153 replies to this topic

[cormac mac airt]

cormac mac airt, on 02 January 2013 - 07:03 PM, said:

Still playing "Let's pretend"? That's not the way science nor reality works.

cormac

Too late to edit, but just to take your analogy of a "silver platter" a bit further. Not only is there no silver platter, but there is neither a saucer nor a decent hankerchief on which to place your non-existant crumbs in support of Atlantis. That you appear not to like this is totally beside the point.

cormac

[Proclus]

cormac mac airt, on 02 January 2013 - 07:52 PM, said:

Too late to edit, but just to take your analogy of a "silver platter" a bit further. Not only is there no silver platter, but there is neither a saucer nor a decent hankerchief on which to place your non-existant crumbs in support of Atlantis. That you appear not to like this is totally beside the point.

*sigh* Maybe my next thread will please you more? Look out!

Edited by Proclus, 02 January 2013 - 08:37 PM.

[docyabut2]

questionmark, on 02 January 2013 - 05:14 PM, said:

good question... but could it be for the same reason some novelists put real people in their novels to make them more credible?

not really, novelists usually use the real people names, when the story is based on a true event, non fiction

[Quaentum]

Plato said that Solon was told about Atlantis by the Egyptians.  There is nothing in all the Egyptian writings that hint at anything Like Atlantis

Plato said Atlantis conquered and ruled much of Europe and North Africa.  There are no writings or stories from any of the locations Atlantis was supposed to have conquered indicating anything like that happened

Plato said that there was a war between Atlantis and Athens and it's allies.  There are no stories or writings to indicate anything like that ever happened.

Plato indicated where Atlantis was and the mud shoal that formed when Atlantis sank.  There is no geographical support for Atlantis existing where Plato indicated it was.  Also there are no accounts of any mud shoal that would have hindered ship travel as Plato indicated.

On those few things alone we either believe that Plato wrote a tale of fiction or that he got everything wrong and if that's the case then maybe he got the existence of Atlantis wrong too.

Edited by Quaentum, 02 January 2013 - 08:58 PM.

[Proclus]

Quaentum, on 02 January 2013 - 08:57 PM, said:

Plato said that Solon was told about Atlantis by the Egyptians.  There is nothing in all the Egyptian writings that hint at anything Like Atlantis

Plato said Atlantis conquered and ruled much of Europe and North Africa.  There are no writings or stories from any of the locations Atlantis was supposed to have conquered indicating anything like that happened

Plato said that there was a war between Atlantis and Athens and it's allies.  There are no stories or writings to indicate anything like that ever happened.

Plato indicated where Atlantis was and the mud shoal that formed when Atlantis sank.  There is no geographical support for Atlantis existing where Plato indicated it was.  Also there are no accounts of any mud shoal that would have hindered ship travel as Plato indicated.

On those few things alone we either believe that Plato wrote a tale of fiction or that he got everything wrong and if that's the case then maybe he got the existence of Atlantis wrong too.

I think you are a bit radical here, aren't you?

There were several movements of war which affected the whole region around Egypt, think only of the Persion wars recent to Plato's time! Then, we do not search for Platos primeval Athens (which surely did not exist although Plato believed in it), but in its adversary: Atlantis! Atlantis still has a certain chance to exist. Furthermore, you ask for written reports by witnesses. Well, Egypt had scripture long before others, so isn't it it too strict to require more written evidence than an Egyptian? Egypt's history shows several events which could have been behind the story.

I don't want to convince you of Atlantis as a reality, but come on: You are too strict.
Think of all the events we only know from Egyptian or only from Babylonian records, etc.!
It's not a must to declare them all phantasy. It's only a possibility.

[the L]

Quaentum, on 02 January 2013 - 08:57 PM, said:

Plato said that Solon was told about Atlantis by the Egyptians.  There is nothing in all the Egyptian writings that hint at anything Like Atlantis

Maybe because ...Egypt 1870, Mummy for hand of money

[the L]

Proclus, on 02 January 2013 - 02:28 PM, said:

Proclus wrote about Plato's Atlantis in his commentary on Plato's Timaeus.
http://archive.org/d...eTimaeusOfPlato

The date of Atlantis and its attack depends on your choice what could have been Atlantis:
In principle every attacker on Egypt is in question, there were many ...

Plato's cyclical history: shows at least two cycles:
A big cycle of reigns of Zeus resp. Cronos (Politicus dialogue).
Smaller cycles of development and destruction of human culture, each of approx. 3000 years.
(Mentioned in the Republic, in the Atlantis dialogues and in the Laws, e.g.)

I dont know about those cycles. Because if he wanted to place them before iron age they would be immortals.
Did you notice anything interesting reading Proclus.
I did read it with skiping. Its hard read.

