I would agree that the definition works; however, how does one judge a state of decline? A decline from what?
I often hear of historians denouncing the Roman empire as decadent and that it was this same decadence that was the downfall of this empire. Does this mean that the Roman empire strayed away from its moral standards? OK, but my reply would be (perhaps in absolute ignorance): what moral standards?
I guess the better question for this thread would have been to ask people to identify moral standards? Can a moral standard be identified? Does it even exist?
From what I have read from some of the stoics and historians like Tacitus many of the Romans had a very strict code involving for lack of better words ruthlessness and insensitivity. They thought that feelings of sympathy were a sign of mental illness. Of course that conveniently fit into their economic and political system. Although it’s hard to say which came first.
Anyway, I recall Tacitus while on a rather sinister mission to feel out the German people for invasion reported that he felt the Germans where much more moral and loyal to each other than the people of Rome. I guess that implies that to at least a few of them strong personal ethics were viewed as being good.
On anther note, I would say that decline is a literal decline. It is when something starts to go from that which uplifts health, happiness, and feelings of community to something that promotes illness, sadness, and separation.
This could be judged based on the entire sphere of activities that touch all known people. This prevents one from pointing out the group that gets it’s help and happiness from killing others, as they promote general decline.
Anyway, anything can be in decline and that doesn’t mean that it can’t get out of decline. It’s just a matter of doing an analysis on it. However, this requires making the dreaded JUDGEMENT! Dahdahdaaaaa!
The benefit of knowing that something is in decline is that is if important things like freedom go into decline then one may not even be able to make such judgments.
Was that Dumanis talking or was I just having a nice dream? Shyster grabbing Moonoq at the wrong end… this is seriously going to sink Detrop and Gamer for a while. Well done. I’m not sure if I contaste with your preoccupation with conceptual playaround (spinozian legacy?) - decadence is a word “too much”? I think I’m onto something here: which word to the metaphysicist isn’t “too much”? The frequency in which thinkers who have a general distaste in the sciences talk about quantitive concepts such as “too much” never fails to delight me. The fact that no metaphysical talkers hiterto have managed to put me into a knowledge box of perfection is a little disappointing - I too desire certainty and ease, a world devoid of quantum physics and matrix algebra . I sincerily wish that all television narratives crowned best thinkers ever and sceintific fiction writers nominated in stockholme. What is decadence? I can’t tell you all - “too much” - prefer to leave that to the king of decandece that was Nietzsche. what I can tell you is that the decadent of the highest caliber swims amist the sea of intellectual creations.
The Romans started demanding more bread and circuses. They stopped being industrious, hard-working individuals. Rome became filthy, and so did many of its citizens during its decline. Look at how Nero and Caligula behaved. Totally self-gratifying and not interested in the Empire. Some historians argue that the sewar system was made of iron, and the people began suffering from poisoning, and the ability to bear children, and those born often had mental and physical defects.
In some waya, we are suffering from pollution, a form of poisoning, and there are many crack and alcohol syndrome children born today. Also, recently, our leaders only appear to care regarding themselves and their friends, not the citizens.
Hum, depends on the civilization. Years ago, we had similar moral standards as the Middle-East, publically executing starving children for stealing bread, disemboweling dissitents and traitors. Polygamy is allowed in some cultures, illegal in others.
[.quote]
[/quote]
Hum, what culture during this time really promoted sympathy? If you have information that I do not know about, please tell me. Remember, I said CULTURE, not the individual.
They had a strong sense of loyalty to their TRIBE, not culture, and the Teutonics continually fought among themselves. Sound familiar.
How many in the West have a strong sense of community? A sense of nationalism, but not a sense of community. How many of you know your neighbors well? I moved here a month ago, and know one neighbor, and frankly do not have the time to visit with others in this apartment block. I lived for eighteen years at my last address, I knew my neighbors, but not well, was not inclined to, as I tend to become bored with idle chit-chat regarding the best laundry soap,. Then there was the religious nut across the street who continually told me what a “good Christian” she is. My hackles went up big time. She found books a waste of time, but loved her afternoon suds, while the children were at school. Ick.
But you are so great a judgement.
[quoteThe benefit of knowing that something is in decline is that is if important things like freedom go into decline then one may not even be able to make such judgments.[/quote]
Judgements based on knowledge and thought are fine, but judgements based on superficial knowlege are not the best.
