beeman458 Posted September 23, 2006 Share Posted September 23, 2006 "As opposed to people of the East who live in perfect harmony with nature?" LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinconroyfarrell Posted September 23, 2006 Author Share Posted September 23, 2006 We of the West invented the way of life being lived in major Eastern cities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
don_e Posted September 23, 2006 Share Posted September 23, 2006 And they of the East invented the city, upon which our way of life is based. Archeology has not dug up any evidence they were harmonious with nature. -- Don E Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beeman458 Posted September 23, 2006 Share Posted September 23, 2006 "Archeology has not dug up any evidence they were harmonious with nature." Enters religion as there's no environmental tie-in to "any" ecosystem other then just plopped in the middle of it; all historical migratory behavior over the many tens of thousands of years taken into consideration going back to Leakey's Lucy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinconroyfarrell Posted September 24, 2006 Author Share Posted September 24, 2006 Before the coming of the evil white man to, say, China, and the subsequent colonization, the chinese had an agrarian economy. Now they have large industrialized cities full of skyscapers, drive more and more cars, work in factories and produce goods for a world economy that is also largely industrialized and westernized. The skyscraper, the car and the factory all come from the West. Why did we invent these things when everyone else seemed content to live without them? The Chinese invented the rocket, but it was Westerners who developed the rocket into the space launch, or the inter-continental ballistic missile. The Turks invented the canon, but it was the Westerners who developed the idea into the uranium-tipped artillery shell. What is it about the West that makes Westerners innovate to this degree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike dixon Posted September 24, 2006 Share Posted September 24, 2006 <i>Before the coming of the evil white man to, say, China, and the subsequent colonization, the chinese had an agrarian economy.</i><P>Who was it that colonized China? And it's kind of funny that a bunch of simple farmers had 5000-mile-long trade routes (e.g. Silk Road) with other ancient civilations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinconroyfarrell Posted September 25, 2006 Author Share Posted September 25, 2006 Switch to decaf, Mike Dixon, no one is saying the evil white man is better than anyone else, just different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
don_e Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 "What is it about the West that makes Westerners innovate to this degree?" --Kevin Time and the mortality of civilizations. Civilization came late to the west, and once it did, the western civilizations moved east as quickly as they could (Alexander, Imperial Rome). Hardly before it was established it began to decline, peaking maybe during the reign of Marcus Aurelius. The West was a backwater, one might say a sewer, until the 18th century. Time and mortality dealt its blows to Arab, Persian, Indian and Chinese civilizations. After 1200 years as a backwater and with the decline of the the eastern civilizations, the west seems to have a caught a wave and advanced the past 300 years. Civilizations in their youth are exuberant and innovative. The west's time had come finally, coincident with the decline in the east. This has happened before, at least twice, Athens and Rome. It didn't work out very well. Third time's the charm, they say. -- Don E Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirk_teetzel Posted September 27, 2006 Share Posted September 27, 2006 "Enters religion as there's no environmental tie-in to "any" ecosystem other then just plopped in the middle of it; all historical migratory behavior over the many tens of thousands of years taken into consideration going back to Leakey's Lucy." argumentum ad ignorantiam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gabriel_metzger Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 I think most people would say that our ideas, mind, and experiences are our filter. What pictures do we take and why? Art is up to the photographer, viewer of the picture and each person. There are no guarantees. There is no returning to nature. We can have innocence if we allow our grown up, experience minds to go back to innocence. It takes practice to work on our adult filters. I think De Sade and the other are both correct! -Gabriel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now