[the L]

cormac mac airt, on 02 January 2013 - 04:17 PM, said:

But it is the only evidence that we have.

Even cormac called Plato dialogues evidence.

[the L]

Quaentum, on 02 January 2013 - 05:42 PM, said:

At what point in time is the story of Atlantis considered true in the roman empire?

In my opinion till fallen of west empire.

[the L]

Quaentum, on 02 January 2013 - 05:19 PM, said:

Nor is it support of existence

Nor it can be used as argument of Plato invention.

[cormac mac airt]

the L, on 02 January 2013 - 10:26 PM, said:

Even cormac called Plato dialogues evidence.

You're reading more into it than what I said "L". Your oft-used quote "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" is, more often than not, used as a convenient excuse for one's not having any evidence in which to support their contention. This is a rather large cop-out IMO. One either has or knows of evidence to support their claims or they don't. It's really that simple.

cormac

[the L]

cormac mac airt, on 02 January 2013 - 11:14 PM, said:

You're reading more into it than what I said "L". Your oft-used quote "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" ...

What can I say...I love that quote. We must be open for possobility, imo.
About you admiting that Plato dialogues were evidence-I forgot to put emoticon. It was funny to see you say that. So...that was a joke.

[cormac mac airt]

the L, on 02 January 2013 - 11:29 PM, said:

What can I say...I love that quote. We must be open for possobility, imo.
About you admiting that Plato dialogues were evidence-I forgot to put emoticon. It was funny to see you say that. So...that was a joke.

Then I missed the joke, sorry "L".

cormac

[kmt_sesh]

cormac mac airt, on 02 January 2013 - 11:34 PM, said:

Then I missed the joke, sorry "L".

cormac

The L is saying by your use of the word "evidence," you're now on record as stating that Plato's writings confirm the existence of Atlantis. You called it "evidence," after all.

But I suspect you already know this. You scoundrel, you!

[The Puzzler]

proclus here mentioned The Laws and I've shown it heaps of times, the passages that state Plato believes as everyone does in the cyclic rise and fall of cultres due to destruction, which he also places into his story of Atlantis - his aim is to find out how laws and politics begins again after such events - the same premise is behind his Timaeus and Critias imo.

The mentioned quote by Aristotle:
Interestingly, based on these two passages (and only on these passages) it is often claimed that Aristotle disbelieved in Atlantis, and many “quote” Aristotle as saying that he who invented the island also sank it, with Strabo being given as the source. However, such a statement does not appear directly in Strabo but is instead a conflation of 2.3.6 and 13.1.36, an inference drawn by attributing the second quotation in 2.3.6 to the Aristotle of 13.1.36 based on the repetition of similar language. This is justifiable, but it is not, strictly speaking, completely certain. If "alternative historians" were real scholars, they would use this uncertainty to dismantle this somewhat weak skeptical argument against the reality of Atlantis.
http://www.jasoncola...-dont-know.html

Interesting, because based on the supposed quote by Aristotle I always had that in the back of my mind as a reason to give up my Atlantis quest, if he didn't say it at all, I have more faith that Plato was indeed telling a "strange but true tale".

From The Laws Bk 3: http://classics.mit....laws.3.iii.html
--------------------------------------------------

What do you mean?
Ath. I mean that he might watch them from the point of view of time, and observe the changes which take place in them during infinite ages.

Cle. How so?
Ath. Why, do you think that you can reckon the time which haselapsed since cities first existed and men were citizens ofthem?

Cle. Hardly.
Ath. But are sure that it must be vast and incalculable?
Cle. Certainly.
Ath. And have not thousands and thousands of cities come intobeing during this period and as many perished? And has not each of them had every form of government many times over, now growing larger, now smaller, and again improving or declining?

Cle. To be sure.
Ath. Let us endeavour to ascertain the cause of these changes; for that will probably explain the first origin and development of formsof government.

Cle. Very good. You shall endeavour to impart your thoughtsto us, and we will make an effort to understand you.

Ath. Do you believe that there is any truth in ancienttraditions?
Cle. What traditions?
Ath. The traditions about the many destructions of mankind whichhave been occasioned by deluges and pestilences, and in many other ways,and of the survival of a remnant?

Cle. Every one is disposed to believe them.
Ath. Let us consider one of them, that which was caused by the famous deluge.

--------------------------------------------

What's most interesting to me from the same passage is the description of Troy sounding just like Atlantis...or a 3rd cycle of Atlantis...

Ath. Ilium was built, when they descended from the mountain, in a large and fair plain, on a sort of low hill, watered by many rivers descending from Ida.

Cle. Such is the tradition.
Ath. And we must suppose this event to have taken place many ages after the deluge?

Ath. A marvellous forgetfulness of the former destruction would appear to have come over them, when they placed their town right under numerous streams flowing from the heights, trusting for their security to not very high hills, either.