Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Isil'Zha.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Capt.Montoya
    replied
    words fail

    First reaction: LOL
    On second thought, seeing that you actually believe what you wrote:



    Be happy with your utopian dreams as escapism from distopian control conspiracy nightmares. I prefer to live in the real world.

    Raw Bean has it exactly right, if you believe we are fragmented just look at the past.

    P.S. if you don't believe history then you don't know it and you are doomed to repeat it...

    Leave a comment:


  • EarthandBeyond
    replied
    I never believed much in history - there was never enough facts to back up everything that is today in a history books. And all the facts that there ever were, are just to easy to fabricate. ( at least thats how i see it )

    Now for a moments lets imagine that tommorrow we manage to build an engine capable of interstellar travell. The whole galaxy would have been open to us. What do you think would have happend, then?

    As i see it, it would look something like this: Majore nations, such as Russia, China, America and EU, would made there own space programms to explore the Universe.
    And once planets simmuler to Earth are discovered, Russians and Chinas nations would be the first to leave Earth for good. And simply why wouldnt they? Just think about it: No more "American Democracy ", no more opposition in government(because simply, whom ever would not aggree with government policy, would be simply left behind), no more threat of terrorists atacks, no more bowing down to other countrys because of there resources, simply put: no more taking Bullshit from other countrys, and the most important: no more English language, no more foreign influence on traditions of Russia and China.
    Russian and Chinies people can finnaly find peace, and work as a 2 separate united nations to improve there living, there traditions, there languages, theer wealth.
    And eventually every other majore country would do the same. Leave Earth for good to find peace among the stars.

    But of couse there will be huge opposition against all of this. Alote of people would loose alote of power over general population. And they will try to do anything to prevent this. And maybe just maybe, they are doing it already now. Making us hummans look like a barbariens, sabotaging Space programs. Ever woundered why Humans havent visited Moon for the last 30+ years? Almost 40 years ago, a human first landed on the moon, we should have been colonizing the moon right now, and working towards the Mars, insted governments spend billlions of dollars on making and figting mininless wars, frightning people with constant treads of terrorrists atacks. They want us to be frightened so they can guide us in what ever way they choose too.

    Leave a comment:


  • raw_bean
    replied
    Originally posted by EarthandBeyond View Post
    Also, Languages, from my point of a view, is a part of something much bigger then just a source to divide us. Think about this:
    One species - divided in to hundreds different, smaller communitys - and here comes the real question: Why?
    Is it really that we can find some culteral inrichments with in this diversity? Or could the answear be much simpler : To control us.
    ...Except that that's pretty much the opposite of the course of human development so far.

    Go back far enough, and primitive humans lived in tribes that were pretty much extended families. There was 'us' which was a very small group, and them which was everyone else.

    Over time we developed larger societies in the form of villages or nomadic clans, expanding the 'us', and maybe even trading rather than warring with the 'them' that was everyone else.

    Feudal societies united even larger groups of 'us' under one Lord or ruling family, and potentially even formed alliances with some of 'them'.

    This eventually (mediaeval times onwards) lead to the formation of large 'nations' with common language and culture, where the 'us' counted people in the millions.

    While there have been many periods of wars and empire-building since then, these days we still have slowly expanding definitions of 'us':

    - with concepts like the 'international community', or 'western civilisation' that people talk about,
    - and meta-national organisations like the United Nations, The European Union, the British Commonwealth, and the African Union,
    - and then there's the best tool for unifying the world ever developed - the internet we're using to communicate (probably from different continents, assuming you're American) right now.

    As for language, less than a thousand years ago, language was so divergent that people in different parts of England couldn't even understand each other, their regional dialects were so different. It was the invention of the printing press and the common availability of the King James Bible that standardised the language enough to allow people from even a hundred miles away from each other to understand each other. Nowadays you could go to any fairly populous region (like a city) of any country in the world and be guaranteed to find somebody who spoke some English.

    In the end, I tend to be optimistic. While there's no doubt that there is much conflict and division in the world right now, and much to worry about in the near future of our lives and those of the next generation, if you step back and look at humanity over a long enough time-scale we're actually becoming ever more united. In my opinion I think we should be focusing on what we can change and effect in the here and now and "let history tend to itself."

