All The More Reason

The title of this piece in LeMonde roughly translates into Creationist Offensive Directed At French Schools. It also says in the article that the guy who wrote the book which is being used to popularize creationism has his own site called the lie of evolution. Sigh. In these situations, it’s never “The mistakes within evolution”, or “Possible contradictions within evolution.” One must go for the biggest thunder, and nothing pulls on the ear faster than “The lie…” or “The real truth about…”. I believe the rhetoric used here is not only interesting to note, but also a real clue as to the amount of respect the writers have to critical thinking.

J.S.

Interesting interview with Samuel Huntington here, via aldaily, that covers some of his thoughts on Islam and 21st century politics. Here’s one choice quote:

NPQ | Many tout Turkey as a bridge between the Western world and the Muslim world. Do you see that?

Huntington | I wouldn’t put a great deal of emphasis on that. Turkey has its own interests and, historically, Turkey conquered most of the Arab world, and the Arabs had to fight wars of liberation to free themselves from the Turks. That’s in the past, of course, and doesn’t necessarily shape what is going to happen. But it’s there in people’s memories.

Jonathan Smith

Latin I know none. I had to even use an english–latin translator to create this title.

In order to stoke the fires of curiosity for latin, I give here a quote from a great book to read at a coffee shop or train station: The Book of Tells by Peter Collett.

The ancient Romans used the term super cilium, literally ‘raised eyebrows’, to refer to the facial expression where the eyebrows are raised and the eyes are slightly closed. This is, of course, not the gesture of submission – it’s the exact opposite, an expression of haughtiness or, to borrow from the Latin, superciliousness. The fact that this gesture and the facial gesture for submission are distinguished on the basis of whether the eyes are in repose or slightly closed shows how very complex facial expressions can be (p.61 – 62).

I understand how someone could make the argument that knowing how to speak Latin is too demanding. However, after reading a paragraph like the previous one, a rudimentary understanding of Latin strikes me as not a supercilious undertaking in the slightest.

I’ve included a link below to an extremely smug looking “roman”. Also, compare these two images to see how subtle the difference is between the offensive and defensive.

Jonathan Smith