Video essay about Columbus, bad but not pure evil?

[J842P]

What say you about Mayan civilization? Incan? Or is it just those evil Europeans?

Us humans are what we are. In our brauns chenicaky emotion can and does over ride reason.

What say you about Christians who based on an ancient line written by an unknown author gays are persecuted? Leviticus obviously.

If you look at all of it , it all comes under the heading of 'ye human condition'. To use a Chritian metaphor we are all sinners. Sin does not come from an outside agent it is part of who we are. Evil is a relative term.

Christians who are anti abortion oppose universal health care for kids. When someone comes along proclaiming Columbus is singular evil, I say look around you today. Morality is a thin veneer.

I'm critical of bad actions by individuals, reagrdless of their background. I am not one to impute supposed race guilt as you do. If a person is Mayan, that does not make them accountable for the actions of every "Native American" who has ever lived, as you have claimed. I reject that philosophy with every measure of my being.

Where has steve said a random Mayan is accountable for every Native American who has ever lived?

 

[Politesse]

What say you about Mayan civilization? Incan? Or is it just those evil Europeans?

Us humans are what we are. In our brauns chenicaky emotion can and does over ride reason.

What say you about Christians who based on an ancient line written by an unknown author gays are persecuted? Leviticus obviously.

If you look at all of it , it all comes under the heading of 'ye human condition'. To use a Chritian metaphor we are all sinners. Sin does not come from an outside agent it is part of who we are. Evil is a relative term.

Christians who are anti abortion oppose universal health care for kids. When someone comes along proclaiming Columbus is singular evil, I say look around you today. Morality is a thin veneer.

I'm critical of bad actions by individuals, reagrdless of their background. I am not one to impute supposed race guilt as you do. If a person is Mayan, that does not make them accountable for the actions of every "Native American" who has ever lived, as you have claimed. I reject that philosophy with every measure of my being.

Where has steve said a random Mayan is accountable for every Native American who has ever lived?

When he equivocated about the innocent deaths of Columbus' victims by citing the supposed equal violence of "Native American Cultures", including the Maya, despite their having no tangible connection to the Taino except Steve's belief that they all belong to the same "race".

 

[Horatio Parker]

No doubt. However:

From d'Ailly's Imago Mundi Columbus learned of Alfraganus's estimate that a degree of latitude (or a degree of longitude along the equator) spanned 56
2
/
3
miles, but did not realize that this was expressed in the Arabic mile rather than the shorter Roman mile with which he was familiar (1,480 m).[32] He therefore estimated the circumference of the Earth to be about 30,200 km, whereas the correct value is 40,000 km (25,000 mi).[citation needed]

Addendum:
It just struck me that whoever wrote that snippet you quoted apparently assumed that no one ever repeated (or checked) the fairly simple measurement that Eratosthenes made. That for over sixteen centuries cartographers relied on translations from the one and only original measurement. A silly assumption. I would assume that since the measurement is so important (critical) and so simple to do that countless people that were concerned with accuracy like cartographers had repeated it over the ages.

No, Columbus made the error. He assumed the source was using the same measurements when it was two types. He thought the meridians of longitude were closer together than they were. Look, if the America’s weren’t there, his mission would’ve failed.

None of this bears much on the monument question imo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[skepticalbip]

Addendum:
It just struck me that whoever wrote that snippet you quoted apparently assumed that no one ever repeated (or checked) the fairly simple measurement that Eratosthenes made. That for over sixteen centuries cartographers relied on translations from the one and only original measurement. A silly assumption. I would assume that since the measurement is so important (critical) and so simple to do that countless people that were concerned with accuracy like cartographers had repeated it over the ages.

No, Columbus made the error. He assumed the source was using the same measurements when it was two types. He thought the meridians of longitude were closer together than they were. Look, if the America’s weren’t there, his mission would’ve failed.

None of this bears much on the monument question imo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You are crediting Columbus with much more than he did. Columbus was simply a navigator who was simply reading the maps available at the time. It was the cartographers that 'determined' the distance to Japan. Columbus was 'guilty' of trusting the map makers.

