3 ms·

I would suggest, rather than inventing your own mythology, rather than subscribing to the mythology of HN comments without any scholarly references, rather than

I would suggest, rather than inventing your own mythology, rather than subscribing to the mythology of HN comments without any scholarly references, rather than write off a history book because it only has a single author (would two have convinced you? perhaps three?), to go directly to the primary sources cited in the book: [1] Patriarcha by Sir Robert Filmer [2] The Diary of William Byrd II of Virginia, 1709-1712 These are just a couple examples, both of which are quite representative of the ideas and culture of the governing elite of the Virginia tidewater. If you engage with these primary sources, you may be able to relieve yourself of any spurious mythologies and preconceived notions.

kimixa 3y ago
I think you completely missed the point here. Your statement categorically denied one proposed cause, and presented another as the sole truth for an incredibly complex social result. I don't know if you're not a native english speaker, so apologies here if that's not the case, but you seem to have fallen down the stairs with a Thesaurus. This didn't help improve the clarity of your comment in any way, and gives the perception you're trying to give your reply a veneer of intellectualism with no content behind it. What "mythology" did I present? I intentionally presented no alternative theory. The proposed theory in the book may be well be a large contributor to the end result of illiteracy in slave populations in the US at the time. But to categorically state that a single reason was true for a society consisting of millions of individuals is absurd.
- VoodooJuJu 3y ago
  Next time you get owned in any kind of argument, don't go for the "ESL" ad hominem, because when you're wrong, you look like a moron, and when you're right, you look like a jerk. It's just a losing play no matter what. This conversation is done.
  - anon84873628 3y ago
    Sadly we can't down vote anymore, but please know well that the only person you "owned" here is yourself.

kimixa 3y ago

I think you completely missed the point here. Your statement categorically denied one proposed cause, and presented another as the sole truth for an incredibly complex social result. I don't know if you're not a native english speaker, so apologies here if that's not the case, but you seem to have fallen down the stairs with a Thesaurus. This didn't help improve the clarity of your comment in any way, and gives the perception you're trying to give your reply a veneer of intellectualism with no content behind it. What "mythology" did I present? I intentionally presented no alternative theory. The proposed theory in the book may be well be a large contributor to the end result of illiteracy in slave populations in the US at the time. But to categorically state that a single reason was true for a society consisting of millions of individuals is absurd.

VoodooJuJu 3y ago
Next time you get owned in any kind of argument, don't go for the "ESL" ad hominem, because when you're wrong, you look like a moron, and when you're right, you look like a jerk. It's just a losing play no matter what. This conversation is done.
- anon84873628 3y ago
  Sadly we can't down vote anymore, but please know well that the only person you "owned" here is yourself.