Greece shocks markets with referendum on austerity

Started by garbon, November 01, 2011, 10:47:43 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

grumbler

Quote from: fahdiz on November 03, 2011, 12:40:38 PM
Augurs read bird flight patterns, not entrails. :nerd:
Roman augers read the livers of sacrificial animals (the auspices) as well as bird flights, meteorological and astrological phenomenon, etc . :nerd:
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

Malthus

Quote from: grumbler on November 03, 2011, 01:59:53 PM
Quote from: fahdiz on November 03, 2011, 12:40:38 PM
Augurs read bird flight patterns, not entrails. :nerd:
Roman augers read the livers of sacrificial animals (the auspices) as well as bird flights, meteorological and astrological phenomenon, etc . :nerd:

What about the livers of Eurocrats and Bankers? Could they read those?  :hmm:
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane—Marcus Aurelius

fhdz

Quote from: grumbler on November 03, 2011, 01:59:53 PM
Quote from: fahdiz on November 03, 2011, 12:40:38 PM
Augurs read bird flight patterns, not entrails. :nerd:
Roman augers read the livers of sacrificial animals (the auspices) as well as bird flights, meteorological and astrological phenomenon, etc . :nerd:

Actually a priest who read entrails was called a "haruspex". Augury explicitly refers to bird flights. It's definitely true that "augury" has come to refer colloquially to any number of divination techniques, but augury back then had a specific meaning.
and the horse you rode in on

HVC

Being lazy is bad; unless you still get what you want, then it's called "patience".
Hubris must be punished. Severely.

Jacob


frunk

Most drill bits probably won't have an opinion.

fhdz

Quote from: Malthus on November 03, 2011, 02:06:32 PM
What about the livers of Eurocrats and Bankers? Could they read those?  :hmm:

It's unknown, but perhaps we should try on a few.
and the horse you rode in on

Richard Hakluyt

I believe fahdiz is correct, though referring to haruspices in general conversation is likely to confuse, hence the extension of meaning for augurs.

Martinus

Quote from: Valmy on November 03, 2011, 01:36:29 PM
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on November 03, 2011, 12:54:50 PM
:huh:  I am bewildered.  Do you have to be the opposite of the descriptive term you're using?  If I describe someone as an athlete, do I have to be "some sort of couch potato or something"?

I mean I get the 19th century idea of a class who make money based on their ownership of capitol rather than labor or aristocratic rentiers.  But in a modern economy, particularly where such a huge percentage work in service industries, what does that refer to?  Because clearly Marty is not an owner of a factory with workers making money off their labor for him to alienate and exploit.  Does it refer to people who are above a certain education level, or who own a certain amount of property, or make a certain level of wages, or what exactly?

Yeah. By the 19th century standards, I'm working class, like almost everyone on this board.

Tamas

Quote from: Martinus on November 04, 2011, 03:53:10 AM
Quote from: Valmy on November 03, 2011, 01:36:29 PM
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on November 03, 2011, 12:54:50 PM
:huh:  I am bewildered.  Do you have to be the opposite of the descriptive term you're using?  If I describe someone as an athlete, do I have to be "some sort of couch potato or something"?

I mean I get the 19th century idea of a class who make money based on their ownership of capitol rather than labor or aristocratic rentiers.  But in a modern economy, particularly where such a huge percentage work in service industries, what does that refer to?  Because clearly Marty is not an owner of a factory with workers making money off their labor for him to alienate and exploit.  Does it refer to people who are above a certain education level, or who own a certain amount of property, or make a certain level of wages, or what exactly?

Yeah. By the 19th century standards, I'm working class, like almost everyone on this board.

:lmfao:

Martinus

Quote from: Tamas on November 04, 2011, 03:58:38 AM:lmfao:

What? Marx defined the working class as individuals who sell their labor power for wages and who do not own the means of production. That's me, along with almost everyone else on this board.

I also do not own enough to live off the capital yet.

For someone raised in the Eastern Bloc, you seem to be woefully ignorant about terminology.

Tamas

Quote from: Martinus on November 04, 2011, 04:06:12 AM
Quote from: Tamas on November 04, 2011, 03:58:38 AM:lmfao:

What? Marx defined the working class as individuals who sell their labor power for wages and who do not own the means of production. That's me, along with almost everyone else on this board.

I also do not own enough to live off the capital yet.

For someone raised in the Eastern Bloc, you seem to be woefully ignorant about terminology.

Just because you manage to fit it into an arbitarily choosed, grossly outdated definition, it still sounds absurd.

Martinus

Quote from: Tamas on November 04, 2011, 04:12:47 AM
Quote from: Martinus on November 04, 2011, 04:06:12 AM
Quote from: Tamas on November 04, 2011, 03:58:38 AM:lmfao:

What? Marx defined the working class as individuals who sell their labor power for wages and who do not own the means of production. That's me, along with almost everyone else on this board.

I also do not own enough to live off the capital yet.

For someone raised in the Eastern Bloc, you seem to be woefully ignorant about terminology.

Just because you manage to fit it into an arbitarily choosed, grossly outdated definition, it still sounds absurd.

What part of "by the 19th century standards" in my post did you miss? Once again you show yourself incapable of understanding written English.

Tamas

Quote from: Martinus on November 04, 2011, 04:19:42 AM
Quote from: Tamas on November 04, 2011, 04:12:47 AM
Quote from: Martinus on November 04, 2011, 04:06:12 AM
Quote from: Tamas on November 04, 2011, 03:58:38 AM:lmfao:

What? Marx defined the working class as individuals who sell their labor power for wages and who do not own the means of production. That's me, along with almost everyone else on this board.

I also do not own enough to live off the capital yet.

For someone raised in the Eastern Bloc, you seem to be woefully ignorant about terminology.

Just because you manage to fit it into an arbitarily choosed, grossly outdated definition, it still sounds absurd.

What part of "by the 19th century standards" in my post did you miss? Once again you show yourself incapable of understanding written English.

I understood it. Still hillarious.

grumbler

Quote from: fahdiz on November 03, 2011, 03:03:29 PM
Actually a priest who read entrails was called a "haruspex". Augury explicitly refers to bird flights. It's definitely true that "augury" has come to refer colloquially to any number of divination techniques, but augury back then had a specific meaning.
The Romans had two priestly colleges;  The College of Augers, and the College of Pontifexes.  One member of each was required to start any official meeting; the auger made and divined the sacrifice (though had to consult "the book" when doing so, as taking the auspices was a legal function), and then the pontifex made the contract with the gods that would have them recognize the meeting.
There was no "College of Haruspices."  All "official" taking of the auspices was done by the augers.

It is true that augery originally referred strictly to bird behavior (not just flights, but noises as well), but by the mid and late republic, Augurs had come to use to any number of divination techniques.  When conducting major official meetings, this often meant animal sacrifice because the magistrates couldn't count on sufficient birds being around to provide an augury, and the auspices had to be consulted before the meeting was legal.  Plus, the animal could be sacrificed after having provided the auspices.  That was considered to bring good fortune in the enterprise.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!