Why Europe?

[Unkotare]

There are many theories as to why a continent full of bloodthirsty, inbred, filthy savages should emerge from the so-called 'Dark Ages' and become the dominant region of the world for a long time. Just wondering which one y'all find most compelling. It's a fascinating historical question, in any case.

 

[Oleoh]

Because they weren't "bloodthirsty, inbred, filthy savages", they were able to advance further than other civilizations. There were laws against incest, murder etc. that ensured well functioning societies. Christianity had a great influence too. But most of all, an adventurus spirit, both in exploration and in the sciences, ensured growth and more prosperity.

 

[Tilly]

There are many theories as to why a continent full of bloodthirsty, inbred, filthy savages should emerge from the so-called 'Dark Ages' and become the dominant region of the world for a long time. Just wondering which one y'all find most compelling. It's a fascinating historical question, in any case.

The 'Dark Ages' weren't really that dark

 

[Oleoh]

There are many theories as to why a continent full of bloodthirsty, inbred, filthy savages should emerge from the so-called 'Dark Ages' and become the dominant region of the world for a long time. Just wondering which one y'all find most compelling. It's a fascinating historical question, in any case.

And the dark ages are called so because there aren't as much written record from that time period. Not because it were a dark time in Europe. Actually the fundation of European wealth were created in that time period.

 

[defcon4]

There are many theories as to why a continent full of bloodthirsty, inbred, filthy savages should emerge from the so-called 'Dark Ages' and become the dominant region of the world for a long time. Just wondering which one y'all find most compelling. It's a fascinating historical question, in any case.

Interesting way to put it. I wonder if you could get into the Vatican library (being proficient in at least 10 languages including the so called dead languages) how your opinion would change.

 

[Unkotare]

There are many theories as to why a continent full of bloodthirsty, inbred, filthy savages should emerge from the so-called 'Dark Ages' and become the dominant region of the world for a long time. Just wondering which one y'all find most compelling. It's a fascinating historical question, in any case.

The 'Dark Ages' weren't really that dark

Yeah but The Dusk Ages doesn't sound as good.

 

[Unkotare]

Because they weren't "bloodthirsty, inbred, filthy savages"......

Plenty of evidence says they were.

 

[Unkotare]

There are many theories as to why a continent full of bloodthirsty, inbred, filthy savages should emerge from the so-called 'Dark Ages' and become the dominant region of the world for a long time. Just wondering which one y'all find most compelling. It's a fascinating historical question, in any case.

And the dark ages are called so because there aren't as much written record from that time period. Not because it were a dark time in Europe. Actually the fundation of European wealth were created in that time period.

Well, just after.

 

[Unkotare]

There are many theories as to why a continent full of bloodthirsty, inbred, filthy savages should emerge from the so-called 'Dark Ages' and become the dominant region of the world for a long time. Just wondering which one y'all find most compelling. It's a fascinating historical question, in any case.

Interesting way to put it. I wonder if you could get into the Vatican library (being proficient in at least 10 languages including the so called dead languages) how your opinion would change.

Why would it?

 

[Oleoh]

Because they weren't "bloodthirsty, inbred, filthy savages"......

Plenty of evidence says they were.

What evidence? And in what way more than others?

 

[defcon4]

There are many theories as to why a continent full of bloodthirsty, inbred, filthy savages should emerge from the so-called 'Dark Ages' and become the dominant region of the world for a long time. Just wondering which one y'all find most compelling. It's a fascinating historical question, in any case.

Interesting way to put it. I wonder if you could get into the Vatican library (being proficient in at least 10 languages including the so called dead languages) how your opinion would change.

Why would it?

I don't know. It sure would be interesting though. It could change in a positive or negative way or could remain the same. All I suspect is that a great deal of knowledge is kept hidden in there.

 

[Unkotare]

Because they weren't "bloodthirsty, inbred, filthy savages"......

Plenty of evidence says they were.

What evidence? And in what way more than others?

Who said "more than others"? You've got nothing to 'defend,' so relax and discuss.

 

[emilynghiem]

There are many theories as to why a continent full of bloodthirsty, inbred, filthy savages should emerge from the so-called 'Dark Ages' and become the dominant region of the world for a long time. Just wondering which one y'all find most compelling. It's a fascinating historical question, in any case.

Dear Unkotare
If you look at the European "linear" way of thinking and even the English language
that evolved from Germanic roots mixed with so many other cultures,
this language has become the common standard in both science and business.

You can look at it two ways:
1. spiritually if you believe humanity is heading for unity, then this language
may be seen as destined to help facilitate that process by adhering to
a linear way of documenting history, including delineating the problems and solutions

2. if you believe in the bloodthirst/savage pack mentality, that the dominant
alpha males kill off anyone or any group that is weaker that challenges their authority,
then it could be seen as political DOMINANCE that causes this language to prevail

3. in particular one of the dominant USES of this English language is uniting
people either on church scriptures that masses of people agree to follow in accord,
or with govt Constitutional laws that unite masses of people who agree on those principles.

With these two institutions of church and state, America has a solid foundation
and culture built on Christian and Constitutional principles as part of our heritage.
And you can see how unity in language to push politically for policies and representation
makes all the difference in both church institutions and govt.

It's not clear which causes what. But you can see the dominating trends
and the relationships they have with each other. Whatever brings about
more unity among the people, that is going to dominate.

