You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
07/07/07...end of the world ?
- Thread starter SmithMachine
- Start date
I think accomplishments of intelligence, such as invention and innovation, are very good measures of a civilization's intelligence, yes. The Mayans couldn't even figure out beasts of burden. If feats of invention and innovation are not good determiners, what do you propose are?Is basing a civilizations intelligence level around what they did or did not invent a way to determine anything?
If it is, then we're an extremely ignorant civilization compared to in say 500 years.
I hate to burst your bubble, but the wheel wasn't invented 500 years after the collapse of the pre-Columbian Maya civilization. The wheel was invented about 7000 years ago, and the last vestiges of the Mayan civilization fell around 1700. Unless you think a civilization making use of the wheel in the year 1627 was 500 years ahead of everyone else, your analogy is not a very good one.
I think accomplishments of intelligence, such as invention and innovation, are very good measures of a civilization's intelligence, yes. The Mayans couldn't even figure out beasts of burden. If feats of invention and innovation are not good determiners, what do you propose are?
I hate to burst your bubble, but the wheel wasn't invented 500 years after the collapse of the pre-Columbian Maya civilization. The wheel was invented about 7000 years ago, and the last vestiges of the Mayan civilization fell around 1700. Unless you think a civilization making use of the wheel in the year 1627 was 500 years ahead of everyone else, your analogy is not a very good one.
I couldn't get my dog to quit going to the bathroom in the house. A lot of other people don't have this problem. I guess since I can't figure out how to get my dog to quit going to the bathroom in the house, my intelligence is lacking. Of course he's outside from now on.
You completely picked a random number that I picked and went with it. The number could've been 100, 1000, or 1000000000 years. What you completely missed was the point that as society ages new inventions and discoveries happen. This doesn't make the past said society stupid. We should prob use the word ignorant rather than stupid anyway as stupid deems one is without the capacity of improvement through learning. Anyway, the point was not when the wheel was created but rather as a society grows so does it's advancement. What we are accomplishing this year will more than likely look elementary compared to what is happening 500, 1000, or 10,000,000 years from now.
And i bet everything i own that the world isent gonna end tomorrow.
I'll take you up on that. So, if you're wrong - I get all your stuff! wooohooo! ......oh, wait a minute....
Since you've opened the door, I think your intelligence is called into question by the fact that you wish for a filthy beast to live indoors with you. It's an irony that since you are here, you are probably concerned with health, yet you see no problem with having a dirty animal in your home, fouling the air your breathe and the items inside your house. It is also foolish to expect an animal to act in any other way than empty its bowels or bladder when the urge strikes.I couldn't get my dog to quit going to the bathroom in the house. A lot of other people don't have this problem. I guess since I can't figure out how to get my dog to quit going to the bathroom in the house, my intelligence is lacking. Of course he's outside from now on.
The wheel was not new at the time of the Mayan civilization. The wheel was thousands of years old before the Mayan civilization even existed. You talk about "new inventions" but the wheel was never a new invention because as far as we can tell, it was the first invention. It's not like I'm blaming them for not having the steam engine or printing press.You completely picked a random number that I picked and went with it. The number could've been 100, 1000, or 1000000000 years. What you completely missed was the point that as society ages new inventions and discoveries happen. This doesn't make the past said society stupid.
We should prob use the word ignorant rather than stupid anyway as stupid deems one is without the capacity of improvement through learning. Anyway, the point was not when the wheel was created but rather as a society grows so does it's advancement. What we are accomplishing this year will more than likely look elementary compared to what is happening 500, 1000, or 10,000,000 years from now.
The lack of the wheel was elementary to people living 5,000 years BEFORE the Mayans. If you were to whisk an ancient Sumerian ahead a few thousand years in history to show them the Mayans, they'd say, "What, no wheels? No animals doing labor? Is there something in the water that made people stupid over the past thousand years?" Seriously, using a beast to pull a load is not exactly rocket science, but it somehow escaped the Mayans for the entire history of their civilization.
You still haven't answered my question about how we should judge how smart a civilization is.
You still haven't answered my question about how we should judge how smart a civilization is.
Perhaps by how much YOU know. Honestly why do you have turn everything into an arguement and try to show how much more you know than everyone else?
