Did Britain Create The Modern World?

[Fido]

Originally Posted by urangutan

The modern world is not science for the betterment of humanity, it isn't fair free trade, it is the church. Not just the Catholic church or the Mosque or Temple but the Hollywoods, the stock exchange, the gold medal tally at the Olmypics. Tyrany has forced science into blocks of patent sales and naming rights. Greed outweighs need and a gusto for ones own church, leads along the path that is modernization.

England brought sport and its fairness out into the world and the world has abused the privelage to express just how modern and fair their lives are in some place. Winning is now nothing but a memory of the day, winning more is the modern world. The church and its concept of we are the way. The industrial revolution, science and charity do not fit in any modern church I know. Every day is now blessed Sunday in the modern world.

You know; The Catholic church made the modern world more than any single country, because they wrote the laws and taught them. And their system of laws was the first modern system of law, and their state was the first modern state. And then the protestants made it what it is, a mirror of Judea, where wealth is justified, and poverty is proof of sin. It is hard to imagine how so few could countrol so much, and it would not be possible except for the trust and ignorence of mankind who worry for their souls, count on miracles, and mind their business.

[urangutan]

It is funny Fido how wealth that you are actually talking of is the production of wealth as opposed to wealth that is in the posession of the aristocracy. Of course wealthy landlords and education simply for those who can afford the privelage of not having to earn another franc to help feed the family is your idea of how the modern world should see its roots. Of course you could always expect a franc if a carriage ran over one of your twenty children because having sex is a sin and procreation is the aim. I don't think you have an idea of what is meant in the concept of modern and by the term law you refer to obedience and servitude as opposed to fair and just.

[Fido]

Originally Posted by urangutan

It is funny Fido how wealth that you are actually talking of is the production of wealth as opposed to wealth that is in the possession of the aristocracy. Of course wealthy landlords and education simply for those who can afford the privelage of not having to earn another franc to help feed the family is your idea of how the modern world should see its roots. Of course you could always expect a franc if a carriage ran over one of your twenty children because having sex is a sin and procreation is the aim. I don't think you have an idea of what is meant in the concept of modern and by the term law you refer to obedience and servitude as opposed to fair and just.

I do have a concept of modern, and that is not to say we could not do much better. I don't agree with the law. Judges have little disgression to judge the law against the facts, but can only judge the facts against the law. The fact is that all we do we do in a legal milieu, even wars. And the fact is that all we think of as modern in our governments and institutions is about a thousand years old, and the beginnings of it were in the realization that the world did not end when Jesus did not return, and so the church which was the universal form of government at that point took over society. From that age we have our great medieval philosophers, the development of international law, and law merchant, and great universities. The rationality that divided philosophy from theology doomed the world to protestantism which wrapped theology in ever greater swathes of faith, but which in turn left capitalism free of moral restraint. So, it does not work, but on the other hand, Western society grew many branches out of a common root. And what most affects us, and makes the social contract workable goes back further yet in the history of the church, and it is spolation. What this means is, that if someone takes what is yours, you cannot take it back by force (despoiling) without giving him a better title to it than you began with. Handy, hunh? This puts us at odds with the Muslims who see that they have an absolute right to justice, because our only claim on justice comes about when we are peaceful. Since most theft is peaceful, and even legal, peace only makes injustice a done deal. We have only an absolute right to peace, and when we say the rule of law to Muslims, it means that we will impose peace regardless of whether it is just or not. And the thing is; it was not so long ago that we were all like the Muslims, and all like the German tribes, and all like the American Native Nations. It is law, and in particular, Catholic Church law that has brought us into the modern world for good or bad. I recommend the Book, Law and Revolution; The formation of the Wesern Legal tradition, by harold J. Berman, widely available in paperback.

[urangutan]

I think you can narrow a fault in capitalism down to patent, copyright and trademark. The greed, lust for treasure and riches can be said to be ancient syndromes and not a result of Protestantism or the Reformation. The world outside the elite and the church having knowledge, is due more to these factors than the supression held over the populace of the church or the opression forced onto them by the elite. Knowledge brought the world up to the palace gates. Knowledge brought the church to its knees in respect of religion and knowledge is the result of people being seen as equal. Something the church and the aristocracy did not give to the population. We were more like others of the world when we released the shackles of the suppressors, while still not denying what we knew. Are you saying that without protestantism, the world might not be so spoilt. Perhaps you are correct but that is how we have abused our own little piece of knowledge. Stand there and condemn the knowlege you have, I wont see you face the church of England or the tombstone of Luther, you will see the Catholic church being your opressor. It took close to seventeen hundred years to remember what education was, so do not put modernity in the same context as the Catholic church.

[de Silentio]

Originally Posted by cut2thepoint

I am asking this as we in britain tend to believe this due to our empire e.t.c I am not stating what my viewpoint yet is as I believe there is many factors involved, and would like to explore them In more detail later , but I would like to know what fellow britons think and the rest of the world first.

Not just Britain alone, France had it's hand it igniting the process toward Modernity. (I speak of Descartes and Bacon)

[Didymos Thomas]

Bacon was English.

[de Silentio]

Originally Posted by Didymos Thomas

Bacon was English.

That's why I said not Britain alone. I should have said: "France had it's hand in igniting the process toward Modernity as well".

Sorry.

[Kinkazzo]

Ciao, I'm a new arrival and since I live in the UK it seemed to me natural to start my "first entry" here...

Amazing! Did Britain create the modern world? Talk about ethnocentrism!
And I who always thought it had been Caesar Augustus, the engederer of a united Europe, the EU actually! Hmmm...

(I'm of mixed genealogies, where Italian is strongly present, as well as Judaic roots and Gallic intromissions -- but I'm glad to see that religion is ever present, in any of your debacles -- it'd make Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens extremely happy...)

Bacon is ALWAYS English, especially with fried eggs!

But, whenever he's mentioned in vain, I'd then prefer analysing the semiological roots of Hermes Trismegistus...

[Didymos Thomas]

That's why I said not Britain alone. I should have said: "France had it's hand in igniting the process toward Modernity as well".

Sorry.

Ah, now I see.

And you're right, France certainly had a hand in developing the modern world.

It seems to me that no nation could be excluded from a list of nations that 'created' the modern world. The British might have more influence on the shape of our modern world than, say, Bhutan, but even that small country has played some role.