India: Ancient Superpower

reply to post by downisreallyup


oh god...

a particular form or stage of civilization

read it ffs ... then read this..

not like you did.

I think we can get a fairly good idea by looking at the above just how incredible the contributions by Indian civilisation is to civilisation.

well?

I flagged and stared it yet i got the beat down from watson and some dude who called me an arsehole

I had to star that post because it was awesome and made me laugh lots.

Originally posted by 13579
reply to post by downisreallyup

 

and the context is wrong...

its a stage of development !!!!! greek "civiliation" is not INDIAN is it?

why? because of the contentent its self... greek is a description of the time not the place..

sheesh

its like saying because im black / white i have my own civiliation ??? in the context the op is using it.

Thats why i said it would be BETTER to use CULTURE as a word.

becuase inida DID NOT HAVE A CILVISATION its a culture that MAKES a civilisation

using civilastion as deemed by your links are only PIN POINTS of humans CIVILIATION correct? BASED ON CULTURES

or dont you get that part?

Sorry, you are once again wrong. India does have a civilization, probably more so than most other groups, because they have a vast time period over which they lived in the same region of the world, and have developed their own cultures which combine to define their civilization. The Greek civilization is called that because it was a long period of time, containing several periods of culture (ancient Greek, classic Greek, modern Greek, etc.). The same goes for India, for India is a large body of people (1.3 billion), living in the same area, over a very long period, and developing their own culture, society, laws, religion, etc. Their books, writings, philosophy, etc. predate western cultures/civilization, and have shown to be far more advanced in many ways. If anyone is entitled to refer to themselves as a civilization, it certainly seems they are.

reply to post by TheLaughingGod

No, as I pointed out in my previous post I didn't call you an asshole, I said you're coming off as one since you're arguing about petty semantics that doesn't in any way hinder you from getting the message of the post. You're complaining about a few words and their meanings which isn't even of importance to the message as a whole while your posts are full of grammatical errors. It just seems like you're going out of your way to point out minor errors just for the sake of it even if they don't even detract anything from the message.

This is great...

No, as I pointed out in my previous post I didn't call you an asshole, I said you're coming off as one

Yup!

since you're arguing about petty semantics that doesn't in any way hinder you from getting the message of the post.

Correct.. that is why i flaged and stared it? and make my own "opinion" known that the wording was wrong. problem?

now this i do find funny..

You're complaining about a few words and their meanings which isn't even of importance to the message as a whole while your posts are full of grammatical errors.

what has that go to do with the topic? Grammitcal errors?

you mean like this one? COLOR or COLOUR? and you have the cheek to call me petty?

LOL

It just seems like you're going out of your way to point out minor errors just for the sake of it even if they don't even detract anything from the message.

No it seems your going out your way to prove a point that has no relation to the topic other than me "being an arsehole"

correct??

reply to post by downisreallyup

and have developed their own cultures which combine to define their civilization.

Thank you

you just made my point for me.

let me show you again .. be for you get all MR smarty pants on mwa

and they are your own words ..

and have developed their own cultures which combine to define their civilization.

they "humans" developed their own "not me" culture " way of being" which "combine"

Originally posted by 13579
reply to post by downisreallyup

 

oh god...

a particular form or stage of civilization

read it ffs ... then read this..

not like you did.

I think we can get a fairly good idea by looking at the above just how incredible the contributions by Indian civilisation is to civilisation.

well?

Yes, exactly, and this proves my point precisely. In his phrase, it is very easy to see how he is using the words, by looking at the context. Let me break it down for you:

"I think we can get a fairly good idea by looking at the above just how incredible the contributions by Indian civilisation (local civilization, as mentioned in my dictionary definition #3) is to civilisation (global civilization, as mentioned in dictionary definition #1)."

You keep posting things which prove my point. Is that what you are trying to do? Even when you posted the definition of a "culture" you also proved my point, since a culture is but one stage of a civilization, whether you are talking about global civilization or a particular civilization (Greek, Indian, Western, etc.)

You are trying to read those definitions as mutually-exclusive, and yet they are meant to be INCLUSIVE. Do you speak English natively?

