It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

human arrogance

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by dave_54
Whoever said a written language was proof of intelligence?


Who did say language was proof of intelligence?

That is a good question.

This may be considered to be way off topic, but I assure you it just seems to be.

What are the names of Gods who provided mankind with language?




posted on Dec, 18 2005 @ 12:50 PM
link   
Who did say language was proof of intelligence?

That is a good question.

This may be considered to be way off topic, but I assure you it just seems to be.

What are the names of Gods who provided mankind with language?


signature
Seeking the end of speculation is a fun hobby.
"BE NOT AFRAID"
- Every Messenger of TRUTH
Any other questions?
If yes, i refer you to the message.
To know yourself is to know there is another option besides serving conquerers or conquering servants.




that is a perfect example of my point. this statement appears to be based on the belief that a supreme deity actually exists. now before any body jumps all over me, let me point out that for tens of thousands of years many (if not all)groups of peoples believed in multiple deities, and now the convetional belief is in a single deity. so who is right? and if those many deities did exist, then where did they go when beliefs changed? and if they did not, then does this one? but most importantly did these ancient peoples that left no writing even believe in deities?

[edit on 12/18/2005 by jurasicdog]

[edit on 12/18/2005 by jurasicdog]



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 12:15 PM
link   
I think what is really interesting here is that we may be witnessing a cyclical event when it comes to monotheism vs polytheism. That in a time so completely blanketed (in the Western World) by Judeo-Christian ethics, in which we see an increasing saturation into our tenets of democracy, you also see in a younger group an emergence of pagan sensibility.

I do not proport to say this is a mainstream thought, but something that I have witnessed growing in popularity. Although this may have been the case for some time, I am only recently noticing these "arcane" systems of beliefs have found a more profound voice amongst my peers.

Our highly touted democracy did not begin with the age of enlightenment, nor with the Declaration of Independence. This is not a new idealology at all. Our Greco-Roman predecessors carried many of the same societal values, but in the confines of a polytheistic structure. Conversely, if we attempt to judge sweeping similarities based on our ethnocentric and microscoped perspectives, we may not see how different we have grown from these paradigms, and how our epistemology has been influenced by the bible and other commonly regarded scriptures.

To get more on point, do we dare to profess a societal superiority simply because we hold the benefit of historical review and hindsight? Pretend for a moment that we disregard undocumented civilizations of which we know little to nothing, and in our arrogance, hoist ourself into the proverbial "winner's circle" amongst modernistic and advanced societies, does this lend any more credibility to the monotheism that is so greatly entwined?

We are seeing a waning in attendance of congregations in churches and synagogues, and the emergence of common thought: spirituality sans Judaism and Christianity. Individually, I have witnessed two divergent paths here, non-deitial centric belifts and polytheism.

Of the latter, a sort of birth of neopaganism, the reemergence of these old cultural tenets that so many can trace roots to. For those of European decent, further back that the theistic edifice of Jerusalem, was Athens and Rome. It is seemingly naturalistic when you look at the repetitiveness of history.

Emile Gillabert in Moise et le phénomène judéo-chrétien wrote
"The Indo-European peoples, before they converted to Semitic ideas, had never considered their religion an absolute truth. Rather, they conceived of it as a heritage of the family, or the caste, and in this way they remained foreign to intolerance and proselytism. This is why we find among these peoples the liberty of thought, the spirit of inquiry and individual research."

By replacing that original polytheism with biblical monotheism, the Westen World has turned this into superegoism. Now that this is seemingly declining, current liberalism doesn't seem capable of enduring the spiritual support of man. So where else would we expect young generations to turn, excepting athiesm or agnosticism, but to their paganistic roots?



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 09:02 PM
link   
I don’t have a problem with going against the popular beliefs, but I do think that some evidence should be required. I’m a big supporter of the notion that anyone can believe something, it just doesn’t make it so. There are so many missing pieces to the puzzle of Pre History, but something like an advanced race, no matter how fanciful or fun, is highly unlikely. If you require only notions or whimsical stories, that’s OK, but some times people need even a small amount of evidence to make such a case.

Jeremiah25- That reminds me of a great book that I found years ago in a museum bookstore, which has since turned into a favorite of mine. It is called “Motel of Mystery” by David Macauley. Your professor’s example is pretty much right from the book, but it is even more effective when you see the book! The illustration of the skeleton wearing a toilet seat & sanitizing band is my favorite! A must read for anyone in the arch/anthro field who feels they know everything.

Though slighly off topic, I think it is linked... I’ve often thought about the future & the possibility of time travel. How will some of our artifacts be thought of, given the likely loss of documentation. I know it is pointless to consider, but time travel could make these discussions proven or dispelled by anyone, not to mention erased or added. If you think about it, especially with the recent Tutor joke, how could someone prove they were from the future? My thinking brings this topic full circle.



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 02:26 AM
link   
absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence, and that's IF you're willing to dismiss stuff like the nazca lines, the giza plateau and so on.

besides, i really like the comment about not looking in the right place:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



new topics

top topics
 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join