I agree that we have had much diluted versions of what might qualify for the governance label 'democracy' but none in history or now that satisfies the level of democracy we need, imo.

I don't refute your sources or what they say, I am just complaining, that what they called democratic, stretches the valid use of the label a little to far for me. — universeness

I have to get back to my happy feeling and I was feeling very happy when you disputed the good of Athens democracy. That triggered what I have read of more equal and peaceful civilizations. There were contemporary civilizations that were doing better when it comes to equality and peace. However, I think Athens' philosophers gave us great intellectual gifts such as mathematical proofs and a comprehensive system of logic. The concept of atoms and evolution have proven useful. The notion that because we can learn and we think we are capable of self-government is essential to our way of life and it is not compatible with religions. Help me here.

What are the fundamental beliefs that make our lives good? I am still working on having a better understanding of Hinduism. But it kind of fell off the track with its reincarnation reasoning that justified a caste system However, I don't think the Hindu caste system is worse than the class systems of Christian Europe. A modern understanding of the effect of different parenting methods and the difference in resources and the effect of trauma on children is superior to religious notions, but we still rely more on religion than science when it comes to what we believe about human nature.

We need a better belief system. Any idea of how to construct that?

No, I usually have it alone - unless you count Madam Secretary.
Anyway, it's hard to drink through an N95 mask disguised as a parrot's beak. (But it makes little children in the supermarket giggle.) And I'm cheerful most of the time. I've done regretting my species - just enjoying what's left of my life. — Vera Mont

I am not sure I know what you are saying, but I woke feeling great physically and mentally great, and then the subject of desalination threw me into a terrible state of mind, making me think I can relate to "regretting my species". We have the ability to create Eden and instead, we are destroying our planet and escalating war.

The subject of this thread is culture and only when our culture for democracy is transmitted by education can we manifest it. The Military Industrial Complex and bankers should NOT have control of our education.

Do you think human scientists are able to design a 'not for profit,' global irrigation system that works and fully benefits and assists the planets ecosystem and all flora and fauna, that exists on and in the planet (including humans)? — universeness

It sure it would be nice if we were willing to put as much effort into that as we have put into war. But the Trump administration’s peace plan totally disregarded Palestine's'need for water. Isreal had control of Palestine's water supply and was not giving Palestine enough water for their health needs, so Palestine has built distillation plants, and Isreal has pushed into the desperately needed land and water supply and built a community named after Trump to encroach on the little land Palestinians need for the water supply.

Have you looked into distillation efforts around the world? This is not normally a philosophical subject but it is a very serious one in today's world. It is not just about water but people's struggles for their lives and war! The US has been building enemies and I do not know how to address this philosophically but surely it is something we should address.

:cry: What we are doing in this world is so different from the possible reality some of us imagine. How do we deal with this? I would say most Americans are clueless about the Palestinian struggle for the land they remember owning, and they struggle for the enforcement of treaties just as Native Americans did when they were pushed into reservations. I got to take a deep breath. I wish we didn't open this Pandora's box about water.

You wrote of possible civilizations that did live in peace without war and that is only sane. War is complete insanity. We for sure have a God of war, David's God is a God of war. Whereas the Hindus have a mythology that supports peace not war. It begins with a terrible war and a determination to avoid that. Those of us with a God who has favorites and a claim to God-given land and war are not doing so well. The different mythologies result in different cultures.

I believe our democracy made the US a very loved nation and that we have gone about destroying that and making the world a less safe place because our schools stop transmitting the culture we had and education for the Military Industrial Complex of our enemy.

I have repeatedly heard distilling water is very expensive. Also it would overwhelming to depend on it for farming or keeping a forest alive. Now if we focused on turning the whole planet into an Eden, we might create an amazing reality, but for some reason that just isn't what Christians attempt to do. Maybe they are afraid of offending God by taking over his work?

Look at what the people of India and Rome did with toilets and Aqueducts. We can do better. Why don't we do better? Maybe dependency on God leaves us with a lack of motivation?

I don't refute your sources or what they say, I am just complaining, that what they called democratic, stretches the valid use of the label a little to far for me. — universeness

I totally agree with you, but if we had education for democracy and replaced the autocratic model for Industry with the democratic one, then we have a more fully democratic reality.

I think people will fight much harder when they believe in the cause they are fighting for and not because they have been bribed by money or promises that may or may not be honoured. Mercenaries were never liked by any side of a conflict. There IS often NO alternative to defending against an invader.
I disagree that if the Persians had conquered and subsumed Greece completely into their empire, that the world would be much different, than it is today. Democracy would have still risen to something similar to where it is today. Perhaps only some of the names and prominent stories would change.
Maybe the middle east would be more prominent today that the West but i don't think that would matter much.

I doubt that if democracy would have risen because I don't think the philosophy for it would have risen. However, the more I think on this, the more interesting the possibility gets. There are matriarchies and in a matriarchy, there is more sharing of power than patriarchies. Men just seem strongly bent in favor of hierarchies, masters, and those subject to the masters. Christianity is soaked in that mentality. Some churches broke away from that but I don't think they are the most popular or powerful churches.

I broadly agree with the content of your quote immediately above. I would just not use the Greek civilization, as any kind of important part of the curriculum of increased (free) education opportunities, you rightly suggest, are required to help build a better future for all.

:love: I love what you said because there is another country that was a contemporary of the Greeks who appear to have had much more equality shared by men and women. The only reason I can think of for us not knowing more about them is they must not have written much and did not have libraries like other civilizations. Spartan women had much more freedom than Athenian women. From a woman's point of view Athens have a terrible social order. But with all that said, I think the Greeks had an intellectual superiority.

I love what you said because the subject deserves our attention. How much do you know of other civilizations? Do have an interest in geology which can give us a better understanding of the physical factors that influence humans differently. Like to me, you just opened what looks like a really good puzzle to put together. :grin:

I don't recognise that one Athena? Any more memory of its storyline? — universeness

Nope that is it and I was horrified to think such a thing could happen, but it is happening to our own planet. Our groundwater situation is very bad and when plants do not have the advantage of underground water, unless there is plenty of rain, you get a desert. I think of that Star Trek show when something triggers my awareness of the growing water problems around the world.

