The second group was a fractuous bunch, given to ascerbic debate and hair
splitting. They raised sophisticated argument to an artform. While they
can never be said to have agreed on much of anything, among the many
theories proposed in the course of their debates was the hypothesis that
the Earth was not flat. A particularly bright aristocrat, while whiling
away his ample free time, made a number of observations which we might do
the honor of calling "experiments". Using the tools of argument which were
common in this second group, he came to the conclusion that the Earth was a
vast sphere and gave a rough estimate of it's diameter.
He had a rough time convincing his peers. The estimated diameter of the
Earth was a number so large that even the most sophisticated mathematicians
of the time were incredulous. No man could ever walk such a distance, no
empire could rule it's expanse. It was a number so vast it was
meaningless.
His experiments were interesting, but one had to trust in his integrity and
precision. Outrageous theories required outrageous amounts of evidence,
and these round Earth theories were like dew covered spider webs:
ephemeral, sophisticated, untrustworthy. Still, the claim made a certian
splash becuase it was so very outrageous. It was discussed and chewed over
and eventually put aside in favor of the next season's topic of debate.
Among these topics were the theories that the Earth travelled around the
sun, and that the universe was constructed of tiny indivisible particles.
Each of these theories waxed and waned as prestigious and brilliant
advocates argued for or against them. Constructing and parsing ever more
erudite arguments became an obsession among the best and brightest in this
second group.
The first group, the Sun-circles-the-flat-Earthers, we remember as the
Romans. They established an
empire which is still awe inspiring millenia after it's fall. In the
process, they conquered the second group we remember as the Greeks. The
Romans found the Greeks amusing; their aristocrats spoke so eloquently and
had such faniciful entertaining stories. These once privelidged people
were enslaved by their new masters as tutors. The Romans adopted what
elements of Greek culture they found entertianing and discarded the rest.
The vast majority of these arguments were lost, but not becuase the Romans
burned them in anger. They were ignored as the irrelevant pontification of
a people that didn't have the strength to protect their own
soverignty...fantasies of fools.
Some of these fragments still survive. Eventually, many Roman leaders were
infected by their slave tutors with a taste for sophistry. They, too,
became addicted to fanciful theories and abstract arguments. In the
processes, they lost a significant distinction:
The difference between "True" and "true-enough"
Reed
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Reed Konsler konsler@ascat.harvard.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------