    Leave a comment:


  • EarthandBeyond
    replied
    Originally posted by Capt.Montoya View Post
    I never said there was a "race gene", so let me be clear what I meant: groups of genes that have small differences between peoples of different regions. Some clusters of genes are more common between clusters of people in certain regions (e.g. lactose tolerance is more common for Asians, Hispanics are more prone to diabetes, Africans are more prone to sickle cell anemia, etc.)
    I'm also aware that if you "quantify" such genetic differences between people of different races and compare them to the genetic differences between persons of the same race the latter may be larger than the former.

    I share your P.o.V., that we're all humans of the very same species, but I see no wrong in recognizing that a few racial differences exist, and that they go deeper than the skin. I however draw the line at anyone saying that any race is better or worse.

    If that makes my position clear let's drop it, as the topic is a sensitive one that might distract us. I'm basically saying the same as you, but you call it "geographic allele differences" while I call it "clusters of genes in certain regions".

    Same thing, different words.

    Speaking of which....Then you only learned to translate, and did not really learn the language. Other languages sometimes have words for something that can only be translated as a phrase.
    To me that is cultural richness, that other people have words for concepts that the English language can't describe the same way. Same goes for how Engish can easily express some things that are harder to say in another language.
    If languages did not make you feel culturally richer too bad, to me it's an enriching experience.
    And I'm also fond of different alphabets, I can't read cyricllic, nor greek, but I recognize what most of those symbols are (i.e. the transliteration), and I actually think it's cool that other alphabets can represent with one character phonemes that the roman alphabet has to show as different letters.

    Frankly, whether aliens would chose to communicate with us or not is at the very bottom of my concerns.
    But think about this: if all we know is one single language how on Earth (and Beyond) would we ever know even where to start to speak with aliens?
    IMO it's only by being a diverse species, with different languages, that we can ever hope to know to learn a truly alien language if we ever need to.
    Same goes for you hypothetical aliens: if they only know one language how can they even get the notion to learn and translate a human language?

    Same goes for a unifed culture, if we are all the same, how can we even begin to understand that we might be offensive to an alien because they have different customs?
    And how would aliens be able to be understanding (and forgiving) of "quirky" human behaviours if they are a monolithic culture that knows nothing of sentient beings with different customs?

    Also think of how would we even think of translating alien script if we didn't have the experience and knowledge of different writing systems on Earth.

    Right now, for better or for worse, English has become the lingua franca of the world. That is how we communicate among people of different countries, of different native tongues, and this forum is an example of that already. Think about it, more and more people already can communicate through a common foreign (for most of them) language, English. And they also can communicate around the world through the internet.
    I think those two facts go a long way toward helping erase barriers, at least in communication.
    I was thinking about what you said, about culteral richness of different languages. I can see you point of view here. But i just think that, its hard way to do things. There is simpler ways of geting that culteral richness with out spending years of studying diffrent languages. - A one language that would have all "enrichment" of others languages.

    Also, Languages, from my point of a view, is a part of something much bigger then just a source to divide us. Think about this:
    One species - divided in to hundreds different, smaller communitys - and here comes the real question: Why?
    Is it really that we can find some culteral inrichments with in this diversity? Or could the answear be much simpler : To control us.

    Leave a comment:


  • Capt.Montoya
    replied
    Originally posted by grumbler View Post
    Actually, this is false. There is no "race gene" in the human species. Our genes are astonishingly homogenous (it is believed that humans had a "genetic bottleneck" some three hundred generations ago), far more so than most species.

    "Race" is purely a social construct. While there are differences in alleles caused by geographic separation, they are overwhelmed by the similarities, and unless one arbitrarily selects a gene and declares it to be the "race gene" (which will prove problematic, to say the least, because it won't result in "races" as we socially construct them) genetics provides us with no means of distinguishing reliably between any two groups of humans.
    I never said there was a "race gene", so let me be clear what I meant: groups of genes that have small differences between peoples of different regions. Some clusters of genes are more common between clusters of people in certain regions (e.g. lactose tolerance is more common for Asians, Hispanics are more prone to diabetes, Africans are more prone to sickle cell anemia, etc.)
    I'm also aware that if you "quantify" such genetic differences between people of different races and compare them to the genetic differences between persons of the same race the latter may be larger than the former.

