I read somewhere that the sequel would be about five minutes long, about the length of the human retaliation from space.
In any case, wouldn't it be more interesting to see how a people connected in the way that the Na'vi are could be turned against each other? Or am I just hopelessly cynical?
Oh I think the reaction was similar to anywhere else. Because Navajo's are basically just like normal people and always have been. My main point is that the idea of the noble savage is condescending, a result of mythologizing a people who you have very little contact with.
I'm not sure it matters one way or another if the indigenous people in question are African, Aboriginal, or Native American. Colonialism had its way with all these people, and Cameron's allegory could apply to each.
Furthermore, I feel like something like ID will do more to undermine people’s faith than any scientific theory because it implies that the existence of a creator IS falsifiable by the scientific method when it certainly is not.
This is a very good point, and something I've been trying to say regarding the culture wars more broadly and this subject more narrowly. I do believe it will have a backlash in the long run, and this gets to the heart of that very thing.
What would you do to stop the Somali pirates?
— Ron
Whoa, Ron. Let’s back up for a second. That’s a mighty large assumption you’re making, that I’d even want to stop Somali piracy. Have you ever been to Somalia? It sucks: anarchy, grinding poverty, famine. Nothing to do for fun but to chew qat and eat your pets. So stop Somali piracy? If the good people of Somalia can make their bleak lives just a little more bearable by downloading music without paying for it, I say we let them.
"Creationist tendencies" made me laugh. I suppose if one is to be religious and one's religion includes the idea of a God/creator one is bound to have such tendencies. Thanks for the props!
But really, don't you think schools start running into some problems when they start asking kids to scientifically prove the existence of God? Don't you think there would be some serious backlash if ID were taught and then science teachers made it their goal to show how completely un-scientific it was and then suddenly you have kids coming home showing their parents how an intelligent designer is in fact not verifiable through scientific methodology?
No worries, Dan. I think there are many who believe sincerely that ID or creationism etc. are legitimate. I don't think the movement pushing ID is sincere, however. Either way, I try to treat the issue and those debating it with a modicum of respect.
My post never presupposed that ID was a legitimate, sincere approach to a scientific question. Where does it do that? I have said before and continue to assert that ID is often little more than a front for the culture wars. It's not scientific nor does it help answer (for me at least) theological questions. I find it to be both insulting to my reason and my religion.
Oh the Na'vi could be druids or whatever - they are symbolic of our impression of what people who live closer to nature must be like in their purest form. They are a shining example. That they seemed more like native Americans than Picts or Celts is really beside the point.
Nope. No parallel at all. I chose to take multi-cultural lit classes in college because I liked the people teaching them. I wasn't a lit-student (creative writing was my thing) so it wasn't that central to what I was doing anyways. In any case, I had the option to take any number of different literature classes and took some of them, just focused on the multi-cultural ones. If I had been in the sciences I could have chosen from all sorts of different science classes - but not ID because it isn't science. The school here that teaches 1/3 of its material in Navajo is also a choice for parents who can choose to send their children to all-English schools as well. Either way, they don't teach the Navajo creation myths in their biology classes.
The “need” for a designer doesn’t come from theological necessity but the evidence itself, and the shakiness of neo-Darwinism in the light of modern genetics.
I didn't say the "need for a designer." I said this particular concept of design betrayed a tendency toward (or need for) anthropomorphizing God.
Well if Cameron had made his Na'vi druids then sure - but the point is that it is an allegory to our modern sense of the noble savage. We have many fine romance writers who will wax poetic about the Celts and such already.
Actually, he's only antagonistic enough to push the humans around a little bit. He's certainly no real leader - that requires the white guy. And he's what, one guy out of how many? That's supposed to be enough to add depth?
Yes the only thing more humorous is the people who apparently are tired of the pontificating on the movie still bothering to write silly comments about it on posts they resent having had to read.
Yeah but it was multi-cultural literature in a literature class. If I'd been in a science class I'd have wanted it to be about science, not some too-afraid-to-call-itself-religion religious material. If I want religion I'll go to mass.
Yeah but people always say that, don't they? Whenever a movie or a book or whatever generates buzz, sparks conversation, etc. then somebody starts complaining that it's just a movie/book/whatever. The point is that it sparks conversation. The conversation is what is important, not the movie necessarily....
I was moving all weekend but caught the end of this game over dinner. My favorite thing about the Cardinals is their ability to make football even more interesting than usual (at least in the last couple years).
I'm pretty underwhelmed by this argument. It's hardly faith in science that leads to eugenics. It's bad science, if anything. It's bending science to the will of sentiment that is at the heart of this problem. The main problem with global warming types is their faith in political solutions to the problem. It's not that they are wrong to look to science for answers on the climate.
On “On noble savages and the humanity of the ‘other’”
I read somewhere that the sequel would be about five minutes long, about the length of the human retaliation from space.
