Why is greek philosophy and culture deified and overrated?
Is it simply because the (now) hegemonic politic entities threw them under a spotlight and used it as some kind of justificative to explain how did certain things reached them?
Indian civilization for instance is more impressive when it comes to scientific, cultural, architectural, technological and pretty much each single metric compared to greeks or romans or whatever, but rarely deified, and one must say it is because greeks inspired someone but most of these inspirations were half-baked or simply lost and later fan-fictioned into existence.
>Indian civilization for instance
did you install a toilet in your dwelling yet pajeet?
>Indian civilization for instance is more impressive when it comes to scientific, cultural, architectural, technological and pretty much each single metric compared to greeks or romans or whatever, but rarely deified, and one must say it is because greeks inspired someone but most of these inspirations were half-baked or simply lost and later fan-fictioned into existence.
You are one of the MANY subhumans on here who keeps making threads about Indian culture just to make Indians look bad. Nobody says that Indians were in outer space while Greeks were in mudhuts. Nobody says that Indians were doing XYZ in 5000 BCE while the rest of the world was chucking spears and waiting for Indians to bless them with knowledge. You have to be a very fringe moron or a blatant troll to say something like this with no elaboration or examples
You're almost as insufferable as the false flagging out of India tards who also have the same goal in mind.
you want people like this to reply, because it's predictable and causes more replies and bumps to the thread.
Greeks and romans were definitely living in mudhuts while indus valley civilization flourished.Y
>indus valley
>civilization
>not a single written record left by them
Pick one, pajeet
Minoans had civilization before you
Indus valley was an autoctonus and self-told civilization, writting from greeks was imported from the levant, a previously developed by egyptians trough the linear process of simplification of hieroglyphs, indus valley developed its own native hieroglyphs
More impressive obviously.
>no one knows what few writings of the IVC say or even IF they're writings at all
Enjoy your classless hippy civilization
>doesn't know about Indus Script
The only reason we know what the hell the Egyptians wrote is because of the Rosetta Stone; are you going to suggest they had no history or civilization before we discovered how to translate their written language?
NTA but you're moronic.
Sure pajeet
Because the massive temple walls of text and first paper like material and ink could have ever been mistaken as not writing
Indians definitely say this shit. You’re just one that realizes it’s fricking moronic and embarrassing to watch your countrymen try and belittle civilizations from thousands of years ago to make themselves feel better about being conquered by the British.
>Nobody says that Indians were doing XYZ in 5000 BCE while the rest of the world was chucking spears and waiting for Indians to bless them with knowledge.
I dunno man. Most normoid Indians are seething nationalists of the worst caliber. Just because Indians on this website tend to be more rational and self-aware on average doesn't make them the majority.
it's just westacuck wewuzing, all philosophy is trash but gayreek is especially mid
It's midwit's delight. In ancient greece itself most philosophers were irrelevant sxhizos
We know more about Indian history from Greco-Roman sources themselves than Indian ones. That should tell you something.
Yeah people take history for granted and assume every civilization/people sat down and wrote a nice clean narrative for us to just pick up and follow when in reality the reason we even know some ethnic groups even existed was because a Greek historian wrote about them off hand.
Even if Greek copied Indians they still added much more material and architecture, and spread it to the world.
it's called the west, it's like you were born yesterday
>the west
The west pretty much ceased to exist in the year 600 then you had a bit of a frickery related to the vatican until a significant part of it became protestant, realistically there is not much of a tie between them let alone a reason to be so fixated in putting any of them both into a spotlight
Because Greek philosophy was adopted by the Christians and Muslims who proceeded to refine and elaborate it and control most of the globe
>Indian civilization for instance is more impressive when it comes to scientific, cultural, architectural, technological and pretty much each single metric compared to greeks or romans or whatever
True but consider how much smaller Greece and Italy are compared to India
Also they were much better in sculpture and had history
>True
Not true. Greco-Roman tech was insanely advanced and Greece and Rome were the wealthiest per capita civilizations on Earth until probably the Renaissance or the high Middle Ages when successor nations began to overtake them
>Greco-Roman tech was insanely advanced
Not true, specially not compared to several of their contemporaries, they had a golden ages but so did india, persia, china, egypt, carthage and whatever big agricultural civilization you can imagine.