Okay. And how does Aristotle etc. relate to a linking of materialism with militarism in a society? — Vera Mont

I hope you really care about his opinion because I found a really good explanation of it. Follow this link and go to page 79. I can not copy and paste it, but it contains more information on the subject than I have come across before. I enjoy the information at this link.

Yeah, Firefly was really good. Serenity was ok. Most of the human dilemma's covered in Firefly were also depicted in varied ways in B5, Star Trek, Star Wars, Stargate, BSG, V, etc. I enjoy the varied ways the writers depict common human dilemmas, in a futuristic framework. — universeness

I particularly remember the Star Trek show about a planet with extremely little water and one tree that someone watered. Maybe that was the tree of forbidden fruit? :chin:

Oh no, all those things are normal. :yum: We can not change the way we live because it would hurt the economy. Like these disasters and wars for resources don't hurt our economy? Sometimes I think reports of human intelligence are highly overrated, but what can be expected of a culture with a God who made humans special from all the other animals and who is a servant to their prayers, giving them whatever they want without limit? Besides these abnormally warm days in May are much better than cool, rainy days. The bugs seem to be very happy with this warm weather. :grin:

I'm doing the part I feel capable of doing. At this time of life, that doesn't amount to much: feed stray cats, grow tomatoes, reduce my carbon footprint, and write books.
And fcs, stop blowing on me! — Vera Mont

Write books? What is your subject?

Whoops time to go. I get a lot from the government, so I feel obligated to give back by volunteering, and frankly, I don't know how long I keep doing this. At my age medical problems have increased my maintenance cost and Medicare is covering them. I owe my country a lot.

Indeed. And the US one has improved its provisions for equality of citizens under the law. But it has not guaranteed translating those improvements into a steady improvement law-enforcement, social services or political access to all citizens equally. It has not resulted in a consistent improvement in leadership over time. The arc of that history is all over the place, not upward. — Vera Mont

I think this failure is all the non-democratic things going on and number one is we stopped transmitting the culture for democracy. We are powerless if we do not understand the ramifications of adopting the German model of bureaucracy and the German model of education for technology, and dropping classical philosophy in favor of German philosophy. You know Hegel and the nation is God and all must be forced to obey the state and Nechzie supermen who have the right to violent rules because they are so superior.

The change in bureaucracy gives government much more power than it had before the change, but, this power to take care of the people, also takes away their power. The change in education goes with the change in the new bureaucratic order because we no longer rely on strong individuals and great leaders, but instead, we have committees that set policy and from there everything is controlled by policy. This creates a headless beast. Nothing can be done without an act of Congress.

Now we all our institutions are organized by German models and we prepare citizens to rely on authority and obey. Education is preparing the young to fit into the mechanical society they have become.

Tocqueville, the despot that Christian democracies would become.

After having thus taken each individual one by one into its powerful hands, and having molded him as it pleases, the sovereign power extends its arms over the entire society; it covers the surface of society with a network of small, complicated, minute, and uniform rules, which the most original minds and the most vigorous souls cannot break through to go beyond the crowd; it does not break wills, but it softens them, bends them and directs them; it rarely forces action, but it constantly opposes your acting; it does not destroy, it prevents birth; it does not tyrannize, it hinders, it represses, it enervates, it extinguishes, it stupifies, and finally it reduces each nation to being nothing more than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.

I have always believed that this sort of servitude, regulated, mild and peaceful, of which I have just done the portrait, could be combined better than we imagine with some of the external forms of liberty, and that it would not be impossible for it to be established in the very shadow of the sovereignty of the people.

https://oll.libertyfund.org/quote/tocqueville-on-the-form-of-despotism-the-government-would-assume-in-democratic-america-1840 — Tocqueville

I suppose because I still have a tiny spark of optimism left: I still have some dim flicker of hope that if we acknowledge the truth of our times, we might still be avert the worst outcomes. It is, admittedly, a very, very small spark. — Vera Mont

There is a lot of good happening but it doesn't make news. I am blown away by how we think everyone should have a good life and all the things we are doing to assure people have that opportunity. We are not only feeding our own families but desire to feed the world. We rush in when another country has an earthquake or famine. Europeans have stopped making war on each other. And we have problems, but we also have more knowledge than ever before, and the internet that can spread knowledge very rapidly and connect us in discussions of what is so and what should be. Unfortunately, an atomic war could throw us back into a dark age. Or global warming could mean the end of reality as we know it. We do face serious problems but we also have a lot of good going on.

I prefer the definition of democracy as governance of, for and by the people. — universeness

That is from Percile's funeral speech during Athens's war with Sparta. Lincoln repeated it during the civil war. But as many love to point out, Athens had slavery and immigrants did not have citizenship rights and women did not have political power, yet Athens was a democracy, as the US was a democracy when it had slavery and women could not vote. So there is an ideal and a less-than-perfect reality?
And we have a problem coming to an agreement on what that ideal is.

You have some eccentric views of what might still be labelled as 'democratic' or 'partially democratic.'
I demand undiluted democracy and any intermediate state of affairs means the fight continues.
Promising Athenian men a vote if they role play galley slaves is not 'introducing democracy as a right in law. It's a compromise for nefarious reasons which can be removed without the democratic mandate of the entire population, just like Rode vs Wade was removed in the USA. — universeness

My information came from the book "Pericles Of Athens And The Birth Of Democracy" by Donald Kagan.

What do you think was the alternative to not defending Athens from the Persian invasions? It is not being a slave to defend against an invasion. The Athens that became the role model for democracy would not have existed if they had not successfully defended against the Persians. Unlike religion, a democracy is always evolving. This is a good thing and it can be a bad thing because change can result in problems. Change makes things unstable. Forgetting what culture has to do with democracy leaves our democracy undefended.

Tying politics to religion is very problematic and we have done that because war is good for religion and religion is good for war. The US decided to pit itself against communism and has it mobilized against communism by calling the communist godless people and building on the notion that God favors the US and the US should serve this God and we go on to fight against evil in the mid-east in complete ignorance of the economic reason for these cold and hot wars. We are no longer a nation of thinking people because we stopped preparing for that when we adopted education for technology and left moral training to the church.

If you are going to demand something, it should be education and preparing the young to be good citizens. Without that education, they will not be "democracy as governance of, for and by the people".
We should demand education for democracy and replace the autocratic model of Industry with the democratic model.

