Jump to content

Talk:Western world: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Confusing edits: new section
Line 150: Line 150:
:True, I inserted that image exactly yesterday to give some weight to pre-Christian beliefs. Not a big deal in itself. [[Special:Contributions/81.129.29.103|81.129.29.103]] ([[User talk:81.129.29.103|talk]]) 22:07, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
:True, I inserted that image exactly yesterday to give some weight to pre-Christian beliefs. Not a big deal in itself. [[Special:Contributions/81.129.29.103|81.129.29.103]] ([[User talk:81.129.29.103|talk]]) 22:07, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
::I'll replace it with more representative stuff. I'll also put some more notable pre-Christian beliefs in the Greek section where such stuff belongs, thank you very much[[Special:Contributions/112.211.192.58|112.211.192.58]] ([[User talk:112.211.192.58|talk]]) 22:18, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
::I'll replace it with more representative stuff. I'll also put some more notable pre-Christian beliefs in the Greek section where such stuff belongs, thank you very much[[Special:Contributions/112.211.192.58|112.211.192.58]] ([[User talk:112.211.192.58|talk]]) 22:18, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

== Confusing edits ==

Hello, why confusing? The colombian exchange is important. Then the caption for that image is better if elaborated. Then the change to the very first paragraph was not me but I agree with it. [[Special:Contributions/2A00:23C4:7155:6D00:8846:F5D:F916:DC03|2A00:23C4:7155:6D00:8846:F5D:F916:DC03]] ([[User talk:2A00:23C4:7155:6D00:8846:F5D:F916:DC03|talk]]) 09:49, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Revision as of 09:49, 10 April 2018


Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia are not newly industrialised countries. I do not understand why someone still insert this nonesence. Newly industrialized countries are South Africa, Mexico, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand and Turkey. source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newly_industrialized_country Period! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:1028:96CA:4526:416E:944E:96F9:61E1 (talk) 10:25, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


I removed the sentence: „… although the OECD includes countries, namely, Chile, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Mexico, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia and Turkey, that are not yet fully industrial countries, but newly industrialised countries.“. It is nonsense. Newly industrialized countries are South Africa, Mexico, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand and Turkey. source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newly_industrialized_country Btw: Czech republic is industrial country for past 200 years.

Contrsx concretus (or whatever his name is ), and lead maps.

For the record, I meant “ Cold War definition” and not “ Cold Wa rin my edit summary. Thank you.Anu-Dingir (Please offer a sacrifice!!!!) 04:18, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of sourced content

User:Jeuryabuese, the sources clearly states Judaism:

  • "Hebraism, like Hellenism, has been an all-important factor in the development of Western Civilization;"
  • "the civilization of western Europe and of America— have been shaped chiefly by Judaeo–Graeco–Christianity, Catholic and Protestant."
  • "Western civilization is also sometimes described as "Christian" or "Judaeo- Christian" civilization".
  • "Judaism has played a significant role in the development of Western culture because of its unique relationship with Christianity, the dominant religious force in the West"

