the "West" that laid the "foundation" for the "West", by picking and choosing from the past and deciding to glorify ancient things Greek (and Roman) and to not dig deeper and further afield in to other equally rich ancient cultures.

A very blinkered view, one perhaps brought about by the wealthier middle-classes taking the opportunities (a couple of centuries ago) allowed by new found wealth and easier travel to go on their Grand Tours to places like Athens and Rome and no further than say Egypt, and bringing home very selective and self-serving impressions and influences.

Many people know this Bill, never mind the fact that the Greeks love to promote their fabricated history as if they were responsible for the big bang.

People must understand that nothing appears out of nothing and everything is built up on the previous.

OMG! ........ am in agreement with S on something!

.... except for the bit about nothing appears out of nothing, cos there's no such thing as nothing as there are always quantum fluctuations which destroy the certainty in our common sense notion of nothingness as being empty, of being a void.... so it follows the Big Bang came out of a pre-existing something, albeit an exceptionally tiny something which we just just happen to call nothing... but don't start me off by pressing me further on this very important matter........ OMG! ....... just mentioned "matter" !!!!!.... and wouldn't want to remind all of how wrong the Greeks were on the matter of matter ..........

"nothing appears from nothing" was meant to be a negative. I meant nothing can just appear, and everything is built up on something.

Yes we did agree on something