20 replies to this topic

[Proclus]

Harte, on 07 January 2013 - 03:24 AM, said:

First, Gomperz died long before anyone even knew how old Athens is.

Reading this it is clear that you have not understood Gomperz. Gomperz did not say that Athens is 10000 years old, but Gomperz said, that Plato said this and believed this! Note the difference! This is not the same. Because with this it is irrelevant which opinion on the age of Athens you have, it is even irrelevant how old Athens really is. It's only about the believes of Plato, right or wrong is not important. For Athens we know that Plato was wrong not only in date but also in facts. But Plato: He believed it. As he did with Atlantis! And this means: Atlantis could be a wrong composition like Plato's primeval Athens, but it could also be real!

Harte, on 07 January 2013 - 03:24 AM, said:

Second, I read your linked text and found nothing but Gomperz (a Classicist, BTW, and not a scientist) repeatedly stating that The Critias is fiction.

You surely noticed that Gomperz contradicts himself to a certain extent, using the word "fiction", but then opening the question on which traditions Plato relied, and to which extent he relied on them. You cannot cite Gomperz to call Atlantis a "pure fiction", this would be a mis-citation. In the end Gomperz simply does not know it, and he confesses this implicitly. You cannot bend Gomperz to be pro or contra a real Atlantis.

The question of reality depends on the extent Plato relied on (distorted) traditions. As we can see with Plato's primeval Athens, it could be unreal, but if Plato relied on a compact Egyptian tradition it could be real. It's an open question, and that is all I wanted to show.

"science": This is an intercultural misunderstanding. In German Classical Studies are considered as science, too, as it was in the Anglo-Saxon world in former times as I read on Wikipedia, but today the meaning of "science" narrowed down to "natural science" in the Anglo-Saxon world. Please help me: How do you call a Classicist, then, if you want to express that he is a "scientist" using scientific means and standards like "historical criticism", without using the word "scientist"?

_

Edited by Proclus, 07 January 2013 - 01:33 PM.

[TheSearcher]

Proclus, on 07 January 2013 - 01:05 PM, said:

Reading this it is clear that you have not understood Gomperz. Gomperz did not say that Athens is 10000 years old, but Gomperz said, that Plato said this and believed this! Note the difference! This is not the same. Because with this it is irrelevant which opinion on the age of Athens you have, it is even irrelevant how old Athens really is. It's only about the believes of Plato, right or wrong is not important. For Athens we know that Plato was wrong not only in date but also in facts. But Plato: He believed it. As he did with Atlantis! And this means: Atlantis could be a wrong composition like Plato's primeval Athens, but it could also be real!

You surely noticed that Gomperz contradicts himself to a certain extent, using the word "fiction", but then opening the question on which traditions Plato relied, and to which extent he relied on them. You cannot cite Gomperz to call Atlantis a "pure fiction", this would be a mis-citation. In the end Gomperz simply does not know it, and he confesses this implicitly. You cannot bend Gomperz to be pro or contra a real Atlantis.

The question of reality depends on the extent Plato relied on (distorted) traditions. As we can see with Plato's primeval Athens, it could be unreal, but if Plato relied on a compact Egyptian tradition it could be real. It's an open question, and that is all I wanted to show.

"science": This is an intercultural misunderstanding. In German Classical Studies are considered as science, too, as it was in the Anglo-Saxon world in former times as I read on Wikipedia, but today the meaning of "science" narrowed down to "natural science" in the Anglo-Saxon world. Please help me: How do you call a Classicist, then, if you want to express that he is a "scientist" using scientific means and standards like "historical criticism", without using the word "scientist"?

_

Erm sorry but....... he actually calls it over-bold fiction, which in my view is even worse than pure fiction. so in fact you don't need to bend Gomperz one way or the other. Reading this it shows that you also have some issues understanding Gomperz. Also, to be totally sure and impartial of what he actually says, you ought to read it in German, the language that it originally written in.

[Proclus]

TheSearcher, on 07 January 2013 - 01:55 PM, said:

Erm sorry but....... he actually calls it over-bold fiction, which in my view is even worse than pure fiction. so in fact you don't need to bend Gomperz one way or the other. Reading this it shows that you also have some issues understanding Gomperz. Also, to be totally sure and impartial of what he actually says, you ought to read it in German, the language that it originally written in.