    I share your P.o.V., that we're all humans of the very same species, but I see no wrong in recognizing that a few racial differences exist, and that they go deeper than the skin. I however draw the line at anyone saying that any race is better or worse.

    If that makes my position clear let's drop it, as the topic is a sensitive one that might distract us. I'm basically saying the same as you, but you call it "geographic allele differences" while I call it "clusters of genes in certain regions".

    Same thing, different words.

    Speaking of which....
    Originally posted by EarthandBeyond
    Well i speak 3 languages, and can understand 2 more. And i feel like it was a big waste of my time, learning all of them insted of just 1, because basicly what i did was, i learned to pronaunce "same words" in to 3 different ways.
    And i ask my self, did it really enriched me? The answear is no.
    Then you only learned to translate, and did not really learn the language. Other languages sometimes have words for something that can only be translated as a phrase.
    To me that is cultural richness, that other people have words for concepts that the English language can't describe the same way. Same goes for how Engish can easily express some things that are harder to say in another language.
    If languages did not make you feel culturally richer too bad, to me it's an enriching experience.
    And I'm also fond of different alphabets, I can't read cyricllic, nor greek, but I recognize what most of those symbols are (i.e. the transliteration), and I actually think it's cool that other alphabets can represent with one character phonemes that the roman alphabet has to show as different letters.

    Frankly, whether aliens would chose to communicate with us or not is at the very bottom of my concerns.
    But think about this: if all we know is one single language how on Earth (and Beyond) would we ever know even where to start to speak with aliens?
    IMO it's only by being a diverse species, with different languages, that we can ever hope to know to learn a truly alien language if we ever need to.
    Same goes for you hypothetical aliens: if they only know one language how can they even get the notion to learn and translate a human language?

    Same goes for a unifed culture, if we are all the same, how can we even begin to understand that we might be offensive to an alien because they have different customs?
    And how would aliens be able to be understanding (and forgiving) of "quirky" human behaviours if they are a monolithic culture that knows nothing of sentient beings with different customs?

    Also think of how would we even think of translating alien script if we didn't have the experience and knowledge of different writing systems on Earth.

    Right now, for better or for worse, English has become the lingua franca of the world. That is how we communicate among people of different countries, of different native tongues, and this forum is an example of that already. Think about it, more and more people already can communicate through a common foreign (for most of them) language, English. And they also can communicate around the world through the internet.
    I think those two facts go a long way toward helping erase barriers, at least in communication.

    Leave a comment:


  • raw_bean
    replied
    Originally posted by EarthandBeyond View Post
    But is there really a future for eveyone, not just a 100 millions or a 1 billion of people, that are living in few countrys. What about the rest of people/humans?
    I think, by dividing our self by bourders, languages, and a simply the way of living ( religion ) we only alienating our selfs one to another. And i feel like there is larger issue at stacke here.
    Since Earth isnt a center of the universe, by dividing our selfs in too 100's communitys, we are alienating our self possibly to other life forms in our galaxy.
    Think about it. If a spaceship/probe discovered our planet, what would they see? They would see a new species, that are so hostile one to another, that they had the need to create boarders, speak diffrent languages just to basicly avoide one another. - Whom would want to communicate with someone like that?
    Well, you're assuming that this alien race won't have it's own diverse groups within it. To be honest, I find the idea of an entire race who share the exact same features, character and culture to be somewhat dull and unfortunate, and whilst there's much to be regretted in all the conflict within the human race, I'd still feel pity for this hypothetical homogeneous alien race, that they lacked the range of experience available to us.

