Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Civilization: A human societal stage where sedentary agriculture and animal husbandry (domestication) is achieved capable of supporting higher population densities, and facilitating the ability to pursue more complex social interaction; coupled with advancements in technology. Common traits of civilization are: division of labor, representational government based on a hierarchical bureaucratic structure, and the proliferation of luxury items and entertainments.How's that?
Agreed... follows V. Gordon Childes traits of Urbanization http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilization#What_characterizes_civilizationbut what about civility?Wally
... Lil' Abner by Al Capp
How about Snuffy Smith, Alley Oop, Major Hoople, Gasoline Alley? These were waining in the late 50's in my area. I still read Prince Valiant in the Sunday paper... Peanuts is still spot on.I agree with kudos to C&H and Farside; propose Dilbert and Pearls Before Swine as modern classics as well.Cheers,WallyPS: Nice to think about this rather than Turkish hackers and other such stuff.W
I agree that the environment influences culture, but the problem with the whole nature versus nurture argument is that sociologists and humanities professors want to use it to explain inequality and social injustices they hate rather than accepting the fact that people are what they are because they choose to be or were taught to be by their friends and family.
Culture consists of the things one generation values enough to pass on to then next; as long as the society is okay with the staus quo that culture will hold to the value set their history goes along a line. When the conventional wisdom is challenged (from within or without) if society sees the need and drives a change that line changes direction.Our current world situation is a result of cultures:1) ...that would like to roll time back 1000 years or so... the rest of the world will have to be destroyed if they won't roll back too!2) ...that have lost sight of how they got where they are... today, we are all that matters.3) ...that would like to lead but are too busy text messaging... to busy to think but have tell someone something all the time!
... the only subject that influences all others. It dictates the present and the future because they too will soon be history.
When I first was studying at Univ. we talked about the old geographic concept of environmental determinism; where a society lived made them, part and parcel, what they were... today this has been discredited by folks claiming that just the location can't totally dictated what a group becomes through time.However; consider the influence scenario. Where one lives (geographically) provides certain options of lifestyle, that is: way of life... which is culture by broadest definition "the way of life of a group or individual". The NW Coast Indians aren't buffalo hunters for a reason. A group has to use what nature provides to survive.The unique culture that results from the differing geographic influences will have a role in what happens to the group through time (their history). Continuing with the Amerind [dating myself here] analogy the California valley tribes lived in relative abundance and had a rather mild climate, so were mellow types. When the whites showed up the Indians gave way, backing into the wilderness a bit further and thought all would be okey-dokey... wrong (but another story). This wasn't the case with, say the Plains Indians. They had a more difficult way of making a living and hence weren't so disposed to moving back into the bush and letting the new guys have all the groceries. Two vastly different cultures lead to two different histories.While this may seem (read is) an over-simplification, I hope you will agree that it does illustrate the principle that geography influences culture which in turn has an influence on history.Influence is the key here; while the old concept was that geography determined.... That did not recognize that many factors (skill or intellegence levels, among others) also would have a bearing on the outcomes of both culture and history.I agree that history, too, will influence history... whatever happens causes feedbacks, positive or (all too often) negative.Wally
Problem solved:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19973873/At least for now; Godspeed Drew!
Wow! That's an excellent article.I like that how he mentioned sociology and it's relation to history.
I agree; here is something a teacher I work with uses with his classes. What say you all?
That list is absolutly useless, An Iranian tourist makes it but Lewis and Clark dont? I know Sacajewea was on the list but they covered an awful lot of country without her. Stupid.
In a word... a crock! $20 million makes one a tourist not an intrepid explorer... five foot tall Russians (that survive) are heros but not really explorers. Again I say: a crock!
As I tell my friends that own PG&E stock when I run my X'mas lights… “at least I know someone who's getting the benefit of the high rates.” Merry Christmas! 😉Cheers,Wally
Perhaps I'm looking at this incorrectly? I'm thinking corn production will increase, but this increase will go to the energy demands instead of food, so food prices will become high. You need to grow an awful lot of acreage to meet energy demands, so wouldn't that cut in to other farm products and create a shortage?
Hmmm... the English needed more cotton, once upon a time, and encouraged the kind folks in India to increase their acreage... which the Indians did. To the end that their was less for their own textile trade (the English paid more) and more folks grew cotton (since they could make more money on this cash crop than was possible on staple crops). That's in the history books... reading on we learn that the net result was that: a) the domestic textile industry in India went in the toilet b) food production went down driving prices (for foodstuff imported by England) went up c) the Indian economy suffered for the benefit of EnglandBefore anyone jumps me about spanking the Brits let me say there are two very positive things that resulted from the English hegemony in India. IPA and Gin & Tonic. IMHO. Oh yeah, Iguess the rail system and the PO count too but have far less impact than the liquids (at least out side India ;D).Disclaimer: these are soley my opinions and not influenced by Steven A. Grasse's book,The Evil Empire--101 Ways That England Ruined The World... an interesting but rather Anglophobic rant.WallyPS: If we want to produce more ethanol corn is far less efficient than (at least one) native grass... work smarter not harder!
... public is simple minded now days, they dont want Dickens, Hawthorne or even Hemingway or Steinbeck, so... the publishers, they are only going to cater to what the market is demanding.
Thank goodness Harry Potter came along; sitcoms are 27 minutes long for a reason. Given that people are beginning to read longer books maybe we can get rid of reality TV and go back to things like Playhouse 90 and the like.Wally
