guardian_rose
TeaDidikai
guardian_rose
Mongolia and China boarder each other. Yet, they are two different societies.
And yet the Gael, who shared a common social structure, had organized boundaries and land rights under title- to say nothing of a common language and an overarching polticical structure couldn't possibly be considered a
nation and thus can't be considered a
society.
In short, I find your analogy flawed and your habit of randomly making up the meanings of words to be unappealing at best, insultingly racist at worst.
Nice definition. Too bad the definition given doesn't support what you are saying.
You saying it is so doesn't make it so.
Quote:
Almost all the definitions given talk about cooperation.
Quote:
Archeological evidence does not support this completely. The Celts were known to war amongst themselves.
You're presenting your limited (and demonstrateably flawed) understanding of historical societies as being objective fact as to their nature.
Who cares if they warred amongst themselves. So did the groups you listed as a society.
That said:
Merriam Webster, Definition 3b, for Society in the link provided above
a community,
nation, or broad grouping of people having common traditions, institutions, and collective activities and interests
Now, I bolded the part, just so you can't say you didn't see it.
Merriam Webster, Definition for Nation
3 : a tribe or federation of tribes
The name of Tribe here being socially expressed amongst the Gael as either Clann or Muintir, depending on if you're examining the regional culture or the overarching National culture of the Gael.
I'm beginning to think this is merely intellectual dishonesty on your part.
Quote:
Quote:
Actually, the reason we have Irish Gaelic and Scottish Gaelic is because Englishmen don't serve the courtesy of honoring cultural distinctions and thus they have misapplied the title of Gaelic to factions it shouldn't have been used to address.
P-Celts aren't Q-Celts, that's true enough, but stop misusing terms that in and of themselves are inaccurate to justify your position.
How so? Where did you find this?
The suffix ic is from the French -ique, it came into usage and is applied as an Anglicization to the Scottish and Irish titles that were best described by their own endonyms.
This form of Racism, of privilege in assigning an exonym to a people under the pressure of the majority is a core element in understanding racism. We are taught in the US about the exonyms such as the word used to address those who are descended from African Slaves. We likely know the slurs used to address our own ethnic heritage. Often we are ignorant of the difference between what the dominate culture calls a minority and what they call themselves and the struggles those people face. Most people don't know about how a word that has been absorbed into common culture could affect someone who is part of the disenfranchised minority.
Nuri is right. We need a discussion on privilege.
Quote:
According to National Geographic, it is a village led by a chieftain. A closed community. Its a fishing village.
So according to your article, your own citation would not meet the standards required to confer the title?
Okay. Case closed.
Quote:
What does this have to do with anything? Is he an expert? Irish? Living in the British Isles or Ireland?
Yes.
Quote:
Still, it will just end in arguments until someone posts references.
Actually, my suspicion is that it will end in a contrast of Facts and Fluff.
Quote:
Because we are not finding common ground here.
A lack of agreement grants you carte blanche permission to further indulge your raciest behavior?
Quote:
Neither of us has given ANY evidence to support what we are saying, and until one of us does, this is just an argument that is beginning to get out of control.
So, a simple "You're engaging in racist behavior, cut it out." Isn't enough of a reason for you to respect another's culture and stop using an insulting term? So, on top of all the other s**t, you're an Oathbreaker too?
Quote:
Please. By all means. Provide proof.
Aside from the fact that as it has already been pointed out, you are the one under the burden of proof, I shall.
So, the passage in question was stated thus:
guardian_rose
To the Church's own admittance, the peoples of Ireland were very resistant to the church's efforts. Some could argue that the inclusion of some of the Celtic pantheon is a way in which the old tradition survives today.
This is a statement of reasoning, or an outright lie, depending on the intention. It relies on people assuming that resiting conversion is evidence that the gods of the Gael were mixed in with Catholic Saints.
Why is this a false argument? Because it rests on a lack of commentary to jump to that conclusion, your personal
mental masturbation unsupported opinion, and any of a number of other fallacious justifications.
