The Northern Europeans were the whitest of them all, and some do not even consider Greeks to be white. So that is why I cited them as the example. It's an ad hoc argument to blame 'geography and climate' when it's whites but discount them when it's blacks. Of course, the climate also differs for blacks, which is why they're black!
100% agree. Both northern Europe and sub-Saharan Africa were largely isolated. Both dealt with difficult weather and climate.
Why are Africans underdeveloped? Part of the reason is isolation, which also applies to Melanesians. That it may also be partly genetic is something that I do believe, but I don't like that people pretend to know causes for sure (rather than likelihood) and how they make sweeping assertions like a supposed IQ cutoff for a civilization.
Agree.
Yes, that is not even called into question by serious people on the left. The dispute is about what the causes of these are.
I don't think this is right. I think many on the left would dispute any differences of any kind between ethnicities or races. Hell these are the people who refuse to acknowledge any difference between men and women.
Writing was not invented that often. And of course, the Arabs and the Jews did not invent their own alphabet, they took it from the (Semitic) Phoenicians. Same for the Greeks, Etruscans and Romans. Did the Europeans invent any writing system? Linear A maybe? I'm not sure if that was borrowed from someplace else, but ours was.
The Egyptians invented writing, so did some Semitic peoples (Arabians and Phoenicians, deriving from Egyptian), the Sumerians invented writing, Greeks Linear A, etc., and from there those roots expanded far and wide. Greek is a pretty big upgrade and evolution over Phoenician. Later, Viking runes seem to be an original invention. Likewise the alphabet evolution from Greek -> Etruscan -> Latin involves some very large shifts and evolutions.
Other than Ethiopian, I'm not sure any African peoples adopted or adapted any scripts until very recently? Not my area of expertise, but Ethiopian is interesting. Semitic language, semitic alphabet, and an almost exact copy of the Arabian script. It's pretty much a direct borrowing. Phoenician -> Greek is a much bigger shift.
I don't think this is right. I think many on the left would dispute any differences of any kind between ethnicities or races. Hell these are the people who refuse to acknowledge any difference between men and women.
Hence 'serious people', people actually familiar with the research in question and not in a position to deny it. Folks like Eric Turkheimer or James Flynn.
The Egyptians invented writing, so did some Semitic peoples (Arabians and Phoenicians, deriving from Egyptian), the Sumerians invented writing, Greeks Linear A, etc.,
The irony is that the Minoans were not Greek. Were they even Indo-European? Certainly open to question. If they're more closely related to Phoenicians, it would mean that no European people invented an alphabet. But that's OK.
Later, Viking runes seem to be an original invention
AFAIK, it comes from Latin.
Likewise the alphabet evolution from Greek -> Etruscan -> Latin involves some very large shifts and evolutions.
The Greek being obviously the most revolutionary. But we were talking about the actual invention of writing. Considering that it was not invented that often, I'm not ready to blame Melanisians or the inhabitants of the Canary Islands for not doing so.
Phoenician -> Greek is a much bigger shift.
Probably the biggest one of all. But it is not invention.
You guys have highlighted a cultural heritage that is associated with the development of writing, learning etc. The cultural traits of writing (and probably a lot more besides) were inherited by successive cultures.
Once a culture develops writing, the language can expand past the point where it must be held in every speakers mind. Concepts can be developed that are not in every day use. Through writing the greatest thinkers and teachers of the past can instruct us directly, in their own words. Writing becomes a mechanism to store the teachings of the greatest thinkers, and to (in some cases) refine and improve on those lessons.
Both "The Art of War" and The Bible were (probably) written by many authors, and have (probably) gone through many versions before reaching their current forms. Both have had huge cultural impact in their own way.
In it a Professor Eugene Valberg (Teacher, Professor of Philosophy) speaks about his experiences living and teaching in South Africa, and his investigation into the language of Zulu and the minds of the speakers of that language. Feel free to look at the comments.
100% agree. Both northern Europe and sub-Saharan Africa were largely isolated. Both dealt with difficult weather and climate.
Agree.
I don't think this is right. I think many on the left would dispute any differences of any kind between ethnicities or races. Hell these are the people who refuse to acknowledge any difference between men and women.
The Egyptians invented writing, so did some Semitic peoples (Arabians and Phoenicians, deriving from Egyptian), the Sumerians invented writing, Greeks Linear A, etc., and from there those roots expanded far and wide. Greek is a pretty big upgrade and evolution over Phoenician. Later, Viking runes seem to be an original invention. Likewise the alphabet evolution from Greek -> Etruscan -> Latin involves some very large shifts and evolutions.
Other than Ethiopian, I'm not sure any African peoples adopted or adapted any scripts until very recently? Not my area of expertise, but Ethiopian is interesting. Semitic language, semitic alphabet, and an almost exact copy of the Arabian script. It's pretty much a direct borrowing. Phoenician -> Greek is a much bigger shift.
Neither here nor there, but interesting.
Hence 'serious people', people actually familiar with the research in question and not in a position to deny it. Folks like Eric Turkheimer or James Flynn.
The irony is that the Minoans were not Greek. Were they even Indo-European? Certainly open to question. If they're more closely related to Phoenicians, it would mean that no European people invented an alphabet. But that's OK.
AFAIK, it comes from Latin.
The Greek being obviously the most revolutionary. But we were talking about the actual invention of writing. Considering that it was not invented that often, I'm not ready to blame Melanisians or the inhabitants of the Canary Islands for not doing so.
Probably the biggest one of all. But it is not invention.
You guys have highlighted a cultural heritage that is associated with the development of writing, learning etc. The cultural traits of writing (and probably a lot more besides) were inherited by successive cultures.
Once a culture develops writing, the language can expand past the point where it must be held in every speakers mind. Concepts can be developed that are not in every day use. Through writing the greatest thinkers and teachers of the past can instruct us directly, in their own words. Writing becomes a mechanism to store the teachings of the greatest thinkers, and to (in some cases) refine and improve on those lessons.
Both "The Art of War" and The Bible were (probably) written by many authors, and have (probably) gone through many versions before reaching their current forms. Both have had huge cultural impact in their own way.
Conversely I drawn your attention to this video: "African Language and the African Mind"
In it a Professor Eugene Valberg (Teacher, Professor of Philosophy) speaks about his experiences living and teaching in South Africa, and his investigation into the language of Zulu and the minds of the speakers of that language. Feel free to look at the comments.