morfe
|
Hey Nigel of Stourport
Jul 30, 2003, 22:21
|
You know I want to know what that mound is!?
Puzzled of Florida :-)
|
pure joy
|
Re: Sacred Landscapes
Jul 30, 2003, 22:31
|
"As a non-believer par excellence I would have to disagree totally with the half-hearted and amateur non-believers above who claim there no such thing as sacred"
Oh, that's very broad brushed and so silly to say that passionate and well articulated views giben the limitations of this discussion are half-hearted and amateur. You don't even know what I believe in, because I haven't actually said it yet! I am arguing for baza's general belief in no belief, but I don't actually equate the word 'sacred' solely with religion, so I CAN accept the phrase 'sacred landscapes' if it means 'highly valued' - and this is obviously conjecture anyway because we don't really know how important these sites and landscapes were to people - I do strongly believe that we will never really get to the bottom of it because our society is so so different that it is basically impossible to really know what people were thinking then, and if we really think we can, then it's simply our modern ego (that we surely must be able to undertand things) overtaking reality.
|
baza
|
Re: Got it wrong?
Jul 30, 2003, 22:31
|
You seem to regard `sacred` as meaning something different to my meaning.
To me `sacred` is synonymous with `holy`.
If you say "this landscape is sacred" then I interpret that to mean that, to you, the landscape has some special religious significance and I can accept that. As far as I am concerned, that doesn`t actually make the landscape sacred, it`s only sacred within the minds of those who have such a faith.
I do know that the word `sacred` is sometimes used without a religious context. To my way of thinking, that just devalues a powerful word.
baz
|
morfe
|
non-belief/sexy?
Jul 30, 2003, 22:37
|
|
I don't think that all sacred space is defined by 'belief', it can be an active, maybe ritualistic conservancy of more than just ideas. This is where conservationists (a fine example of a line blurred between 'realists' and 'the loony tree huggers') stand anywhere on this or that side of a line that maybe defined as 'having notions of sanctity'. It may be useless to save the Spotted Owl, as far as loggers are concerned, but the belief of conservationists is more far reaching than that. It all becomes subjective here, so I won't go on. Reductionists and nihilists, mathematicians and clerks all live in the same world as New Age guru's and conservationists. Some mathematicians are conservationists. It's what makes the world go round. Common sacred space may be a forest that is managed for both logging AND wildlife. I call that progress.
|
baza
|
Re: Nasal cavities
Jul 30, 2003, 22:38
|
A Man Utd fan is free to regard Old Trafford as sacred, however, I can only repeat, that doesn`t make it, actually, sacred.
baz
|
morfe
|
Society so different?
Jul 30, 2003, 22:46
|
But we have tribes and cultures (Irian Jaya? etc) that are still little-changes since before our stoneage, I believe the clues are all there? if we haven't Westernised everyone before we discover the 'truth' about ancient minds? But Northern ancient minds may have been SO different. My mind is different than my Latin neighbour, in many ways, but we still 'meet' on so many levels I'm sure clues to ancient land use exist in our collective and individual unconscious minds? A table is a table because of the idea behind it, not because of our perception of it (speaking ultra-literally). So our modern perceptions of Avebury could not feasibly, I agree, be appropriated with much approaching the historical truth.
I'm suspicious. Two graffitti artists living in the same street may 'tag' their respective space for very different psychological reasons. Archeologists finding these tags in many years may not distinguish this, they may not even know that the fact it is 'illegal' could be a motivating force, etc etc
|
nigelswift
|
Re: Sacred Landscapes
Jul 30, 2003, 22:51
|
Sorry, I'd only read Baza and Fw at the beginning of the thread, and was meaning to pull their leg in a light-hearted way. I hadn't read down to the more serious stuff.
(Memo to self: read whole thread before adding comment!).
|
morfe
|
definition of Sacred?
Jul 30, 2003, 22:52
|
A Man Utd fan is free to regard Old Trafford as sacred, however, I can only repeat, that doesn`t make it, actually, sacred.
And I say again that sacred is by definition 'subjective' . You saying that something is NOT sacred is easily as subject to criticism (if not moreso) than those finding sanctitiy in a place or object. Your denial of their experience is just denial? Or else it is an attempt to rate which can or not be 'sacred'. or else you deny 'sacred' as a concept. because it is that; a concept. Concept scan be useful or not, i find. That's how I appreciate it. Thanks for replying, I find this stimulating discussion :-)
|
morfe
|
Re: Sacred is...
Jul 30, 2003, 22:56
|
|
I haven't a clue how the land was perceived in prehistoric times, but I can guess that every new born baby looks at it and goes "!!!!!"
|
nigelswift
|
Re: Hey Nigel of Stourport
Jul 30, 2003, 22:57
|
Dear Puzzled,
Crookbarrow Hill, Worcester...
Not a mention on TMA, never excavated, and a big round perfect beauty...
|