Did India have indoor central heating, primitive steam engines, and computers?
>primitive steam engines, and computers
No. And neither did greeks or romans
>bu-but we recently found this scraps and leftlovers of a toy that was never given any use and definitely did not changed anything on scale not for them nor for anyon
That's not an argument dumbass, if you have a "primitive steam engine" you use for nothing of value or do not inspire and gives rise to anu further tech is as worthless as that electric battery found in persia that never advanced further. In the same way there is evidence of numeral uses on 20 KYA in some bones on africa but never becane a widespread thus relevant system.
Indians were better builders, better mathematiciand and had more sophisticated ways for longer time and with more prevalence than greeks and romans, not just 1000 years, but 4000, they were the first people calculating the planetary orbits with precision and the inventors of numerals, their ancient structures are far more impressive and their tech is too.
Yet no ones puts them in a spotlight
Greeks gave us conic sections, euclidean geometry and much
India only accomplishment was numbers
It's not true
Indians themselves translated Greek books and wrote about how much their owed to Yavanas (Greeks/Ionians), or how Yavanas should be acknowledged for their knowledge despite being barbarians
Alexandria was the cultural and scientific capital of the world for half a millenium, and even Indians translated science books of Greeks through Egypt
Also, Indians didn't know how to write when many classical Greek works were produced.
Indians forgot how to write from the Indus Valley collapse until writing was reintroduced in India by the Achaemenid Empire. Writing for Indians is mostly something they did the last 2000 years, not before.
Elements by Euclid was still used by westerners a century ago, it was the most long lasting constantly used scientific treaty, long lasting because everything in it is correct, it didn't get outdated, when non euclidian geometry was developed, geometry as we knew it simply became euclidian geometry
Like, simply read more.
As late as some decades ago a new field of maths was created based on the works of Diophantus (Diophantine geometry)
what is more interesting about the deification of greek and rome is the precedent, because it is obviously aimed to make of them great enough to credit them for anything while leaving "the muslims" outside, it's more of a justificative-larp than anything.
greco-romans on themselves weren't a great deal, they had a oglden age for a brief period but overall weren't much better than their contemporaries and definitely not trough the ages and are, hardly, the origin of much.
when westerners need to find a excuse for "where did these numbers, or alphabet, or pillars" came they just say "greeks", thus, avoiding to give credit to those that civilized greeks such as mesopotamians or levantines, even egyptians and persians
>Is it simply because the (now) hegemonic politic entities threw them under a spotlight and used it as some kind of justificative to explain how did certain things reached them?
It all comes from the Renaissance which is basically the beginning of the modernity. During that time europeans rediscovered the classical works and built their civilization on them. Just think about it, agnosticism, rationalism, atomism, democracy, humanism, and all of these ideas which were predominant during the classical period of Greece are the same ideas which shaped the modern western civilization.
I am at the history university from my city and during the class the teacher was full of biases against other civilizations which confronted the greeks, a colleague of mine who is a fan of the persians pointed this out and the teacher was just repeating this ideological propaganda that the greeks had muh democracy and shit.
>Greek Civilization is over glorified
True, this probably has it roots in it being the founding myth of Weste...
>Indian civilization for instance is more impressive when it comes to scientific, cultural, architectural, technological and pretty much each single metric compared to greeks or romans or whatever
Come on Pajeet, it's time to get off IQfy and back to the call center
Honestly i don't care, i'm glad they're putting greeco-romans out of focus and giving a spotlight to other foreign civilizations like indian, egyptian, persian, etc.
All of them are equally foreign after all.