That one man is the one the entire nation, according its its acknowledged, sworn-by and much vaunted constitution, by its established electoral process, through the changes of its culture, selected to lead the whole nation and represent it among the world's nations. — Vera Mont

The interruption of the constitution changes as the culture changes.

Trump was very frustrated with the limits put on him. I am sure Bidin is dealing with a lot of frustration too. For a long time the US democracy has looked like a disaster to me, as one president things in motion for a certain outcome and the next president dismantles what the first on put in place, as Reagan dismantled the alternative energy efforts made by Carter. And Trump disbanded the organization for dealing with pandemics that Obama put in place. And none of these men acted alone but were chosen and supported by special interest groups.

The US Constitution is clear about the government staying out of special interest business but global economic and military changes have glued governments to special interest. And the one president is reacting to forces far beyond the control of anyone. Yuk, this is politics. How can we be philosophical about this? How about logos, reason, the controlling force of the universe?

I offer gun control as an example of cultural control. The reason different states have opposing points of view about gun control is they have different cultures that promote the mentality of gun ownership of oppose the mentality of gun ownership. The abortion issue is also one of opposing cultures.

How I used them was: materialistic people are concerned with possessions and social status; spiritualistic ones are concerned with the personal 'soul' or 'essence' and its relation to the supernatural. — Vera Mont

I think that is the general understanding of materialism but being materialistic or spiritual has a different meaning beginning with Aristotle.

What was Aristotle say about matter?
For Aristotle, matter was the undifferentiated primal element; it is that from which things develop rather than a thing in itself. The development of particular things from this germinal matter consists in differentiation, the acquiring of the particular forms of which the knowable universe consists.

Form | philosophy - Encyclopedia Britannica — Encyclopedia Britannica

So for Aristotle, reality is a matter of matter, not gods and spirits. That line of thinking goes with Democritus.

What is Democritus known for? Democritus was a central figure in the development of the atomic theory of the universe. He theorized that all material bodies are made up of indivisibly small “atoms.” Aristotle famously rejected atomism in On Generation and Corruption.

Democritus | Biography & Facts - Encyclopedia Britannica — Encyclopedia Britannica

That pulled the Greeks away from superstitious thinking where creation is about gods and spirits. They determined sickness and things like epilepsy occurred for physical reasons, not because gods made these things happen. Water becomes H2O, not a spirit being. Spirits do not live in trees. It goes with arguments against there being a God and Satan and angels and demons. Does that make sense? Being spiritual is believing in spirits. :gasp: But not exactly as the ancients believed in spirits. Oh dear, this is pretty paradoxical. Back to Aristotle.

Aristotle famously contends that every physical object is a compound of matter and form. This doctrine has been dubbed “hylomorphism”, a portmanteau of the Greek words for matter (hulê) and form (eidos or morphê). Highly influential in the development of Medieval philosophy, Aristotle’s hylomorphism has also enjoyed something of a renaissance in contemporary metaphysics.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/form-matter/ — Stanford

Aristotle's teacher was Plato and Plato gave us his understanding of forms. For Plato changeable earth is not the ultimate reality, but there is a realm of perfection. Plato being an important source for Christian thinking. Like the Catholic invasion of Islam's territory, lead to the West rediscovering the ancient Greek and Roman classics and the Church picked up Aristotle and Plato to support Chruch doctrine.

The Church developed Scholasticism and brought the West into the Renaissance, the return of the intellectual advancements of ancient Greek and Romans.

Wow, all that thinking is melting my brain. This thread is about culture and culture gives us our understanding of reality. Important to consider without education in Greek and Roman classics we do not have the culture that came out of the Enlightenment when educated people were literate in the classics. Christianity did not give us democracy with liberty and justice. Our democracy comes from the classics.

The word democracy means- a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.

There is not one model of democracy. All governments to varying degrees are autocratic and democratic. So the Christian dominated Republic of Germany became the enemy of the US in two world wars and we fought against the authoritarianism of Germany, just as Athens opposed the authoritarianism of Sparta. The US and the Greek city-states had slaves. Christian Europe had serfs that are the same as slaves, except serfs and sold with the land and the property rights of slaves do not tie the slaves to the land. Democratic governments can restrict who gets to vote. The US concept of equality has changed over the years and there are still pockets in the US that resist treating people of color with equality.

I am running out of time, but quick here is the story of Athens adopting Spartan democracy. It was genius to defend Athens at sea, but this also required a lot of men to row the boats, and in a sea war everything sinks so they would get no booty for their effort. Also, Athens did not have the money to pay men to get on the boats, so a deal was cut. If the men defended Athens they would get the right to vote. Economic conditions were pushing for democracy, but the need to defend Athens turned an idea into action.

After the war, Athens created government jobs, built a universtity to attract people from around the world,
they rebuilt Athen's temple that was also expected to attract people from around the world. Athena's new temple taught the world of democracy with statues and pictures. This was a whole new relationship of the gods and a new relationship for the people. You may remember the gods battle with each other and threw each other out of power just as humans did, but with the temple of Athena comes rule by reason.

Alot of this was extremely different from Sparta, but it was brought on by war and adopting the democratic part of Sparta's organization for war. Athens did not take care of everyone as Sparta did, but Athens did all in its power to provide opportunities and improve the economy. If we understood such things perhaps we would also increase opportunities but not give everyone welfare. Some members of society need help but we have taken that too far.

Except single parents could be considered working people and we might pay more attention to the well-being of children. Someone has to care for the children and the children and their caregivers have needs that must be met.

That would apply more to Athens, which was both, than Sparta, which was militaristic, but ... um... more spartan in lifestyle. they outlawed currency and their top virtues were equality (among citizens), military fitness, and austerity.
Meanwhile the Celts were warriors, mercenaries, traders and explorers, farmers and crafters, more given to luxury in personal adornment than in public show.
I wouldn't call any of the cultures more 'spiritual' than any other: they all had their supernatural beliefs, values and loyalties. — Vera Mont

You may have being spiritual confused with religion? Being materialistic is not lusting for things. Being materialistic is believing everything is matter, meaning gods and other spirits are not possible. Celts were not materialistic and neither were Greek philosophers who could conceive of the trinity of God. Christian Romans were killing each other in an argument about Jesus being the son of god or the God (the trinity). Romans did not have a word for the concept of the trinity of God so if Jesus was the son of God that would mean more than one god. There were all kinds of arguments about if Jesus was a God, when was he born or when he was baptized, or when he died. Roman kings could become gods when they died, but they were mortals when they lived. A Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are three gods or three expressions of the same thing. Back in the day Christians killed each other because of that debate.

