The God of the Machine - Tranche #3

Posted by mshupe 2 years ago to History
11 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

Chapter One, Excerpt 3 of 3
The Energy Circuit of the Classical World

Briefly sketched, the method by which Rome swept the seas verges on the burlesque. Ignorant of naval maneuvers, and with no chance to learn, the Romans simply transformed an encounter at sea into something like a land battle as possible and fought it their own way. Between victories, the Romans generally wrecked their own fleets by inexpert seamanship. The expense bore heavily on Rome.

Nor did Rome resort to state absolutism on the plea of emergency; there was no seizure of private means. It should be noted that though Roman military discipline strict, and esteem appropriate to conduct in the field, a Roman general, or his troops, stood in less fear of penalties from their own government than the Punic commanders. On the other hand, if the secret of the development and longevity of the Roman empire inhered in military aptitude, the conquering regime of Napoleon should have struck root and flourished for an equal duration.

“If Rome in due time forced the locks of the Atlantic, there was a reason. Still, it was a Greek who went through alone. Moreover, the personal character of Pytheas is so relevant that fiction could scarcely invent him. He was a scientist as well as a merchant adventurer. Though admitted to have made valuable contributions to the science of astronomy, he was accused of lying about what he saw with his own eyes, by men who had never been there at all. What should be marked is the form of opposition he was obliged to encounter.”


All Comments

  • Posted by j_IR1776wg 2 years ago in reply to this comment.
    A depressing thought - that a "...brutal wilderness unsullied by political institutions..." can never again be replicated on Earth. This means that a new America based on Individual Rights must await widespread space travel.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by 2 years ago in reply to this comment.
    Yes, and I was thinking more along the lines of Brad Thompson's great book, America's Revolutionary Mind.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by VetteGuy 2 years ago in reply to this comment.
    Spoiler alert! We'll get to a big part of the reason later in the book when we get to Education. Some of the issues Paterson brings up sound like they are out of today's headlines, but they were well established in 1943, when the book was written.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by 2 years ago in reply to this comment.
    An optimistic thought - a unique confluence of brutal wilderness unsullied by political institutions integrated with the newly discovered ethics of individualism and rights protected by objective law. For the first time in two thousand years a laboratory for natural law and human nature to create a revolution of the mind that became kinetic in 1776. America proved man's heroic nature. Fortunes built without force, only the power of ideas.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by j_IR1776wg 2 years ago in reply to this comment.
    A depressing thought - that the only reason for the existence of the U.S.A. was a unique confluence of Enlightenment minds coupled with a widespread fear and loathing of the British Empire among the populace. The majority convinced that a new government could not possible be worse than the existing one.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by 2 years ago in reply to this comment.
    I think the reason comes down to human nature, specifically the nature of consciousness. Primary to that: free will; to think is volitional. Every level of mental focus requires more effort. The default is the automated responses of the subconscious, which are also programmed by ideas formulated in the conscious mind. Because it is always easier to react than to think long-term, most people resist the effort of rational thought and action. In summary, for people with low self-esteem, independence of intellect and action is to be feared; it requires the effort of virtues like integrity and productiveness. Its easier to be a moocher and rely on force over mind.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by j_IR1776wg 2 years ago
    Does History move in a straight line? Or does it rise and fall as the tide? I wrote here years ago:

    “Mankind has vacillated for untold centuries between Objectivity (Aristotle's Logic and Galileo's experimental method, primarily) and Subjectivity (Protagoras' "Man is the measure of all things, of things that are, that they are, of things that are not, that they are not.")”

    The last major outbreak of Objectivity called the Age of Enlightenment in the 17th and 18th Centuries which peaked with The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution began to ebb soon after the Constitution was presented to the world. America today (2023) is totally run by Subjectivists. I agree with your assertion that there has never been a government created on the principles of individualism.

    The question is why haven’t men been able to take the foundation provided by those two documents and moved closer to a government based on the principles of individualism? Why have we sunk back into the muck of Subjectivism?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by 2 years ago
    Paragraph 1 - Challenge the traditional methods and replace them with means that fit the objective.
    Paragraph 2 - Objective rewards and penalties are founded in what can be controlled.
    Paragraph 3 - Objective evidence is frequently dismissed or punished but wins in the long-run.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo