Anachronous Rex
New Member
While brainstorming ideas for the new science sticky a thought came to mind that, while it probably doesn't belong in that particular thread, is still quite frustrating, and I now seek to learn if my League comrades think so as well.
There is an idea, rarely expressed as such, but nonetheless prevalent in society and amateur historical circles, that all legends are at least in some respect derived from actual historical events or observations.
This idea has gathered such tremendous force behind it that now I can scarcely mention Noah's flood without hearing of the Black Sea, cyclopes without hearing of mammoth skulls, Atlantis without hearing of Knossos, and - in more academic schools - Amazons without somebody bringing up Hittites (allegedly the Mycenaeans thought they were girly because they shaved.)
As though these explanations were proven facts.
As though ancient peoples lacked the imagination to conceive of a one-eyed giant on their own; or ponder after a thunderous deluge what might occur if the rain did not cease to fall.
While I do not oppose speculation on principal, the common acceptance of what is - in actuality - merely cleaver guesswork, is at best troubling; at worst, this actively encourages pseudoscience by creating an environment in which any intelligent-sounding hypothesis may be taken seriously.
Your thoughts comrades?
There is an idea, rarely expressed as such, but nonetheless prevalent in society and amateur historical circles, that all legends are at least in some respect derived from actual historical events or observations.
This idea has gathered such tremendous force behind it that now I can scarcely mention Noah's flood without hearing of the Black Sea, cyclopes without hearing of mammoth skulls, Atlantis without hearing of Knossos, and - in more academic schools - Amazons without somebody bringing up Hittites (allegedly the Mycenaeans thought they were girly because they shaved.)
As though these explanations were proven facts.
As though ancient peoples lacked the imagination to conceive of a one-eyed giant on their own; or ponder after a thunderous deluge what might occur if the rain did not cease to fall.
While I do not oppose speculation on principal, the common acceptance of what is - in actuality - merely cleaver guesswork, is at best troubling; at worst, this actively encourages pseudoscience by creating an environment in which any intelligent-sounding hypothesis may be taken seriously.
Your thoughts comrades?