This is not going to discuss how small bands of Spaniards were able to defeat much larger Aztec and Inca armies and conquer these great New World civilizations. This has been discussed often. (One interesting modern idea is given in Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs, and Steel.) Rather, I am going to look at some of the motives of the Conquistadors.
According to the written accounts they have left us—mostly written by priests in their band—the Spanish Conquistadors who conquered the New World's great civilizations (notably the Aztec and Inca but also the Maya) found, in the Aztec capital city of Tenochtitlan, a city bigger and more grand than anything they knew in Europe.
Yet they had no scruples about conquering and destroying these civilizations, destroying their monuments (often using the stone from Aztec temples to build their Christian cathedrals), and slaughtering or enslaving the people.
If, on the one hand, they (perhaps grudgingly) admitted respect for the material cultures they were conquering, how were they able to rationalize the attitudes shown by their destroying these cultures, burning their books, and so forth?
I think the main answer lies in the fact that they were able to regard these peoples as pagans and "heathens." Anyone who was not Christian of course would be so regarded. The Conquest was all about God, glory, and gold: converting the peoples encountered (that was why priests were brought along); the personal glory of the soldier/adventurer and of the King; and the gold that would be sent back to Spain as booty.
As to the role of conversion as a motive, or of the non-Christianness of the native peoples: Because of Spain's rivalry with Portugal for trade and control of new territories, the Papacy endorsed Spain's control of the lands Columbus had discovered with the understanding that Spain would spread Christianity into the new lands.
As I have seen the encounter of the Spanish with the native ruler (I think this was Atahualpa, the Inca ruler) depicted: when he was told that the book he was presented with—a Bible—was the word of the Spaniards' god, he said he did not hear it speaking to him at all. (Of course he had no notion of writing.) Thus he threw it to the ground in disgust, and that was a pretext for an attack by the Spaniards. (I admit that one probably should not take a TV depiction as accurate history.)
Historians may argue which of the three motives was most important. And, as a footnote, I am not a historian. Maybe historians know more about all this than I do (and, of course, the medium of the blog permits anyone to post comments on what I write). Still, I feel that history is at least as much about interpretation as about "facts." Certainly plenty of scholarly argumentation and conflict goes on. Even if there are unambiguous, established "facts," it's not always clear what factors were most important in bringing down an empire, for example, or causing a war, or in fact any of the big events of history.
Copyright © 2010 by Richard Stein
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
What's Changed in the World. Part 4 - How People Spend Their Time; and the Sexual Revolution
People used to spend their time listening to the radio. My family, when I was a kid and we had not yet gotten a TV (we were in fact the third family on our block to get a TV, and my aunt and grandparents already had them) used to sit around the radio in the evening, in a darkened room—just as though it was a TV. Maybe we were rehearsing for TV.
Nowadays boys of a certain age skateboard and play video games. Plus, of course, the time that girls as well as boys—and adults—spend on computers, with social networking sites, chat rooms, and so forth.
So there have been changes in how people spend their time. Whether these things mean far-reaching changes to society—well, that will be the subject of articles, books, and dissertations for a long time.
Another big change to society has been the so-called "sexual revolution." I was an adolescent just before some of the consequences of the invention of the birth control pill really began to be felt. So "in my day," young men and women did not have sex as much as young people do now. A horny young man who was going out on a date, and who thought that he might be able to have intercourse with his date, wanted to be prepared by having a "rubber" in his wallet. But they were not easy to come by. Unlike today, they were not on display out in the open in stores. They could only be gotten from a drugstore, and they were kept behind the counter—so you had to ask for them. If it was even legal for minors to buy condoms (and I frankly don't remember), young potential condom buyers would have been reluctant to try to buy them. A far change from today, when they might be handed out in high schools!
Copyright (c) 2010 by Richard Stein
Nowadays boys of a certain age skateboard and play video games. Plus, of course, the time that girls as well as boys—and adults—spend on computers, with social networking sites, chat rooms, and so forth.
So there have been changes in how people spend their time. Whether these things mean far-reaching changes to society—well, that will be the subject of articles, books, and dissertations for a long time.