    Originally posted by EarthandBeyond View Post
    Well i speak 3 languages, and can understand 2 more. And i feel like it was a big waste of my time, learning all of them insted of just 1, because basicly what i did was, i learned to pronaunce "same words" in to 3 different ways.
    And i ask my self, did it really enriched me? The answear is no.
    I feel like, all the languages do are simply divide us, make us unabel to communicate one with another. Make barriers, boarders between us. Make things harder, more complicated then they could be.
    See, I feel completely differently. I love language, and while I really haven't exercised my ability with languages as much as I should (my German is rusty despite all the German family I have, and I've picked up a few bits and bobs of Dutch, French, the odd Italian word) I still love playing with what I do know, as do many of my friends and family. I also love to travel, and experience different cultures and foods and ways of life and of thinking, and it saddens me sometimes how MUCH of western culture is the same everywhere. If your unified world culture exists in anything, it's in the fact that you can go to any moderately sized city in the world and eat at McDonald's and drink at Starbucks, and that depresses me to no end.




    Have you seen the film 'Babel'? I think you should. It's a film that in one sense is about just what you're saying, about all the things that divide us as different groups of people. The struggles with communication, in terms of language or culture or politics or even ability to hear. But at the same time it's about how we're all connected, we're all ultimately very much the same with the same concerns and needs and feelings in our lives, how we can reach out across these barriers and share something with someone who might seem to be from another world.
    Last edited by raw_bean; 11-19-2007, 03:09 AM. Reason: Typo

    Leave a comment:


  • grumbler
    replied
    Originally posted by Capt.Montoya View Post
    Also, that races exist is proven by genetics, not only by looks (that any race is better or worse is unproven however). In the future I hope that all the races would have intermixed, so that the species is more like one race.
    Actually, this is false. There is no "race gene" in the human species. Our genes are astonishingly homogenous (it is believed that humans had a "genetic bottleneck" some three hundred generations ago), far more so than most species.

    "Race" is purely a social construct. While there are differences in alleles caused by geographic separation, they are overwhelmed by the similarities, and unless one arbitrarily selects a gene and declares it to be the "race gene" (which will prove problematic, to say the least, because it won't result in "races" as we socially construct them) genetics provides us with no means of distinguishing reliably between any two groups of humans.

    Leave a comment:


  • zingzangspillip
    replied
    Originally posted by EarthandBeyond View Post
    I feel like, all the languages do are simply divide us, make us unabel to communicate one with another. Make barriers, boarders between us. Make things harder, more complicated then they could be.
    In some ways, you're right. A lot of what makes different cultures different lie in their mythologies and religious beliefs, as well as their military history (i.e. who they've conquered/been conquered by), not in the language. There are, however certain concepts lying within languages that are unique to those languages.
    The only example (and it's not a very good one) I can think of is jingy, a word from Japanese, that has it's closest relation in English in the saying "honour among thieves." However, I am led to believe it means much more than that.

    Leave a comment:


  • EarthandBeyond
    replied
    Originally posted by Capt.Montoya View Post
    Your question is wrong to say that these are "pieces of society", they are indeed different societies, even if all human. Also, that races exist is proven by genetics, not only by looks (that any race is better or worse is unproven however).In the future I hope that all the races would have intermixed, so that the species is more like one race.

    B5 presented a believable future, and it was one where there were still different languages and societies (e.g. the president from the Russian Federation). Other fictional examples have been presented. So the answer is yes.
    And look at the past, when 10, 50, 100 years ago other idealists wondered if there was a future with different societies... we are their future.

    So again, it is possible.

    But is there really a future for eveyone, not just a 100 millions or a 1 billion of people, that are living in few countrys. What about the rest of people/humans?
    I think, by dividing our self by bourders, languages, and a simply the way of living ( religion ) we only alienating our selfs one to another. And i feel like there is larger issue at stacke here.
    Since Earth isnt a center of the universe, by dividing our selfs in too 100's communitys, we are alienating our self possibly to other life forms in our galaxy.
    Think about it. If a spaceship/probe discovered our planet, what would they see? They would see a new species, that are so hostile one to another, that they had the need to create boarders, speak diffrent languages just to basicly avoide one another. - Whom would want to communicate with someone like that?

    I speak two languages, know enough to understand a third one. Frankly I think we should never eliminate linguistic diversity. Diversity enriches humanity
    Well i speak 3 languages, and can understand 2 more. And i feel like it was a big waste of my time, learning all of them insted of just 1, because basicly what i did was, i learned to pronaunce "same words" in to 3 different ways.
    And i ask my self, did it really enriched me? The answear is no.
    I feel like, all the languages do are simply divide us, make us unabel to communicate one with another. Make barriers, boarders between us. Make things harder, more complicated then they could be.

