Why Were the Greeks So Clever?

[Razgovory]

I view the Mediterranean civilization as having collapsed in the West a little after Rome fell but last longer in the east.  Western civilization started on the rubble of the older one, and while it borrowed alot from the past it was distinctly different.

That's rather ignorant. The entire history of Western philosophy and ideology can be described as an argument between Aristotle and Plato.

If you go back that far Russia is also a western country.  So is Syria.  Also you used the word "meme" which reduces your credibility to nearly nothing.

[Sheilbh]

well, there's two major tracks. one is the classical (romano-greek) and the other is middle eastern (jews [religion] and phoenicans [alphabet] and arabs [math and a lot of other useful stuff]).

Of course the Arabs were themselves syncretic.  They've got an alphabet but their literature is heavily influenced by Persian examples, their mathematical genius (especially in astronomy) was a mix of Indian and Greek stuff (what we call Arabic numbers the Arabs call Indian numbers) and their philosophy was fundamentally Greek, especially Aristotle.

But they mixed what was Greek with influences from India and Persian much the same way.

[Martinus]

Anyway, the answer is simple: Greeks were Philosophical and Creative, so they got more Great People, and cheaper theatres, libraries and universities. No wonder they were clever. 

[Alexandru H.]

I view the Mediterranean civilization as having collapsed in the West a little after Rome fell but last longer in the east.  Western civilization started on the rubble of the older one, and while it borrowed alot from the past it was distinctly different.

That's rather ignorant. The entire history of Western philosophy and ideology can be described as an argument between Aristotle and Plato.

Pretty much. But I would add one thing. After the fall of Rome western civilization pretty much retreated to the monasteries. From these came the future royal counsellors, ministers, intellectuals, academia founders that characterize in such a measure the intellectual Middle Ages. Monasteries had two roles: to preserve Christian literature and knowledge (the works of the great greek and roman theologians), plus to create areas of independence within a realm (the same reason the Egyptian monks invented monasticism in the 3rd century). Judging by these elements, I can't see Western Civilization as something different from the last three centuries of Roman rule, only a local adaptation.

Society was changed with the arrival of barbarians but the intellectual climate wasn't barbarian, there wasn't any attempt to adapt the old culture to the new warlords. Ironically, the rise of secular literature (the first signs of a true and distinct Western culture) can be directly linked to the imitation of Greek/Roman models, but done from the perspective of a city dweller rather than an isolated monastic community.

[Warspite]

Anyway, the answer is simple: Greeks were Philosophical and Creative, so they got more Great People, and cheaper theatres, libraries and universities. No wonder they were clever. 

[Threviel]

That's rather ignorant. The entire history of Western philosophy and ideology can be described as an argument between Aristotle and Plato.

My old pol sci professor used to say that western philosophy is Plato and some footnotes.

[Pat]

I agree it was the spirit of competition and the ideas of Greece that made it great, but why did these arise in Greece and not elsewhere?

Olive tree cultivation is believed to have begun on Crete in Minoan times, and soon spread to the rest of Greece. Olive oil found many uses and soon became a very valueable commodity throughout the ancient mediterranean world. Homer referred to it as "liquid gold". The Greeks kept slaves to harvest and make the oil which was traded throughout the ancient world along extensive trade routes - giving the Greeks an excess of resources and plenty of time to spend on sports and philosophy.

[Martinus]

I agree it was the spirit of competition and the ideas of Greece that made it great, but why did these arise in Greece and not elsewhere?

As I said in my first post in this thread: a seafaring nation means more trade/xenophiliac than others; with limited resources (which gives more incentive to go out and bring it to Greece; and also breeds competition). And since you lack arable land, you don't have a feudal hereditary caste developing either, which means a greater social mobility.

[Admiral Yi]

I agree it was the spirit of competition and the ideas of Greece that made it great, but why did these arise in Greece and not elsewhere?

Victor Hanson makes the argument (in Culture and Carnage?) that one advantage of The West (tm) was the lack of a powerful central government that enjoyed a monopoly on science and technology.  His exemplar was Venetian canon casting and Ottoman crap, but I think it applies to Greeks vs. ROTW as well. 

[Martinus]

I agree it was the spirit of competition and the ideas of Greece that made it great, but why did these arise in Greece and not elsewhere?

Victor Hanson makes the argument (in Culture and Carnage?) that one advantage of The West (tm) was the lack of a powerful central government that enjoyed a monopoly on science and technology.  His exemplar was Venetian canon casting and Ottoman crap, but I think it applies to Greeks vs. ROTW as well.

Yes, but this is all a consequence, not a cause.

[alfred russel]

How do all of you feel about questioning the extent to which the greeks were actually exceptional. Their cultural achievements were admired and preserved by the Romans, while other empires didn't have similar benefactors.

[Admiral Yi]

Yes, but this is all a consequence, not a cause.

A consequence of what?

[Martinus]

Yes, but this is all a consequence, not a cause.

A consequence of what?

Geography and climate, imo. Though it is not a theory I have given a lot of thought.

[Alexandru H.]

How do all of you feel about questioning the extent to which the greeks were actually exceptional. Their cultural achievements were admired and preserved by the Romans, while other empires didn't have similar benefactors.

I would say the Romans are overrated, not the Greeks. The Roman rule destroyed much of the originality of the Greek culture: look at the banquet in "Satyricon": nobody discusses Plato, Homer or other original thinkers; the rich roman patrons are obsessed with mediocre stories, copies of famous sculptures and philosophical discussions that would have made Thales laugh his ass off... nobody in Rome would invest money and patronage for true genius.

The greek great moment was arguably the Hellenistic period. The Roman one is the consummerist age.

[Razgovory]

What's really weird is that we have people who aren't even part of western civilization going on about it.