In any case, wouldn't it be more interesting to see how a people connected in the way that the Na'vi are could be turned against each other? Or am I just hopelessly cynical?
"
Oh I think the reaction was similar to anywhere else. Because Navajo's are basically just like normal people and always have been. My main point is that the idea of the noble savage is condescending, a result of mythologizing a people who you have very little contact with.
"
I'm not sure it matters one way or another if the indigenous people in question are African, Aboriginal, or Native American. Colonialism had its way with all these people, and Cameron's allegory could apply to each.
"
Hey my review last week likened Avatar to Ferngully! I imagine that comparison was drawn a number of times, actually....
On “evolution & metaphysics”
This is a very good point, and something I've been trying to say regarding the culture wars more broadly and this subject more narrowly. I do believe it will have a backlash in the long run, and this gets to the heart of that very thing.
On “One Daily Caller feature I am genuinely excited about”
I love the opening one:
On “evolution & metaphysics”
"Creationist tendencies" made me laugh. I suppose if one is to be religious and one's religion includes the idea of a God/creator one is bound to have such tendencies. Thanks for the props!
"
Et tu, Jaybird?
But really, don't you think schools start running into some problems when they start asking kids to scientifically prove the existence of God? Don't you think there would be some serious backlash if ID were taught and then science teachers made it their goal to show how completely un-scientific it was and then suddenly you have kids coming home showing their parents how an intelligent designer is in fact not verifiable through scientific methodology?
"
No worries, Dan. I think there are many who believe sincerely that ID or creationism etc. are legitimate. I don't think the movement pushing ID is sincere, however. Either way, I try to treat the issue and those debating it with a modicum of respect.
"
My post never presupposed that ID was a legitimate, sincere approach to a scientific question. Where does it do that? I have said before and continue to assert that ID is often little more than a front for the culture wars. It's not scientific nor does it help answer (for me at least) theological questions. I find it to be both insulting to my reason and my religion.
"
I kind of like the gremlin theory, myself.
On “On noble savages and the humanity of the ‘other’”
Oh the Na'vi could be druids or whatever - they are symbolic of our impression of what people who live closer to nature must be like in their purest form. They are a shining example. That they seemed more like native Americans than Picts or Celts is really beside the point.
"
Nope. No parallel at all. I chose to take multi-cultural lit classes in college because I liked the people teaching them. I wasn't a lit-student (creative writing was my thing) so it wasn't that central to what I was doing anyways. In any case, I had the option to take any number of different literature classes and took some of them, just focused on the multi-cultural ones. If I had been in the sciences I could have chosen from all sorts of different science classes - but not ID because it isn't science. The school here that teaches 1/3 of its material in Navajo is also a choice for parents who can choose to send their children to all-English schools as well. Either way, they don't teach the Navajo creation myths in their biology classes.
On “evolution & metaphysics”
Thanks, RTod.
"
I didn't say the "need for a designer." I said this particular concept of design betrayed a tendency toward (or need for) anthropomorphizing God.
On “On noble savages and the humanity of the ‘other’”
Well if Cameron had made his Na'vi druids then sure - but the point is that it is an allegory to our modern sense of the noble savage. We have many fine romance writers who will wax poetic about the Celts and such already.
"
They were smoking something, Jaybird.
"
That's like half yuppie half hippie right?
"
Actually, he's only antagonistic enough to push the humans around a little bit. He's certainly no real leader - that requires the white guy. And he's what, one guy out of how many? That's supposed to be enough to add depth?
"
Yes the only thing more humorous is the people who apparently are tired of the pontificating on the movie still bothering to write silly comments about it on posts they resent having had to read.
"
Yeah but it was multi-cultural literature in a literature class. If I'd been in a science class I'd have wanted it to be about science, not some too-afraid-to-call-itself-religion religious material. If I want religion I'll go to mass.
"
Yeah but people always say that, don't they? Whenever a movie or a book or whatever generates buzz, sparks conversation, etc. then somebody starts complaining that it's just a movie/book/whatever. The point is that it sparks conversation. The conversation is what is important, not the movie necessarily....
On “Arizona-GBay”
Suck it, Green Bay.
I was moving all weekend but caught the end of this game over dinner. My favorite thing about the Cardinals is their ability to make football even more interesting than usual (at least in the last couple years).
On “Roger Ebert, Ben Stein, and the culture war”
I'm pretty underwhelmed by this argument. It's hardly faith in science that leads to eugenics. It's bad science, if anything. It's bending science to the will of sentiment that is at the heart of this problem. The main problem with global warming types is their faith in political solutions to the problem. It's not that they are wrong to look to science for answers on the climate.
"
Kyle - comparing where a historical movement is similar to its modern equivalent leaves out all the differences.
The National Review opposed interracial marriage at one point. They no longer do, nor should they be held accountable now for having done so then.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.