MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Politics, The Final Frontier (Politics)
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 20, 21, 22 ... 104, 105, 106  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Since the nineteenth century, and arguably before that. I’m an academic and my experience is that it’s being used increasingly, both in publications and in museums. In some fields, it’s the norm. Seems like you want to lecture me otherwise. Sigh!

Although this is perfectly serviceable for the Twittersphere, AE-ists could hardly miss the string of rhetorical blunders Stewart has committed

1. The technically authoritative statement Since the nineteenth century conjoined with the argument-strengthening but non-authoritative and arguably before that.
2. I’m an academic. Never state that which is known.
3. In my experience is weak, subjective and true. Always use formulations like “it can readily be observed” which are strong, objective and not provably untrue.
4. being used increasingly Oh dear, he’s sold the pass. It seems Brear was right after all.
4. in some fields He’s sold it again.
5. Seems like you want to lecture me otherwise. Sigh. This can be a good sign off but not when you have just proved your opponent’s case for him.

Unfortunately Mr Brear now reveals himself to be not an academic but a simple hobbyist.

Well I don’t really want to labour this point but, having had a quick glance through some of my books, I find that Mattingly, Goffart, Lane Fox, Faulkner, Cunliffe, Millett, Ottaway and Collingwood/ Richmond all use BC. I could not find one book where the author used BCE.

What a dummy. Appealing to the facts!
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

There's a bit more to-ing and fro-ing, with others putting in their two-penniesworth, but Mr Brear eventually recognises when he's outgunned

Thanks Stewart - if I’m wrong, I’m wrong, my impression was that this was a fairly recent phenomenon. I think it’s something to do with passing 65. I was thinking just a few minutes ago that I do seem to be getting more truculent ...

Stewart is magnamimous in victory

That’s a generous reply. Thank you. Have a good weekend!

which is when our Hats decides enough is enough...
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

The BCE/CE formulation is clumsy. It is also incomprehensible. Common to whom? But we have no choice. OK, it's not ideal but if youse guys want to use our system then we set the ground rules. Do you think we atheists like intoning 'In the year of our lord' any more than you do?

This is very elegant. Note that Hatty is occupying the very highest ground of all since the one thing all academics are is atheist. Of course she is not spelling out who 'youse guys' are but I wouldn't want to be in their shoes by the sound of it. Stewart, who is in their shoes, tries the airy approach to this dangerous newcomer.

Commonly used (for the sake of convenience). From my point of view, shifting to “CE" is an acknowledgement of the issue at least and a way to signal awareness.

Only for Hatty to reveal the true enemy within.

By the mid 20th C (AD) Americans dominated the academic world. By the middle of the 2nd half of the 20th C Jews dominated the American academic world. They were irked by the Christianity of such a fundamental matter and started pushing for BCE and CE to replace AD/BC

Gorblimey, whasshedonenow?
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Stewart sighs with relief. He's been on a sticky wicket throughout because his basic argument -- that CE/BCE is convenient, politically and religiously neutral, logical and the new normal -- is frankly in tatters. He knows, in his corner of the Twittersphere, that striking an anti anti-semitic note is sure to unite all factions behind him.

There are a lot of conspiracy theories abt the Jews — that they control(led) academia, the media, finance systems, etc. I’m not going to engage w/ that further than to say we should be careful not to invoke those tropes in these troubled times.

Indeed, indeed. Hatty's response though is, I have to say, a bit feeble

The term conspiracy theory is generally pejorative, for good reasons. However labelling something a 'conspiracy theory' when it manifestly is not is an interesting sociological phenomenon. It's called cognitive dissonance by psychologists.

I will say why when I have finished fielding some irate phone calls.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

I am starting to worry that the experts might not know as much as I think. I always assume I am outgunned on knowledge, but the whole debate was really poor.

Stewart sighs with relief. He's been on a sticky wicket throughout because his basic argument -- that CE/BCE is convenient, politically and religiously neutral, logical and the new normal -- is frankly in tatters. He knows, in his corner of the Twittersphere, that striking an anti anti-semitic note is sure to unite all factions behind him.


No, I think he really believes he is surrounded by nasty anti-semites because he knows bugger all about the history of chronologies, and he knows less about different variants of historical time.

It's only really fanatics that want to impose one calendar or chronology. Most people of all religious groups, whether Muslim, Hindu, Christian, Jewish or anyone else, are relaxed about a multi faith world, with different festivals, chronologies and calendars.

