5 ms·

Every time I get a link from this foreign policy site, I get the impression that this is, very well disguised but still strong, the good old "voice of the white

by gbog 10y ago

Every time I get a link from this foreign policy site, I get the impression that this is, very well disguised but still strong, the good old "voice of the white West". It is obviously never explicit, but there a smell of "we know better" behind.

cromwellian 10y ago
The article is just a reporting of a debate sparked by a native Chinese archaelogist's published theory. This seems like a weak attempt to smear them as Orientalist commentators. The article covered previous evolutions of origin theories and how nationalism and politics often get involved. Overall the article looks like a straightforward reporting of the context of this research.
- Scriptor 10y ago
  He's a geochemist, not an archaeologist. Racial issues aside, there have been many instances where a scientist in one field tries to make sweeping statements about another field. In most cases they lack a deep understanding of the other field and are unaware of mountains of evidence that otherwise contradict what they say.
  - seanmcdirmid 10y ago
    As far as I can tell, their is not much evidence either way on whether written language moved from Mesopotamia or Egypt to China, and there definitely isn't a prepondance of evidence. Heck, we still aren't sure if Egyptian language came from Mesopotamia or not. There is also the chance that the concept of written language came from the Middle East but was re-implemented independently (after knowing it was possible and useful) from whatever proto writing existed at the time (e.g. oracle bone script).
    - vorg 10y ago
      > the concept of written language came from the Middle East but was re-implemented independently from whatever proto writing existed at the time This seems the most likely because it only takes one person in ancient times moving from one society to another to impart such knowledge. Anyone supporting that idea doesn't have to offer any evidence -- it's up to the person disagreeing to disprove it because their position is far less likely. Given that both Chinese and hieroglyphs both have radicals (in Chinese, as part of a character, and in hieroglyphs, trailing the character), the concept of radicals may also have spread the same way.
  - cromwellian 10y ago
    That doesn't change critique of Foreign Policy mag, it's not their theory, they're just reporting a somewhat interesting discussion happening in another country, the Economist does this all the time.
pbhjpbhj 10y ago
The article notes a Chinese national anthem referring to a popular myth of [some] people coming to China from the far, far West. This seems consistent with ideas of Africa as the crucible of human civilisation; you appear to think that idea is some sort of Western imperialism? Can you explain further how a group of Egyptians traveling to China supports the notion of Western (ie West Europe + North America) notions of superiority? Even if the whole concept had been born out of Western imperialism, that wouldn't of course make it wrong.

by gbog 10y ago

cromwellian 10y ago

The article is just a reporting of a debate sparked by a native Chinese archaelogist's published theory. This seems like a weak attempt to smear them as Orientalist commentators. The article covered previous evolutions of origin theories and how nationalism and politics often get involved. Overall the article looks like a straightforward reporting of the context of this research.

Scriptor 10y ago
He's a geochemist, not an archaeologist. Racial issues aside, there have been many instances where a scientist in one field tries to make sweeping statements about another field. In most cases they lack a deep understanding of the other field and are unaware of mountains of evidence that otherwise contradict what they say.
- seanmcdirmid 10y ago
  As far as I can tell, their is not much evidence either way on whether written language moved from Mesopotamia or Egypt to China, and there definitely isn't a prepondance of evidence. Heck, we still aren't sure if Egyptian language came from Mesopotamia or not. There is also the chance that the concept of written language came from the Middle East but was re-implemented independently (after knowing it was possible and useful) from whatever proto writing existed at the time (e.g. oracle bone script).
  - vorg 10y ago
    > the concept of written language came from the Middle East but was re-implemented independently from whatever proto writing existed at the time This seems the most likely because it only takes one person in ancient times moving from one society to another to impart such knowledge. Anyone supporting that idea doesn't have to offer any evidence -- it's up to the person disagreeing to disprove it because their position is far less likely. Given that both Chinese and hieroglyphs both have radicals (in Chinese, as part of a character, and in hieroglyphs, trailing the character), the concept of radicals may also have spread the same way.
- cromwellian 10y ago
  That doesn't change critique of Foreign Policy mag, it's not their theory, they're just reporting a somewhat interesting discussion happening in another country, the Economist does this all the time.

pbhjpbhj 10y ago

The article notes a Chinese national anthem referring to a popular myth of [some] people coming to China from the far, far West. This seems consistent with ideas of Africa as the crucible of human civilisation; you appear to think that idea is some sort of Western imperialism? Can you explain further how a group of Egyptians traveling to China supports the notion of Western (ie West Europe + North America) notions of superiority? Even if the whole concept had been born out of Western imperialism, that wouldn't of course make it wrong.