The Celts won wars because they fought with the power of their gods. They were uncivilized and undisciplined when it came to war, and they were terrifying with their screaming and yelling and assure that they had the most powerful gods.

Back in the day, people thought the people who won wars had the most powerful god. Constantine realized the power of war and god, and united the Romans with one God after he saw the sign of a cross in the sky and this God made it possible for him to win a war. :lol: That is mythology and it works wonders when you want people to carry weapons and run into each other knowing the likelihood of being killed.

Egypt had a trinity of spirit. One part of the trinity dies when our body dies. A second part of the trinity is judged and may or may not be allowed into the good life. The third part of the trinity always returns to the source and because one with the source. Everything was part of a spiritual reality. That is the opposite of being materialistic like those people who deny there is a god with angels and demons.

So, why not stick for now to comparing the Spartans with the Athenians, the Thesbians and Thebes,
Rhodes, Corinth, Argos etc. The influence of the Greek city states on islands like Crete and Cyprus.
The Trojan War etc, etc. The Romans came much later and the Spartans were more Nazi like, than even the Romans imo. — universeness

For sure being a good citizen in Sparta was very different from being a good citizen in Athens. Athens adopted democracy from Sparta a city/state that demanded strict conformity to its military needs and took care of its citizens who had nothing to do except support Sparta's military needs. However, Athens encouraged individual differences and created jobs, but not welfare for its citizens. Athenians remained fully responsible for their own well fare. Understanding the differences between Sparta and Athens may be a very important thing for people in the US to know.

Germany was the modern Sparta and the US was the modern Athens. Then the US adopted the German models for bureaucracy and education and now the US is what it defended its democracy against. Where would you like to go with this discussion of cultural differences?

I am afraid I know too little of the show to have anything to say about it, except it appears to be good mythology. Joseph Campbell, an expert on mythology, said that we need a shared mythology and he thought Star Trek was our the best mythology we had a few years ago. Your show is next in line to fill the need for mythology and reconsider our past religious mythology.

Joseph Campbell thought that when we do not have a shared mythology, we create our own mythology and use the people in our lives to fill the different roles. So we end up in psychoanalysis trying to figure out our role in our private mythologies, our personal dramas. I fell in love with Greek mythology because I saw it as a way to learn how to be my own hero when I was very vulnerable and needed to become my own hero. Which carried me forward to studying philosophy.

Mind you, when I was in the middle of my parenting years I went from being an ideal 1950's mother and wife, to "just a housewife". It was a terrible identity crash along with an economic crash and divorce. I understand all this sociologically, not politically.

This one's a disappointment (in my book, a damp squib compromise, but if he died in office, you'd have an insurrection - at best) and the last one was.... I don't know what you think, but it's no secret what I think of the last one.
So? Have you done it yet? Have you lined up all the presidents in chronological order and compared their [actual, factual] characters and achievements to trace the arc of US history?
What if you stopped thinking of what was better in the past and what's better in the present (Spoiler: they don't match) and think of the story unfolding? If US history were a long-running TV series, what would probably happen next? — Vera Mont

I don't think we share enough thoughts in common to have the slightest idea of what the other one is talking about. I sure have no idea what you are talking about or think is important. I am thinking culture and human nature. You appear to be thinking politics.

As for 'doing better' just line up all your own presidents for comparison. — Vera Mont

I am not sure that would have any value because one man does not have that much power compared to the cultures that make up the US or any nation. For me, the measure of a nation is the result of culture. What we believe is based on culture, what we do is based on culture. Basically, we are reactionary and shaped by our place and time in history. We are unconscious of why we do things, and why think as we do, and react as we do. "Know thyself" is an Ancient Greek aphorism but I don't think we are paying much attention to that wisdom. Going through life reacting without reasoning brings us to regrets.

The name ‘Celts’ is a modern name which is used to describe many tribes of people who lived during the Iron Age. — universeness

Does it matter what word we use to identify a group of people as long as the concept is understood? I am hurting with our new technological correctness. Before we had education for this, we used the "Conceptual Method" for education. Teachers were told to not fuss over the details, but to focus on the concept. This created an atmosphere where the student and teacher could strongly disagree and the student would be correct as long as s/he understood the concept. Which also goes with teaching logic and that we should never be too sure of ourselves, because we can not know all there is to know. AND I AM VERY GRATEFUL TO YOU FOR OPENING AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ME TO EXPLAIN OUR DIFFERENCE OF THE PAST. We are experiencing cultural change and things are a little rough right now.

I think it's more interesting to talk about the relations between the Greek city states and the Spartans and of course, the Persians. The Spartans for example, imo, were xenophobic Nazis of the worse kind and the Greeks not much better, especially under that hell spawn, Alexander the butcher. — universeness

You have presented facts well. May point is more conceptual, but I could not clarify the concept without your opening for me to do so. :smile: Now how do I do this within the context of the mythology of the TV show you have shared with us. Again let me say I am very grateful for your contribution to this thread. My original thought was the Greeks and Celts (maybe with a different name) shared notions of liberty and curiosity and spiritual matters, as opposed to the Romans who were much more materialist, meaning less spiritual. Ah, stumble- you have led my mind into new territory and I am realizing I do not have the words for the concept, except to say Romans were materialistic and the Greeks and Celts shared a spiritual consciousness. Hum, I am noticing there is not much difference between the words "materialistic" and "militaristic". :love: Oh my, you have opened doors of consciousness. I hope you can take further into this awareness.

I need to run and can not finish my reply. I hate being called back to mundane reality when my heart and soul are flying free in the conceptual realm. :roll:

Wishful fantasy. If the greed-driven corporate economy and the deceitful, infighting, xenophobic government of an interplanetary empire is exactly like the corrupt, deceitful, infighting, xenophobic government of ancient Assyria, where is the "better"? Where is the arc of history? — Vera Mont

I think I understand the reasoning behind your thought, but I am bewildered that we can not achieve "the better" through reasoning. I think we are proving those of the Enlighten right, that with reason we can do better. We are doing much, much better than we have done in the past, but we are at a critical point now and this has thrown us into chaos, as Athens and all civilizations have had their moments of crisis and were forced to rethink everything and evolve to new levels of complexity. We must continue as the gods, arguing until we have a consensus on the best reasoning.