If I said "Hey, I really don't want to go to Deo's Birthday Party" and a year later Nuri says "Tea said she didn't want to go to Deo's Party. She bought the cake!" it makes as much sense as your statement "The Irish Resisted Conversion. Saint Brigit is a goddess of the Gael!".
Quote:
Second, there are some saint's days that are celebrated almost identically to their gaelic counterparts.
There you go again with that whole "I don't care what the Gael have to say about it, I think I will force my Anglicization upon them" thing.
Prove that these Saints weren't Saints. I noticed you completely failed to address this statement. I'll wait for that proof.
Quote:
I am working on that. Are you working on proving I am wrong, or shall this continue to be he said she said?
The problem with your position is that the Burden of Proof is on you.
The problem I am having arguing with you is that you're relying on your privilege to indulge racist attitudes, and using more logical fallacies than I can shake a stick at.
Quote:
Where did you find this at? I have never heard of a warrior being called a druid.
A lack of evidence does not demonstrate evidence of the lack.
Cu already named one.
Quote:
Quote:
3) That the Gael do not count "with their varying beliefs [as] a society."
Man has warred over his beliefs from the time he learned to walk upright.
None of this proves that the Gael are not a society. Care to try again or are you willing to concede that the definitions of the words Society and Nation as cited above demonstrate that you misused the term.
It doesn't matter if clusters within these different groups had different beliefs. The United States is no less a nation for the fact that Nuri and Deo live here with the same rights of Citizenship as Fred Phelps.
Quote:
St. Brigit. In the Celtic Pantheon, Brigid. If I recall correctly, she was a goddess of healing and fertility.
You'll need to demonstrate that the Vita Sanctae Brigidae is a fraud. We'll wait.
You honestly thought for an instant that you simply saying that a historical figure from whom we have documentation as an individual and their relics would be taken as proof?
Do you not know what the word means?
I am. I'm also not keeping myself so open that I'll indulge fluff.
This isn't speculative, it's fabrication.
Quote:
The question posted wasn't an "Isn't it 100% fact".
The initial question? It was seeking accurate information. Not unfounded personal opinion to replace fact.
Quote:
There really isn't a whole lot that ties the various tribes together, other than pantheons and similarities in dialect.
So, you're ignoring the common language, the social structure, the governmental system, the land boundaries... In other words, you're presenting your personal unsupported opinion as fact again.
You know there's a term for this right? Appeal to Authority. Or liar. Depends on the context I suppose.
Quote:
Quote:
8 ) That being a Druid "was a lifestyle and a title".
We'll come back to this with the whole more proof thing.
I'll wait.
Quote:
Quote:
9) That "[T]he Tain,... shows splits in the society: warriors and druids".
I am assuming that you have read The Tain, yes? There are many examples of splits in social structure. Actual quotes to come as soon as I can locate my book of Celtic mythologies.
Cu addressed this, but even still, a split doesn't denote a lifestyle over a title. I'll wait for you to prove that there was a "typical way of life" for the Druids of the Gael that marked them as a distinct culture unto themselves, rather than a title within a culture.
Quote:
Did I ever say it was a complete, 100% honest reference? We use what we have. Sure, there are parts of the Roman writings that are obviously questionable.
So, you knowingly perpetuated false information in order to make your case.
Do you have any ethics at all Oathbreaker?
Quote:
Can he prove or disprove something you can't?
Often. And the other way around.
Quote:
While we wait, I have a question for you Tea. You mentioned somewhere that you attended Evergreen State College, yes? The one in Puget Sound? If so, I can give you the location of the mythical National Geographic video, assuming that the Timberland Regional Library hasn't phased it out. It is a VHS, after all.
Before you ask, no. I can't go there myself. I live in interior Alaska now, and thats a bit out of my way to get the vid title. My local library doesn't have the greatest resources at its disposal.
Shoot.
Quote:
One last thing. How can I rape a culture, that, by Tea's definitions, is dead? The worst you could accuse me of, is grave digging.
Do not lie. I never claimed nor supported anything by definition, that said the culture of the Gael was dead.
I challenge you to post where I did, or correct yourself.