Just for Giggles:

civ·i·li·za·tion (sv-l-zshn) KEY

NOUN:

An advanced state of intellectual, cultural, and material development in human society, marked by progress in the arts and sciences, the extensive use of record-keeping, including writing, and the appearance of complex political and social institutions.
The type of culture and society developed by a particular nation or region or in a particular epoch: Mayan civilization; the civilization of ancient Rome.


cul·ture (klchr) KEY

NOUN:


The totality of socially transmitted behavior patterns, arts, beliefs, institutions, and all other products of human work and thought.
These patterns, traits, and products considered as the expression of a particular period, class, community, or population: Edwardian culture; Japanese culture; the culture of poverty.
These patterns, traits, and products considered with respect to a particular category, such as a field, subject, or mode of expression: religious culture in the Middle Ages; musical culture; oral culture.
The predominating attitudes and behavior that characterize the functioning of a group or organization.

Originally posted by 13579
reply to post by downisreallyup

 

and have developed their own cultures which combine to define their civilization.

Thank you

you just made my point for me.

let me show you again .. be for you get all MR smarty pants on mwa

and they are your own words ..

and have developed their own cultures which combine to define their civilization.

they "humans" developed their own "not me" culture " way of being" which "combine"

Originally posted by Robbi
Just for Giggles:

civ·i·li·za·tion (sv-l-zshn) KEY

NOUN:

An advanced state of intellectual, cultural, and material development in human society, marked by progress in the arts and sciences, the extensive use of record-keeping, including writing, and the appearance of complex political and social institutions.
The type of culture and society developed by a particular nation or region or in a particular epoch: Mayan civilization; the civilization of ancient Rome.


cul·ture (klchr) KEY

NOUN:


The totality of socially transmitted behavior patterns, arts, beliefs, institutions, and all other products of human work and thought.
These patterns, traits, and products considered as the expression of a particular period, class, community, or population: Edwardian culture; Japanese culture; the culture of poverty.
These patterns, traits, and products considered with respect to a particular category, such as a field, subject, or mode of expression: religious culture in the Middle Ages; musical culture; oral culture.
The predominating attitudes and behavior that characterize the functioning of a group or organization.

Thank you Robbi, those are excellent definitions. And since we are talking about a group of people here (Indians) who have developed all those attributes mentioned under civilization, that is why it is more appropriate to use that word. They have languages (hundreds), advanced religion with massive amount of writings, complete legal system, complete political system, complete social system that is unique in the world (caste system), unique collection of foods, unique games, etc.

This really is very silly to be arguing over such a simple issue, and yet Mr. 13579 derailed the thread from the start, thinking he is such the linguistic police, and so I was just hoping he would admit he was wrong, so the OP could get on with it and not have to constantly be apologizing for doing something that wasn't even wrong.

reply to post by downisreallyup


No let me tell you

asia is not a civliation is it?

read it.. read the OP i did ..

and i only pointed out ONE word I have NOT said any information the OP has posted is a lie but what i did do is try and HELP him/her with how she/her was trying to put the point accross

You on the other hand THINK i have a problem with the context and reason for the OP

and i dont. but is that my problem? No its yours becuse I posted FIRST and i did so for a reason.. because i do in fact like the SUBJECT. i liked it that much i FLAGED AND STARED IT.

is it wrong really for me to point out a WORD that is being missunderstood even tho the intention of the post was NOT?

and yet i come across as the arsehole? wow

Alright everybody, now that we understand what civilisation is, let us come back to the larger point of the thread.

reply to post by zazzafrazz


Yes, I will definitely mention the India and Egypt connection later, with evidence to back it up. The first thing I want to cover because it is so crucial in defining Indian history is the Aryan invasion theory and it is also the biggest distortion of Indian history because it separates the vast literature of India from the Indus valley civilisation, when in fact I will demonstrate they are the same.

reply to post by downisreallyup


ITS NOT WHEN YOU ARE DEALING WITH A a group of people you you claim to be indian yet live continant of asia

are you that blind? really? look at watson for refrence even he admited the premis of the op is WRONG

by its very definistion civiliation MEANS HUMAN EVOLUTION

culture on the other hand is a desciption of HUMAN BEHAVIOUR that CREATES A CIVILATION

reply to post by Indigo_Child

Aryan invasion theory

what???????????

ok now you have to be kidding me...

Originally posted by 13579
reply to post by downisreallyup

 

No let me tell you

asia is not a civliation is it?

read it.. read the OP i did ..

and i only pointed out ONE word I have NOT said any information the OP has posted is a lie but what i did do is try and HELP him/her with how she/her was trying to put the point accross

You on the other hand THINK i have a problem with the context and reason for the OP

and i dont. but is that my problem? No its yours becuse I posted FIRST and i did so for a reason.. because i do in fact like the SUBJECT. i liked it that much i FLAGED AND STARED IT.

is it wrong really for me to point out a WORD that is being missunderstood even tho the intention of the post was NOT?

and yet i come across as the arsehole? wow

I never called you an arsehole, I called you stubborn. He did not use the word wrong.

