History Section: Quick Questions Thread

Discuss historical events and information concerning any culture, time, or location in our world (or even the frontier beyond).

Re: History Section: Quick Questions Thread

Unread postby Aygor » Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:24 am

Korin wrote:Was Sun Tzu real? Simple question, so that's why I asked here.

Sima Qian's Shiji and Confucius' Annals of the Spring and Autumns state that Sun Zi/Sun Wu (zi: ChangQing) was a nobleman during the Spring and Autumn era, born either in Wu or in Qi, as the two writings have a different version; both versions agree to say that he was an active general serving king Helu of Wu.

He is likely to have existed, but his role as a general/strategist and as author of "The Art of War" is vastly debated due to having only 2 sources which also disagree on some events.
分久必合,合久必分
Ἀτύφως μὲν λαβεῖν, εὐλύτως δὲ ἀφεῖναι
User avatar
Aygor
Langzhong
 
Posts: 536
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 5:09 pm

Re: History Section: Quick Questions Thread

Unread postby Korin » Wed Mar 13, 2013 7:14 pm

Aygor wrote:
Korin wrote:Was Sun Tzu real? Simple question, so that's why I asked here.

Sima Qian's Shiji and Confucius' Annals of the Spring and Autumns state that Sun Zi/Sun Wu (zi: ChangQing) was a nobleman during the Spring and Autumn era, born either in Wu or in Qi, as the two writings have a different version; both versions agree to say that he was an active general serving king Helu of Wu.

He is likely to have existed, but his role as a general/strategist and as author of "The Art of War" is vastly debated due to having only 2 sources which also disagree on some events.


I had a feeling he was real, but I don't understand why people thought some of the Art of War wasn't? So people would consider him "overrated"? - explain, since I don't quite understand. Also what genre of books would be TAoW?

IMO - I think he was the main author of Art of War but in time, people changed it alot so that's why it's different, mainly cause of translation. It's like saying Luo Guanzhong wasn't author of his fiction novel ROTK, or Chen Shou didn't do ROTK (Records, not Romance), same with Sima Qian or Confucius actually existing. Sun Tzu most likely was the main author of the book(s) but people changed in time since it was probably made long before late Han / Three Kingdoms... stuff made that long ago, it's hard to make it out to be totally 100% real, since books made long ago can be easily changed by people over time.
Soshi.
User avatar
Korin
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 713
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: History Section: Quick Questions Thread

Unread postby Aygor » Wed Mar 13, 2013 10:00 pm

Korin wrote:I had a feeling he was real, but I don't understand why people thought some of the Art of War wasn't? So people would consider him "overrated"? - explain, since I don't quite understand. Also what genre of books would be TAoW?

The Art of War could be considered a manual, as far as genre is concerned.

I am not an expert, but as far as I know, and as I said last post, since the sources about him are few and non consistent in certain aspects his role as author of the book and as a Wu general (and his very existence) are debeated, that might be why someone considers him to be overrated regarding his fame of "creator" of military strategy.
As I said I am no expert and would love to hear an opinion from somene who has a better grasp on the matter than myself.

Korin wrote:It's like saying Luo Guanzhong wasn't author of his fiction novel ROTK, or Chen Shou didn't do ROTK (Records, not Romance), same with Sima Qian or Confucius actually existing..


Well developed by different authors over time, his work has also been completed and corrected by the Mao brothers who fixed several consistency problems.
Just as Sun Zi, his role as an author is debeated and not to be taken for granted.
Also, as Chen Shou collected Zhuge Liang's writings one may inquire that some parts of the Sanguo Zhi may have been compiled from already existing chronicles.
Sima Qian and Confucius' lifes are well documented, differently from Sun Zi's.
分久必合,合久必分
Ἀτύφως μὲν λαβεῖν, εὐλύτως δὲ ἀφεῖναι
User avatar
Aygor
Langzhong
 
Posts: 536
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 5:09 pm

Re: History Section: Quick Questions Thread

Unread postby Korin » Tue Apr 23, 2013 5:12 am

Who was more superior, Han or Ancient Rome?
Soshi.
User avatar
Korin
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 713
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: History Section: Quick Questions Thread

Unread postby Aygor » Tue Apr 23, 2013 5:38 pm

Korin wrote:Who was more superior, Han or Ancient Rome?

None was superior, the two empires were just as different as the people which originated them were.
My personal favourite would be the Roman Empire though.
分久必合,合久必分
Ἀτύφως μὲν λαβεῖν, εὐλύτως δὲ ἀφεῖναι
User avatar
Aygor
Langzhong
 
Posts: 536
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 5:09 pm

Re: History Section: Quick Questions Thread

Unread postby Korin » Wed Apr 24, 2013 7:28 pm

Why did the SS Nazis think that brain size was imporant? It doesn't matter how big your brain is, since the size of your brain doesn't mean anything, you can be smart with the tiniest brain.
Soshi.
User avatar
Korin
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 713
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: History Section: Quick Questions Thread

Unread postby Shikanosuke » Wed Apr 24, 2013 10:10 pm

Korin wrote:Why did the SS Nazis think that brain size was imporant? It doesn't matter how big your brain is, since the size of your brain doesn't mean anything,


You need to do some research on this. There are many studies suggesting a link between increased brain size with intelligence.
User avatar
Shikanosuke
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 4307
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 2:22 am
Location: US

Re: History Section: Quick Questions Thread

Unread postby Korin » Wed Apr 24, 2013 10:21 pm

Shikanosuke wrote:
Korin wrote:Why did the SS Nazis think that brain size was imporant? It doesn't matter how big your brain is, since the size of your brain doesn't mean anything,


You need to do some research on this. There are many studies suggesting a link between increased brain size with intelligence.


Show me because I don't believe as I made a post about this on CHF and the mod I was arguing with agreed with me with this

Neanderthals did indeed have larger brains than modern humans, but it was packaged differently in the skull than ours. You are right that a bigger brain doesn't necessarily equal high intelligence. Whales have the largest brains in the world, but they haven't accomplished what we have.


http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index. ... hal/page-3?

yeah, "studies" - there's been studies about alien life, too. :|
Soshi.
User avatar
Korin
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 713
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: History Section: Quick Questions Thread

Unread postby Shikanosuke » Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:07 pm

Korin wrote:
Show me because I don't believe as I made a post about this on CHF and the mod I was arguing with agreed with me with this


Prof McDaniel found a correlation in his study. Hereis another study from VCU. I found these with a cursory google search. I'm not saying there is a positively proven correlation. I'm merely saying there is debate on the issue so we shouldn't really say one way or the other yet.



yeah, "studies" - there's been studies about alien life, too. :|


No, no there haven't. You can't study something for which there is no body of evidence. That's an insane statement, what would study? It'd be nothing more than speculation at best.
User avatar
Shikanosuke
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 4307
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 2:22 am
Location: US

Re: History Section: Quick Questions Thread

Unread postby Korin » Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:15 pm

Yeah, 'debate' - I just don't believe just because you are 'big brained' - doesn't make you smart. Whales have the biggest brain in the world, but yet they aren't the smartest in the world.

P.S. those are from 2005, and is still relevant, BUT there's probably been counter attacks to those claims, probably.

edit: http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2 ... -more.html (link that I found on CHF)

but the picture on there actually shows they had slightly bigger brains and how it worked differently from us. I can tell it's slightly bigger or my eyes are playing tricks on me. But if you read the page there, you can tell that their brains are made different from us, kinda.
Soshi.
User avatar
Korin
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 713
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 10:50 pm

PreviousNext

Return to World History Deliberation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

Copyright © 2002–2008 Kongming’s Archives. All Rights Reserved