New editorial - Western Civ & Spartans

[J Marwood]

Finally, I am amazed at how the simple act of debate seems to be a lost art. Here is an example of how to make a possible criticism of John's EDITORIAL. Watch and be amazed, oh boys and girls, I will do this in less than 100 words and there will be nary a cry about being "offended" or by making bogus challenges.

"Mr. Clements:

You state in your editorial, or seem to imply, that the Western civilizations founded the concept of human rights. But, a Persian ruler, Cyrus the Great, appears to have published a manifesto of human rights in 539 BC which guarantees religous freedom, as outlined here:

http://www.farsinet.com/cyrus/

How can you therefore make the claim that the Western nations developed the concept of human rights?"

Wow, less than 100 words, I provided a linked source and my reply even has a connection to John's original purpose regarding the EDITORIAL - the 300 Spartans.

Is that not what Ms Boyden did? Admitedly without the helpful link.

[Gene Tausk]

Finally, I am amazed at how the simple act of debate seems to be a lost art. Here is an example of how to make a possible criticism of John's EDITORIAL. Watch and be amazed, oh boys and girls, I will do this in less than 100 words and there will be nary a cry about being "offended" or by making bogus challenges.

"Mr. Clements:

You state in your editorial, or seem to imply, that the Western civilizations founded the concept of human rights. But, a Persian ruler, Cyrus the Great, appears to have published a manifesto of human rights in 539 BC which guarantees religous freedom, as outlined here:

http://www.farsinet.com/cyrus/

How can you therefore make the claim that the Western nations developed the concept of human rights?"

Wow, less than 100 words, I provided a linked source and my reply even has a connection to John's original purpose regarding the EDITORIAL - the 300 Spartans.

Is that not what Ms Boyden did? Admitedly without the helpful link.

Well, I lost count of Ms. Boyden's response somewhere around word 500.
I was trying to point out in my response how a person could write a succinct, SHORT criticism without resorting to directly insulting the writer.

I don't see your point. If, however, you are trying to say that Ms. Boyden responded to Mr. Clements' article, then yes, Ms. Boyden did write a response to Mr. Clements article.

[J Marwood]

Mr Tausk, are you really claiming that it was the length of Ms Boyden's reply that meant it was not responded to?

I'd agree with you that it is perfectly possible to give a succinct polite reply to a post, something I think would have avoided much of the bad feeling on both sides of this debate.

[Gene Tausk]

Mr Tausk, are you really claiming that it was the length of Ms Boyden's reply that meant it was not responded to?

I'd agree with you that it is perfectly possible to give a succinct polite reply to a post, something I think would have avoided much of the bad feeling on both sides of this debate.

Mr. Marwood, I have no idea why no one responded to Ms. Boyden. Quite frankly, I don't care. I was being somewhat sarcastic in my response concerning Ms. Boyden's verbose answer. Sarcasm, incidentally, seems, to be another dying art. However, the rules of this forum do not contain the requirement that all posts must elicit a response. You can respond to Ms. Boyden's post if you want (as long, of course, as you follow our rules).

I made my post to clarify why some people were banned from this forum. As a forum moderator, I wanted to make it clear that John Clements was not responsible for the banning of any individuals. I also posted to show how easy it is to create a measured, short response to Mr. Clements' editorial.

And, incidentally, I agree with you. Succinct, polite replies would have avoided much of the bad feelings. However, not all. As pointed out in my earlier post, some people engaged in shrill, juvenile behavior that they would not moderate. Fortunately, since this is a moderated forum, that is where I, and others, step in.

I really cannot see where this exchange is at all on point to the issues of John's editorial. I explained my reasons for making my post.

Let's keep it now on the issues raised in John's essay. I'm sure there are many points left to discuss.

[Will Adamson]

Succintness...now that appears to be a lost art.

[Axel Pettersson]

I have not been able to follow this due to studies so excuse me if I jump straight in and fall short, but how come the article discussed here has changed its content since I first read it? editing is cool, but should it not be labelled to be so if it has been?