Do you have any valid reason to state before this is being taken to an admin? Infantom (talk) 22:20, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, I am a newbie here and you show a little bit of aggression (See:before this is being taken to an admin?). Second, to repeat the sources speak of Judaism, as only indirectly involved (because it is a precursor of Christianity) not directly like the Greco-Roman world in Europe. Plus, the Judeo-Christian concept is a new one (20th-century American concept). I could suggest that you create a new section Hebraism (like the one that exists right now Hellenism) BUT not including it into the lede of the article.Jeuryabuese (talk) 22:31, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Your opinion is nice but contradicts the sources, i see no reason to argue about interpretations when there are such clear sources. Infantom (talk) 22:50, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Additional source: "Judaism has influenced western civilization in a multitude of ways." [1]
This seems like a specific enough a question that it would be a very good candidate for an WP:RFC, so long as it is concise and neutrally worded. GMGtalk 23:31, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
User:GreenMeansGo, care to comment on the sources themselves? It seems that Jeuryabuese making up baseless excuses also completely irrelevant to what the sources state. So what if "Judeo-Christian" is a "new" term? What does it have to with legitimacy of the claim? It's a common term used by scholars. Nothing but excuses. Plus, the same sources that mention Christianity, mention Judaism as well, but for some reason Christianity is ok. Infantom (talk) 11:16, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, one way or the other, per guidance at MOS:LEAD, the lead should summarize the body, and it doesn't look like it is covered really at all in the body that I'm seeing. GMGtalk 13:03, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
User:GreenMeansGo, that's ok, i'll add the relevant information (similar to this). I would like to hear your opinion about the sources, since that's the "controversial" issue here. ThanksInfantom (talk) 13:38, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Umm... it's a little hard to judge them thoroughly since they don't appear to be available online (and I haven't had access to a university library in ten odd years). So it's hard to tell if the passages quoted are from a single isolated statement, or a summary from a work which treats the topic in greater detail throughout, which would mean more as far as determining the WP:DUEWEIGHT. GMGtalk 13:42, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
1) The last two are accessible [2]], [3]. 2) shouldn't we remove the entire sentence then? as it relies on the same sources as well. Infantom (talk) 13:49, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Another source [4]. Infantom (talk) 13:54, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's not absolutely required that sources be available online, or even in English, although it does make it difficult to discuss them for those who don't have easy access. Tertiary sources like Britannica are often the most useful in determining relative weight, while sources like the Patterson book are often the most useful in writing the meat of the content. I would say overall the point is moot until we have a section in the article to summarize in the lead. Without it, we can't really judge whether we're summarizing it well or not. GMGtalk 14:08, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
User:GreenMeansGo, Ok, thanks. I'll add the relevant information when the protection expires, there's a great information in the related 'history of western world' articles. BTW the other sections, 'Roman Empire', 'Hellenic', and 'Christian schism' are not sourced at all. Generally there are problems with the entire article. Infantom (talk) 14:25, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hold up. Why does it mean that we should remove the entire sentence if the sources are from a single source (which they are not)? Also, it is patently not true that the sections "Hellenism", "Roman empire", "Christian schism" are "not sourced at all", though I agree that there is some original research at work here, particularly adding some outdated Enlightenment scholarship (most of which I have removed, the rest seemed to be summaries of stuff from other articles, which can be easily fixed by getting the sources of those articles and giving them to the relevant material) Also, why are the sources the "main issue" here? They are reliable and say what every history book and scholar say.Anu-Dingir (Please offer a sacrifice!!!!) 22:54, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Have a look at the comment i replied to. Shouldn't it be relevant to the rest as well? "Christian schism" has no sources at all while the rest have only one source each. (for the record i don't think we should remove anything). As for the sources, i totally agree. "Judaism" was removed by an editor who ruled them out, that's why i initiated this discussion. Glad to see there's a sufficient agreement here. I'll add a relevant section to the body of the article and that should resolve the dispute. Cheers. Infantom (talk) 23:37, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a section about Judaism with additional sources. I also modified the lead per MOS:LEAD. Infantom (talk) 23:11, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

