Jump to content
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 877 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

.. be judged by people in the future using their standards of right and wrong?

Groups such as PETA and various "Friends of the Earth" would love nothing better than to ban the eating of animal flesh. Animals have "rights" too doncha know and to raise them for our nourishment is considered by some to be exploitation of the worst kind. Plus, raising animals for food is far less efficient than using the land to grow grains for us to consume directly. They of course ignore the fact that most rangeland isn't suitable for growing crops, but activists never let cold hard reality get in the way of their silly claims.

But I digress. Let's suppose that at some point one hundred years in the future, eating animal flesh is finally universally condemned and banned, and anyone that would even consider eating an animal or defend the practice, is denounced as evil.

My question: Are we evil today for eating animal flesh, because people 100 years in the future declare us to be evil?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me just say this..

Anyone shows up on our road sporting a PETA shirt and eyeing up on our horses to try and save them from the great lives they have with us..Go on in and try to take them..See how far you get before my bull mastiffs are drooling on your necks waiting for us and the sheriff to find you.

We'll be along around feeding time that afternoon or early morning.You'll just have to wait it out.

Don't worry,they won't eat you..As long as you just lay there nice and still..

:D

 

 

 

 

  • Haha 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Phorumities said:

.. be judged by people in the future using their standards of right and wrong?

<stuff>

 people 100 years in the future declare us to be evil?

Why wait that long? Very sure I will only make the century because Bill Door was on holiday but even 25 years back I can judge.

Also horses scare me almost as much as my cats.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Every generation feels compelled to vilify its predecessors. Part of that is the clarity that perfect 20-20 hindsight delivers and part of that is rationalization.

Rationalization because when a new generation wants to make its own questionable decisions, part of the PR campaign involves making their elders look silly, depraved, incompetent or evil.

Its wasteful and undignified, but it is very much a component of human nature.

Every generation sees itself as Crusaders To Save the World, even the ones lining mass graves with its dissenters.

Edited by AmandaKeen
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, AmandaKeen said:

Every generation feels compelled to vilify its predecessors. Part of that is the clarity that perfect 20-20 hindsight delivers and part of that is rationalization.

Rationalization because when a new generation wants to make its own questionable decisions, part of the PR campaign involves making their elders look silly, depraved, incompetent or evil.

Its wasteful and undignified, but it is very much a component of human nature.

Every generation sees itself as Crusaders To Save the World, even the ones lining mass graves with its dissenters.

Rationalization can also be used to make one's own ancestors look "good" in an attempt to take on a shine from them rather than being judged on one's own merits right now. A historian's job is to accurately describe what people in the past did and the context that they were acting within. "Judging" what happened in the past is a waste of time.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Phorumities said:

My question: Are we evil today for eating animal flesh, because people 100 years in the future declare us to be evil?

Not on this premise, but where it could lead... possibly to an inflammitory thread that makes Tommy sad. Don't poke Tommy.

But to answer the point; are our ancestors 100 years ago evil? Or theirs 100 years before that? While there is a little cleanup of some facts, and one or two can be seen as evil, generally when the people are dead it's written off as unenlightened times.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Rationalization can also be used to make one's own ancestors look "good" in an attempt to take on a shine from them rather than being judged on one's own merits right now. A historian's job is to accurately describe what people in the past did and the context that they were acting within. "Judging" what happened in the past is a waste of time.

I tend to be a bit of a cynic where historians are concerned. I was present for some rather dramatic/traumatic events in the 1980’s and 1990’s and since then have heard “history” tell a highly revised version of those events.

When my children came home from school talking about the “new version” I was more than a little bit shocked.

History is written by the winners, and not always by the obvious ones.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Ivanova Shostakovich said:

I don't believe eating animals is the only thing future generations, such as they may be, might be cursing us for.

and if I may add, we don't have to wait for future generation. Even today we know that many things we do are wrong, yet we keep doing them. If we continue, there might be no future generations, or maybe not many of them.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, AmandaKeen said:

History is written by the winners...

This is an opinion that I've run across many times, and I think it is to some extent true but by no means universal. I'd bet there were at one time (maybe not so much now) more histories of the American Civil War by southerners than northerners. The trick with history is to read a lot of it and don't ever stop. People are always learning new things and making new observations. That's what historians do if they're worth a damn.

As for judging our predecessors by current standards, I'm against it. I judge the people I find in history by who they were in their own time. I get irritated, for instance, with things like the currently very prevalent Columbus bashing trend. Yeah, Columbus was a total racist and yes he was a religious zealot. BUT SO WAS EVERYONE ELSE IN HIS TIMELINE AND SOCIETY. He'd been immersed in that since birth, one can hardly blame him for it. He was also much too interested in personal profit for my taste, and of course he was dead wrong about the size of the earth. But with all that, what he did was a tremendous achievement, and he was without doubt one of the greatest sailors of all time.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AmandaKeen said:

I tend to be a bit of a cynic where historians are concerned. I was present for some rather dramatic/traumatic events in the 1980’s and 1990’s and since then have heard “history” tell a highly revised version of those events.

