Author Topic: Episode #357  (Read 2206 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DimaNovo

  • Brand New
  • Posts: 1
Re: Episode #357
« Reply #30 on: May 28, 2012, 12:10:42 AM »
Long before futurama
Professor Dowell's Head by Alexander Belyayev.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professor_Dowell%27s_Head
http://www.allreaders.com/Topics/info_9700.asp

Offline klintistvud

  • Not Enough Spare Time
  • **
  • Posts: 169
Re: Episode #357
« Reply #31 on: May 28, 2012, 03:39:47 AM »
(click to show/hide)

It's Persian.  8)

It's also not saying 'death to the west'.  ;)

Well, maybe to Israel. 


Offline donmac

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 22
  • Beedee Beedee Beedee This Sucks!
Re: Episode #357
« Reply #32 on: May 28, 2012, 10:16:46 AM »
On the Mayan Calendar subject, one thing that I think should be mentioned in all of this is that most of the Mayan written history was destroyed by the Spaniards.  Most writings were burned (primarily by priests and monks, who thought they were the work of the devil) so that only three authentic Mayan Codices survived also with a few fragments of others (note: there are some claims that more exist, but those are all disputed).  Those few Codices, along with whatever is written on walls and surviving pottery fragments, is all we now have.  With such a massive loss of information, what we know about the Mayan culture (including their calendar system) would likely be incomplete.

I have heard they had a cure for cancer, which was lost during this period. And since I just said that, I am sure it is, in fact, true and not some episode of The Twilight Zone or a book by Michael Moorcock.  ::)

Yeah, it's funny to look at all the stuff that was speculated, before the Mayan hieroglyphs were deciphered, on what they said.  It was usually speculated that the writings said advanced stuff and had deep knowledge about the world and the universe.  Then the writing was eventually figured out and it was all just incredible mundane stuff and a lot of ancient superstitions.

It makes me think there must be (or should be) a logical fallacy named just for this, the assumption that any ancient mysterious (or even mythical) civilization must have been more advanced than our modern day civilization.  It's like some sort of "Paradise Lost" fallacy.

Offline GodSlayer

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 12484
  • Apteryx Pessimistus
Re: Episode #357
« Reply #33 on: May 28, 2012, 07:58:22 PM »
On the Mayan Calendar subject, one thing that I think should be mentioned in all of this is that most of the Mayan written history was destroyed by the Spaniards.  Most writings were burned (primarily by priests and monks, who thought they were the work of the devil) so that only three authentic Mayan Codices survived also with a few fragments of others (note: there are some claims that more exist, but those are all disputed).  Those few Codices, along with whatever is written on walls and surviving pottery fragments, is all we now have.  With such a massive loss of information, what we know about the Mayan culture (including their calendar system) would likely be incomplete.

I have heard they had a cure for cancer, which was lost during this period. And since I just said that, I am sure it is, in fact, true and not some episode of The Twilight Zone or a book by Michael Moorcock.  ::)

Yeah, it's funny to look at all the stuff that was speculated, before the Mayan hieroglyphs were deciphered, on what they said.  It was usually speculated that the writings said advanced stuff and had deep knowledge about the world and the universe.  Then the writing was eventually figured out and it was all just incredible mundane stuff and a lot of ancient superstitions.

It makes me think there must be (or should be) a logical fallacy named just for this, the assumption that any ancient mysterious (or even mythical) civilization must have been more advanced than our modern day civilization.  It's like some sort of "Paradise Lost" fallacy.

even scientists pose optimistic hypotheses which turn out to be wrong. it's not an intellectual crime.
Quote
"In making his way through life, a man will find it useful to be ready and able to do two things: to look ahead and to overlook: the one will protect him from loss and injury, the other from disputes and squabbles."

Offline Trinoc

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4451
  • Dumb, in a pocket, and proud of it.
Re: Episode #357
« Reply #34 on: May 29, 2012, 07:33:50 AM »
It makes me think there must be (or should be) a logical fallacy named just for this, the assumption that any ancient mysterious (or even mythical) civilization must have been more advanced than our modern day civilization.  It's like some sort of "Paradise Lost" fallacy.

