Weapon/Tool Development/Anthropology... Formerly Blocking useless?

[JowGaWolf]

you are aware that the Christian church has burnt books that didn't agree with the bible? You seem to be singing out Islam for book burning, when the Christians were at least as bad for destroying non religious text (and killing the author), to destroy science

But the theory of burning of the library didn't say that Christians burned the library. Had they said that Christians burned the library because the library didn't agree with the bible, then I would have given a modern day example of Christians burning their own knowledge (which I can't think of a modern day example). But the theory is that Muslims burned it, so I gave a modern example of the Taliban destroying their own knowledge.

 

[jobo]

the key concept however is the muslims were and are active in destroying all historically significant artifacts. books, temples, statues, you name it they are actively destroying them.

but they are no madder than the,abundance of anti science , flat earthers , moon hoaxers, evolution didn't happen lot that American has,, that is all built on it not agreeing with the bible that would destroy the books if they had the chance, not to mention the lot destroying historical statues all over the south , and don't forget they burnt Beatles records for being anti god

 

[jobo]

But the theory of burning of the library didn't say that Christians burned the library. Had they said that Christians burned the library because the library didn't agree with the bible, then I would have given a modern day example of Christians burning their own knowledge (which I can't think of a modern day example). But the theory is that Muslims burned it, so I gave a modern example of the Taliban destroying their own knowledge.

well no they arnt,destroying their own knowledge, all that they are destroying it pre Muslim, so ergo, nit theirs

the most modern example of mass book burning, by christians was the,serbs,( Christians) destroying the books of the Bosnians ( Muslims) back in 1992

 

[jobo]

quite possibly the biggest loss to man kind since the burning of the library of Alexandra, was the,Christians burning the manuscripts of the,mayans back in the,1500s, god only knows what knowledge of early civilisations was lost

 

[JowGaWolf]

Christians have done it ONCE, Christians have done it thousands of times, if IT is supressing science literature and killing the,scientist,

Suppressing and destroying are 2 different things. Suppressing is an effort to keep something from coming into existence. Destroying is a "permanent" removal of something that exists. Christians destroyed works from their scientists, but much of their destruction of knowledge was the destruction of knowledge that came from different cultures. They took what they needed and claimed it their own and destroyed the rest. This is the more common type of destruction of knowledge that humans do. Destruction of your own knowledge isn't common in comparison since destroying your own knowledge is the same as destroying your own group, culture, or civilization. Which is what Christians were doing when they were destroying early science. Literature books are a different type of knowledge destruction. Here the knowledge may or may not be a historical or science base knowledge. Literature could be an opinion, satire, or even about sex.
When I use the term knowledge I'm thinking of something that can be used to improve or understand the world around us. Things that are done for entertainment like the National Enquirer type literature doesn't rank high on what I consider knowledge.

 

[jobo]

Suppressing and destroying are 2 different things. Suppressing is an effort to keep something from coming into existence. Destroying is a "permanent" removal of something that exists. Christians destroyed works from their scientists, but much of their destruction of knowledge was the destruction of knowledge that came from different cultures. They took what they needed and claimed it their own and destroyed the rest. This is the more common type of destruction of knowledge that humans do. Destruction of your own knowledge isn't common in comparison since destroying your own knowledge is the same as destroying your own group, culture, or civilization. Which is what Christians were doing when they were destroying early science. Literature books are a different type of knowledge destruction. Here the knowledge may or may not be a historical or science base knowledge. Literature could be an opinion, satire, or even about sex.
When I use the term knowledge I'm thinking of something that can be used to improve or understand the world around us. Things that are done for entertainment like the National Enquirer type literature doesn't rank high on what I consider knowledge.

killing what is currently one of the,clevererest men in the world for writing a book that contradicts the bible, IS destroying knowledge that would benefit man kind and the,countless millions that,died through the,destruction of medical knowledge

there are a long list of ancient book the,Christians burnt , fir not being Christian, are you in denial of this fact?

 

[JowGaWolf]

Christians burning the manuscripts of the,mayans back in the,1500s, god only knows what knowledge of early civilisations was lost

I agree with this. This is why there is such a gap. But that type of destruction of knowledge was common back then. If it was foreign knowledge, discovers would take what was useful to them and claim it as their own, destroy the rest, and force the inhabitants to learn their history, language, and perspectives. It wasn't until later on as civilizations matured, that they understood the value of what was lost by destroying that knowledge. I would hope that the lesson has been learned but human history has shown that there will always be someone out there that makes it a goal to destroy knowledge. A nuclear war would have a similar effect. Things of great value would be lost that aren't related to money, jewels, and precious metal. All research, knowledge, and information within the area of destruction would vanish.

 

[JowGaWolf]

killing what is currently one of the,clevererest men in the world for writing a book that contradicts the bible, IS destroying knowledge that would benefit man kind and the,countless millions that,died through the,destruction of medical knowledge

this fits my definition of what destroying means. I'll wait for you to catch up to my other statements before I reply

 

[jobo]

I agree with this. This is why there is such a gap. But that type of destruction of knowledge was common back then. If it was foreign knowledge, discovers would take what was useful to them and claim it as their own, destroy the rest, and force the inhabitants to learn their history, language, and perspectives. It wasn't until later on as civilizations matured, that they understood the value of what was lost by destroying that knowledge. I would hope that the lesson has been learned but human history has shown that there will always be someone out there that makes it a goal to destroy knowledge. A nuclear war would have a similar effect. Things of great value would be lost that aren't related to money, jewels, and precious metal. All research, knowledge, and information within the area of destruction would vanish.