So it really makes little difference whether it's CE or AD because people are always going to ask Stewart what is this Common Era? Why and how do we use it?

Stewart's answer, whether atheist or not, that it is commonly used so as not to offend, has no explanatory potential so this question won't go away.......

"What is the origin of the winter festival ?"

"Err"

"Was it Christmas?"

"Err"

"Who were the Christians"

"Err"

The answers becomes easier when you are more relaxed about alternative chronologies.....and less embarrassed by the origin(s) sic of your favored selection....
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Yes, I largely agree with this -- though I disagree that Stewart knows "bugger all about chronologies". I would think he is extremely au fait in this area since his academic speciality -- early medieval manuscripts -- is centrally concerned with the question. Which is where 'careful ignoral' comes in. He knows, or he ought to know, that the impetus for the CE/BCE formulation came from Jewish academics -- and quite properly so, they are as entitled to push for their preferences as are any other interest group.

Alternatively he knows, or ought to know, that this rather commonplace observation is in fact untrue. An urban myth. That it was some other group (or no group at all) that generated the trend towards CE/BCE. If so, he is in an ideal position to put Hatty (and other mistaken people) straight. To the great betterment of human knowledge. The fact that he chose instead to go off on an anti-anti-semitic rant means we are none the wiser. He did not, you will notice, either confirm or deny Hatty's thesis.

Of course Stewart would probably take issue with "Jewish academics ... as a(n) interest group" but that is a general problem in this whole area. It is always a matter of judgement whether a given group is or is not acting with a common purpose. Clearly this is not a Protocols of Zion situation but nor is it an "academics generally, some of whom happen to be Jewish" position. Unless it is! Stewart could have told us but chose not to.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

But on the Jewish Conspiracy angle it is worth pointing out that their days of striving for world domination seems to have passed, at least judging by the sorry parade of British Jewry luminaries that have passed across out TV screens during l’affaire Jérémie. In the old days we could rely on a cabinet minister, a grandee or two from one of the Five Families, a Chief Rabbi with a satisfyingly fire and brimstone mien, and an entire tribe of thoughtful intellectuals.

This time round the only thoughtful Jewish intellectual on view has been Jon Lansman and he’s on Jeremy’s side! (Blimey, he’s cleaned up his act since we were all entryists together.) As for the rest ... well, they seem to have appointed a chartered accountant as Chief Rabbi (it’s a trend -- Duncan Welby is even greyer). And the politicos! Strewth, we have to make do with Louise Ellman who can’t even do a decent Liverpool accent or John Mann ... he used to be my MP, we didn’t even know he was Jewish when we kicked him out ... or Lynn Featherstone (who she?). Of course there is the divine Margaret Hodge but, alas, she is past her redoubtable prime.

What this country needs is more Jewish conspirators not less. We can provide our own social workers and stand up comics, thank you very much.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

The term conspiracy theory is generally pejorative, for good reasons. However labelling something a 'conspiracy theory' when it manifestly is not is an interesting sociological phenomenon. It's called cognitive dissonance by psychologists.

The error Hatty is making, and it is a common one in these unstructured rhetorical debates, is that she is stating a simple truth. It just leads to the rebuttal “So what?” or the even more deadly no reply at all. Which is what happened and which ended everything then and there. That by the way is the second most common error – insistence on having the last word when the opponent should be left swinging in the wind.

But if a comment really is called for, it is generally best to take the opponent at face value, which keeps the ball in play, but making sure the goalposts are unobtrusively shifted the way you want them to be. Something along the lines of

Sorry, Stewart, I didn’t know it was a conspiracy theory. I actually thought it was true, even uncontentious, so thanks for the heads up. What then was the source of the impetus, would you say? I can see that less partisan labels would be preferable in an ideal world but it’s hard to understand why the entire world would ditch something that is familiar and makes sense for something that isn’t and doesn’t. Surely political correctness is not so strong in academia that we have to be perverse?
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Mick Harper wrote:
Yes, I largely agree with this -- though I disagree that Stewart knows "bugger all about chronologies". I would think he is extremely au fait in this area since his academic speciality -- early medieval manuscripts -- is centrally concerned with the question.