Either way, imho there is truly a western culture/western civilization (someting my generally social liberal pl sci professors has told me atleast, and usually in a appreciative tone, which I like), and it is not bound by geography but by ideas, whereby asking where, physically, this "western" exist makes no sense to me.

[J Marwood]

I have not been able to follow this due to studies so excuse me if I jump straight in and fall short, but how come the article discussed here has changed its content since I first read it? editing is cool, but should it not be labelled to be so if it has been?

I would certainly think it should.

Either way, imho there is truly a western culture/western civilization (someting my generally social liberal pl sci professors has told me atleast, and usually in a appreciative tone, which I like), and it is not bound by geography but by ideas, whereby asking where, physically, this "western" exist makes no sense to me.

Thanks Axel, this is helpful. If 'The west' is defined by ideas rtaher than by geography, then what are these ideas? And from where do they come?

[Derek Wassom]

Mr. Plum & Mr. Marwood
Mike never said Greece and Rome were the sole source of western culture. Not on these forums or yours. No one has. Mike said it was the BASE. Lets be fair.

[Justin Lompado]

I dont intend to get sucked into this debate, however this caught my attention.

You state in your editorial, or seem to imply, that the Western civilizations founded the concept of human rights. But, a Persian ruler, Cyrus the Great, appears to have published a manifesto of human rights in 539 BC which guarantees religous freedom, as outlined here:

http://www.farsinet.com/cyrus/

How can you therefore make the claim that the Western nations developed the concept of human rights?"

Read Herodotus for the life of Cyrus and his predecessors/successors and see if we can hold them in high regard of human life.

[Axel Pettersson]

I have not been able to follow this due to studies so excuse me if I jump straight in and fall short, but how come the article discussed here has changed its content since I first read it? editing is cool, but should it not be labelled to be so if it has been?

I would certainly think it should.

Either way, imho there is truly a western culture/western civilization (someting my generally social liberal pl sci professors has told me atleast, and usually in a appreciative tone, which I like), and it is not bound by geography but by ideas, whereby asking where, physically, this "western" exist makes no sense to me.

Thanks Axel, this is helpful. If 'The west' is defined by ideas rtaher than by geography, then what are these ideas? And from where do they come?

I am in no way a scholar in history first of all, and these suggestions are my own.

It doesn't have to be something wrong in that though, as "western" is what you decide to define it as. Geographicly you can define it in many ways, also historically and (as I do in this case) depending on different ideas and how they have been implemented.

Democracy to me is a distinctly Western idea. From Athens and forward in history. You can spot some form of democracy in the Italian city states during the rennaissance (though, the demos was not everyone but a specific group,between them they practiced forms of democracy) and then on through the Enlightenment. All this in Europe, which during this time (roughly) could be the elusive "West."

There are many kind of democracies though, and what we have in Sweden, or what there is in India, Brazil or the US has little in common with classical Athens (I wonder if they would aknowledge us as democratic at all, really).

This was something I could notice without putting it against other cultures. If I want to measure cultures when it comes to for example as written in the article (as I saw it first):

"... architecture, engineering, scientific and medical inquiry, philosophy, literature, music, theater, sculpture, painting, cuisine, sports, jurisprudence, military science, exploration, and so many other areas of the humanities."

I think I would have to be very much subjective, so much that I do not think I would be able to make a meaningfull discussion. That of cource is me, if others can argue that this kind of cuisine or art is superior to that, they of cource should.

Edit: The way I argue I can in no way say wether an idea is born western or adapted as western by showing where it came from geographicly, as I excluded Geography as a frame for defining the West. It is possible if you describe the culture it was developed in as western, of cource. Jesus is an emensly important figure nomatter how we chose to define "West", but the culture he was born in can hardly be described as Western (I leave that to the ones with knowledge)

[J Marwood]

I understand your point there, I think, that democracy grew out of the Athenian ideal, into what we now think of as representative democracy.

However, Parliamentary democracy is, I feel, as much a product of Germanic cultures. For example the Anglo-Saxon Witenagemot. In addition, the granting of universal suffrage is a very modern idea, one that would be alien to a pre-Solon Athenian.

