06-24-2002, 02:03 PM
Hi everyone.<br>
<br>
I am reading the italian translation of<br>
CARNAGE AND CULTURE by Victor Davis Hanson (2001).<br>
I am about 2/3rd the way thru.<br>
It discusses various exemplary battles in "history" including the ancient battles of Salamis, Gaugamela and Cannae.<br>
I have mixed feelings about the book and might say more about it later once I finish and if anyone else has read it.<br>
<br>
The general thesis, as I understand it, is: over the past 2700 years in western culture there has been a cultural continuity (sometimes evident, sometimes thin, but never cut) with the attitude that the "free-men" of the Greek city-states had towards war and politics [hence religion and philosphy], an attitude that always given western societies the advantage in militarily confrontations with other cultures but also devastating effects when we fight ourselves (all-out total war).<br>
<br>
That philosphy and hence science are social by-products of how the greeks decided to settle their military affairs is the focus of my intimate thoughts now. I have come to think that science is a western creation that arose in a particular type of society, the same greek one (!); science is an accident of history and not a human innate attitude towards the world, just like "democracies", made of civil and "free" soldiers that react and act against "real" and "understandable" enemies, hence of men that move and act in a "real" world and not passive puppets in a magical one, are not innate and not universal in human societies. Such free men want to understand to be able to manipulate better others, things...; the sharper of such men then ask themselves what "real" means, and that is how philosphy begins. Philosophy and science can begin and then prosper only in a society were there is freedom to speak out and critisize and where one must "prove" his point with an "argument" that must be "convincing". What characterizes a good argument, a "proof", is the essence of logic (Aristotle). Modern mathematics (Euclid) follows. Fame and status are not enough to be convincing. Simply because the King says something doesn't make it right! The soldiers of such a society are free to go to battle, decide to do so, are not coerced, find a rational mechanism to fight efficiently, and then better, always looking for ways to contribute and exploit ideas or drop bad ones. Of course there is the tragic side of all this: men are very irrational and want to believe things, anything, just as long as charismatic leaders or priests tell them they will be saved. Only our rational society has succeeded in convincing millions of young men to let themselves be butchered on horrible battle fields. No logic, no mathematics, just ideologies. This instinct towards wanting to herd in groups is evidence that science, philosophy and democracy are not instinctive and natural human expressions.<br>
<br>
I am anxious to read the reactions to this book here in Europe. It will probably be attacked.<br>
<br>
But it is not a perfect book. In particular the Cannae chapter is the one I liked less (maybe because it the one "I think" I already know more about). And thruout the chapters, and even in any one, he repeats himself too much, almost like a drum beat, but maybe this is a rhetorical artifact.<br>
<br>
<br>
<p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/ugoffredo.showPublicProfile?language=EN>goffredo</A> at: 6/24/02 5:05:19 pm<br></i>
<br>
I am reading the italian translation of<br>
CARNAGE AND CULTURE by Victor Davis Hanson (2001).<br>
I am about 2/3rd the way thru.<br>
It discusses various exemplary battles in "history" including the ancient battles of Salamis, Gaugamela and Cannae.<br>
I have mixed feelings about the book and might say more about it later once I finish and if anyone else has read it.<br>
<br>
The general thesis, as I understand it, is: over the past 2700 years in western culture there has been a cultural continuity (sometimes evident, sometimes thin, but never cut) with the attitude that the "free-men" of the Greek city-states had towards war and politics [hence religion and philosphy], an attitude that always given western societies the advantage in militarily confrontations with other cultures but also devastating effects when we fight ourselves (all-out total war).<br>
<br>
That philosphy and hence science are social by-products of how the greeks decided to settle their military affairs is the focus of my intimate thoughts now. I have come to think that science is a western creation that arose in a particular type of society, the same greek one (!); science is an accident of history and not a human innate attitude towards the world, just like "democracies", made of civil and "free" soldiers that react and act against "real" and "understandable" enemies, hence of men that move and act in a "real" world and not passive puppets in a magical one, are not innate and not universal in human societies. Such free men want to understand to be able to manipulate better others, things...; the sharper of such men then ask themselves what "real" means, and that is how philosphy begins. Philosophy and science can begin and then prosper only in a society were there is freedom to speak out and critisize and where one must "prove" his point with an "argument" that must be "convincing". What characterizes a good argument, a "proof", is the essence of logic (Aristotle). Modern mathematics (Euclid) follows. Fame and status are not enough to be convincing. Simply because the King says something doesn't make it right! The soldiers of such a society are free to go to battle, decide to do so, are not coerced, find a rational mechanism to fight efficiently, and then better, always looking for ways to contribute and exploit ideas or drop bad ones. Of course there is the tragic side of all this: men are very irrational and want to believe things, anything, just as long as charismatic leaders or priests tell them they will be saved. Only our rational society has succeeded in convincing millions of young men to let themselves be butchered on horrible battle fields. No logic, no mathematics, just ideologies. This instinct towards wanting to herd in groups is evidence that science, philosophy and democracy are not instinctive and natural human expressions.<br>
<br>
I am anxious to read the reactions to this book here in Europe. It will probably be attacked.<br>
<br>
But it is not a perfect book. In particular the Cannae chapter is the one I liked less (maybe because it the one "I think" I already know more about). And thruout the chapters, and even in any one, he repeats himself too much, almost like a drum beat, but maybe this is a rhetorical artifact.<br>
<br>
<br>
<p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/ugoffredo.showPublicProfile?language=EN>goffredo</A> at: 6/24/02 5:05:19 pm<br></i>
Jeffery Wyss
"Si vos es non secui of solutio tunc vos es secui of preciptate."
"Si vos es non secui of solutio tunc vos es secui of preciptate."