The maps that I have seen that Columbus supposedly relied on show the distance from Spain to Japan to be less than the distance from Spain to Arabia. Columbus would be quite aware how far Arabia was regardless of what someone calls a 'mile'.

But you are right, the voyage would have failed if the American continents had not been in the way. It would have failed for several reasons, mutiny or running out of provisions among them.

Do you really believe (as your link indicated) that the diameter of the Earth was never measured and refined over the sixteen or so centuries from that first determination? The experiment is so fucking simple and the results so critical to know that I find it difficult to believe that people concerned with accuracy wouldn't do their own measurement.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

It was the cartographers that 'determined' the distance to Japan. Columbus was 'guilty' of trusting the map makers.

So on Columbus Day, we should probably worship the tomb of the unknown cartographers then, instead.

 

[skepticalbip]

It was the cartographers that 'determined' the distance to Japan. Columbus was 'guilty' of trusting the map makers.

So on Columbus Day, we should probably worship the tomb of the unknown cartographers then, instead.

Hey, I could go with that. But then since Columbus day was created to honor Italian-Americans, the unknown cartographer would need to be Italian. Apparently when the day was created they assumed that most notable Italian available to choose from was Columbus.

Sorta like St. Patrick's day was declared in the U.S. to honor Irish-Americans, not St. Patrick.

 

[Politesse]

It was the cartographers that 'determined' the distance to Japan. Columbus was 'guilty' of trusting the map makers.

So on Columbus Day, we should probably worship the tomb of the unknown cartographers then, instead.

Hey, I could go with that. But then since Columbus day was created to honor Italian-Americans, the unknown cartographer would need to be Italian.

If we need a heroic Italian cartographer who did his own math and knew how to reason out a logical argument, Amerigo Vespucci comes to mind as an obvious candidate. As a plus, I don't think he was ever accused of any serious crimes.

 

[steve_bank]

Where has steve said a random Mayan is accountable for every Native American who has ever lived?

When he equivocated about the innocent deaths of Columbus' victims by citing the supposed equal violence of "Native American Cultures", including the Maya, despite their having no tangible connection to the Taino except Steve's belief that they all belong to the same "race".

You are eiter unable to see my point due to ignorance of actual American cultures betong Columbus, or you are willfully ignorant refusing to see the problem in your moral argument on Columbus.

He was one of many. If he is evil, so were Matins. Archeological evidence shows a brutal culture.

Evil today...Christian Neo Nazis.

 

[steve_bank]

Hey, I could go with that. But then since Columbus day was created to honor Italian-Americans, the unknown cartographer would need to be Italian.

If we need a heroic Italian cartographer who did his own math and knew how to reason out a logical argument, Amerigo Vespucci comes to mind as an obvious candidate. As a plus, I don't think he was ever accused of any serious crimes.

In terms of heroic adventure the Vikings had Columbus beat. They crossed open ocean with a latitude and longitude system and I believe without a compass. Greenland, Iceland, and what is now Canada.

Should be called Leif Ericson Land. There are remains of settlements in NA.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leif_Erikson

Leif Erikson or Leif Ericson[note 1] (c. 970 – c. 1020) was a Norse explorer from Iceland.[6] He was the first known European to have set foot on continental North America (excluding Greenland), before Christopher Columbus

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

There is a big statue of Eriksson in Iceland.

 

[skepticalbip]

Hey, I could go with that. But then since Columbus day was created to honor Italian-Americans, the unknown cartographer would need to be Italian.

If we need a heroic Italian cartographer who did his own math and knew how to reason out a logical argument, Amerigo Vespucci comes to mind as an obvious candidate. As a plus, I don't think he was ever accused of any serious crimes.

Sounds silly to me. Any historical figure can be accused of 'serious crimes' if the detractors wants to dig deeply enough. Even St. Patrick can be accused of the 'serious crime' of driving Irish snakes into extinction if someone is determined enough to demean him.

 

[skepticalbip]

There is a big statue of Eriksson in Iceland.

