• burgersc12@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    34
    ·
    2 months ago

    I mean that’s our interpretation of a translation of something said thousands of years ago. But if they want to they can choose to believe what they want. IMO an ancient island sinking due to gods is no different than saying “high tech civ nuked itself out of existense” but with less context. I’m not saying this really happened, but its not like its impossible, just extraordinarily unlikely to be true.

    • Andonyx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I’m not sure if you’re arguing that it being fictional is an interpretation or that its demise from the ire of the Gods is an interpretation.

      If it’s the former, you are incorrect. The single best primary source being his own protege and student Aristotle who also makes it clear the whole thing is didactic invention. (There are debates that some individual events within the story are inspired by actual events in Egypt and Athens, but its existence is never presented as fact. The entire idea that this was some historical account came mostly from a judge writing his own history books in the 19th century.)

      This is also not debatable due to translation. It’s Plato. The best scholars of all time in both language and history have studied this, literally for centuries. There is not any serious or scholarly debate about his intentions with this story. And multiple, equally capable translations of Aristotle corroborate that.

      If you’re talking about the destruction of Atlantis, it’s been too long for me to argue that specifically, but the idea that it was divine punishment is the prevailing view of that story.

      • burgersc12@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        34
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Even if all the scholars think it wasn’t literal doesn’t mean he didn’t mean it literally, that could just be how we have been interpreting it

        • Confused_Emus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          22
          ·
          2 months ago

          Plato wasn’t writing in some long-dead obscure language that we only have vague translations of, it was Greek. It’s not a matter of interpretation.

          • burgersc12@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            20
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            You can’t even intrepret my English correctly, how can we assume we know what was going through some dudes head several thousand years ago?? Also I’d like to see where Plato wrote “I made it all up about Atlantis” cause AFAIK we just assumed this is the case

            • in4aPenny@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              You can’t even intrepret my English correctly

              Communication isn’t what you say, it’s what the other person hears.

    • 100_kg_90_de_belin @feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      2 months ago

      Our interpretation of a translation

      My brother in Saint Jerome, the best minds in history have been nitpicking Plato’s works for centuries. There are libraries filled with commentaries of his works. Of course, they may be all wrong /s

      PS: Saint Jerome is the patron of translator.

      • burgersc12@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        2 months ago

        And for centuries we thought Troy was a myth made up by Homer until we found that shit. The fact that people act like we can make no mistakes and know everything already pisses me off. Way to kill the intrigue of ancient life.

          • burgersc12@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            2 months ago

            But like that’s at least interesting, more so than “we crawled out of the woods ~10k years ago, invented everything, end of story” which feels… like it can’t be true to me. We have been functionally the same for ~200k years, we didn’t do anything in 190k years??

            • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              2 months ago

              it’s basically just that we needed writing to really start building up stockpiles of knowledge and build upon things, and we didn’t start really permanently writing things down until we needed bookkeeping for tax reasons, which wasn’t necessary until we fucked up by inventing civilization.

              Like seriously, everything we know in the modern world may very well stem from our ancestors in the fertile crescent wanting to brew beer and bake bread, it’s so fucking funny.

              • burgersc12@mander.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                2 months ago

                Well our best guess now place farming starting like 12k years ago, which falls in line with the timeframe of Atlantis. Like I get what you’re saying but it doesn’t necessarily follow that there was definitely no civilization before the fertile crescent, its just very unlikely and extremely difficult to prove.