Donna, Furry Frog?.Bing ?

Everyone's poo stinks.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I was going to say something similar. Pretty much all the trouble has left, especially a certain few, which is OK to me.

 

I've only put one person on ignore here. No comment on who they were. But she's gone now

 

I would think we get a lot more newbies here due to CT showing up highly on Google. Some people get tired of such questions, some newbies are argumentative they didn't find their retirement in grandpa's coins, etc. I think that explains some newbie interactions I have seen. I doubt they get almost any over there yet.

 

You know this forum has always had a very thick line. Stepping on the line doesn't necessarily get you in trouble. It is when a member starts flirting with the other side that does.

Don't think that it won't happen again.
We all might be mild mannered at this time. But it only takes a few missteps to bring the strife back.

 

I'm guessing you elected not to read my entire post.

 

@masterswimmer I didn't mean for that to come across the wrong way.

 

Don't be tempted by the Other Side



wait .. isn't that just the Reverse ??

 

All good. I just have long arms. Sometimes I feel the need to pat my own back.

 

It happens I think that the Idea behind this forum is community. I have reported before, at the same time. Having a blind eye, can be admirable. And too quick to win, can be a down fall.

 

Being an "older" member, my memory isn't as good as it used to be (come to think of it, it was never very good) but it seems as if politics (in a broad context) caused many of the problems here. Ancient politics isn't as touchy as modern politics.

 

Not to us anyway. But if ancient people could see the ridiculously high quality of our cushy, abundant lives, and then hear about the stupid "political" topics that get our undies in a bunch, they would wonder how we could be so stupid and unappreciative.

 

I agree, but some wish to bring their modern politics into discourse of right or wrong regarding the ancient world. Condemning the past based upon modern beliefs is a fools errand, but the most modern generations believe they have the moral right to do so.

 

You said that? I am really not surprised. No matter how true it is..
Modern day folk have been tuned into reacting as if it is instinctive or something.

 

Wasn't there just a discussion of the "worst" Roman emperors...

 

I am a moral relativist in the universal sense, but if we take this perspective too far then we'd conclude that nobody could ever be judged for anything regardless of time, place, or severity. The problem is that low-minded people do not account for nuance, and they lack the skills of introspection required to realize the impact that environment has on every single one of us.

Is it morally problematic to believe that social/professional ceilings are inherently determined by class status at birth? ........... Yes

Was Julius Caesar a moral monster for believing this?............ No

It's not something that can be demonstrated logically, but I do believe that we have made significant progress on the morality front in the last 2000 years (thanks to secular humanism). But, we all, just like ancient peoples, are products of our times and environment. That being the case, we can't judge them too harshly, because when we judge them, we are effectively judging ourselves.

 

You can judge "worst" within a culture and time sir. Problem is when you bring modern morality back to ancient times, you are judging people after the fact on your morality, when they had no opportunity to know what morality they would be judged on. However, Romans themselves were shocked by the likes of Elagabalus, so much so his own grandmother had him and his mother put to death in order for the family to stay in power.

Most Romans were extremely moral people, they simply had different morals than us. They would be shocked by some things we do today. So if you are going to judge "morality" it should be based upon the moral code everyone at the time agreed to

 

For those who feel that we of today are moral people in the sense that we are enlightened by religion or culture, it is more accurate to say that we have been acculturated to accept things as right or wrong because few of us ever really challenge the mores we are raised to accept. If people are raised in a society where slaves are all around them, doing mundane tasks and nobody seems to object to this we soon find nothing too objectionable about having slaves around. The fact that we are repulsed by certain behavior, say sacrificing human infants (Carthage) or crucifying criminals (just about everywhere in the Ancient World) or having criminals fight it out to the death as entertainment (Rome) means nothing more than we are born into and acculturated to see these behaviors as "wrong". Conversely it also means that some of what we do today and think of as quite permissible may some day be seen by a majority of people as reprehensible, degrading, ,inhumane or just plain disgusting and we may be blasted and labelled as a cruel people because we did or believed these things (slaughtering and consuming animals). Are we a cruel people because we do that? Will today's livestock farmers be viewed as we view the lanistae (Rome's slave dealers)? As much as I wish that certain behaviors did not happen "back then" I have to keep in mind that this can be not just futile but fatuous as well. Perhaps NOT allowing your first born son to be sacrificed to Moloch or Tanit or maybe NOT having criminals publicly or violently executed was the sin or failing of that period. Like it or not most of us accept what everybody around us does and those who do not are the misfits, curmudgeons, sick or incendiaries of their time and place. Was Julius Caesar immoral for having ravaged his way across Gaul to achieve his fame and fortune? Not by the morals and mores of his time and place. No more so that I am for enjoying a hamburger in my time and place. And to remind us what site we are on, let me ask readers if this man, Trajan, was a great ruler, a model to be emulated, a man worthy of deification, and blessing (may you be as successful as Trajan) or was he a war criminal, massacring his way to infamy? Depends, doesn't it?

 

Agree, but
"However, Romans themselves were shocked by the likes of Elagabalus, so much so his own grandmother had him and his mother put to death in order for the family to stay in power."
Who was worse, him or them.

 

Yes!