Would it be better to be Independent from history?

I am wondering whether or not someone exists for whom his/her ancients` lives do not influence the route on which he/she goes.
2nd ..Which spiritual targets of U, are effected more by the achivement of the historical knowledge..love or hate

I am very curious about these two major things,which are under the contol of the source of interaction among the people who are enabled to communicate on a suitable platform.

Originally posted by Murat I am wondering whether or not someone exists for whom his/her ancients` lives do not influence the route on which he/she goes.

We are all influenced by what has gone before whether we realise it or not, if an individuals ancestors were to do something different then the individual may not exist. Just because I was unaware of the decision to set up a penal colony in Australia doesn't mean that I would still be here if that was event did not take place. In short we can not escape history.

Regards, Praetor.

Originally posted by Murat I am wondering whether or not someone exists for whom his/her ancients` lives do not influence the route on which he/she goes. 2nd ..Which spiritual targets of U, are effected more by the achivement of the historical knowledge..love or hate I am very curious about these two major things,which are under the contol of the source of interaction among the people who are enabled to communicate on a suitable platform.

There is a Tribe in South America that have no past tense. They do not have a history because they cannot communicate it in language at all, there is no culture of keeping history or recording anything that occurred in the Past.

They also have no numbers or time, or a concept of time. which sounds great to me!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirah%C3%A3_language
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirah%C3%A3_people
http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,414291,00.html


Edited by Ovidius - 16-Apr-2007 at 11:57

why can no one escape the concept of time? By not having a work or a concept of 'events being placed' then you remove time. Yes, ok there is always a certain element of the sun going down, seasons etc, but that is slightly different to having a concept of time.

The Piraha people have no word for time and, according to studies, do not keep time. Their concept of time does not exist based on culture, they do not measure it nor pay attention to it.

As for History in their culture - they have no past tense and do not 'culturally' pay attention to the past. They therefore live without history, with or without your technical definition. There is no 'living history' either - they do no construct the past and cannot within their language.

Thats what anthropology believes, anyhow.

How can it be impossible?

Yes, Concepts are different from words. I would say that Time is based on an acknowledgement of three things - Past, Present and Future. Considering that the Piraha basically merge the three into one, I think that Time is not significant as a concept. Like we both agree, there is always going to be a partial use of events in the day - sun going up and down, the moon etc. But does this constitute time, I don't things so, not really. I think there is a differences between concepts of 'time' and understanding process or change.

As for Age - they don't have numbers or a past tense, I wonder if they have a word for old. But I don't know if they distinguish between peoples ages.

Yes, Obviously there is some degree of memory. They can, according to this, communicate it, but in the present tense and if they were reliving it basically. They have a certain degree of process too. However, the argument Daniel Everett has is that they do not posess a History because it is not culturally significant.

If you are interested...

see

http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/CA/journal/issues/v46n4/054006/054006.html

Thats the Jorunal of Current Anthropology - 46, 4.



Edited by Ovidius - 17-Apr-2007 at 09:22

Originally posted by Ovidius Yes, Concepts are different from words. I would say that Time is based on an acknowledgement of three things - Past, Present and Future. Considering that the Piraha basically merge the three into one, I think that Time is not significant as a concept. Like we both agree, there is always going to be a partial use of events in the day - sun going up and down, the moon etc. But does this constitute time, I don't things so, not really. I think there is a differences between concepts of 'time' and understanding process or change.

Speaking about concepts let me add that the concept of time is a much-debated subject.
Indian texts � Hindu and Buddhist - say time is an illusion .Yet the illusion persists. (I heard Einstein shared a similar view). Man needs to break up time into fragments because he has to understand, monitor and manage his life and of his fellow beings.
The linier time, as we understand it, exists because we have learnt to impose a relative concept over the absolute. For example, we have accepted a �day� as a working unit of time. We have divided / sub- divided it into hours, minutes, seconds etc. We measure our work and life in terms of these units. A �day� itself is reckoned with reference to sunset and sunrise. We may call this a relative view.
However, we all know sun neither sets nor rises. From the Absolute point of view, there is no day or night. It is a time- less universe (because �time� as we understand it, is measured in terms of the interval between two events.)
We in our daily life impose a relative concept (day) over the Absolute (time- less ness).This we do, because we are living in a relative world and not because we are ignorant of the sun�s status. Otherwise, how else can we live in a relative world?