10-15-2011, 01:31 PM
Quote:However with special regard to Jona I must say I doubt it is worth debating with people so narrow-minded and intolerant that they are seriously offended by a dating system, or rather the name of a dating system.I think there is always a need for debate. Take, for example, the battle of Kerbala, which is (for Shi'ite Muslims) a pivotal event in history. The opponents of the good leader Huseyn are portrayed as completely evil. However, if you read the sources, you can see that they were consistently trying to save their opponents and reduce bloodshed to a minimum.
Here is room for debate. I once discussed this with people in Iran, one of them a cleric of some rank, who found it useful to listen to my theory, which must have been unusual to them, and probably even offensive. I think that doing my best to create common ground - i.c., by using BCE/CE dates - created the possibility to exchange ideas.
A similar argument, again from Iran, can be found in Mary Boyce's books on Zoroastrianism. She avoided BC/AD dates, and created new ways to discuss Zoroastrians, which were generally well-accepted by the adherents of the ancient faith.
The point is not that one system is better than another; it's that showing respect for sensitivities creates room for dialogue.
Quote:I think only western Euro/Americans even give a s**t about this. We're so wrapped up in collective historical guilt that we think other peoples must be equally horrified at our past.I generally sympathize with this; the western world is sometimes a bit too harsh about its own past. We're not the Big Evil People we sometimes admit to.
On the other hand, it's self-criticism and the awareness that our own prejudices are not shared by others, that gives western civilization one of its competetive advantages. We're open to other ideas. That's practical if you want to debate them.