POV-pushing in the lede

I have removed the following text [5] on the grounds that it is not backed by the sources used. Ditto with this pic [6], it is totally undue, especially its placement at the top of the article. Khirurg (talk) 16:28, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is backed by an entire section and numerous sources in the body of the article, plus the introduction. All the sources explicitly state "Judaism". Where exactly is the POV? Why is the source of prof. Art Marmorstein from Northern State University is undue? seems like excuses to avoid mentioning non European influence. Edited again per MOS:LEAD Infantom (talk) 17:30, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, that's better. I can work with that. Khirurg (talk) 18:07, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry but your last edit isn't good enough, definitely not fully aligned with the sources. First you removed new sources i have added with no reason, and that's not the first time. Second, there are many sources which explicitly state major Judaism/Jewish/Israelite impact. What you did was downplaying other influences and attributing them more minor role. Western world isn't founded solely on Greek and Roman cultures, no source in the article support such thing. As long as Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome are mentioned instead of roman culture and Hellenism so should Ancient Israel instead of Judaism. Infantom (talk) 23:24, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
One thing is "Impact" and other thing is what means " Western world", if we follow the POV of some users here , then we can add also Iran and India in the lead section, why not?. romans and greeks are enough for the lead. you guys only focus in the hebrew version of the bible. that seems to me very POV patriotic and Im not beeing racist as someone have called me here.LuigiPortaro29 (talk) 23:40, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You keep avoiding the sources and pushing your own personal opinion. Where did you see a focus only on the "Hebrew bible"? read the article for a change instead of reverting all the time. There's nothing to do with "patriotism", there are 10 sources that support the current version and an entire section. And yes, Near East civilizations should also be mentioned (i'm the one who added them in the first place) if there are sufficient sources. This is probably goes to dispute resolution. Infantom (talk) 23:52, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"Impact" and "Influence" are one thing, but "founding" is something completely different. None of these sources back the "founding" claim. This is intellectual dishonesty and needs to stop. Khirurg (talk) 00:18, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"West" in "Western" comes from Western Christianity, and one of the sources speaks of Jesus as the foundation of Western civilization. Another speaks of Western civilization as chiefly built from Catholic-Protestant Christianity. The Romans and Greeks did not think of themselves as "the West", and were separate from the Nords and Scandinavians, who only became part of the West, like Greece and Rome, through Christianity.Anu-Dingir (Please offer a sacrifice!!!!) 01:55, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking of Nords, only after the Germanic peoples are mentioned and the Near Eastern peoples expanded in the body can the Ancient Near Eastern peoples be mentioned in the lead.Anu-Dingir (Please offer a sacrifice!!!!) 02:22, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No, Jesus is not the "foundation of Western Civilization". I'm starting to get the impression that it is futile discussing with someone with your views, not to mention your fellow edit-warrior, who has a somewhat different motivation, although same difference in the end. Khirurg (talk) 04:32, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Don't be autistic, and don't play the victim. Do you realize how ridiculous you sound?Anu-Dingir (Please offer a sacrifice!!!!) 09:11, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Jesus is not the foundation according to autistic slags like you. Even anti-Christian scholars say otherwise. Your bullying behavior almost got me to forget that you slimy POV-warrior.09:17, 17 March 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by LittleDipper (talkcontribs)

Analysis of sources

Several strong claims are currently being pushed in the article by a couple of editors (Infantom, LittleDipper), for example that "The West was and is founded upon Christianity, ... through which it is founded upon... Ancient Israel/Judaism", or that "Ancient Israelite Judaism is the foundation of Western morality." and several others to that effect. These are very strong claims. In addition the two editors are edit-warring to have this picture

The twelve tribes of Israel

placedg it at the very top of the article for maximum visibility. Below I analyze the whether the claim "| "The West was and is founded upon Christianity, ... through which it is founded upon... Ancient Israel/Judaism" is backed by the sources.

Source Verdict Comment
Andrea C. Paterson (2009). Three Monotheistic Faiths - Judaism, Christianity, Islam: An Analysis and Brief History. AuthorHouse. pp. 39–. ISBN 978-1-4343-9246-6."Judaism has influenced western civilization in a multitude of ways" No "Influence" is not the same as "founding", published is Authorhouse, a self-publishing outfit [7], does not meet WP:RS
Marvin Perry (1 January 2012). Western Civilization: A Brief History, Volume I: To 1789. Cengage Learning. pp. 33–. ISBN 1-111-83720-1."We talk of a Judeo-Christian tradition as an essential component of western civilization" No Nothing about "Ancient Israel", "essential component" not the same as "founding". High school textbook, low quality tertiary source, to be avoided per WP:PSTS
Role of Judaism in Western culture and civilization, "Judaism has played a significant role in the development of Western culture because of its uniqurelationship with Christianity, the dominant religious force in the West". Judaism at Encyclopædia Britannica No Many cultures played a "significant role in the development of western culture, but that's not the same as founding it. Britannica is a generalist tertiary source best avoided per WP:PSTS.
Jonathan Daly (19 December 2013). The Rise of Western Power: A Comparative History of Western Civilization. A&C Black. pp. 21–. ISBN 978-1-4411-1851-6."Another people contributed richly to the rise of the west without ever founding an empire of ruling a large territory: the Jews." No "contributed richly", definitely, founding, no.
Prof. Art Marmorstein, Northern State University, ANCIENT ISRAEL (THE HEBREWS) "Still, the Israelites had a major impact on Western civilization" No Excerpt from website, self-published, does not meet RS.
Cambridge University Historical Series, An Essay on Western Civilization in Its Economic Aspects, p.40: Hebraism, like Hellenism, has been an all-important factor in the development of Western Civilization; Judaism, as the precursor of Christianity, has indirectly had had much to do with shaping the ideals and morality of western nations since the christian era. No Key word here is "indirectly"
Caltron J.H Hayas, Christianity and Western Civilization (1953),Stanford University Press, p.2: That certain distinctive features of our Western civilization — the civilization of western Europe and of America— have been shaped chiefly by Judaeo–Graeco–Christianity, Catholic and Protestant. No "certain features have been shaped", yes, "founding", no
Horst Hutter, University of New York, Shaping the Future: Nietzsche's New Regime of the Soul And Its Ascetic Practices (2004), p.111:three mighty founders of Western culture, namely Socrates, Jesus, and Plato. No Meant somewhat tongue-in-cheek
Religions in Global Society – Page 146, Peter Beyer – 2006 unknown No quote provided
Fred Reinhard Dallmayr, Dialogue Among Civilizations: Some Exemplary Voices (2004), p.22: Western civilization is also sometimes described as "Christian" or "Judaeo- Christian" civilization. No "sometimes described" is very different from founding