no, if it contradicted the bible they would destroy t, if it was other wise useful ir not, anything that said the garden if Eden wasn't the birth of humanity and any thing that,suggested the tribes of Israel wernt the colonizers of the world was destroyed.

any Medicine that didn't involve praying would have you burn as a witch,

even suggesting the earth was a) round and b) not the centre of the universe was instant death.

the, suppression of,science was,absolute, at a1000ad europe was backwards compared to the romans and very much behind the Muslim word in Technology, which is why they kept getting beat in the crusades

 

[JowGaWolf]

no, if it contradicted the bible they would destroy t, if it was other wise useful ir not, anything that said the garden if Eden wasn't the birth of humanity and any thing that,suggested the tribes of Israel wernt the colonizers of the world was destroyed.

any Medicine that didn't involve praying would have you burn as a witch,

even suggesting the earth was a) round and b) not the centre of the universe was instant death.

the, suppression of,science was,absolute, at a1000ad europe was backwards compared to the romans and very much behind the Muslim word in Technology, which is why they kept getting beat in the crusades

Which burnings destroyed some knowledge but the majority of it wasn't on destroying knowledge. The majority of it was simply accusing people of things that weren't true. Some of the killings were done to advance power or to feel powerful. There were regular people who didn't practice medicine or science that were burned or drowned for being a witch. They are records of women being burned as a witch simply for having sex. While some people who had valuable knowledge were killed. I wouldn't classify it as a culture destroying it's own knowledge. Anymore than a murder killing a doctor or scientist today.

For me when a culture destroys it's own knowledge, it's done by destroying the institutions that distribute that knowledge. Your example of the round earth vs flat earth would fit into this category as the church really did attack the institution with the goal of destroying it and later suppressing it

 

[jobo]

mean while the Chinese had discovered gun powder, whilst Europe was,still trying to get the bow and arrow to work properly

 

[jobo]

Which burnings destroyed some knowledge but the majority of it wasn't on destroying knowledge. The majority of it was simply accusing people of things that weren't true. Some of the killings were done to advance power or to feel powerful. There were regular people who didn't practice medicine or science that were burned or drowned for being a witch. They are records of women being burned as a witch simply for having sex. While some people who had valuable knowledge were killed. I wouldn't classify it as a culture destroying it's own knowledge. Anymore than a murder killing a doctor or scientist today.

For me when a culture destroys it's own knowledge, it's done by destroying the institutions that distribute that knowledge. Your example of the round earth vs flat earth would fit into this category as the church really did attack the institution with the goal of destroying it and later suppressing it

that not my point, people who were using medicine proven to work from ancient times, were burnt, this as late,as the,1700s, it was considered a black art

that non medical people were also burnt doesn't change that

 

[jobo]

that not my point, people who were using medicine proven to work from ancient times, were burnt, this as late,as the,1700s, it was considered a black art

that non medical people were also burnt doesn't change that

there have been witch trials in Europe, Italy springs to mind in the,20th century

 

[jobo]

there have been witch trials in Europe, Italy springs to mind in the,20th century

in fact witch craft was a criminal offence in the UK u till 1951

 

[JowGaWolf]

in fact witch craft was a criminal offence in the UK u till 1951

Well regardless. Thanks for the conversation but I don't want to get into any discussion about Witch Craft. So I will end my contribution to taking the conversation so far off topic.

 

[Martial D]

This is descending into Art Bell territory, and fast.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Well regardless. Thanks for the conversation but I don't want to get into any discussion about Witch Craft. So I will end my contribution to taking the conversation so far off topic.

Why are you willing to discuss other religions but not paganism?

 

[Martial D]

Why are you willing to discuss other religions but not paganism?

Witchcraft =/= Paganism

 

[jks9199]

Admin Note:

This thread was created as a split from another thread after major thread drift. Please try to stay on topic, folks.

jks9199
Administrator

 

[Anarax]

I see your point, Kirk. But "should" is a subjective concept. In my opinion (for all that's really worth), even those maintaining a tradition should evolve. Sword styles should strive for better swords (surely we can actually make better swords today than were made 100's of years ago) and better technique - even if they are aiming to maintain a tradition held long ago. By "better sword" I don't mean necessarily a wholesale change of the weapon, but the tweaks over time that leverage what can be improved without discarding the entire concept. If they don't strive to improve (which will lead to evolution, even if only slowly), my argument would be that they are practicing a performance art (though I might still refer to it as a martial art - my usage is not consistent). My attitude is driven by what one can safely assume was the likely motivation of those who practiced the art at whatever point in time is being recreated/maintained: they likely were trying to be as good at it as they could.

Good point. IMO functional martial arts should strive to adapt to the time and geographical location that they're in. For example; if a Karate or Kung Fu teacher moved to the Philippines and opened a martial arts school their curriculum might start to incorporate more knife defenses. Considering the overwhelming majority of murders in the Philippines are done with blades, it would simply makes sense to do so. This can be done while still maintaining the concepts of your system though.

However; if preservation is what some want to focus on then I can understand their reasoning for doing so. Post Boxer Rebellion Wushu is probably the best way to got about it. Properly advertising what category your martial art fits into I think is were some schools could be a lot clearer. "preservation takes precedence over functional self-defense" probably isn't going to bring in a lot of students, but explaining that to students before they join is an important disclaimer.

If martial arts never evolved nor adapted we wouldn't have nearly as many diverse styles, which I think would be unfortunate.