Do great civilizations produce great men or do great men produce great civilizations?
Civilizations produce men that proclaim things great.
>>1712787
Both, but the former is far more common than the latter
>>1712787
A civilization becomes great when it produces great men.
Who among us can be said to be truly "gr8"?
>>1712796
zero basis for this
>>1712801
this
civilizations become great after great men produce particular things. sometimes it comes down to singular inventions, such as the stirrup or chariot. sometimes it's a lot greater, such as a 3k mile wall.
culture cannot uplift 70 iq savages.
the mistake is thinking that culture has a lifeblood of it's own. it does not. culture is the direct result of smart individuals communing with each other.
Let us suppose we are confronted with a desperate thing—say Pimlico. If we think what is really best for Pimlico we shall find the thread of thought leads to the throne or the mystic and the arbitrary. It is not enough for a man to disapprove of Pimlico: in that case he will merely cut his throat or move to Chelsea. Nor, certainly, is it enough for a man to approve of Pimlico: for then it will remain Pimlico, which would be awful. The only way out of it seems to be for somebody to love Pimlico: to love it with a transcendental tie and without any earthly reason. If there arose a man who loved Pimlico, then Pimlico would rise into ivory towers and golden pinnacles; Pimlico would attire herself as a woman does when she is loved. For decoration is not given to hide horrible things: but to decorate things already adorable. A mother does not give her child a blue bow because he is so ugly without it. A lover does not give a girl a necklace to hide her neck. If men loved Pimlico as mothers love children, arbitrarily, because it is THEIRS, Pimlico in a year or two might be fairer than Florence. Some readers will say that this is a mere fantasy. I answer that this is the actual history of mankind. This, as a fact, is how cities did grow great. Go back to the darkest roots of civilization and you will find them knotted round some sacred stone or encircling some sacred well. People first paid honour to a spot and afterwards gained glory for it. Men did not love Rome because she was great. She was great because they had loved her.
>>1713139
Thus sayeth Chesterton
>>1712787
Men become known as great by doing great things. These great things sometimes culminate in civilizations we later call great.
>>1712787
A NOBLE PEOPLE PRODUCES GREAT PERSONS; GREAT PERSONS PRODUCE A GREAT CIVILIZATION.
>>1712787
According to Rousseau, great men make great civilizations that in turn educate great men, the cycle continues.
No, i am not going to post the exact source. I think it was in "the social contract", first couple of chapters.
>>1713252
>Rousseau
>>1713262
Yeah, what an idiot he was compared to you
It's a positive feedback loop. Ultimately, man created civilization though.
For all my lurking Muslim buddies.
Hope you all had a good Eid and many angels visited you.
>Unironically believing in big man theory
Rome still sends the troops and resources to Gaul.
Any idiot could defeat a bunch of vaguely united tribes when you are in the prime of the Iron age and have a massive population.
Communism rose because Asiatic countries were culturally more communal with autocratic governments, it fell because the autocrats saw they could enrich themselves more if they joined the free market.
There is no big man, just somebody in the right situation who takes advantage of the way the world was going
>>1712787
both. either can also be created by chance.