Who believes that the morality..........

...
ignorant savages ....

Forget some of the "savages" part.My forum brethren have most of that covered.

the question obtains
Why would you think your(long dead) ancestors to be "ignorant"?
Choose a time---say 40kybp can you honestly claim that you know what they knew?
How about 11kybp and gobekli tepe can you honestly claim that you know what they knew?

We are all ignorant of/about most things
possibilitiescircle.jpg


Such, may also have been true os our long dead ancestors.
 
Forget some of the "savages" part.My forum brethren have most of that covered.

the question obtains
Why would you think your(long dead) ancestors to be "ignorant"?
Choose a time---say 40kybp can you honestly claim that you know what they knew?
How about 11kybp and gobekli tepe can you honestly claim that you know what they knew?

We are all ignorant of/about most things
possibilitiescircle.jpg


Such, may also have been true os our long dead ancestors.

Agreed

We are finally , with the finding of Gobekli Tepi , understanding we were far from just being savages . 11,500yrs ago .
 
I think the Romans were the least moral, but even they had a moral code.
Least moral to whom, and by what standards? The Romans relied on a strong sense of tradition and social custom, a code that could be very rigid at times. If having a code of some sort is what defines one as "moral".
 
No, it isn't.

Do you think the Vikings thought of themselves as savage? Compared to what? They had the most advanced culture, technology and civilization they knew of. They would have considered themselves the pinnacle of civilized.

Only other people invoke 'savage' as a descriptor.

It is they way they conducted themselves , which leads to savagery , as a descriptor of the Vikings .
 
of long dead ignorant savages are applicable today, in the 21st century.
Let's say it isn't.
Then all you have to do is show that the people whose morality you are talking about "applying" were 1) ignorant and 2) savages. As they are long dead (let's presume), that will be difficult.
 
Calgacus of the Caledonian confederacy (Picts) in approaching battle with the roman forces
In a speech to the assembled warriors was said to have said:
"Whenever I consider the origin of this war and the necessities of our position, I have a sure confidence that this day, and this union of yours, will be the beginning of freedom to the whole of Britain. To all of us slavery is a thing unknown; there are no lands beyond us, and even the sea is not safe, menaced as we are by a Roman fleet. And thus in war and battle, in which the brave find glory, even the coward will find safety. Former contests, in which, with varying fortune, the Romans were resisted, still left in us a last hope of succour, inasmuch as being the most renowned nation of Britain, dwelling in the very heart of the country, and out of sight of the shores of the conquered, we could keep even our eyes unpolluted by the contagion of slavery. To us who dwell on the uttermost confines of the earth and of freedom, this remote sanctuary of Britain's glory has up to this time been a defence. Now, however, the furthest limits of Britain are thrown open, and the unknown always passes for the marvellous. But there are no tribes beyond us, nothing indeed but waves and rocks, and the yet more terrible Romans, from whose oppression escape is vainly sought by obedience and submission. Robbers of the world, having by their universal plunder exhausted the land, they rifle the deep. If the enemy be rich, they are rapacious; if he be poor, they lust for dominion; neither the east nor the west has been able to satisfy them. Alone among men they covet with equal eagerness poverty and riches. To robbery, slaughter, plunder, they give the lying name of empire; they make a solitude and call it peace."

......................
Rome:
Is enslaving people moral?

..........................
It seems that the roman fleet went around scotland but didn't land and fight where they saw the brochs(se other thread_
 
Calgacus of the Caledonian confederacy (Picts) in approaching battle with the roman forces
In a speech to the assembled warriors was said to have said:
"Whenever I consider the origin of this war and the necessities of our position, I have a sure confidence that this day, and this union of yours, will be the beginning of freedom to the whole of Britain. To all of us slavery is a thing unknown; there are no lands beyond us, and even the sea is not safe, menaced as we are by a Roman fleet. And thus in war and battle, in which the brave find glory, even the coward will find safety. Former contests, in which, with varying fortune, the Romans were resisted, still left in us a last hope of succour, inasmuch as being the most renowned nation of Britain, dwelling in the very heart of the country, and out of sight of the shores of the conquered, we could keep even our eyes unpolluted by the contagion of slavery. To us who dwell on the uttermost confines of the earth and of freedom, this remote sanctuary of Britain's glory has up to this time been a defence. Now, however, the furthest limits of Britain are thrown open, and the unknown always passes for the marvellous. But there are no tribes beyond us, nothing indeed but waves and rocks, and the yet more terrible Romans, from whose oppression escape is vainly sought by obedience and submission. Robbers of the world, having by their universal plunder exhausted the land, they rifle the deep. If the enemy be rich, they are rapacious; if he be poor, they lust for dominion; neither the east nor the west has been able to satisfy them. Alone among men they covet with equal eagerness poverty and riches. To robbery, slaughter, plunder, they give the lying name of empire; they make a solitude and call it peace."

......................
Rome:
Is enslaving people moral?

..........................
It seems that the roman fleet went around scotland but didn't land and fight where they saw the brochs(se other thread_

no enslaving is not moral .
 
S
Let's say it isn't.
Then all you have to do is show that the people whose morality you are talking about "applying" were 1) ignorant and 2) savages. As they are long dead (let's presume), that will be difficult.
Stoning your children to death for disobedience will do and they knew nothing about space exploration.
 
Stoning your children to death for disobedience will do and they knew nothing about space exploration.
There aren't many people anyone can show stoned their children to death for disobedience.
Meanwhile, I doubt too many people today actually know anything about space exploration.(http://www.phys.ufl.edu/~det/phy2060/heavyboots.html I don't know if the email is a hoax or not, but I verified its basic finding years ago when it first came out). And they can't get a fire lit or feed themselves without expert industrial scale help. Is "savage" supposed to be some kind of opposite end of the scale that has "feeble" on the other end?
 
There aren't many people anyone can show stoned their children to death for disobedience.
Meanwhile, I doubt too many people today actually know anything about space exploration.(http://www.phys.ufl.edu/~det/phy2060/heavyboots.html I don't know if the email is a hoax or not, but I verified its basic finding years ago when it first came out). And they can't get a fire lit or feed themselves without expert industrial scale help. Is "savage" supposed to be some kind of opposite end of the scale that has "feeble" on the other end?
Lovely equivocations. huzzah.
 
It would seem that your grasp of the English language and indeed reality is somewhat tenuous. I might wait until your released, although I do hope that is not imminent.
Thanks. Bye for now. Keep eyes down back away slowly.

lol
the egg timer on u being banned has been turned on
i only posted so i could have a post inside a closed thread of a banned member just for novelty value.
 
Back
Top