Where debating everything under the sun is only the beginning

Quote from: string on 2014-03-03, 11:18:19

Speaking of "Life", the Life Expectancy of people has increased a lot over the centuries. It must have taken an awful lot of religion to achieve that!

I see, elder people were unknown before the miracle of the industrial revolution and life expectancy has certainly exploded with the advent of atheism...

You might well be on to something!!! A quick look at a few graphs and charts show that both atheism and life expectancy rates started a steep climb from 1950 onwards!

Hallelupasta?

Hallelupasta?

Quote from: garydenness on 2014-03-03, 20:44:34

..........charts show that both atheism and life expectancy rates started a steep climb from 1950 onwards!

[glow=green,2,300]Wonderful. Mix it with gay liberation and you'll have the secret for eternal life... [/glow]

Education and social cohesion (you can pick other terms too if you wanted) are two of the foundations of society. How do you measure them? Growing middle classes, wealth, technological development etc etc.

Sustained peace? When did that happen? Ever?

Please back on topic, will you.

Quote from: garydenness on 2014-03-03, 20:30:46

Education and social cohesion (you can pick other terms too if you wanted) are two of the foundations of society. How do you measure them? Growing middle classes, wealth, technological development etc etc.

As I thought. We measure those things very differently. I measure education by the quality of books people write. The comparative number of schools and students in successive eras is also a good measure, and evaluations as to what extent rulers support those institutions.

Social cohesion is measured by lack of internal strife, stability of social and administrative institutions, continuity of traditions. Things like that. Something called middle class is applicable only to this century and previous. It's a rather anacronistic and dubious concept to all earlier times.

Quote from: garydenness on 2014-03-03, 20:30:46

Sustained peace? When did that happen? Ever?

There have been times and places. A current immediate example is Sweden - 300 years of peace. This is not unprecedented, depends on how you delimit it. If you desperately refuse to see peace among people and prosperity of arts and  sciences in old times, you won't see it.

Sweden is a great example. I agree. If you can quietly ignore the half dozen or so wars that they've gotten themselves involved in over the last 300 years.

I'll award you ten bonus points if you can name the single civilisation in human history that did not arm itself and use those arms.

What has undoubtedly gone over your head, is that you have in a backhanded manner, agreed with my original point.

I suspect the vast majority of people a thousand years ago has a crystal clear sense of purpose. As you say. Something along the lines of 'try not to die today'. Rich people joined in. 'Try not to die this week'.

what I think you'll find is that with a decent education, you'll normally find a population making more intelligent decisions leading to increased prosperity, technological developments etc etc. That there are decent schools tends to be the forerunner of all of this...

Quote from: garydenness on 2014-03-04, 19:30:57

Sweden is a great example. I agree. If you can quietly ignore the half dozen or so wars that they've gotten themselves involved in over the last 300 years.

Sorry I got the number wrong http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=114&artikel=5746324
They celebrated mere 200 years of peace. Looks like they consider loss of Finland also a war, even though this was practically decided in a real war a 100 years earlier.

This is how Swedes define their peace. You are of course welcome to your own opinion on what peace is, but it will be unengaging as long as you don't spell it out yet you assume everybody should accept your silent premises.

Quote from: garydenness on 2014-03-04, 19:30:57

What has undoubtedly gone over your head, is that you have in a backhanded manner, agreed with my original point.

Which original point? This one? ...

Quote from: garydenness on 2014-03-03, 20:30:46

I suspect the vast majority of people a thousand years ago has a crystal clear sense of purpose. As you say. Something along the lines of 'try not to die today'. Rich people joined in. 'Try not to die this week'.

This was the element I have been objecting to. It was a mere undertext at first but soon enough you spelled it out properly. The way I see it, you have actually conceded my point now when you say: 

Quote from: ersi on 2014-03-04, 20:20:53

Quote from: garydenness on 2014-03-04, 19:30:57

what I think you'll find is that with a decent education, you'll normally find a population making more intelligent decisions leading to increased prosperity, technological developments etc etc. That there are decent schools tends to be the forerunner of all of this...

Except that you talk without examples, i.e. without data, so it's hard to say. Well, doesn't matter as long as you remain unspecific.

WTF??

1. I have no idea what you're talking about.

2. You had a point? Seriously?

3. Planes, trains and auto-mo-fo-biles. Where's your data?!

Quote from: ersi on 2014-03-04, 20:20:53

Quote from: garydenness on 2014-03-04, 19:30:57

What has undoubtedly gone over your head, is that you have in a backhanded manner, agreed with my original point.

Which original point? This one? ...

No. My original point. I'm not helping you out here.

