I read a fascinating post the other day, called ‘So you think you are Trad’. I recommend that everyone read it. It was overall very well done, and covered a lot of very important ground. It definitely covers its ground much better than the person defining ‘patriarchy’, about which I had
Excellent article. I would quibble about the origins of Western Civ. Its roots are deeper than Luther, towering figure that he was. Monotheism, and ultimately Christ, are the antecedents. The fact that Greek pagans developed many of the same conclusions based on observation and reason merely confirms the idea that all Truth is God's Truth and that God has revealed much about himself in the natural world.
I would have the same quibbles, which I think I mentioned in the article.
The key, for me, is when did it 'become' Western Civ... ie break out from those roots, and others that developed from those roots, and develop its own identity.
Given that RC culture is Western (as opposed to Eastern Orthodox) I'm not sure I would make a distinction. You could say a distinction occurred at the Great Scism but the cultural differences between east and west would already have been in place at that time. I'm not sure there has been a significant culture shift in Western Civ until the recent post modernist abandonment of reason.
Well, some would depend on how we define 'Western' here. In the sense I think the OP is using it, RC is not 'western'. IE many of the traits typically associated with 'Western' civ are much more protestant than RC. While the RC did a lot of study and preserving of text, the Scientific explosion was much more Protestant than Catholic.
Excellent article. I would quibble about the origins of Western Civ. Its roots are deeper than Luther, towering figure that he was. Monotheism, and ultimately Christ, are the antecedents. The fact that Greek pagans developed many of the same conclusions based on observation and reason merely confirms the idea that all Truth is God's Truth and that God has revealed much about himself in the natural world.
I would have the same quibbles, which I think I mentioned in the article.
The key, for me, is when did it 'become' Western Civ... ie break out from those roots, and others that developed from those roots, and develop its own identity.
Given that RC culture is Western (as opposed to Eastern Orthodox) I'm not sure I would make a distinction. You could say a distinction occurred at the Great Scism but the cultural differences between east and west would already have been in place at that time. I'm not sure there has been a significant culture shift in Western Civ until the recent post modernist abandonment of reason.
Well, some would depend on how we define 'Western' here. In the sense I think the OP is using it, RC is not 'western'. IE many of the traits typically associated with 'Western' civ are much more protestant than RC. While the RC did a lot of study and preserving of text, the Scientific explosion was much more Protestant than Catholic.
Rome is the western church as opposed to Constantinople but I understand your distinction re the development of science and industry.
Well, to be fair, not so much my distinction but the OP.