I will withdraw, but on what I can see he is no William Smith.
Send private message
Hatty
Site Admin

In: Berkshire
View user's profile
Reply with quote

The alternative form of “Before the Common Era” and “Common Era” dates back to 1715, where it is used in an astronomy book interchangeably with “Vulgar Era.” At the time, vulgar meant “ordinary,” rather than “crude.” The term “Vulgar Era” is even older, first appearing in a 1615 book by Johannes Kepler.

Replacing BC with CE may be a symptom of putting neutral science before religion, more to the point Catholicism which traditionally dominated scientific research. 1715 is by coincidence or not the year of the first Jacobite rebellion.

Kepler penned the bon mot 'Truth is the daughter of time'
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Well, Kepler would be writing in Latin (or maybe German) so I should like to know how they arrive at Vulgar Era. Astronomy books of 1715 would also likely be in Latin. But of course 'the common era' as meaning AD might have as wondrous a pedigree as one likes, it is is still undeniable that nobody actually used it in the modern academic era until ... well, that's the rub, isn't it? The fact that neither Stewart nor anybody else in the discussion did more than wave airily at antecedents would lead AE-ists to conclude that it is an antique usage of no relevance at all.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

There is a parallel situation over Imperial and metric measures. No matter how much British (and American) authorities try to teach succeeding generations of schoolchildren to use the latter in preference to the former, it still hasn't stuck. Not even nearly.

I do not say uniformity would not be welcome in any of these matters -- the Hubble space telescope would have worked first time if it had -- only that trying do so for the relatively trivial reason of contemporary political correctness should probably not be one of them.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Hatty wrote:
The alternative form of “Before the Common Era” and “Common Era” dates back to 1715, where it is used in an astronomy book interchangeably with “Vulgar Era.” At the time, vulgar meant “ordinary,” rather than “crude.” The term “Vulgar Era” is even older, first appearing in a 1615 book by Johannes Kepler.


"What was the common era?"

"Err well yes.... the common era was what used to be known as the Vulgar era."

"Thanks can you say more?

"Phew, yes I can in the olden days.... Bibles were produced in Vulgate Latin, these were populous commmoner tomes.......a good example is St Jeromes"

"Thanks.. Who was St Jerome?"

"Err... He was a raging anti semite."

"Oh Dear"

"Oh Double Dear"
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Mick Harper wrote:
The sting is in the tail.

Call For Papers for proposed sessions at The International Medieval Congress, University of Leeds, 1-4 July 2019 Materiality and Sanctity: St Thomas Becket Among the Saints Organisers: Dr Paul Webster (Cardiff University); Dr Elma Brenner (Wellcome Collection)

2020 will be a year of major anniversaries for the history of the cults of the saints of medieval England. Particularly prominent will be the 850th anniversary of the martyrdom of St Thomas Becket and the 800th anniversary of the translation of Becket’s relics to their magnificent (now lost) shrine in the Trinity Chapel in Canterbury Cathedral.

So terribly careless of them. England's No 1 saint at England's No 1 shrine too!


Of course if you are a linear CE sort of guy, where chronos doesn't offend, you get the impression that Beckett's translation was 50 years after his death. Because the numbers 50, 100 up to 850(!) are important to these folks......

In fact the translation was calculated according to the biblical jubilee
You shall count off seven Sabbaths of years, seven times seven years; and there shall be to you the days of seven Sabbaths of years, even forty-nine years. Then you shall sound the loud trumpet on the tenth day of the seventh month. On the Day of Atonement you shall sound the trumpet throughout all your land. You shall make the fiftieth year holy, and proclaim liberty throughout the land to all its inhabitants. It shall be a jubilee to you; and each of you shall return to his own property, and each of you shall return to his family. That fiftieth year shall be a jubilee to you. In it you shall not sow, neither reap that which grows of itself, nor gather from the undressed vines. For it is a jubilee; it shall be holy to you. You shall eat of its increase out of the field. In this Year of Jubilee each of you shall return to his property.


There is still debate about whether Jubilees occur on the 49th year or 50th....either way it's a cyclical calculation, not linear, and the scribes and historical actors act out events accordingly.

What aids understanding?
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

The Translation took place on a Tuesday because Tuesdays were special to Thomas' life (so called Thomas' Tuesdays) . Lawks oh Lordy. That's another strange coincidence in my (and everybody else's) linear world to tweet about.
Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 20, 21, 22 ... 104, 105, 106  Next

Jump to:  
Page 21 of 106

MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group