When my children came home from school talking about the “new version” I was more than a little bit shocked.

History is written by the winners, and not always by the obvious ones.

Note that I only said what a historian's job was, not whether or not it's being done well... : )

Also the history any of us received in our history classes probably isn't worth much because there's no way to go deep enough into everything in a setting like that. There are a lot of things that happened through history that the average person knows nothing about that may change the way things they "know," but that doesn't mean that those things have been "hidden", just not seen because they aren't looked for.

Personally I'm less upset about the state of the world right now than a lot of people, not because I like some of the things that are happening but because I'm aware that the same things happened before many times and, well, we've always been idiots as a [human] race but we've still managed to survive. For example, look up the "Palmer raids" of 1919-1920 and see if they don't look familiar...

Edited by Theresa Tennyson
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Dillon Levenque said:

and of course he was dead wrong about the size of the earth. But with all that, what he did was a tremendous achievement, and he was without doubt one of the greatest sailors of all time.

A classic example of Historical Revisionism...

Cristobal Colon wasn't a "sailor" at all. He was a mathamatics-illiterate, inept clerk, looking for a way to get rich quick.

1. He took the ancient Greek calculations for estimating the size of the Earth, that were well known and understood by scholars of the day, and got them badly wrong, grossly underestimating the size.

2. He attempted to calculate the distance east from Italy to China by converting the directions in Marco Polo's "The Travels" into a "Weat to East distance" using trig, and got it very badly wrong, because Marco didn't give accurate compass directions or distances but in stead wrote stuff like "...from the town of Shufti-el-Bunkup where we had purchased a great quantity of dates very cheaply, our caravan proceeded southeast-ish for 8 days to Bunkup-el-Shufti, where we sold the past-their-sell-by dates to the date wine makers for a considerable profit...". As a result of trying to convert that kind of info into lengths of the sides of a triangle, and angles, so as to work out the "eastern vector", old Colon got that figure, Italy to China very badly wrong in the opposite direction, way too high.

3. He subtracted the too high Italy to China guestimate from the way too low Size of the Earth guestimate, and concluded that China was 4 weeks by boat due west of spain.

4. He then went round the courts of Europe looking to borrow a boat and some sailors on the promise of a share of the VAST PROFITS he'd make coming home 8 weeks later with Chinese silk and porcelain at Direct-to-the-Public Discount Warehouse Prices!. He didn't count on most monarchs having clerical advisors a LOT better at the math than him, who told their employers "don't listen to Colon, he's a blithering idiot who cant count past 10 without taking his pointy shoes off".

5. Eventually he found a monarch with lots of boats who was willing to lend some because the monarchs wife liked Italian men in very tight tights... And away he sailed.

6. The Captain headed off with Colon by his side, for the 4 weeks, and no sign of China, the Captain wanted to turn back, Colon insisted they press on, and then, just as they were reaching the point of no return on food and water... Land Ho!

7. Colon walks up to a native, pulls out his copy of Marco Polo's Italian/Chinese - Chinese/Italian Merchants Phrase Book and...

...

Colon: Hmmm, lets's see, ah!  "Please direct me to the silk warehouse, I am an Italian Merchant and wish to make a large and very cheap purchase..." Wung Po Ping Chong Phat Dung!

Native: [heathen foreign gibberish] ?

Colon: I don't understand, this Chinaman doesn't speak Chinese!

Captain: Erm Mr Colon sir, correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't Marco Polo say Chinamen are yellow, with narrow slitty eyes, and dress in silk robes with long pigtails? But this chap is, well, brown, and wearing a cotton loincloth, and has round eyes and a mop of short hair... Not very Chinese at all, looks more Indian to me.

Colon: Damn it Captain, I TOLD you you were sailing too far south, we MISSED China a week ago and now we're in the East Indies! Hmm Polos Italian/Indian phrase book...   Where did I put that...

Captain: Never mind I have a man who's a dab hand at foreign languages... Sgt. Sancho, sort it out will you>

Sancho: WHERE-O TEA-O? WHERE-O SPICES-O?

Native: [heathen foreign gibberish] ?

*SMACK*

Native: OWWWWWW! [HEATHEN FOREIGN GIBBERISH]!

...

Some time later...

Sancho: I've had a friendly chat with Gotalotlbotl. He says they don't got any Captain, no tea, porcelain, silk, spices, none of that stuff, and he's never heard of these China and India places neither.

Captain: Sancho, you appear to have a new earing made of PURE GOLD! Where did you get it...

Sancho: Um, from Gotalotlbotl... Should I ask him where it came from?

Captain: Guess...

Sancho: WHERE-O GOLD-O?

*smack*

Native: OWWWWWWW! [HEATHEN FOREIGN GIBBERISH]!

...

And thus Cristobal Colon discovered the "West Indies" and gave the name "Indians" to all the inhabitants of the New World.