And son of a gun, if we want peace, we need a president who knows better than say stupid things that piss off the leaders of violent countries. Creating ourselves as the enemy of other nations is a really stupid thing to do! and I am very disappointed in our present leader.

My goodness that was very complex. I think it definitely qualifies as myth. I wonder what the Greek gods would be like if at the time their consciousness included the possibility of spaceships and different races throughout the universe fighting for their ideologies and battling for control of humans.

I think that is exactly how the ancient minds worked in the creation of earthly god myths, except the ancients had no thought of space travel so there had to be gods they could use to express the thoughts that came to mind as their civilizations grew. We know the goddess Athena was changed when Athens entered the war with Persia and Apollo came at a time when growth was causing chaos pressuring people to think things through rather than just react to events. They were creating their movie and explaining how things happen. By "they", I mean all ancients trying to figure out how we should live together.

That is how I see things because I have written my whole life and I have had moments when I was sure I was inspired and saying brilliant things. That is how it is when we get into the creative mode. I also know the ancients invented more and more gods as they realized new concepts and an Egyptian pharaoh ordered his scribes to search the archives and figure out which of the gods is a true god. For a while a pharaoh ordered there was only one god, pissing off all the priests representing other gods. Anyway, isn't it helpful to see a modern example of thinking about the gods/aliens and humans?

The trouble is that the Star Trek prime directive was NEVER applied in our early history.
Bloody conquest was the main clarion call in the infancy of what we at some point called 'civilisation.'
The global socioeconomic complete imbalance that exists today, is a consequence of those who in the past with tech advantages, did not adhere to a prime directive, that compelled them to leave aboriginal peoples unmolested. — universeness

Universeness you may appreciate this. The Celts and Greeks got along just fine at first. Unlike the Celts and Romans. As the Celts perceived the Romans they not only made slaves of others, but they also made slaves of themselves. It would take a lot more information gathering for me to maintain a discussion of such matters but I think it is worth knowing more.

In time the Celtic population increased, leading to their migration south and wars fought to occupy new territory in the Roman/Greek region. If we think of ourselves as evolved from an ape-like creature we can perhaps be more forgiving of human behavior and maybe a bit more in awe of our desire to do better. Packs of dogs and troops of chimpanzees do not stop to question the rightness of fighting for the recourses and territory they needed. Why do expect so much more from humans?

My brain tires and it is time for me to rest. I am listening to lectures about Hinduism right now. Their epic myth that made them more resistant to war put them on a different path than the path Rome followed. My goodness there is so much to know, and my poor brain can't keep up with my desire to know.

Would you follow the Shadows or the Vorlons in the Babylon 5 universe, or would you reject them both? — universeness

I know nothing of them.

Global overpopulation is cased by factors traceable through history. The proselytizing religions had a fair amount to do with it, as did the requirement of agriculture and war machineries for cheap human raw material. Industry needed fewer workers, but a surplus labour pool kept them in perpetual competition and thus kept wages low. Unfettered reproduction in the lower classes has always served the interes of the upper classes, who kept their own relatively low, by the simple expedient of constraining their women and casting their own surplus seed to the lower classes. — Vera Mont

I love your arguments that begin with information. That advances discussion.

Now there's a typically American whopper of a historical distortion! American industry colonized the 'developable' world the same way the British had before them - with the aid of military intervention where guile and buying already corrupt officials failed. The industrialists were, at first, strip-mining everywhere for natural resources, and later for cheap, compliant labour. If the process was made easier by replacing inconvenient or unco-operative native governments, they had the means to do so. Those countries didn't become 'shitholes' by accident or the local population's efforts.
Throughout the nineteenth century and up to the 1930s,
American corporations stridently resisted local opposition
— https://www.unmpress.com/9780826319968/the-century-of-u-s-capitalism-in-latin-america/
as they secured what they wanted in Latin America, cheap labor, plentiful raw materials, and favorable business conditions. After World War II, Latin American nationalism and revolutions forced American-owned enterprises to redefine their business model throughout the region. U.S. businesses integrated themselves into local societies through direct investment in manufacturing and the creation of broad-based consumer societies eager to buy everything from Coca-Cola to Chevrolets
Here are eight of the most notorious cases of US interference in Latin America.
Nothing remotely Star Trekky! — Vera Mont

There is nothing to argue against, but I will add my perspective that never before could we feed so many people and actually have a choice to lift the level of poverty so that all have a decent standard of living. That is, today, what is possible means an increasing number of people trying to figure out how to feed the world and give everyone a decent standard of living, so they are not desperately risking their lives to get into more successful countries. The truth of our caring is real, and it was not possible in the past. Also, we know more about them thanks to modern media than we ever did. I knew relatively nothing about the rest of the world when I was growing up and I was unaware of any reason to know about the rest of the world. Today is a very different reality and we are working on figuring out how to live with this new reality.

However, in the distant past, a few people did travel and they returned with information and objects from their travels. There was some commerce and cultural transmission. Just nothing like what we have to today! In the past, I would have been too concerned about keeping my own family alive to care about people miles away. We can think of a better world because we have a better world.

Considering our businesses represent us around the world, perhaps we the people should have a say in how we are represented? That would be less of a problem if we replaced the autocratic model of industry with the democratic model. The global problem is an excellent reason to return education to education for good moral judgment. The place to start making a better world is education. We got to get people thinking about right and wrong, not just about making a profit. Truth is our reality is what we make it and we need better education for making good choices.

My apologies for the defect in my character whereby my brand of historical nostalgia fails to be myopic and pollyanna enough for your liking. Enjoy your Mother's Day, madam. — 180 Proof

Do you think we would be where we are today without the Enlightenment which spread knowledge that originated in Athens and Rome and ended rule by the Chruch and kings? Using insults to cover up an inability to use reason, is very modern.

Don't strain your arm by patting yourself too much on the back too hard.

*Myths and facts have only the most tenuous relationship.*
If you mean determine what's true and false in history, the answer is: Not always. Documents and chronicles are as often falsified as destroyed; witnesses and participants lie, or are intimidated into silence. Past facts may be unrecoverable, unverifiable. But a good many historical facts do survive; conflicting and differing records can be compared; time-lines and family lineages traced; supporting documentation found in the form of personal correspondence and journals; business ledgers, cargo manifests, registers of birth, marriage and death survive... Even quite a lot of physical evidence can be detected by scientific methods. It's painstaking, intellectually demanding work, but there are those who love it and are faithful to it.