And by the way your term "pre-Colombian Maya" statement is WRONG. The Mayas come and still live in the Central American region currently Guatemala and parts of Southern Mexico. The indigenous people of Columbia are the Embera who still live in the Choco-Uraba area of northwestern Colombia in the Murindo Rainforest.
(Go ahead and feel free to go into a 10 page lecture disecting my post and telling me how wrong I am)
You still haven't answered my question about how we should judge how smart a civilization is.
Your intelligence is in serious question at the mere fact you are asking people you deem inferior to you about how you can judge something. One can judge a civilization in many ways. One of which is common-sense, humanity, how it fought wars, its empire, influence on modern society etc.
And by the way your term "pre-Colombian Maya" statement is WRONG. The Mayas come and still live in the Central American region currently Guatemala and parts of Southern Mexico. The indigenous people of Columbia are the Embera who still live in the Choco-Uraba area of northwestern Colombia in the Murindo Rainforest.
I used the adjective "pre-Columbian" to distinguish that civilization from the current diaspora of Maya. It's no more incorrect than saying "ancient Egypt" in order to distinguish that civilization from the current population of Egypt.
Since you've opened the door, I think your intelligence is called into question by the fact that you wish for a filthy beast to live indoors with you. It's an irony that since you are here, you are probably concerned with health, yet you see no problem with having a dirty animal in your home, fouling the air your breathe and the items inside your house. It is also foolish to expect an animal to act in any other way than empty its bowels or bladder when the urge strikes.
The wheel was not new at the time of the Mayan civilization.
You still haven't answered my question about how we should judge how smart a civilization is.
It's good to know that you consider animals filthy beasts. I'm sure that when you have kids/grandkids you will reiterate your beliefs and not allow any animals inside the house. I've known animals that were cleaner than some people.
Why are you still stuck on the wheel? I thought we were past that? You're either supra-focused or extremely narrow-minded that you're still stuck on the wheel which was just an example of an object.
My argument was never on judging how smart a civilization was. I just merely mentioned that pretty much future civilizations will out-perform, out-invent, and out-create previous generations.
However, you seem bent on some sort of expanded argument.
I've never said that anyone is inferior to me.Your intelligence is in serious question at the mere fact you are asking people you deem inferior to you about how you can judge something.
One can judge a civilization in many ways. One of which is common-sense, humanity, how it fought wars, its empire, influence on modern society etc.
The issue was how to judge how "smart" a civilization is, not how to judge it. It was Moonbeam who said that the Mayans were one of the smartest civilizations ever. Since they never figured out the wheel and beasts of burden, I disagreed.
However, you seem bent on some sort of expanded argument.
The fact is, he seems to have a serious problem which requires him to be the centre of attention all of the time.
tanizaki said:I used the adjective "pre-Columbian" to distinguish that civilization from the current diaspora of Maya. It's no more incorrect than saying "ancient Egypt" in order to distinguish that civilization from the current population of Egypt.
Actually it IS very incorrect. Not at all like "ancient Egypt" and the current population of Egypt because the Maya never were in Colombia or what Colombia currently is and are not there now or ever will be...
Actually it IS very incorrect. Not at all like "ancient Egypt" and the current population of Egypt because the Maya never were in Columbia or what Columbia currently is and are not there now...
"Pre-Columbian" means before Christopher Columbus, a navigator and explorer of some note. The word has nothing to do with Colombia, a country in South America, or Columbia, a university in New York City.
"Pre-Columbian" means before Christopher Columbus, a navigator and explorer of some note. The word has nothing to do with Colombia, a country in South America, or Columbia, a university in New York City.
You can't change you context half way through a discussion.
ahh. ok. well then you can't compare it to your previous statement (Ancient Egypt and people currently there now) which you did.
How so? It's simply a temporal designator.
Seriously, it's impolite to take part in a conversation if you don't know the meanings of the words. Not knowing "pre-Columbian" in a discussion of Latin American history is analogous to being baffled by the word "colonial" when talking about North American history.
You can't change you context half way through a discussion.
How was context of anything changed? Moonbeam was the one who raised the topic of the pre-Columbian Maya.