Another big change to society has been the so-called "sexual revolution." I was an adolescent just before some of the consequences of the invention of the birth control pill really began to be felt. So "in my day," young men and women did not have sex as much as young people do now. A horny young man who was going out on a date, and who thought that he might be able to have intercourse with his date, wanted to be prepared by having a "rubber" in his wallet. But they were not easy to come by. Unlike today, they were not on display out in the open in stores. They could only be gotten from a drugstore, and they were kept behind the counter—so you had to ask for them. If it was even legal for minors to buy condoms (and I frankly don't remember), young potential condom buyers would have been reluctant to try to buy them. A far change from today, when they might be handed out in high schools!
Copyright (c) 2010 by Richard Stein
Monday, August 23, 2010
My Thoughts on the "Ground Zero Mosque"
I won't belabor the fact that the proposed building is not simply a mosque (although it does contain worship space), nor that within the same radius of Ground Zero there are lots of possibly not very savory businesses.
Muslim believers and worshippers have every right to build their building. There are a number of constitutionally-guaranteed freedoms involved, not the least being the freedom of religion. It is simply wrong for anyone to try to prevent their doing what they propose.
That said, I have to say that, for them to wish to do what they are doing—certainly with full knowledge of Americans' feelings about the area and what happened there—is insensitive at best and provocative at worst.
So I am saying, they should not want to do this, but if they press ahead anyway, we have no right to stop them.
Here is a link to a very good article on the subject, with which I agree:
http://www.aolnews.com/opinion/article/opinion-whos-being-insensitive-about-the-ground-zero-mosque/19606975
copyright (c) 2010 by Richard Stein
Muslim believers and worshippers have every right to build their building. There are a number of constitutionally-guaranteed freedoms involved, not the least being the freedom of religion. It is simply wrong for anyone to try to prevent their doing what they propose.
That said, I have to say that, for them to wish to do what they are doing—certainly with full knowledge of Americans' feelings about the area and what happened there—is insensitive at best and provocative at worst.
So I am saying, they should not want to do this, but if they press ahead anyway, we have no right to stop them.
Here is a link to a very good article on the subject, with which I agree:
http://www.aolnews.com/opinion/article/opinion-whos-being-insensitive-about-the-ground-zero-mosque/19606975
copyright (c) 2010 by Richard Stein
Saturday, August 21, 2010
What's Changed in the World. Part 3 - Science
In some fields of science, progress may have been frustratingly slow—both to the general pubic and to the professionals in those fields. For example, it is still not possible to predict volcanic eruptions or tornadoes--and warnings of imminent tornado strikes are all too short. Basically, warnings are issued only once a tornado has actually formed and been spotted.
However, it is in the biomedical fields that we have seen astonishing progress. With many miraculous new drugs and new surgical procedures, such as transplants, many illnesses and medical conditions are no longer death sentences. Patients with certain types of cancer now have much longer life expectancies. Patients with HIV/AIDS can now often live long with the virus. Generally, people are living long lives, now, with many illnesses and conditions that would have shortened their lives a few decades ago.
There are entirely new kinds of medical imaging (CT scans and MRI); and, the sequencing of the human genome has almost unlimited possibilities for associating diseases with specific genes and maybe also permitting new treatments.
I can't comment too much on the physical sciences except maybe astronomy, which has intersected my life at several junctures. Astronomy has made a lot of progress with incredible new tools such as the Hubble Space Telescope.
The field of computers, both computer hardware and software, has probably done more to transform our lives than any other technical field; but I've covered a lot of this in the posting on changes to communication.
Copyright © 2010 by Richard Stein
However, it is in the biomedical fields that we have seen astonishing progress. With many miraculous new drugs and new surgical procedures, such as transplants, many illnesses and medical conditions are no longer death sentences. Patients with certain types of cancer now have much longer life expectancies. Patients with HIV/AIDS can now often live long with the virus. Generally, people are living long lives, now, with many illnesses and conditions that would have shortened their lives a few decades ago.
There are entirely new kinds of medical imaging (CT scans and MRI); and, the sequencing of the human genome has almost unlimited possibilities for associating diseases with specific genes and maybe also permitting new treatments.
I can't comment too much on the physical sciences except maybe astronomy, which has intersected my life at several junctures. Astronomy has made a lot of progress with incredible new tools such as the Hubble Space Telescope.