* The word 'myth' is so frequently used to stand for falsehood or lie that it's now considered an exact synonym. It is not. A myth is a story that has been passed down in a culture through oral tradition; it may have had some basis in fact at one, or it may be a conflation of old legends; either way, they are part of the fabric of a human society; a narrative of identity and continuity; it's purpose is not and has never been to deceive anyone. I would plead for a distinction between 'myth' and 'lie'. * — Vera Mont

I believe we are in the Resurrection. Geologists, anthropologists, and related sciences are digging up the past, and it is our job to learn as much as we can and to rethink everything. Like God did not make an Eden that is big enough for all of us and that we can feed so many people is to our credit. Something that could not be achieved if humans were afraid of gaining knowledge. I was thinking of a more general agreement on what is a fact and what is a myth than the detailed judgment of truth of which you speak.

Can one group of people be superior and can this justify them exploiting those who are inferior? If some can be superior to others what are the characteristics of superiority? Socrates said if we exploit people sooner or later they become our problem. Is that true? Is there a God who has favorite people? I guess I am leaning toward debates of being ethical and moral that bring out the good instead of the bad. I am not sure if it matters what color I am, or where my family line began, but I do think it matters if we believe in creationism or evolution.

Of course, we need to know what is true because our decisions must be based on truth or the outcome will be bad. If an untruth is advanced for good reason and is truly believed to be a truth and not a lie, it is still going to lead to bad results. I would not call religious people liars but I do not agree they know the truth and there are good reasons for resolving this problem.

Well, as I've pointed out previously, I prefer 'economic democracy fortified by representative democracy' rather than our status quo laissez-faire, plutonomic, "representative democracy" (i.e. constitutional republicanism) inspired by classical Athens & Rome and established in 1789. The "group think" of "the people" – who have only ever ratified with their "morally-informed" votes the various exploitation agendas of plutocrats – was baked into the US system almost two centuries prior to the "1958 National Defense Education Act ". — 180 Proof

I think you have a spot on your body that makes you imperfect and maybe I should not attempt to reason with an imperfect person. All of Athena and all of Rome were not of one mind. Would you please stop ending discussions with statements of a perceived Roman or Athenian flaw. The Enlightenment took what was best of Athens and Rome and embraced it, opening the opportunity for us to do even better.
Can we please focus on the good?

What do you know of Deming's democratic model for Industry and the possible social and economic ramifications of replacing autocratic industry with the democratic model? I have said democracy is about how we live. What is the difference between autocracy and democracy that could have a huge impact on families and our whole social economic order?

Learning Group Think is learning how to think without learning the logic for good reasoning. It goes with reliance on authority and that reliance on authority has terrible political and social ramifications. I don't think you are understanding the bigger picture? We changed HOW we teach the young to think and made them dependent on authority and easily swayed. People have become reactionary instead of being independent thinkers, and the increase in mental health problems demonstrates what is wrong with this change.

I really like most of your list of 12 proviso's for a better world but I would change 6 to "Universal FREE education, healthcare and a guaranteed welfare level that provides basic needs, from cradle to grave."
I would change 9 to "Freedom of personal religion but no religious authority figure is acceptable."
I would change 10 to 'Respect for the rights of private property unless it was obtained by nefarious means.'
I would also remove 'freedom from search and seizure,' from your number 8, as you would be removing one of the main defences against nefarious individuals and organisations. — universeness

How about Cicero? “God's law is 'right reason.' When perfectly understood it is called 'wisdom.' When applied by government in regulating human relations it is called 'justice.” Cicero

“law in the proper sense is right reason in harmony with nature.” when all understand this “there will not be one such law in Rome and another in Athens, one now and another in the future, but all peoples at all times will be embraced by a single and eternal unchangeable law.” 4

In case everyone is not familiar with Cicero, he was a Roman statesman who studied in Athens. He is speaking of knowing logos, reason, the controlling force of the universe.

I want to throw Star Trek into this argument and the mandate to not interfere in the lives of those on other planets. As global overpopulation has resulted in a flood of people coming to US borders and overwhelming cities that are pressed to care for them, it is only logical for us to sincerely wish their own nations could meet their needs. We want the best for everyone and sent many of them our Industries believing if their economies grew commerce for everyone would get better. But let us consider the Star Trek mandate. It is impossible for the whole world to have the standard of living of the US, because this is a finite planet and that means there are limits to what we can do and for how long we can do it.

We bought off Israel and Egypt to maintain peace in the mid-east and this worked pretty well but we ignored the Muslim Palestinians and this ignorance has not gone well and other Muslim countries who want to defend the Palestinian Muslims and we come out as the evil empire and a good share of the world is turning against the US, same as the Greek city-states turned against Athens and support Sparta in the destruction of Athens.

Exactly what are our limits and what should they be, as we wish all the very best?

Ah yes, the myth of 'discernment by committee' ... — 180 Proof

Well yes, do you have a better idea? Democracy is an imitation of the gods who argued with each other until they had a consensus on the best reasoning. What follows is rule by reason. This goes with understanding logos, reason, the controlling force of the universe. These ideas are what brought us to our greatness and forgetting them, following a false god, is problematic.

Can you imagine such an attempt and such a committee. :grin:
Who would you put on such a committee? — universeness

I like what Vera Mont said.

It would have to be international - historians who have no national loyalties, or else have thrashed out their biases among their peers. It is possible for a academics to see past and beneath their own inherited mythology. Indeed, quite a few have published fat, well-documented books on the historical distortions in their own nation's identity-story.
Of course, there is a much larger number of books published with the aim of distorting it farther, to serve one faction or another. It's not easy for a the average reader to evaluate them. And, given the investment people have in - and the sacrifices they are asked to make for their country, belief in that narrative is not easily swayed. — Vera Mont

I am wondering, isn't it possible to determine what is a myth and want is a fact? Many ancient people realized they must know truth because to believe in something that is false will lead to bad results. Knowing the truth is important to democracy and our health. Believing demons make us sick and refusing to believe it is germs or believing a god will protect us from disease is not a good choice. Believing we can get away with destroying our atmosphere is not a good choice. Believing lying to the masses to be popular with them is not a good choice. Following liers is not a good choice. Following people who want control of oil, such as the invasion of Iraq, is not a good choice. These are not good choices because the consequence of bad choices is bad outcomes.