    Leave a comment:


  • Harrdy
    replied
    Sorry for my cynical comment below... (you can stop reading if you can't stand cynism *g*)

    As long as everybody is in the mindset of "doing as little as possible" there will be no change. All the modern dictators (changes from democracy to dictatorship) came to power because the "common man" was just not interrested in politics, and only believed in their lies. I am from a country that welcomed the dictator with flags and march music, I *know* that people turn to the politician that *seems* strongest when they are hurt (physically or psychological), and if they didn't invest TIME and EFFORT in the search then they get a manical madman. Nowadays it seems (to me) that this mechanism even gets stronger by taking away the need to think before elections. You get a big entertainment and parades, but nobody stops for a deeper look into the issues and ideas. From the outside the events after Sep.11 where quite shocking, but I am sure they would be no different in europe, given an equal shock to the public. There is an old saying: If you do not learn from history you are doomed to repeat it.

    PeAcE

    Leave a comment:


  • Triple F
    replied
    The people of the world already realise this

    But as a pack animal there will always be a hierarchy within human society with leaders, and those aspiring to take over by fair means or foul. And as a pack we must have others to compete with, if we didnÆt we would quickly splinter so one existed, and differences would be quickly established for some mutual bickering.

    It would take 100Æs of millennia to breed that out of us, just look at the earliest recorded history of man, has a strangely familiar ring to it: greed, manipulation of the masses, corruption, murder.

    The best you can hope for is common sense prevails (at least most of the time) and we regain some of that curiosity that helped drive our society to the level it currently attained. Because that does seem to have disappeared lately and I find that more concerning.

    Leave a comment:


  • zingzangspillip
    replied
    A lot of animosity between societies today has nothing to do with cultural differences. It has to do with money and power. When the people of the world realise they are being led by politicians whose only concern is to create more power for themselves, we may eventually get what we see in Babylon 5. Or even Star Trek perhaps, although that is unlikely.

    Leave a comment:


  • Capt.Montoya
    replied
    Originally posted by EarthandBeyond View Post
    But where this is all going?
    Is there really future in being divided on to hundreds peaces of society? We are all of the same race, after all.
    Your question is wrong to say that these are "pieces of society", they are indeed different societies, even if all human. Also, that races exist is proven by genetics, not only by looks (that any race is better or worse is unproven however).In the future I hope that all the races would have intermixed, so that the species is more like one race.

    B5 presented a believable future, and it was one where there were still different languages and societies (e.g. the president from the Russian Federation). Other fictional examples have been presented. So the answer is yes.
    And look at the past, when 10, 50, 100 years ago other idealists wondered if there was a future with different societies... we are their future.

    So again, it is possible.



    Why the need for boarders, different languages?
    I speak two languages, know enough to understand a third one. Frankly I think we should never eliminate linguistic diversity. Diversity enriches humanity.

    Leave a comment:


  • EarthandBeyond
    replied
    But where this is all going?
    Is there really future in being divided on to hundreds peaces of society? We are all of the same race, after all.
    Why the need for boarders, different languages? Why the need to kill each other?
    When i look in to the future, all i see is a mirrow, broken in to hundred small peaces. And that mirrow will never be abel to give you a clear picture.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lunan
    replied
    oh indeed i have, and dune is the masterpiece, especially of showing that you don't have to spend ALOT of time talking about how it works, but can still show its there.

    david weber really does a very good job at this, in on basilisk station for example we get fairly indepth on the hero's planet and gov structure and some on the protagonists, but we hear of at least 5 other powers who have very little if anything to do with the story (at least in the first book)

    or in elizabeth moon's serano books we hear about them even if never seen.

    yes it was a main criticism of trek, and others.
    my main point is it takes maybe an extra page or 2, or even just 2 or 3 lines to establish a deeper and more "real" world.

    while i love anne mccaffrey she can also leave to much out or be overly Utopian.

    then again as with anything there is good and there is bad, it just seems that there is too much tendency to want to be too simple in what is really the single most complex genre that any writer could work in(thats SF as in Speculative Fiction not just science fiction)

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X