British Intellectual Capacities

Ollie Garchy

Ollie Garchy

Active member
I would like to make a comment that is worthy of discussion: why is the British capacity for intellectual debate (social sciences) so impressive? Why does their academic system continually enrich the world with thinkers of impressive sensitivity and skill? The Brits have taken over this area. It was the Germans in the 19th Century. The Americans are a close second, but they are still second. In the coming decades, the Chinese and Indians will come to dominate. How will they do? Will they make for a better human race? Personally, I don't think so. I am European and also Eurocentric, but I think the world will fail without a strong European influence. I think that the Brits have hit the top levels of what we are capable of, and it is all downhill from here. What do the members think?
 
Last edited:
that's a biased opinion, but you stated that anyway i guess. I figure, the chinese will have to reform eventually and move towards a freer society, but maybe not a full democracy. The nation has come out of good and bad times for thousands of years, i guess now is a good time for them and maybe they'll contribute to the world again like they did in the past, who knows. India will just keep up pace with china, but i really can't see them as being any sort of great power outside of south asia, i don't think that's their mindset.

The british are pretty damn impressive in argumentation and rhetoric, especially if you've ever seen one of their run of the mill parliamentary meetings. The MPs make American congressmen look like schoolboys, plus they're fun to watch when they get really riled up.
 
one thing they influenced indians in is that they passed on their infinite capacity for verbosity.
i am testement to that.
 
Aye, I would add that the quantity is hardly relative to the quality. Ollie, from whence did you make this decision? Can you cite some examples or is this just your gut feeling?
 
America has the most universities that people can study abroad with. I can tell you guys that most american students would rather be in some other part of the country going to college, but there really isn't much want to go another nation's college. Maybe we have so much choice at home that's not necessary, though most people would probably be interested in studying abroad for a semester or two.
 
I think that is a very absurd statement and would like to see some documented proof for this...

I mean that is like saying the Brits invented the internet...They didn’t a Brit invented the World Wide Web that uses the Internet that was developed in the US... http://www.ideafinder.com/history/inventions/story070.htm

That is just an example... I mean if the US is so second then why did the Brits need our help back in the 40s?

Why is it that when large disasters occur the US is right there bringing in supplies, yeah sure everyone else helps too but how is it that the US aircraft carriers dwarf any other on the planet today? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_carrier#Aircraft_carriers_today

Why is it that the only three countries in the world to have put a human in space are Russia, USA, and most recently China?

Then again it all happened with a little bit of everyone I mean the USA is the melting pot and you cant deny that...

So really your statement is absurd, rude, incorrect, and fact less :)
 
Donkey said:
I think that is a very absurd statement and would like to see some documented proof for this...

I mean that is like saying the Brits invented the internet...They didn’t a Brit invented the World Wide Web that uses the Internet that was developed in the US... http://www.ideafinder.com/history/inventions/story070.htm

That is just an example... I mean if the US is so second then why did the Brits need our help back in the 40s?

Why is it that when large disasters occur the US is right there bringing in supplies, yeah sure everyone else helps too but how is it that the US aircraft carriers dwarf any other on the planet today? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_carrier#Aircraft_carriers_today

Why is it that the only three countries in the world to have put a human in space are Russia, USA, and most recently China?

Then again it all happened with a little bit of everyone I mean the USA is the melting pot and you cant deny that...

So really your statement is absurd, rude, incorrect, and fact less :)
Click to expand...

Here is the proof: If academic thinkers in the US are as good as you suggest -- and there are people like Anthony Cordesman who break the mold -- then why does the US have so many problems? We are not talking about minor problems, either. We are talking about major...heavy duty...social problems.

I am talking about the SOCIAL SCIENCES, anyway. But, I am not talking about societal reform or even measurement. I am really only talking about the skill of social scientists...and by that I mean historians. American historians are good. No question about that. The Brits are better, in my opinion, though. The Germans still have their good people, but are not produced in the same quantity as the Brits. The Americans are produced in large number, but a far smaller number are good.

The proof is in the "pudding", so to speak. A good historian looks at the facts and asks hard questions. He or she does not just repeat the accepted political line and hope for advancement. That was Hitlerism. That was Stalinism. That's North Korea. That's China. That's India. The accepted political line is ALWAYS drivel. How many American revisionists are there?

"Revisionism" is real history. If you do not understand this basic truth, then you have never experienced the wonder of reading the archival record and realizing that the "pudding" is rotten. A good university forces the students to re-think all basic assumptions. The Brits seem better at this...that is my point.

How can one quantify this fact? I Don't know. I can only point to old and new Brit. historians. Think about the whole crew. Men ranging from AJP Taylor to David Irving...lots of radical stuff. I personally do not like their work...I respect it, though. I could add a whole number of new names, but you guys probably don't know them. Some of the old or young are turgid, but so what.
 
"Revisionism" is real history. If you do not understand this basic truth, then you have never experienced the wonder of reading the archival record and realizing that the "pudding" is rotten. A good university forces the students to re-think all basic assumptions. The Brits seem better at this...that is my point.
Click to expand...
Sometimes I think its best to let drummed up stories remain instead of using ur super duper "Revisionist" history. The same "revisionist that think the holocaust never happend. Screw that.

However, back on topic. Being the brilliant sociologist you are you under stand that the maintaing of the social structure is necessary for the cohesiveness of society. Some of the things that form that social structure are events in our history that have not been recorded as absolutely accurately. There might have been a few exaggerations here and there. Who cares? It helps our identity as a nation. Who cares how many people there were at the Alamo, it helps us understand ourselves as a nation.


How many American revisionists are there?
Click to expand...
Not to many we have a lot of good things in our history, and some bad things we look at them all. We dont try to create things that arent there like those "revisionist."


And just on a personal note.

Maybe people would receive your posts better if you did'nt try to sound like a super psuedo intellectual , snobby, european.

Way to live up to a sterotype.
 
Rabs said:
Sometimes I think its best to let drummed up stories remain instead of using ur super duper "Revisionist" history. The same "revisionist that think the holocaust never happend. Screw that.

However, back on topic. Being the brilliant sociologist you are you under stand that the maintaing of the social structure is necessary for the cohesiveness of society. Some of the things that form that social structure are events in our history that have not been recorded as absolutely accurately. There might have been a few exaggerations here and there. Who cares? It helps our identity as a nation. Who cares how many people there were at the Alamo, it helps us understand ourselves as a nation.


Not to many we have a lot of good things in our history, and some bad things we look at them all. We dont try to create things that arent there like those "revisionist."


And just on a personal note.

Maybe people would receive your posts better if you did'nt try to sound like a super psuedo intellectual , snobby, european.

Way to live up to a sterotype.
Click to expand...

Revisionism has nothing to do with the Holocaust...that's just nonsense. Revisionism is science in operation. It is the best and noblest of any academic discipline. Asking questions and finding answers...that's what this is all about. Denying that the killing of Jews happened is purely insane...and incidentally used by "Big Brother" to protect itself. Holocaust "revisionism" (a pure fantasy) is used to beat people into compliance. It becomes the best example of why people should not ask questions. Why do you think that governments actually take Holocaust revisionism seriously? Is it not just the same as alien invasions? In my books anyway...there is NO evidence for that type of crap.
 
Ollie, you still haven't given a source for this idea of British intellectual domination or declared this your own visceral interpretation.

??
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top