The rest, as they say is... History...

13 hours ago, Dillon Levenque said:

he was without doubt one of the greatest sailors of all time.

Hahahahahahahahahahaha! :D 

Funny...



 

Edited by Klytyna
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Klytyna said:

A classic example of Historical Revisionism...

Cristobal Colon wasn't a "sailor" at all. He was a mathamatics-illiterate, inept clerk, looking for a way to get rich quick.

 

Balls.

Columbus did what no European navigator had ever done. He left the coast behind and kept going, because he believed that a landmass was out there close enough for sailing distance and he had the guts to go find it. He had to navigate with compass, logs (look up nautical speed measuring and find out why they call it 'knots', if you're interested) and other primitive aids; it was over 200 years before the invention of the sextant. Despite all that, he managed to figure where he'd sailed accurately enough so that on his return trip he first sighted the coast of Europe less than a hundred miles north of his departure point, for which he was aiming.

In the US every schoolchild knows all that stuff about India/Indians (or at least they did when I was one); that is what I meant with the 'size of the earth' comment.

If you'd like to buff up your knowledge I recommend "Admiral of the Ocean Sea" by Samuel Eliot Morison. It's still in print; I see it on Amazon. I'd offer to loan my copy but I don't trust you not to mark it up.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dillon Levenque said:

Balls.

Columbus did what no European navigator had ever done.

back to school with you ;) some angry lovers of SPAM might be very upset of you calling them "no Europeans" ...

 

Edited by Fionalein
Link to post
Share on other sites

We could certainly be considered evil in the future but there is no way to foresee what the moral compass will be in 100 years. It would make a nice premise for a science fiction time travel story though. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dillon Levenque said:

Balls.

Balls indeed...

Mr Colon was no "Navigator", a Navigator wouldn't have made the errors he did... Strictly speaking he wasn't an Explorer either, explorers go out looking for NEW lands... Colon just thought he'd found a shortcut to one already known, that would bypass the trade tariffs and embargoes of the middle east, and allow for BIG profits on Far East Goods...

Not Navigator, not Explorer, just a Merchant with poor math skills...

First of all, he estimated the journey West to South East Asia at about 3700 km... Instead of 20,000 km...

He also estimated that the East Indies, and Japan were further north than they really are.

2 hours ago, Dillon Levenque said:

because he believed that a landmass was out there close enough for sailing distance

Not "A Landmass", South east Asia, because as we've pointed out, he could barely count...

2 hours ago, Dillon Levenque said:

He had to navigate with compass, logs (look up nautical speed measuring and find out why they call it 'knots', if you're interested) and other primitive aids;

I'm Ex Navy... Trust me I know what the terms originated as.

I also know that the basic principle of navigation at that time, was, still, to sail north or south till you were at the same latitude as your target, then sail east or west till you bumped into it. The same technique used by the Scandinavians, when sailing from Norway to Iceland, Greenland, and even Vinland, half a millennium before Colon. Tools such as the cross-staff, the astrolabe or the quadrant (a precursor of the octants and sextants).

I'm also aware that deep sea fishermen from Bristol were catching cod off the grand banks in the 1480's. And the Portuguese had already reahed the Cape of Good Hope, and were exploring the Indian Ocean, following the currents and tradewinds.

And for the record, Colon wasn't the first European to sail anywhere by "not hugging the coast".

Try the discovery of the Azores, in the 1420's, for example... Or the Portuguese again, discovering the currents and trade winds of the North and South Atlantic, in the 15th C, making two 'easy' routes for heading west and east from Europe, to the Azores and beyond, and for accessing west Africa.

To hear you go on, one would think colon was some kind of genius, who invented the idea of sailing out of sight of land...

He wasn't and didn't.

2 hours ago, Dillon Levenque said:

Despite all that, he managed to figure where he'd sailed accurately enough so that on his return trip he first sighted the coast of Europe less than a hundred miles north of his departure point, for which he was aiming.

Not he... The Sailing Master, and the ships Captain, not Colon...

2 hours ago, Dillon Levenque said:

If you'd like to buff up your knowledge I recommend

... Something not written by a Yank Admiral and doesn't puff up Colon? Be wary of history books written in the first half of the 20th C by Military Officers. Syme's "The Roman Revolution" for example, is very clearly the product of a British Officer, from the Age of the Raj, and tends to colour everything in that light.... Unsurprising as it was written in 1933.

I'm sure an American Admiral's 1942 work on "The Hero who discovered America!" is equally flawed.

3 hours ago, Dillon Levenque said:

but I don't trust you not to mark it up.

Thanks, but I wouldn't trust an American Admiral to find the "pointy end of the boat" that somebody with a lower rank and more brains is driving for him...

Which brings us back to Colon...

He might have been granted a title of "Admiral" for the voyage, but is maritime expertise seems to have been limited to saying...

"Hey yous, El Capitano... Aima da pointy enda thata way! Capiche? Are we there yet?"



 

Link to post
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 877 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...