2 ms·

First you define North in terms of arrangements of continents (saying north is where northern continents are, cool) and then you use English etymology as defini

First you define North in terms of arrangements of continents (saying north is where northern continents are, cool) and then you use English etymology as definition? Lol. > You're probably reading this part Probably? I literally quoted it. You claim I misinterpreted that phrase but you don't give a better option. All definitions of north are by convention or relative to space (so if it flips then "northern arrangement" of continents you see from the moon will be southern)

midoridensha 3y ago
"North" IS by convention. I've been saying this all along. It has nothing to do with any map. The place we call "the north pole" is north because it's been defined that way for ages. Apparently the origins of the word have to do with Sun, but the effect is the same, because it points to the same place on this spinning ball. You quoted it, but you don't understand it.
- throwaway290 3y ago
  Ah but that's my point, turns out north is not a well-defined concept contrary to what I thought first. That quote is ambiguous and could be interpreted as "north is where the up on the map is". And actually there seems to be no better definition (that eg. would stand the flip of axis). What are we arguing about again?
  - midoridensha 3y ago
    North IS a well-defined concept. From the most ancient times, people knew where north was: it's 90 degrees left of east, and east is where the Sun rises. Go back in time 5000 years and ask anyone where North is, and they'll point you to it, long before any modern maps of the world were ever made. Wikipedia having one poorly-written line about it doesn't change tens of thousands of years of human history and knowledge about where north is. Wikipedia isn't even an authoritative reference on anything.
    - throwaway290 3y ago
      Great, so why do you link to it then?

2 ms·

First you define North in terms of arrangements of continents (saying north is where northern continents are, cool) and then you use English etymology as defini

by throwaway290 3y ago

midoridensha 3y ago
"North" IS by convention. I've been saying this all along. It has nothing to do with any map. The place we call "the north pole" is north because it's been defined that way for ages. Apparently the origins of the word have to do with Sun, but the effect is the same, because it points to the same place on this spinning ball. You quoted it, but you don't understand it.
- throwaway290 3y ago
  Ah but that's my point, turns out north is not a well-defined concept contrary to what I thought first. That quote is ambiguous and could be interpreted as "north is where the up on the map is". And actually there seems to be no better definition (that eg. would stand the flip of axis). What are we arguing about again?
  - midoridensha 3y ago
    North IS a well-defined concept. From the most ancient times, people knew where north was: it's 90 degrees left of east, and east is where the Sun rises. Go back in time 5000 years and ask anyone where North is, and they'll point you to it, long before any modern maps of the world were ever made. Wikipedia having one poorly-written line about it doesn't change tens of thousands of years of human history and knowledge about where north is. Wikipedia isn't even an authoritative reference on anything.
    - throwaway290 3y ago
      Great, so why do you link to it then?