Didn't Aristotle argue if it doesn't have substance it is not real, or something like that. Gods have no substance and we can not directly experience them. We can think of a god and have a feeling that we think is a god, but how do prove that is a god and not own reaction to what we think? I once used Artmis a Greek goddess to help me get off a forested mountain but I know these gods and goddesses as concepts, not as beings. This is extremely important because only when what we believe is correct will we get good outcomes. Acting on false information results in bad outcomes.

Concerns about public misinformation in the United States—ranging from politics to science—are growing. Here, we provide an overview of how and why citizens become (and sometimes remain) misinformed about science. Our discussion focuses specifically on misinformation among individual citizens. However, it is impossible to understand individual information processing and acceptance without taking into account social networks, information ecologies, and other macro-level variables that provide important social context. Specifically, we show how being misinformed is a function of a person’s ability and motivation to spot falsehoods, but also of other group-level and societal factors that increase the chances of citizens to be exposed to correct(ive) information. We conclude by discussing a number of research areas—some of which echo themes of the 2017 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine’s Communicating Science Effectively report—that will be particularly important for our future understanding of misinformation, specifically a systems approach to the problem of misinformation, the need for more systematic analyses of science communication in new media environments, and a (re)focusing on traditionally underserved audiences. — Dietram A. Scheufele https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9914-5407 scheufeleatwiscdotedu and Nicole M. Krause

Yes Vera, you're right. But the general population assumes that a good government will sit authority or it will have to lose its seat, due to the ones in knowledge of everything. So no intetest in politics is there because of that assumption by some. If no interest means wickedness can actually gain power and sit in power and control, then an interest in politics and political parties becomes necessary. But those who show no interest, are not anyone who will be listened to, so they just act dumb, neutral and show no interest. — Beena

Culture matters and if we do not understand that we will be dominated by those who lust for power. Democracy is about how we live and it depends on our willingness to take responsibility for living up to the following characteristics. I hope you all agree this list is better than the 10 commandments of God. It is from the grade school series "Democracy Series" "The Way of Democracy". published by the Macmillan Company 1940.

1. Respect for the dignity and worth of the individual human personality.
2. Open opportunity for the individual.
3. Economic and social security.
4. The search for truth. (this is about science and all the humanities not just reading the Bible and obeying and depending on a God like a child.)
5. Free discussion; freedom of speech; freedom of the press. (This does not include the freedom to lie nor the freedom to spread hatred because that is immoral and destructive).
6. Universal education.
7. The rule of the majority; the rights of the minority; the honest ballot.
8. Justice for the common man; trial by jury; arbitration of disputes; orderly legal processes; freedom from search and seizure; right to petition.
9. Freedom of religion.
10. Respect for the rights of private property.
11. The practice of the fundamental social virtues.
12. The responsibility of the individual to participate in the duties of democracy.

If we do not understand this way of life, our democracy is not defended. Only when democracy is defended in the classroom is it defended. Our education for technology does not defend our democracy. The military does not defend our democracy. Guns can not defend an ideology and way of life.

Ah yes, "ruled by reason" such as that of misogynistic slave cultures like Classical Greece and Rome upon which our ethnic cleansing settlers' "constitutional republic" had been founded and had legalized chattel slavery and then systemic apartheid until about a half-century ago. :brow: — 180 Proof

I love your argument and if I had a better brain I would start a thread to debate the evils of slavery. Unfortunately, my weak brain can handle only one subject at a time.

My post prior to the one with that clip ends with an emphatic Live Long and Prosper (not Make America Great Again). — 180 Proof

I do not understand what that has to do with democracy requiring education for a culture that promotes liberty and justice. You have implied something but I don't know what.

I agree 80s Trek was a dumbed down, paint-by-numbers version of the 60s Trek, but as an example of the latter's originality inspite of crass commerce considerations in contrast to the former's derivative formulaic commercialism and not an example of your "change of education in 1958" (whatever that means – Sputnik-scare? :roll: ) Both 60s & 80s audiences, for the most part, had lacked the 'classical education' of most of the creators, writers & actors of the original show so it's not surprising that the less challenging and visionary show has always been more popular, especially with under-40somethings. — 180 Proof

Thank you for clarifying your argument. Now I will clarify mine. The 1958 National Defense Education Act resulting from the Sputnik scare, came with dropping education for good moral judgment and leaving moral training to the church. That is a disaster!!! It also means replacing education for independent thinking with "Group Think" and that is the most obvious change between the original Star Trek and the New Generation. John Wayne was very much part of the American mythology and Kirk was the John Wayne of outer space. Picard is the "Group Think" captain. Can you remember the distinct difference between them? Star went from advancing our independent thinking culture to advancing the "Group Think" culture, and now add to this no concept of shared morality except the Bible.

We no longer have the culture of the Enlightenment, nor any chance of it manifesting it without education for that. I love that you speak of how much the original Star Trek relied on that cultural influence. Today colleges promote German philosophy more than they promote the Greek philosophy which is the foundation of a culture for democracy. German philosophy is not free of Christian influence. Germany was the model of a humanoid warrior species the Klingons. We now think the glory and power of God means the US and its military might, just as our world war enemy was dominated by its military. And may God, rather than reason save our sorry asses. We must not rely on independent reasoning! That is what Satan wants us to do and we must follow God not reason. You know, Eve disobeyed God and ate the terrible fruit. I must buy a gun as Jesus told us to do and defend against God's enemies. Hail Hitler/Trump. Be clear, this not about one man, but a culture changed by education. We are what defended the world against and AI will increase this reality if we continue to believe we are the manifestation of God's power and glory.