And supposedly, he had some run-in with the Mandan Indians, killing some. Just goes to show that no fucking "white man" merits recognition for anything impressive they may have done.

 

[Politesse]

Hey, I could go with that. But then since Columbus day was created to honor Italian-Americans, the unknown cartographer would need to be Italian.

If we need a heroic Italian cartographer who did his own math and knew how to reason out a logical argument, Amerigo Vespucci comes to mind as an obvious candidate. As a plus, I don't think he was ever accused of any serious crimes.

Sounds silly to me. Any historical figure can be accused of 'serious crimes' if the detractors wants to dig deeply enough. Even St. Patrick can be accused of the 'serious crime' of driving Irish snakes into extinction if someone is determined enough to demean him.

I hope you're fucking joking. Mythology and multiple primary sources written by credible first-hand witnesses including the accused are not even remotely the same thing.

- - - Updated - - -

There is a big statue of Eriksson in Iceland.

Just goes to show that no fucking "white man" merits recognition for anything impressive they may have done.

And yet, no one has actually said anything of the sort. Possibly because the rest of us aren't racists. Go figure.

 

[skepticalbip]

Sounds silly to me. Any historical figure can be accused of 'serious crimes' if the detractors wants to dig deeply enough. Even St. Patrick can be accused of the 'serious crime' of driving Irish snakes into extinction if someone is determined enough to demean him.

I hope you're fucking joking. Mythology and multiple primary sources written by credible first-hand witnesses including the accused are not even remotely the same thing.

Thus showing that you don't have a clue as to why a person is noted as significant in history. It certainly isn't because they were angels, personally admirable, or even good people. It is because of their accomplishments. Columbus opened the new world to Europe, that is a notable accomplishment whether you like it or not. FDR could be labeled as 'evil" because he saw to it that nuclear weapons development was funded that ended up causing the horrible death of a hell of a lot of Japanese and the problems of the cold war (where even more people died). But the accomplishment that FDR is noted for in history was his remaking of the U.S. culture.

 

[steve_bank]

Sounds silly to me. Any historical figure can be accused of 'serious crimes' if the detractors wants to dig deeply enough. Even St. Patrick can be accused of the 'serious crime' of driving Irish snakes into extinction if someone is determined enough to demean him.

I hope you're fucking joking. Mythology and multiple primary sources written by credible first-hand witnesses including the accused are not even remotely the same thing.

Thus showing that you don't have a clue as to why a person is noted as significant in history. It certainly isn't because they were angels, personally admirable, or even good people. It is because of their accomplishments. Columbus opened the new world to Europe, that is a notable accomplishment whether you like it or not. FDR could be labeled as 'evil" because he saw to it that nuclear weapons development was funded that ended up causing the horrible death of a hell of a lot of Japanese and the problems of the cold war (where even more people died). But the accomplishment that FDR is noted for in history was his remaking of the U.S. culture.

That pretty much sums it up. Caesar was a ruthless son of a bitch as was all the Romans of his day. . Yet his military history is still studied today. He made advance in structured military organization and structured battlefield tactics.

 

[Politesse]

Sounds silly to me. Any historical figure can be accused of 'serious crimes' if the detractors wants to dig deeply enough. Even St. Patrick can be accused of the 'serious crime' of driving Irish snakes into extinction if someone is determined enough to demean him.

I hope you're fucking joking. Mythology and multiple primary sources written by credible first-hand witnesses including the accused are not even remotely the same thing.

Thus showing that you don't have a clue as to why a person is noted as significant in history. It certainly isn't because they were angels, personally admirable, or even good people. It is because of their accomplishments. Columbus opened the new world to Europe, that is a notable accomplishment whether you like it or not. FDR could be labeled as 'evil" because he saw to it that nuclear weapons development was funded that ended up causing the horrible death of a hell of a lot of Japanese and the problems of the cold war (where even more people died). But the accomplishment that FDR is noted for in history was his remaking of the U.S. culture.

I'm not sure how you got the idea that I don't consider Columbus to be a significant figure in history...