 

[defcon4]

Dear emilynghiem , what happened to Esperanto? That supposed to be the world language when it was created. (not that I miss any of it, I have never learned it)

 

[Unkotare]

There are many theories as to why a continent full of bloodthirsty, inbred, filthy savages should emerge from the so-called 'Dark Ages' and become the dominant region of the world for a long time. Just wondering which one y'all find most compelling. It's a fascinating historical question, in any case.

Interesting way to put it. I wonder if you could get into the Vatican library (being proficient in at least 10 languages including the so called dead languages) how your opinion would change.

Why would it?

I don't know. It sure would be interesting though. It could change in a positive or negative way or could remain the same. All I suspect is that a great deal of knowledge is kept hidden in there.

I would say "preserved" rather than "hidden," but would it change the question at hand?

 

[Unkotare]

Dear emilynghiem , what happened to Esperanto? That supposed to be the world language when it was created. (not that I miss any of it, I have never learned it)

Really stupid idea, that was.

 

[Unkotare]

There are many theories as to why a continent full of bloodthirsty, inbred, filthy savages should emerge from the so-called 'Dark Ages' and become the dominant region of the world for a long time. Just wondering which one y'all find most compelling. It's a fascinating historical question, in any case.

Dear Unkotare
If you look at the European "linear" way of thinking and even the English language
that evolved from Germanic roots mixed with so many other cultures,
this language has become the common standard in both science and business.

You can look at it two ways:
1. spiritually if you believe humanity is heading for unity, then this language
may be seen as destined to help facilitate that process by adhering to
a linear way of documenting history, including delineating the problems and solutions

2. if you believe in the bloodthirst/savage pack mentality, that the dominant
alpha males kill off anyone or any group that is weaker that challenges their authority,
then it could be seen as political DOMINANCE that causes this language to prevail

3. in particular one of the dominant USES of this English language is uniting
people either on church scriptures that masses of people agree to follow in accord,
or with govt Constitutional laws that unite masses of people who agree on those principles.

With these two institutions of church and state, America has a solid foundation
and culture built on Christian and Constitutional principles as part of our heritage.
And you can see how unity in language to push politically for policies and representation
makes all the difference in both church institutions and govt.

It's not clear which causes what. But you can see the dominating trends
and the relationships they have with each other. Whatever brings about
more unity among the people, that is going to dominate.

Wow. I have to say that you are really confusing cause and effect dramatically here. Europe didn't 'create' linear thinking, and English isn't the dominant language internationally today due to some inherent characteristics of the language itself, but because the Western world - more specifically America - has been the dominant culture for some time. I say "some time," but not all time. The Roman Empire lasted much longer than the US so far has and English was not its lingua franca. Keep going back, and Alexander didn't speak English. You mention the Church - not based on English. Speaking of lingua franca, don't forget that for about 300 years following the Norman Conquest the language of official government business in England was French. When your government business was done you'd go to church and use Latin. Later you might go home and use vulgar English with your family while you waited to die of some communicable disease.

And if you think the world is heading toward something like linguistic unity behind one language any time soon, you are mistaken.

 

[defcon4]

There are many theories as to why a continent full of bloodthirsty, inbred, filthy savages should emerge from the so-called 'Dark Ages' and become the dominant region of the world for a long time. Just wondering which one y'all find most compelling. It's a fascinating historical question, in any case.

Interesting way to put it. I wonder if you could get into the Vatican library (being proficient in at least 10 languages including the so called dead languages) how your opinion would change.

Why would it?

I don't know. It sure would be interesting though. It could change in a positive or negative way or could remain the same. All I suspect is that a great deal of knowledge is kept hidden in there.

I would say "preserved" rather than "hidden," but would it change the question at hand?

No it wouldn't change the question. Hidden and preserved, how is that? If it were not hidden they could publish most of it. Nowadays we have the technology to copy them without damaging them, no? (I couldn't enjoy them though, lack of language proficiency)

 

[Unkotare]

There are many theories as to why a continent full of bloodthirsty, inbred, filthy savages should emerge from the so-called 'Dark Ages' and become the dominant region of the world for a long time. Just wondering which one y'all find most compelling. It's a fascinating historical question, in any case.

Interesting way to put it. I wonder if you could get into the Vatican library (being proficient in at least 10 languages including the so called dead languages) how your opinion would change.

Why would it?

I don't know. It sure would be interesting though. It could change in a positive or negative way or could remain the same. All I suspect is that a great deal of knowledge is kept hidden in there.

I would say "preserved" rather than "hidden," but would it change the question at hand?

No it wouldn't change the question. Hidden and preserved, how is that? If it were not hidden they could publish most of it. Nowadays we have the technology to copy them without damaging them, no? (I couldn't enjoy them though, lack of language proficiency)

Maybe that's the point. What do you think is there that we don't know about at least in general terms?

 

[defcon4]

Interesting way to put it. I wonder if you could get into the Vatican library (being proficient in at least 10 languages including the so called dead languages) how your opinion would change.

Why would it?

I don't know. It sure would be interesting though. It could change in a positive or negative way or could remain the same. All I suspect is that a great deal of knowledge is kept hidden in there.

I would say "preserved" rather than "hidden," but would it change the question at hand?

No it wouldn't change the question. Hidden and preserved, how is that? If it were not hidden they could publish most of it. Nowadays we have the technology to copy them without damaging them, no? (I couldn't enjoy them though, lack of language proficiency)

Maybe that's the point. What do you think is there that we don't know about at least in general terms?

Early discoveries and esoteric knowledge.