Look, I read it in German, I am German, and Gomperz clearly says: Plato believed in a primeval Athens, and thus in Atlantis, too. For Athens it is clear: It is not true. A self-deception of Plato. But to which extent there was a distorted tradition behind Atlantis is unknown. I am really getting angry that you pick only the words you like from Gomperz. I never did this. I always stated that Gomperz opens a question, not more.

You don't like open questions, do you?

Citations:

"Truth and fiction were blended in this narrative; but the fiction was not wholly arbitrary, and a considerable measure of self-deception preceded the deception practised on others. Plato believed that he had discovered some of the essential features of his political ideal in the dim beginnings of his native city."

"We should be glad to know how far Plato's fiction is based on popular legend; how far the belief in an extensive country in the West rests on the presupposition of a not wholly unsymmetrical distribution of land between the Eastern and Western hemispheres; how far the fact, now attested by documentary evidence, of an incursion into Libya and Egypt made by conquering "sea-nations" coming from the West. But on all these points we are left to uncertain conjecture."

In the latter quote it becomes quite clear that Gomperz is self-contradictory: He talks of "fiction" and then of "fact" - what now? An open question.

I am really getting angry about Atlantis skeptics picking only what they like. I never would do this. I do not claim that Gomperz said Atlantis was real. He did not. Why do Atlantis skeptics have such a big lack of scientific discipline? In the end Atlantis skeptics seem to be not better than certain Atlantomaniacs. Really. I cannot stand this. Always these blanket premature judgements!

_

Edited by Proclus, 07 January 2013 - 02:37 PM.

[Harte]

Proclus, on 07 January 2013 - 02:33 PM, said:

Look, I read it in German, I am German, and Gomperz clearly says: Plato believed in a primeval Athens, and thus in Atlantis, too. For Athens it is clear: It is not true. A self-deception of Plato. But to which extent there was a distorted tradition behind Atlantis is unknown. I am really getting angry that you pick only the words you like from Gomperz. I never did this. I always stated that Gomperz opens a question, not more.

You don't like open questions, do you?

Citations:

"Truth and fiction were blended in this narrative; but the fiction was not wholly arbitrary, and a considerable measure of self-deception preceded the deception practised on others. Plato believed that he had discovered some of the essential features of his political ideal in the dim beginnings of his native city."

According to the linked essay, the "political ideal"  Plato thought he had discovered was what he wrote about in The Republic, not in Timaeus or Critias.

So, Gomperz is saying that Plato believed that the culture he described in The Republic was similar to Athens ancient culture.

Gomperz goes on to claim that Plato was attempting to "flesh out" the society from The Republic in the dialogues Timaeus and Critias - years later - but left off on it when the entire exercise of giving a realistic setting to the society he described in The Republic became too unscientific for Plato's tastes.

Harte

[Proclus]

Harte, on 07 January 2013 - 06:43 PM, said:

Gomperz goes on to claim that Plato was attempting to "flesh out" the society from The Republic in the dialogues Timaeus and Critias - years later - but left off on it when the entire exercise of giving a realistic setting to the society he described in The Republic became too unscientific for Plato's tastes.

*sigh* ... just another cherry picker ...

I give up. I don't like to explain each single step of thought again and again and more and more in detail.
That's boring.

Strange that such a short text like Gomperz' is overstraining the capacity of analysis of the forum's members. That is the reason why you cited Cameron: You never understood what Cameron said, you just only cite hime because he says things you like. Therefore you never realized the weakness and errors of his arguments. Science ... be it "natural science" or "social sciences / Humanities" works only, if you apply the principle "sine ira et studio". My hope is that the Gomperz text will turn your minds when his thoughts will sink in deeper over time. Maybe after some years you will understand?

We will see us then :-)

_

Edited by Proclus, 07 January 2013 - 10:03 PM.

[Harte]

Proclus, on 07 January 2013 - 10:01 PM, said:

*sigh* ... just another cherry picker ...

I give up. I don't like to explain each single step of thought again and again and more and more in detail.
That's boring.

Strange that such a short text like Gomperz' is overstraining the capacity of analysis of the forum's members. That is the reason why you cited Cameron: You never understood what Cameron said, you just only cite hime because he says things you like. Therefore you never realized the weakness and errors of his arguments. Science ... be it "natural science" or "social sciences / Humanities" works only, if you apply the principle "sine ira et studio". My hope is that the Gomperz text will turn your minds when his thoughts will sink in deeper over time. Maybe after some years you will understand?

We will see us then :-)

*sigh* ... just another poster with poor reading comprehension.

Harte