The field of computers, both computer hardware and software, has probably done more to transform our lives than any other technical field; but I've covered a lot of this in the posting on changes to communication.
Copyright © 2010 by Richard Stein
Thursday, August 19, 2010
What's Changed in the World. Part 2 - Communication
I think that it's in communications that the greatest changes have occurred in the past few decades.
Of course the computer has been a transforming invention. Once upon a time, computers were very large and only businesses, government, and scientific research establishments were able to have them.
Then, in the early 1980s we began to see small home computers. Then Apple, with its computers that had a graphical user interface, and then later MicroSoft's Windows, began to make computers sufficiently user-friendly that everyone could learn to use one. Now many universities require incoming students to have a computer, and even high school students consider having a computer to be necessary for doing their homework. As of 2010, it is estimated that there is nearly one computer for every resident of the United States and Canada.*
Computers and the Internet have changed so much of our lives: how we date, how we shop, and much more. Interpersonal relations have been transformed by computers, in particular by the Internet and "social networking" web sites like Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter. Cell phones, which rely on what is essentially computer technology, have also transformed our lives. I just read that many young people have never used a phone with a cord ("except at my grandparents'"). And who writes letters nowadays? Anything written and mailed is scorned as "snail mail" and ridiculously slow and old-fashioned—all this to the detriment of the post office, which has seen mail volume drop because of the use of email, not to mention the FAX machine--which now has been around for more than 30 years and thus is not thought of as an innovation anymore.
We have new ways of spending our time: using social networking sites, sending and reading email, texting, and so forth. And, as I wrote in an earlier post, so many of us now seem very committed to doing one or more of these activities at the same time as something else: for example, talking on the cell phone while driving, shopping, etc.
The cell phone looks like one of those cases where fact has caught up with science fiction. Anyone old enough to remember the comic strip Dick Tracy might remember that Dick had a "two-way wrist radio" (and then, later, a "two-way wrist TV"). Then the "Star Trek" characters on TV had their "communicators." These fictional wireless communication devices now look like nothing but anticipations of the cell phone.
In an emergency, you no longer have to (as in a scene from an old movie) knock on the door of some strangers when you are stuck on a stormy night. You no longer have to look for a phone booth. You no longer have to ask anyone to use the phone in their home or place of business. Pay phones are disappearing, being removed from public places. They are going the way of the buggy whip.
Think of how the cell phone has transformed our lives. No one is ever out of touch anymore—with their bosses, their families, their friends. (I personally think that being unreachable has its good points; and I guess that someone who wanted to be out of touch could be: we can always shut those cell phones off. But I doubt that very many people do.)
And, I could go on about the "smart phone," and all the marvelous things that has made possible. But I don't own one so maybe I'm not aware of the most important and transformative things that they have made possible.
With the spread of wireless phones, many individuals and families no longer have a phone with a cord. And, does anybody remember telegrams? They were used to sending messages of congratulations when I was a kid, but earlier they were a primary method of communication. They were probably particularly useful for overseas communications because international phone calls were very, very expensive. Telegrams were not fast, by today's standards, but they were faster than what we now call "snail mail" letters. Now gone and mostly forgotten. Western Union, the telegraph and telegram company, survived into more recent times by "wiring" money.
* http://www.technewsreview.com.au/article.php?article=9967
Note added 8/30: With so many amazing apps for the smart phone appearing daily, I think this is going to be a truly transformative technology.
Copyright © 2010 by Richard Stein
Of course the computer has been a transforming invention. Once upon a time, computers were very large and only businesses, government, and scientific research establishments were able to have them.
Then, in the early 1980s we began to see small home computers. Then Apple, with its computers that had a graphical user interface, and then later MicroSoft's Windows, began to make computers sufficiently user-friendly that everyone could learn to use one. Now many universities require incoming students to have a computer, and even high school students consider having a computer to be necessary for doing their homework. As of 2010, it is estimated that there is nearly one computer for every resident of the United States and Canada.*
Computers and the Internet have changed so much of our lives: how we date, how we shop, and much more. Interpersonal relations have been transformed by computers, in particular by the Internet and "social networking" web sites like Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter. Cell phones, which rely on what is essentially computer technology, have also transformed our lives. I just read that many young people have never used a phone with a cord ("except at my grandparents'"). And who writes letters nowadays? Anything written and mailed is scorned as "snail mail" and ridiculously slow and old-fashioned—all this to the detriment of the post office, which has seen mail volume drop because of the use of email, not to mention the FAX machine--which now has been around for more than 30 years and thus is not thought of as an innovation anymore.
