zompist bboard

I'm looking for a specific instance of this (or something very similar) having taken place on earth:

A Verdurian scientist may be mocked for pursuing studies of no apparent practical value (such as the reconstruction of protolanguages, or the theory of evolution), but he will no longer be stripped and covered with horse dung-- an occasional imperial punishment for idle philosophers.

http://www.zompist.com/pagan.htm

rotting ham wrote:I'm looking for a specific instance of this (or something very similar) having taken place on earth:

A Verdurian scientist may be mocked for pursuing studies of no apparent practical value (such as the reconstruction of protolanguages, or the theory of evolution), but he will no longer be stripped and covered with horse dung-- an occasional imperial punishment for idle philosophers.

http://www.zompist.com/pagan.htm

Tarring and feathering?

Dewrad wrote:Tarring and feathering?

No, I could've sworn I read about it somewhere. Maybe it's just the level of realism in Almea. The closest I can think of at the moment is Hindu prayascitta. Devotees found guilty of misconduct were made to wash their hair with cow dung, or as a more severe form of penance, to eat it. Why cow dung? Because it's "holy, but inedible".

BTW, I don't understand why a culture that looks down on abstract thinking so much would produce a strong philosophical tradition. Greek conservatives thought philosophical inquiry was dangerous, but most Greek citizens seemed to have been in awe of Plato's wisdom. As far as I can see, every terrestrial culture strong on philosophy has been more obsessed about truth and wisdom than how to make the barley ripen faster. (at least in its spare time :p)

rotting ham wrote:BTW, I don't understand why a culture that looks down on abstract thinking so much would produce a strong philosophical tradition. Greek conservatives thought philosophical inquiry was dangerous, but most Greek citizens seemed to have been in awe of Plato's wisdom.

I think you're over-thinking it. The culture that produced the first artificial life form is also the most religious country in the developed world. The same country that created the gulag archipelago also created The Gulag Archipelago.



For further reading, see below:

Cultures aren't monolithic... our own culture produces people speaking in tongues and zealous atheists, communists and libertarians, scientists and people who deny everything science comes up with.

Modern American culture is unusually modular, with countless club-like subcultures such as this one. Unless they inherited philosophy prepackaged with an older tradition like medieval Europe, I think Cadhin philosophers would at least need a substantial appreciative cultural bubble to work in. In savage times, it's impossible to devote oneself to philosophical inquiry without overwhelming lay support. To begin with, how would schools attract young pupils when their friends and family have zero respect for philosophers? They can't find out about the awesomeness of philosophy through Wikipedia. The cultural carnival you see today is the result of a smaller world with light speed communications.

PS. The Middle East used to be somewhat similar to 21st century America in this respect when it was the mercantile center of Eurasia.

I understand the dilemma here. It would be hard for natural sciences to develop without some form of German skepticism, so to speak. Without sufficient scoffing, philosophy may very well float off into unreachable heights, like in the case of Advaita Vedanta.

However, would it develop at all in the unfriendly environment of Cadhinas?

If so, why? What motivates Cadhinorian philosophers?

All cultures have controversies. Look at the Greek or Roman wavering between democracy, republicanism, and autarchy, their extremely divided religious thought, and differing attitudes toward war. Medieval Christendom was highly divided on the worth of Aristotle— Aquinas was at first resisted, and the Orthodox remained dismissive. China was divided on the acceptability of Buddhism, attitudes toward state power, women's role, openness to the maritime world, and more.

You're over-extrapolating from one data point. Cadhinas was not one entity. Some Cadhinorians enjoyed philosophy, some hated it, and most were indifferent. (And of course "philosophy" isn't unified either.)

Thanks, being a socially acknowledged matter of controversy would probably have been enough. If the masses generally disregarded impractical speculation as piffle, then the schools would've only attracted outcasts, rebels and conspiracy theorists. I was wondering just how close to the Piraha the Cadhinorians saw themselves in terms of unrepentant straight-headedness.

PS. "And of course "philosophy" isn't unified either." Label for head in the clouds daydreaming.

Do cultures have to be monolithic for this sort of discussion on social dynamics?

zompist wrote:China was divided on the acceptability of Buddhism, attitudes toward state power, women's role, openness to the maritime world, and more.

China had controversies about state power and women's roles? I thought they were resolutely patriarchal and autocratic for pretty much all their history.

The fact Chinese society and history is very much male-oriented and autocratic, that doesn't mean people in China didn't and don't disagree with chauvinism and autocracy. It just means they repeatedly have lost to the other guys.

You thought wrong.

(I know that's a bit abrupt. Slightly less so: China was divided on the acceptability of Buddhism, attitudes toward state power, women's roles, openness to the maritime world, and more. Details can be found in Mote's Imperial China.)

If you think Confucian culture was/is patriarchal and autocratic, you should read up on the philosophy of Legalism under the first Emperor. Confucius was socially liberal by the standards of his time.

Only a kneejerk reaction, but off the top of my head I think that at the top levels China has probably historically been less patriarchal than medieval and early modern Europe. Dowager empresses in particular seem to have been a lot more powerful than European equivalents.