About half the sources are low quality or do not meet WP:RS. None of them explicitly back the strong claim that "Western civilization is founded upon Judaism". Based on this, I think it's fine to say in the lede that Judaism had a significant effect/contribution/influence/shaped western civ, but not that Western civilization is "founded" upon it on par with ancient Greece and Rome. "Ancient Israel" is an anachronism and not used by any sources, and should not be used here either. I also feel the picture is WP:UNDUE, especially at the top of the article. Khirurg (talk) 06:13, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pleas explain how half of the sources do not meet WP:RS. Also I am not the one saying Jesus is the foundation of Western civilization, it is just what the source says.Anu-Dingir (Please offer a sacrifice!!!!) 09:03, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Also please stop pretending that we are the ones who are close-minded and biased here when we are just backing what scholars in the field say. And please tell us the methodology you used to analyze these sources. And do you know what "anachronism" even means? We have an article called "History of ancient Israel and Judah. Please stop with your non-scholarly bullshit.Anu-Dingir (Please offer a sacrifice!!!!) 09:07, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
this guys are only POV Patriotic, ok Let's talk :According to the "Hebrew Bible", ( and then they say that this is not the hebrew bible!) the Twelve Tribes of Israel or Tribes of Israel , were said to have descended from the 12 sons of the patriarch Jacob (who was later named Israel) by two wives, Leah and Rachel, and two concubines, Zilpah and Bilhah. this is not founding, Here they are only trying to make Fake propaganda.LuigiPortaro29 (talk) 09:21, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Why are you citing the Hebrew Bible? Its contents are irrelevant here. The rest of your edit is so autistic that I don't even have the energy to respond to it.Anu-Dingir (Please offer a sacrifice!!!!) 10:20, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Khirurg, You keep saying "tertiary" sourc eas if it is a desth sentence to us using the sourc3, whic is not what WP:NOR; if anything, it says that tertiary sources are helpful in evaluatintg due weight- andthe rertiart soirce clealrly show that Ancient Israel should be given as much emphasis as Ancient Greence, and Ancient Rome.Anu-Dingir (Please offer a sacrifice!!!!) 10:34, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You are playing with semantics and selectivity interpret the sources (i.e "indirectly" instead of "all important factor"). All the sources that mention Hellenism and Rome, mention Judaism in same time, but for some reason you question only the Jewish component. No source in article says the West is founded upon Rome or Ancient Greece, but it doesn't seem to bother you. Your edit version did not mention significant influence as you just suggested. I would suggest to replace "founded upon" with "influenced by" (for all factors) and end your semantics game. Infantom (talk) 11:22, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"Founded" is okay, fine even. It is a pretty normal term to say.Anu-Dingir (Please offer a sacrifice!!!!) 12:15, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I know, but i'm trying to reach a compromise. The thing is that the "analyzed" sources are used for the mentioning of Ancient Greece and Rome as well, and they don't mention "founding". The hypocrisy here is stunning. Infantom (talk) 12:46, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sources that Greece and Rome are the birthplace/foundations of Western Civilization? Easiest thing in the world [a]. I hadn't bothered presenting them because I thought that was common knowledge. But I guess I was wrong. Oh well. Khirurg (talk) 16:36, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Ricardo Duchesne (7 February 2011). The Uniqueness of Western Civilization. BRILL. p. 297. ISBN 90-04-19248-4. The list of books which have celebrated Greece as the "cradle" of the West is endless; two more examples are Charles Freeman's The Greek Achievement: The Foundation of the Western World (1999) and Bruce Thornton's Greek Ways: How the Greeks Created Western Civilization (2000)
  2. ^ Chiara Bottici; Benoît Challand (11 January 2013). The Myth of the Clash of Civilizations. Routledge. p. 88. ISBN 978-1-136-95119-0. The reason why even such a sophisticated historian as Pagden can do it is that the idea that Greece is the cradle of civilisation is so much rooted in western minds and school curicula as to be taken for granted.
  3. ^ William J. Broad (2007). The Oracle: Ancient Delphi and the Science Behind Its Lost Secrets. Penguin Publishing Group. p. 120. ISBN 978-0-14-303859-7. In 1979, a friend of de Boer's invited him to join a team of scientists that was going to Greece to assess the suitability of the ... But the idea of learning more about Greece — the cradle of Western civilization, a fresh example of tectonic forces at ...
You will also note that a), none of the sources are self-published (do you know what that means?) junk or high school textbook, while I added them much more elegantly than the crude clunky way you have, which screams "POV-PUSHING". Khirurg (talk) 16:44, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to dive into this discussion with the suggestion that the section "Influences of Judaism" be removed entirely. For one thing, it is nestled under the heading "Historical divisions" which is entirely a geographical section and has little to nothing to do with the cultural influences of the "Western world". Secondly, there is already a reference to the Biblical Christian culture's influence on Western culture, and since the entire argument of the "Influences of Judaism" section appears to be that Judaism, as the foundation of Christianity, formed a large part of the basis of the Western world, that argument is already encapsulated in the proper place, with Wikilinks to further detailed articles on the topic. The point of this section in this article appears to be to push a particular point of view rather than to impart any real information. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:50, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree with user WikiDan61.LuigiPortaro29 (talk) 17:32, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Samuel Huntington Obsession?