It is interesting that you mention India in your post. Is India part of 'the West'? India is a representative democracy, with an education system heavily based on that of pre-WW2 UK, has a relatively free market and a healthy middle class. It is also reknowned for it's religious liberalism. However it is still a predominantyl agrarian society with a polythesistic main religion. Where does this sit in the 'Western World'.

[J. F. McBrayer]

I understand your point there, I think, that democracy grew out of the Athenian ideal, into what we now think of as representative democracy.

However, Parliamentary democracy is, I feel, as much a product of Germanic cultures. For example the Anglo-Saxon Witenagemot. In addition, the granting of universal suffrage is a very modern idea, one that would be alien to a pre-Solon Athenian.

And to further confuse the issue, consider the Haudenosaunee, a non-Western democracy. It is thought by many to have influenced the design of the American constitution, though this is also credibly disputed.

Not to diminish European contributions to human liberty, which have been highly significant, if somewhat inconsistent.

It is interesting that you mention India in your post. Is India part of 'the West'? India is a representative democracy, with an education system heavily based on that of pre-WW2 UK, has a relatively free market and a healthy middle class. It is also reknowned for it's religious liberalism. However it is still a predominantyl agrarian society with a polythesistic main religion. Where does this sit in the 'Western World'.

I kind of like Mohandas Gandhi's response when asked by a reporter what he thought of Western civilization: "It would be a good idea."

[Axel Pettersson]

I understand your point there, I think, that democracy grew out of the Athenian ideal, into what we now think of as representative democracy.

However, Parliamentary democracy is, I feel, as much a product of Germanic cultures. For example the Anglo-Saxon Witenagemot. In addition, the granting of universal suffrage is a very modern idea, one that would be alien to a pre-Solon Athenian.

Absolutely, it would be difficult to argue that one idea so broad as democracy goes from one place in time to another without changeing and taking influende from other ideas.

It is interesting that you mention India in your post. Is India part of 'the West'? India is a representative democracy, with an education system heavily based on that of pre-WW2 UK, has a relatively free market and a healthy middle class. It is also reknowned for it's religious liberalism. However it is still a predominantyl agrarian society with a polythesistic main religion. Where does this sit in the 'Western World'.

Once again it would probably depend on how you define it (religiously, politically, languagewise, ethnically and on and on). If democracy is a western invention (I think it is) then sure! But India is mora than just a form of democracy for sure. Influenced by western values perhaps?

A free market does not have to be western either, also depending on how you want to define it.

Anyways, if I wanted to make the whole world democratic (I want to) then I can no longer expect to say that democracy is western (it seems a paradox). its roots are western, but there is as showed one form of democracy in India and other in other places.

Darn, I feel about as far away from HEMA as I can possibly be, it only feels like an on topic discussion because it has to do with the editorial, not with Historical European Martial Arts (I did not see the link between those two so clearly in the first place, probably a languge barrier).

[J Marwood]

OT, but an excellent list of such works is the St John's College reading list

Why would you use their reading list?

Because I think holds a large number of books that have been influencial in a wide number of cultures.

and you don't even believe it exists. You are even hinting that we have made it up... even though, of course, it is taught at Oxford and most other respectable colleges. I guess we do have a lot of influence.

What I have said, is that I am unlcear of what is meant by 'western culture', and that includes the St John's college reading list. I can take a guess as to what you mean by it, but discussing the foundations or otherwise of something is impossible without first understanding what it is we are talking about.

For example Mr Clement's article (prior to be being edited) mentions jurisprudence as a particular merit of the west. However, we see very different legal approaches between the adversarial legal systems of the UK and US, and the inquisitorial system more common in Italy. How do we reconcile these differences in this overarching definition?

[J Marwood]

Darn, I feel about as far away from HEMA as I can possibly be, it only feels like an on topic discussion because it has to do with the editorial, not with Historical European Martial Arts (I did not see the link between those two so clearly in the first place, probably a languge barrier).

This is true and perhaps it would be time to move the non-HEMA related discussions elsewhere. Opinions? Mod decision?