We have new ways of spending our time: using social networking sites, sending and reading email, texting, and so forth. And, as I wrote in an earlier post, so many of us now seem very committed to doing one or more of these activities at the same time as something else: for example, talking on the cell phone while driving, shopping, etc.
The cell phone looks like one of those cases where fact has caught up with science fiction. Anyone old enough to remember the comic strip Dick Tracy might remember that Dick had a "two-way wrist radio" (and then, later, a "two-way wrist TV"). Then the "Star Trek" characters on TV had their "communicators." These fictional wireless communication devices now look like nothing but anticipations of the cell phone.
In an emergency, you no longer have to (as in a scene from an old movie) knock on the door of some strangers when you are stuck on a stormy night. You no longer have to look for a phone booth. You no longer have to ask anyone to use the phone in their home or place of business. Pay phones are disappearing, being removed from public places. They are going the way of the buggy whip.
Think of how the cell phone has transformed our lives. No one is ever out of touch anymore—with their bosses, their families, their friends. (I personally think that being unreachable has its good points; and I guess that someone who wanted to be out of touch could be: we can always shut those cell phones off. But I doubt that very many people do.)
And, I could go on about the "smart phone," and all the marvelous things that has made possible. But I don't own one so maybe I'm not aware of the most important and transformative things that they have made possible.
With the spread of wireless phones, many individuals and families no longer have a phone with a cord. And, does anybody remember telegrams? They were used to sending messages of congratulations when I was a kid, but earlier they were a primary method of communication. They were probably particularly useful for overseas communications because international phone calls were very, very expensive. Telegrams were not fast, by today's standards, but they were faster than what we now call "snail mail" letters. Now gone and mostly forgotten. Western Union, the telegraph and telegram company, survived into more recent times by "wiring" money.
* http://www.technewsreview.com.au/article.php?article=9967
Note added 8/30: With so many amazing apps for the smart phone appearing daily, I think this is going to be a truly transformative technology.
Copyright © 2010 by Richard Stein
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
What's Changed in the World. Part 1 - Transportation
This is the first of a series of blog postings on how the world has changed, mainly within my lifetime (sixty-some years), or over a somewhat longer period, since the 1930s. I was made to think about how things are changed or are different by watching, on DVD, an operetta by Kurt Weill called "Street Scene" and set in 1930s New York.
1. Transportation
In transportation, while some things have changed, some things really have not changed a lot. We still have cars, and they run on gas, a few hybrid cars notwithstanding and the imminent coming of plug-in electric cars notwithstanding. Nor would I radically qualify what I say for the existence of a few vehicles that run on propane, biodiesel, or whatever.
And we still have buses, trucks, and subways that are not basically changed (although the city of Chicago boasts of running several hundred hybrid buses). No, I won't say transportation has changed radically until we see vehicles powered by radical new fuels, or lots of high-speed or maglev trains in the U.S.
True, cars have changed in that they've gotten much more sophisticated, with more systems onboard for convenience and safety; and they are more powerful and thus faster. (A big 1930s Buick might have had only 80 horsepower or so, whereas now auto makers are bringing out models with 500 and 600 horsepower. I'm not sure I understand why.)
At one point—from the 1920s through, say, the '50s--long car trips were fostered by famous long highways like Route 66, which ran from Chicago to Los Angeles. A whole new car-centered culture sprang up, with the innovation of "motor hotels" (later to be called motels) and other roadside businesses that sprang up along the great road to serve the masses of travelers. Route 66 and its ilk were made obsolete by the Interstate Highway system, preached, if you will, by President Eisenhower much as medieval popes preached the Crusades, but not completed for a couple decades. (The system as originally envisioned was completed in 1992 but Interstate highways continue to be built. Under another view, the final leg of the original system is being completed right now.*)
Planes, I must admit, made a qualitative leap when passenger aircraft started to be jet-powered. (Jets can fly faster, higher, and smoother.) But what has changed much more than the available modes of transportation is their utilization. Fifty, sixty, seventy years ago people commonly rode on trains (just look at old movies). Today many people have never ridden on a train. When Amtrak took over the operation of passenger rail service in America in 1971, it dropped half of the existing trains; many smaller towns, and the small cities where I spent my youth—Scranton, PA and Wilkes-Barre, PA—no longer had any train service.
