or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › I think this is what JM meant...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

I think this is what JM meant...

post #1 of 15
Thread Starter 
Trying to follow his logic in that other thread about the downfall of civizilation, and I think this is what he was trying to argue: As we have defined civilization, there has to be progress in the arts and culture, among other developments. These cultural developments are not necessary for survival. In life, we are too busy with work and our responsibilities to support or help develop this cultural progress. (Until recent developments in history, would a farmer have the time and leisure to read the latest novels, hear the latest music, etc..) However, at some point in history, we have seen a segmentation of society where you have a leisure class. Only when this leisure class exists, will you have a class of people who can dedicate the time and effort to supporting and encouraging the arts to exist. Anything that helps grow this leisure class will have an effect on the progress of culture, and thus civilization. With immigration, what you have is a group of people who are willing to engage in manual labor. Once, you have all the basic needs of soceity met, can society turn its attention on non-essential matters such as art. The immigrants have filled certain jobs which the natives would have had to work in order for society to function. Now, you've freed up this pool to engage in activities such as the arts, etc...
post #2 of 15
esquire, I agree that that is what he was trying to say, but I think that 1. he was trying to remember the basic ideas from some high school sociology course that he probrably wasn't paying attention in 2. he was trying to add in ideas that he picked up at home about the importance of "gentry" - of hereditary nobility and possibly about how western europe didn't qualify as civillization. agreed, civillization comes about only when there is the ability to produce a surplus of food suffitient to allow some of the population to specialize in labor that is not directly related to food production. typically, this is considered the classes that are warriors, burocrats, priests, scholars, builders, artists etc. it doens't mean that they are specifically sloan rangers
post #3 of 15
Ok, globetrotter, frankly, you are a joke. It is bureaucrats, not burocrats. Probably, not probably. And are you trying to say Sloane Ranger, because a)\tI don't have a clue what a Sloan is, let alone a Sloane Ranger. ( I do however know that the term Sloane, in common language refers to someone of Chelsea) b)\tThe assumption I would come to is that a Sloane Ranger is some sort of derogatory term for the Chelsea set, in reference to their Range Rovers??? c)\tA Sloane Ranger is commonly a reference to the upper-middle class. NOT the aristocracy, gentry, or leisure class. Who questioned whose intellect? Moreover, in reference to your points: 1. No. You are wrong; however, never did I claim to be an expert on sociology. However, I am quite sure I have a better understanding of what the word civilization means, than you. 2. Read through the aforementioned thread a few more times, I am sure you will come to understand it. Esquire, you have it spot on. I apologise if it was somewhat difficult to follow, but at the end of a long day at work, and constantly having to switch between French, English, German, Italian, and Arabic, coherence is the last of my worries.
post #4 of 15
Quote:
coherence is the last of my worries.
obviously
post #5 of 15
Keep it under control guys.
post #6 of 15
[Oh, never mind; I'll be nice.]
post #7 of 15
Quote:
Ok, globetrotter, frankly, you are a joke. It is bureaucrats, not burocrats. Probably, not probably. And are you trying to say Sloane Ranger, because a)\tI don't have a clue what a Sloan is, let alone a Sloane Ranger. ( I do however know that the term Sloane, in common language refers to someone of Chelsea) b)\tThe assumption I would come to is that a Sloane Ranger is some sort of derogatory term for the Chelsea set, in reference to their Range Rovers??? c)\tA Sloane Ranger is commonly a reference to the upper-middle class. NOT the aristocracy, gentry, or leisure class. Who questioned whose intellect? Moreover, in reference to your points: 1. No. You are wrong; however, never did I claim to be an expert on sociology. However, I am quite sure I have a better understanding of what the word civilization means, than you. 2. Read through the aforementioned thread a few more times, I am sure you will come to understand it. Esquire, you have it spot on. I apologise if it was somewhat difficult to follow, but at the end of a long day at work, and constantly having to switch between French, English, German, Italian, and Arabic, coherence is the last of my worries.
Attacking someone's spelling is pretty stupid. That only happens when you're bankrupt of things to say. Grow up. Listen to what he has to say, don't get caught up with details like that, it really doesn't matter.
post #8 of 15
I have plenty of other things to say, but they would expose his stupidity to such an extent that it would be insulting. Therefore, I refrain from that. I was also serious about Sloane; I truly do not understand from where he has conjured this term up.
post #9 of 15
Quote:
Quote:
(jmswentworth @ April 28 2005,17:09) coherence is the last of my worries.
obviously
Well done.
post #10 of 15
Quote:
I have plenty of other things to say, but they would expose his stupidity to such an extent that it would be insulting. Therefore, I refrain from that. I was also serious about Sloane; I truly do not understand from where he has conjured this term up.
and yet, you claim to have been educated at Harrow.
post #11 of 15
Quote:
Quote:
(jmswentworth @ April 29 2005,11:39) I have plenty of other things to say, but they would expose his stupidity to such an extent that it would be insulting. Therefore, I refrain from that. I was also serious about Sloane; I truly do not understand from where he has conjured this term up.
and yet, you claim to have been educated at Harrow.
Very observant of you.
post #12 of 15
Seriously, everyone cool it.
post #13 of 15
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by globetrotter,April 29 2005,11:43
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmswentworth,April 29 2005,11:39
I have plenty of other things to say, but they would expose his stupidity to such an extent that it would be insulting. Therefore, I refrain from that. I was also serious about Sloane; I truly do not understand from where he has conjured this term up.
and yet, you claim to have been educated at Harrow.
Very observant of you.
The loan ranger was an American pop culture icon, like the Marlboro Man. It doesn't even remotely resemble your elaborate socio economic extrapolations. It was a typo.
post #14 of 15
the term sloan ranger referes to a group of brits that are more or less equal, in a way, to american preppies - with a lot of differences, but refering to the same type of social grouping. this is a term that may not be commonly in usage among sloan rangers, but wouldn't be entirely unknown, either. it would be difficult to imagine that a 31 year old british banker, who was educated at harrow, would not have never heard or read the term - he might not like it, but he would not be unfamilar with it. oh, and I am now cooling it, as requested.
post #15 of 15
Quote:
the term sloan ranger referes to a group of brits that are more or less equal, in a way, to american preppies - with a lot of differences, but refering to the same type of social grouping. this is a term that may not be commonly in usage among sloan rangers, but wouldn't be entirely unknown, either. it would be difficult to imagine that a 31 year old british banker, who was educated at harrow, would not have never heard or read the term - he might not like it, but he would not be unfamilar with it. oh, and I am now cooling it, as requested.
I guess I'm wrong, never heard of that before.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Chat
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › I think this is what JM meant...