And, for your edification, here is an academic essay on the Asian Civilization:

Asian Civilization

reply to post by downisreallyup

My gosh, you are really a thick-headed old mule, aren't you!

yeah i love insults.. "thick headed mule"

tho i did like arsehole better.. LOL crackers

Originally posted by 13579
reply to post by TheLaughingGod

 

No, as I pointed out in my previous post I didn't call you an asshole, I said you're coming off as one since you're arguing about petty semantics that doesn't in any way hinder you from getting the message of the post. You're complaining about a few words and their meanings which isn't even of importance to the message as a whole while your posts are full of grammatical errors. It just seems like you're going out of your way to point out minor errors just for the sake of it even if they don't even detract anything from the message.

This is great...

No, as I pointed out in my previous post I didn't call you an asshole, I said you're coming off as one

Yup!

since you're arguing about petty semantics that doesn't in any way hinder you from getting the message of the post.

Correct.. that is why i flaged and stared it? and make my own "opinion" known that the wording was wrong. problem?

now this i do find funny..

You're complaining about a few words and their meanings which isn't even of importance to the message as a whole while your posts are full of grammatical errors.

what has that go to do with the topic? Grammitcal errors?

you mean like this one? COLOR or COLOUR? and you have the cheek to call me petty?

LOL

It just seems like you're going out of your way to point out minor errors just for the sake of it even if they don't even detract anything from the message.

No it seems your going out your way to prove a point that has no relation to the topic other than me "being an arsehole"

correct??

For Gods sake would you just give it up..

No, not color or colour, errors like "grammitcal", there's probably 3 in every one of your sentences.

But I usually don't point out errors in grammar since I'm not that good with the language myself, I would be shooting myself in the foot.

If you didn't get it, I did it to make a point, that it's not of importance just like your opinion about his wording, and that you shouldn't complain about supposed errors in the OP's use of the language when your own posts are full of them.
However, the use of the word was appropriate so deal with it,
admit it's perfectly fine to call it indian civilisation and not culture, have a little intellectual honesty.

You're making a big deal out of me thinking you're acting like an asshole(smartass or besserwisser would be a better word), while at the same time you called downisreallyup an idiot until you edited that bit out.

I'm done with you.

[edit on 25-12-2009 by TheLaughingGod]

reply to post by downisreallyup


Yet you fail to understand one.. ASIA I NOT INDIA is it?

Look.. be for you post me some more lame stuff please

Indian civilisation deserves its credit as being known amongst the most greatest civilisations of all time.

first line of the OP

then you have the balls to post this?

And, for your edification, here is an academic essay on the Asian Civilization:


LOL

sorry what part of ASIA is not india am i missing in your logic?

you do now asia is a contentent right and india is a name for a place that happens to be IN asia

you know like CHINA?

or shall i skool you in geogrophy?

Originally posted by 13579
reply to post by downisreallyup

 

ITS NOT WHEN YOU ARE DEALING WITH A a group of people you you claim to be indian yet live continant of asia

are you that blind? really? look at watson for refrence even he admited the premis of the op is WRONG

by its very definistion civiliation MEANS HUMAN EVOLUTION

culture on the other hand is a desciption of HUMAN BEHAVIOUR that CREATES A CIVILATION

reply to post by downisreallyup


its prove you wrong

contributions by Indian civilisation is to civilisation.

This is a controdiction...

read it..

READ IT unless your to arrogant to say OK yeah your right he/she made a mistake?

I mean wtf?

reply to post by Indigo_Child


I am very interested in hearing the explaination about how Indian culture "seeded" Egyptian culture.

But, the Indo-Aryan culture refers to the cultures of Northern India. Historians are attributing it to a proto(meaning very early in identification) Indian/Iranian culture. Language, artifacts and culture differed distinctly in this period, from the N.W. of the Indian sub-continent, to the S. of the sub-continent.

The idea that any Europeans traveled to India, subjegated the populous and consequintly ruled the N. has fallen very far out of favor, mainly because of the ethnocentric connotations of it. Also, there is not much history(artifacts,etc..) to back up a culture coming from E.Europe and then mysteriously leaving India.

Also, it is thought that the "Invaders" came from modern day Iran. Linguistics, culture, etc... show trends that reinforce this. To this day the Languages of the area are called Indo-Aryan.