The mad mullahs of Iran have ruled that a man who poured acid on a young girl’s face should be punished by having his eyes gouged out and his nose and right ear chopped off, according to an Iranian opposition group.

The sadistic attacker, identified only as Jamshid, was convicted last October by the clerical regime’s highest court of deliberately pouring acid on the face of a girl named Shirin, causing her to lose her own right ear and eyesight, according to the National Council of Resistance to Iran.

The Muslim theocracy’s top judges routinely order grisly punishments, including stonings and mutilation, arguing that it is justified under Islamic laws.

Quote from: garydenness on 2014-03-04, 20:35:51

Quote from: ersi on 2014-03-04, 20:20:53

Quote from: garydenness on 2014-03-04, 19:30:57

What has undoubtedly gone over your head, is that you have in a backhanded manner, agreed with my original point.

Which original point? This one? ...

No. My original point. I'm not helping you out here.

I pointed out what I was responding to. You chose not to. So be it.

When I mentioned my original point, what I was referring to was my original point. Not some random point mid way through the conversation. The original one. I assumed that when I stated 'my original' point, you'd understand that that to mean the original point I made. This is a conversation. Usually, the original point will be the first point a person makes.

I didn't think this would be difficult. My bad.

Just to clarify, I was referring to my original point. Not any random points I made since then.

[glow=black,2,300]Iran orders man’s eyes to be gouged out after acid attack

[/glow]

Quote from:   The New York Post     http://nypost.com/2014/03/03/iran-orders-mans-eyes-to-be-gouged-out-after-acid-attack/  

The mad mullahs of Iran have ruled that a man who poured acid on a young girl’s face should be punished by having his eyes gouged out and his nose and right ear chopped off, according to an Iranian opposition group.

The sadistic attacker, identified only as Jamshid, was convicted last October by the clerical regime’s highest court of deliberately pouring acid on the face of a girl named Shirin, causing her to lose her own right ear and eyesight, according to the National Council of Resistance to Iran.

The Muslim theocracy’s top judges routinely order grisly punishments, including stonings and mutilation, arguing that it is justified under Islamic laws.

Anyone want to make book that they won't use sedatives or anesthesia?

Sounds like the peaceful law of a peaceful religion .......................  Yes??    No??

What do you think?

Quote from: Jimbro3738 on 2014-03-03, 10:16:34

Quote

Thousand years ago people were more open-minded than they are now, and more structured, with a clear sense of purpose in their lives at the same time. This is an important measure for me at least.

The proof of which comes from where?

Thousands of years ago, people sacrificed their children to the gods. While I can't prove that, I believe it firmly.

With your standard of proof, I have plenty of proof: Read a book. Specifically, a book from a thousand years ago. Even more specifically, a book by the authors I mentioned.

There is little romantic about agrarian society, while there were exceptions life was poor, nasty, brutish, and short.

I get that the two of you think that poverty and ignorance is more noble than affluence, that suffering ennobles the spirit. But you are sitting in a comfortable century reading medieval romances, doing some mental time slumming, thinking you could get there what you can't get here.

There is little romantic about agrarian society, while there were exceptions life was poor, nasty, brutish, and short.

But you are sitting in a comfortable century reading medieval romances, doing some mental time slumming, thinking you could get there what you can't get here.

There is little romantic about agrarian society, while there were exceptions life was poor, nasty, brutish, and short.

Georges Duby (October 7, 1919 – December 3, 1996) was a French historian specializing in the social and economic history of the Middle Ages. He ranks among the most influential medieval historians of the twentieth century and was one of France's most prominent public intellectuals from the 1970s until his death in 1996.

You just might sound convincing, had I not grown up in a farm myself, amongst people who had been rural for times immemorial. You just might have a point if my knowledge were gathered from medieval romances.

Btw, do you know what a medieval romance is? It's a love story between a knight and a lady.

Quote from: ersi on 2014-03-05, 06:44:50

You just might sound convincing, had I not grown up in a farm myself, amongst people who had been rural for times immemorial. You just might have a point if my knowledge were gathered from medieval romances.

Your knowledge of medieval life was gathered from a twentieth century farm?

Quote from: ersi on 2014-03-05, 06:44:50

Btw, do you know what a medieval romance is? It's a love story between a knight and a lady.

I don't find that a very good description. It's about a knight, a quest, and the values of chivalry (visualized in a cross). What you're talking about is a later development, from the 12th century or so onward.

Quote from: jax on 2014-03-05, 06:25:36

I get that the two of you

I don't read [...] internet porn. Agrarians are nice for [...] smoking that stuff.

• I refer to two people, The Portuguese-Estonian Nostalgic Front


• The quoted individual from PENF has an embedded quote


• Confusion