As for Scotty's gruff irritation on display in that clip, it's not with the computer per se but with his situation – being stranded out of time (75 years in the future) by accident and realizing that he was obsolete. You'd have to watch the episode titled "Relics", Athena, in order to fully appreciate the context of Scotty's forlorn mood. — 180 Proof

My post prior to the one with that clip ends with an emphatic Live Long and Prosper (not Make America Great Again). — 180 Proof

I think my understanding of Scott is correct. Not only do some of us fear we are obsolete, but that our Enlightenment past is dying along with the death of our planet. We have fought every war for nothing if we do not turn things around. We are now what we defended the world against. I hope to change this fate for our planet and that might begin with laws that reduce the use of computers and IA and protect our liberty and personal power. When I call someone, I want to have the power to control the moment, not a dam computer program or human receptionist that is programmed just like a computer. I don't think you understand Scott's irritation.

Regarding the US, our political democracy without economic democracy is a democracy-in-name-only (DINO) which, from periodic national crisis to crisis, has been dismantling itself brick by brick since 1789 by disproportionately serving Capital at the expense of Labor and Nature (both of which are in revolt: reactionary populisms and global warming, respectively).
— 180 Proof

But the arc of history for the past two centuries has been towards liberty. Women and minorities are de facto second class citizens, but they are not de jure second class citizens anymore. I was watching "In the Heat of the Night", the other day. America really has made a lot of progress in the last 60 years. How does that square with what you're saying? — RogueAI

Vera Mont — Vera Mont

I want to argue the US has lost its way and is headed for a police state if it does not awaken to the necessity of culture for social order and continues down the path of authority over the people. I think our increasing reliance on technology is destroying our liberty and that is why I started this thread.

I think Proof has a very good point about not actually having a democracy unless the Industry uses the democratic model instead of the autocratic model. During the Great Depression Deming tried to convince Industry to adopt his democratic model for industry and it refused. At the end of WW11 Deming went to Japan and taught them the democratic model and Japan went on to out-compete the US for world markets and this has very seriously hurt the US because of the loss of blue-collar Industrial jobs for the average Joe.

We would not have the divides we have today if the US had both education for democracy (culture) and it replaced autocratic Industry with the democratic model. We could have a new golden age that can not happen when few people know that is possible.

The US needs psycho-analysis just as individuals do because we are so unconscious of the past that is manifesting problems today. We began with Industry that followed England's autocratic order, and the patriarchal Bible that supported kings and slavery and made women the property of men. When a journalist interviewed pioneers who remembered our pioneer days, some women were outraged about the big fuss over slavery when their own slavery was ignored and called marriage. We can look to the Iroquois and see a very different social and economic order. Even though these people were very advanced, they faced genocide largely because of religion, greed, and patriotic/autocratic order. The Bible is not a book for democracy.

Okay we have an agreement that knowledge of matriarchies has value.

Yes. Thankfully not everyone is swayed by the belief in monetary value above all else. When it comes to the US (looking in from the outside) it does appear to hold more sway over there than in Europe. There are other differences too, and I believe it is mostly connected to a stronger sense of patriotism (which I personally dislike). — I like sushi

Money is power and I can see a problem with speaking of it as an evil. If we were a herd of sheep or buffalo we would be looking for food, instead of worrying about how to get the money to pay for it. I think I am fumbling in the effort to find the right words. Buddhism makes an issue of not allowing ourselves to be driven by desires but all of nature is driven by desires and that is not evil.

Having a good economy is important to everyone, so maybe we should give some thought to how that is possible. But, but, wow, I can not find the words for my thought, there needs to be an element of heart in our considerations of what is desirable. Who should we include and who should be excluded from our struggle to have a good life? I don't know if men ask questions like this?



I wish I had time to read another book but I don't. Perhaps you could share some of it because I think there is something I am trying to know but I can not. I need more information.

I read, settling down to be farmers was a huge shift in Hebrew morality. When they were herders they shared the land and the herds in common. When they settled into farming, the individual family took precedence. They began competing with each other for resources and this new situation demanded a new morality.

By the way, I think we are in the Resurrection. A time when the sciences are revealing the past and we have to learn from it and rethink everything so we are living as best we can with our present reality that is very different from the past.

You have, I think, successfully summarized all exchanges on the subject of all national histories and traditions. — Vera Mont

Oh brother, that is a can of worms! The problem is glaring in the relationship between Israel and Palestine. Each side of this conflict presents their children a different version of their shared history.

How about the US with resistance to people of color being represented as they want to be represented in US history books?

Your comment had a big effect on my understanding of the problem and possible solution. What if a committee made a sincere effort to determine what is myth and what is fact?

I don't want to take anything away from your affection for Machiavelli. His advice to princes has stood the test of time, But so have the works of propagandists and public relations operators, who have found ways of guiding present tense princes without having to resort to "love me or fear me" alternatives. Better to get the public to obey without them knowing too much about how they are being led about, and who holds the leash, — BC

Yipes, I do not love Machiavelli! I think he is a scoundrel and that he has reproduced the problem many times through his book. He surely should not be the model of leadership for a democracy. A democracy needs to be rule by reason, not by some clown who is an expert at manipulating people.

The point I am always trying to make is we can not have rule by reason without transmitting a culture that manifests that. My second point is education for technology prepares us to be ruled not to have rule by reason. The 1958 change in education changed our culture and the clip Proof gave us is a pretty good explanation of that. In the clip, Scott represents all of us who remember when things were different, and f**k the damn computer that has replaced a human receptionist.

Well, in comparison to ST TOS's aircraft carrier-like Enterprise, the ST TNG's Enterprise-D.is a "Love Boat"-like cruise ship. :smirk: — 180 Proof

Whoo, I had a much stronger emotional reaction to that clip than I expected.

I love the beginning with Scott's irritation with the computer wanting exact numbers and then his emotional reunion with the people he knew and the pain of this being a memory of them and not actually them and how cold and analytical Picard appears.

It was in part my irritation with the process of getting a medical appointment that motivated me to start this thread. To me the reliance on technology today is rude, and impersonal, and reduces us to complete powerlessness unless we reply with the exact code the computer wants. We have willingly given up our personal power and liberty and some are welcoming even more AI with open arms. And it isn't just AI but the compliance to its control. Interesting that they chose Scott to make the point. That is a whole different cultural factor. Spock would not get the same message across.

It would be cool to see each member of the crew take the position of Scott in that clip, and to see the many different facets of the same thing.

The problem was not, IMO, the "German model of bureaucracy" i — 180 Proof

I think you underestimate the significance of bureaucratic order. Kings had nothing like the power of modern bureaucracies. I have run out of time. Hopefully, I will remember to come back with an explanation because the change has very strong social, political, and economic ramifications.