I wouldn't approve of a federal holiday honoring Julius Caesar either.

Yes, I know he was Italian also. And "white". Whatever, I still wouldn't want Caesar Day.

 

[skepticalbip]

Thus showing that you don't have a clue as to why a person is noted as significant in history. It certainly isn't because they were angels, personally admirable, or even good people. It is because of their accomplishments. Columbus opened the new world to Europe, that is a notable accomplishment whether you like it or not. FDR could be labeled as 'evil" because he saw to it that nuclear weapons development was funded that ended up causing the horrible death of a hell of a lot of Japanese and the problems of the cold war (where even more people died). But the accomplishment that FDR is noted for in history was his remaking of the U.S. culture.

I'm not sure how you got the idea that I don't consider Columbus to be a significant figure in history...

I wouldn't approve of a federal holiday honoring Julius Caesar either.

Yes, I know he was Italian also. And "white". Whatever, I still wouldn't want Caesar Day.

I'm sure that the world's population will change how they determine and approve who is a notable person since you think different considerations should be taken into account. I can see Abraham Lincoln statues being torn down across the country since he was directly responsible for the deaths of over half a million Americans

 

[Politesse]

Thus showing that you don't have a clue as to why a person is noted as significant in history. It certainly isn't because they were angels, personally admirable, or even good people. It is because of their accomplishments. Columbus opened the new world to Europe, that is a notable accomplishment whether you like it or not. FDR could be labeled as 'evil" because he saw to it that nuclear weapons development was funded that ended up causing the horrible death of a hell of a lot of Japanese and the problems of the cold war (where even more people died). But the accomplishment that FDR is noted for in history was his remaking of the U.S. culture.

I'm not sure how you got the idea that I don't consider Columbus to be a significant figure in history...

I wouldn't approve of a federal holiday honoring Julius Caesar either.

Yes, I know he was Italian also. And "white". Whatever, I still wouldn't want Caesar Day.

I'm sure that the world's population will change how they determine and approve who is a notable person since you think different considerations should be taken into account. I can see Abraham Lincoln statues being torn down across the country since he was directly responsible for the deaths of over half a million Americans

The whole thing you're enraged about is that public opinion has changed toward Columbus himself. If you're cool with the idea that perspectives change, why are you so upset about this particular change?

And again, neither I nor anyone has ever suggested that Columbus is not notable. Recognition and worship are not synonyms. It's the holiday that's the problem, not name recognition.

 

[skepticalbip]

I'm sure that the world's population will change how they determine and approve who is a notable person since you think different considerations should be taken into account. I can see Abraham Lincoln statues being torn down across the country since he was directly responsible for the deaths of over half a million Americans

The whole thing you're enraged about is that public opinion has changed toward Columbus himself. If you're cool with the idea that perspectives change, why are you so upset about this particular change?

Enraged? Another strawman? (and a way to evade addressing that Abe Lincoln was directly responsible for so many deaths of Americans?) Pointing out the asinity of judging someone from another time and culture by your personal particular morals in your current culture is not being enraged. Most likely in another hundred years your current moral code and culture will be seen as awful by their standards. Certainly in another two hundred years.

And again, neither I nor anyone has ever suggested that Columbus is not notable. Recognition and worship are not synonyms.

Another strawman. I have seen no one 'worship' Columbus. All I have see is recognition of his accomplishment.

 

[Politesse]

Enraged? Another strawman? (and a way to evade addressing that Abe Lincoln was directly responsible for so many deaths of Americans?) Pointing out the asinity of judging someone from another time and culture by your personal particular morals in your current culture is not being enraged. Most likely in another hundred years your current moral code and culture will be seen as awful by their standards. Certainly in another two hundred years.

And again, neither I nor anyone has ever suggested that Columbus is not notable. Recognition and worship are not synonyms.

Another strawman. I have seen no one 'worship' Columbus. All I have see is recognition of his accomplishment.

Declaring a holy day in someone's honor & getting uoset when their flaws are remarked on = worship.

Yes, Abraham Lincoln was controversial. That's why we shot him to death after the war.