I think that comes under "Argument from Antiquity". The idea seems ingrained in our society. In the UK (at least), university students are still said to be "reading" a subject rather than studying it or doing research into it, the implication being that all education consists of reading old texts in the hope of discerning the ancient God-given wisdom which we have lost over the ages by our sinfulness, rather than creating new knowledge by studying the world around us.
Do people who say "First World Problems" really think the only concern of people in developing countries is where the next bowl of rice is coming from?

Offline Shadow Of A Doubt

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 3257
  • Itinerant fantasist
Re: Episode #357
« Reply #35 on: May 29, 2012, 07:47:18 AM »
It makes me think there must be (or should be) a logical fallacy named just for this, the assumption that any ancient mysterious (or even mythical) civilization must have been more advanced than our modern day civilization.  It's like some sort of "Paradise Lost" fallacy.

I think that comes under "Argument from Antiquity". The idea seems ingrained in our society. In the UK England (at least), university students are still said to be "reading" a subject rather than studying it or doing research into it, the implication being that all education consists of reading old texts in the hope of discerning the ancient God-given wisdom which we have lost over the ages by our sinfulness, rather than creating new knowledge by studying the world around us.

Never heard it north of the border (except on University Challenge  ;)).

Offline Trinoc

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4451
  • Dumb, in a pocket, and proud of it.
Re: Episode #357
« Reply #36 on: May 30, 2012, 12:37:25 PM »
It makes me think there must be (or should be) a logical fallacy named just for this, the assumption that any ancient mysterious (or even mythical) civilization must have been more advanced than our modern day civilization.  It's like some sort of "Paradise Lost" fallacy.

I think that comes under "Argument from Antiquity". The idea seems ingrained in our society. In the UK England (at least), university students are still said to be "reading" a subject rather than studying it or doing research into it, the implication being that all education consists of reading old texts in the hope of discerning the ancient God-given wisdom which we have lost over the ages by our sinfulness, rather than creating new knowledge by studying the world around us.

Never heard it north of the border (except on University Challenge  ;)).

I'd mostly only heard it on UC as well, but I assumed that was because at "traditional" universities (Oxford, Cambridge, Durham, but also places like St Andrews?) used the terminology. I went to a modern, "concrete jungle" university, but even there one of the lecturers in my department was listed as the "reader", which seems doubly odd since the subject was something with no basis in antiquity at all: computing science.
Do people who say "First World Problems" really think the only concern of people in developing countries is where the next bowl of rice is coming from?

Offline Shadow Of A Doubt

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 3257
  • Itinerant fantasist
Re: Episode #357
« Reply #37 on: May 30, 2012, 02:54:46 PM »
It makes me think there must be (or should be) a logical fallacy named just for this, the assumption that any ancient mysterious (or even mythical) civilization must have been more advanced than our modern day civilization.  It's like some sort of "Paradise Lost" fallacy.

I think that comes under "Argument from Antiquity". The idea seems ingrained in our society. In the UK England (at least), university students are still said to be "reading" a subject rather than studying it or doing research into it, the implication being that all education consists of reading old texts in the hope of discerning the ancient God-given wisdom which we have lost over the ages by our sinfulness, rather than creating new knowledge by studying the world around us.

Never heard it north of the border (except on University Challenge  ;)).

I'd mostly only heard it on UC as well, but I assumed that was because at "traditional" universities (Oxford, Cambridge, Durham, but also places like St Andrews?) used the terminology. I went to a modern, "concrete jungle" university, but even there one of the lecturers in my department was listed as the "reader", which seems doubly odd since the subject was something with no basis in antiquity at all: computing science.

True, I wouldn't be surprised if St. Andrews went with the pretentious option given that it seems most people there are a bit, well, odd.  :P

 

personate-rain