Who has such a hard-on for this single anglo-centric author, to the point of puting a map at the very top that contradicts the rest of the article? Latin America, SPECIALLY the Southern Cone countries are 100% western, maybe some like Bolivia are very influenced by indigenous cultures but there is much less influence from them on a country like mine (Argentina) that there is black african influence in the US wich somehow despite being a relative new western nation can decide wich are and arent western, despite some LA countries being much more like Europe, come visit Argentina or Uruguay and say its not western, 80+% white people, 90% catholics, a constitution modeled on the US one, all goverment buildings looking like French buildings, no death penalty like Europe, gender and societal customs like Europe (Specially Italy and Spain). Not including these countries as western is just anglo-centric BS! Maybe just because they are not satellites of the US that dont blindy follow it like the UK or other Anglo countries... ? 181.47.138.89 (talk) 16:22, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@181.47.138.89: I dispute that the map in question contradicts the rest of the article. The article makes quite clear that there is a difference of opinion regarding Latin America's status as part of the "Western world". I do not dispute your characterization of the Western-ness of much of Latin America, but neither your nor my opinion is the issue here; we must cite specific reliable sources. The map in question indicates that it is sourced to one particular reliable source. If you can provide an equally reliable source to dispute Huntington's characterization, please let us know, and we can discuss that here to reach the proper consensus. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 16:47, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delphic oracle

How is the oracle of Delphi the most representative thing about Western culture that it must be the image of the first paragraph of the body? 112.211.192.58 (talk) 22:00, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

True, I inserted that image exactly yesterday to give some weight to pre-Christian beliefs. Not a big deal in itself. 81.129.29.103 (talk) 22:07, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'll replace it with more representative stuff. I'll also put some more notable pre-Christian beliefs in the Greek section where such stuff belongs, thank you very much112.211.192.58 (talk) 22:18, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing edits

Hello, why confusing? The colombian exchange is important. Then the caption for that image is better if elaborated. Then the change to the very first paragraph was not me but I agree with it. 2A00:23C4:7155:6D00:8846:F5D:F916:DC03 (talk) 09:49, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Cite error: There are <ref group=lower-alpha> tags or {{efn}} templates on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}} template or {{notelist}} template (see the help page).