The flip side of people not relying on trains for their travel was of course the increase in air travel. And not only did planes replace trains for overland travel, planes replaced ships even more completely for trans-oceanic travel. It's still possible to cross the Atlantic on a ship, but our everyday travel—for business and almost as completely for pleasure—now is done on planes. If speed is your criterion, it's no contest: you'll take the plane rather than a ship. And with trains as compared with planes, it's understandable that not many people care to spend two or three days on a train for those longer trips.
Another thing once associated with trains but now long gone is Railway Express. Individuals and businesses could use it to send parcels. Think of it as the predecessor of UPS. I sent a big steamer trunk with my clothes to my new address when I was starting grad school.
___________
*Wikipedia, s.v. Amtrak.
Copyright © 2010 by Richard Stein
1. Transportation
In transportation, while some things have changed, some things really have not changed a lot. We still have cars, and they run on gas, a few hybrid cars notwithstanding and the imminent coming of plug-in electric cars notwithstanding. Nor would I radically qualify what I say for the existence of a few vehicles that run on propane, biodiesel, or whatever.
And we still have buses, trucks, and subways that are not basically changed (although the city of Chicago boasts of running several hundred hybrid buses). No, I won't say transportation has changed radically until we see vehicles powered by radical new fuels, or lots of high-speed or maglev trains in the U.S.
True, cars have changed in that they've gotten much more sophisticated, with more systems onboard for convenience and safety; and they are more powerful and thus faster. (A big 1930s Buick might have had only 80 horsepower or so, whereas now auto makers are bringing out models with 500 and 600 horsepower. I'm not sure I understand why.)
At one point—from the 1920s through, say, the '50s--long car trips were fostered by famous long highways like Route 66, which ran from Chicago to Los Angeles. A whole new car-centered culture sprang up, with the innovation of "motor hotels" (later to be called motels) and other roadside businesses that sprang up along the great road to serve the masses of travelers. Route 66 and its ilk were made obsolete by the Interstate Highway system, preached, if you will, by President Eisenhower much as medieval popes preached the Crusades, but not completed for a couple decades. (The system as originally envisioned was completed in 1992 but Interstate highways continue to be built. Under another view, the final leg of the original system is being completed right now.*)
Planes, I must admit, made a qualitative leap when passenger aircraft started to be jet-powered. (Jets can fly faster, higher, and smoother.) But what has changed much more than the available modes of transportation is their utilization. Fifty, sixty, seventy years ago people commonly rode on trains (just look at old movies). Today many people have never ridden on a train. When Amtrak took over the operation of passenger rail service in America in 1971, it dropped half of the existing trains; many smaller towns, and the small cities where I spent my youth—Scranton, PA and Wilkes-Barre, PA—no longer had any train service.
The flip side of people not relying on trains for their travel was of course the increase in air travel. And not only did planes replace trains for overland travel, planes replaced ships even more completely for trans-oceanic travel. It's still possible to cross the Atlantic on a ship, but our everyday travel—for business and almost as completely for pleasure—now is done on planes. If speed is your criterion, it's no contest: you'll take the plane rather than a ship. And with trains as compared with planes, it's understandable that not many people care to spend two or three days on a train for those longer trips.
Another thing once associated with trains but now long gone is Railway Express. Individuals and businesses could use it to send parcels. Think of it as the predecessor of UPS. I sent a big steamer trunk with my clothes to my new address when I was starting grad school.
___________
*Wikipedia, s.v. Amtrak.
Copyright © 2010 by Richard Stein
Friday, August 6, 2010
More on SUVs
An article on AOL Autos, on the new (2011) Ford Explorer SUV reminds us of all the news that surrounded the Explorer a decade ago, when there were many rollover accidents involving Explorers and resulting in some 150 deaths.
While the tires (Firestone) supplied on the Explorers got a lot of the blame, the NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) stated, after its investigations into the accidents, that driver error may have been to blame.
The fact is, taller vehicles such as SUVs (all things being equal) have a higher center of gravity and will be more prone to roll over. That's simple and inexorable physics. Presumably many of the people who own and drive SUVs are not prepared to take account of their vehicles' handling characteristics, particularly the vehicles' handling characteristics in an emergency situation.
These owners and drivers are not properly aware that they are not driving cars. They think they've got cars but with the ability to absolutely stick to the road on snow and ice. Many have learned, to their sorrow, that that's not the case.
Also, too many drivers of SUVs—as with other vehicles—can be seen driving while talking on cell phones, maybe making left turns with one hand on the wheel. I am sure any driving teacher tries to tell student drivers that a vehicle is properly controlled only with both hands on the wheel. I think that, particularly in the case of SUVs, you have a perhaps three-ton lethal weapon which is not being properly controlled.
So, given drivers' ignorance of SUVs' characteristics or their disregard of those vehicle characteristics, I think there is a job of education that needs to be done. As I said, some of the larger SUVs weigh three tons. They can be deadly weapons, given the harm that can occur to a smaller vehicle when it is hit by a monster SUV, and need to be driven with more responsibility.
Copyright © 2010 by Richard Stein
While the tires (Firestone) supplied on the Explorers got a lot of the blame, the NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) stated, after its investigations into the accidents, that driver error may have been to blame.
The fact is, taller vehicles such as SUVs (all things being equal) have a higher center of gravity and will be more prone to roll over. That's simple and inexorable physics. Presumably many of the people who own and drive SUVs are not prepared to take account of their vehicles' handling characteristics, particularly the vehicles' handling characteristics in an emergency situation.
These owners and drivers are not properly aware that they are not driving cars. They think they've got cars but with the ability to absolutely stick to the road on snow and ice. Many have learned, to their sorrow, that that's not the case.
Also, too many drivers of SUVs—as with other vehicles—can be seen driving while talking on cell phones, maybe making left turns with one hand on the wheel. I am sure any driving teacher tries to tell student drivers that a vehicle is properly controlled only with both hands on the wheel. I think that, particularly in the case of SUVs, you have a perhaps three-ton lethal weapon which is not being properly controlled.
So, given drivers' ignorance of SUVs' characteristics or their disregard of those vehicle characteristics, I think there is a job of education that needs to be done. As I said, some of the larger SUVs weigh three tons. They can be deadly weapons, given the harm that can occur to a smaller vehicle when it is hit by a monster SUV, and need to be driven with more responsibility.
Copyright © 2010 by Richard Stein
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Old and Nutty*
If you're a bit nutty, you hear voices.
If you're old, you don't hear clearly.
If you're old and nutty, you hear voices but you don't know what they're saying.
_____
*Okay, not a "PC" term.
Copyright (c) 2010 by Richard Stein
If you're old, you don't hear clearly.
If you're old and nutty, you hear voices but you don't know what they're saying.
_____
*Okay, not a "PC" term.
Copyright (c) 2010 by Richard Stein
Childproof Caps and Containers
You know those childproof containers and childproof caps that you find nowadays on everything from A to Z? I call them adult-proof. I don't know whether children can open them but adults sure can't. (I wouldn't be surprised if children can open them more easily than adults, because children are clever little devils. Just look at how much better children are with computers than their parents or grandparents.)
Today I was trying to open a bottle of toilet-bowl cleaner. I think that I broke the childproof cap mechanism, causing the contents to leak out around the neck and all over the outside of the bottle and onto my skin—which can't be good for it. Well, that's the price I must pay for ensuring the safety of the zero children in my household.
Copyright (c) 2010 by Richard Stein
Today I was trying to open a bottle of toilet-bowl cleaner. I think that I broke the childproof cap mechanism, causing the contents to leak out around the neck and all over the outside of the bottle and onto my skin—which can't be good for it. Well, that's the price I must pay for ensuring the safety of the zero children in my household.
Copyright (c) 2010 by Richard Stein
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
