1. Tim
   Member

   I know that this is a wonderfully generous free online course and thus one should perhaps operate with an understanding of there being some imperfect information, but there are so many ambiguities, discrepancies and errors in the first video of the history module that I have to comment on it. I also noticed some very poor writing in both the subtitling and text, and Ben has clearly chosen the wrong emphasis and cadence in several sentences, which adds to the confusion, I won't say anything further about the grammar and syntax employed, but I would urge you to review this module.

   1. What does Ben mean when he states that the sites of Stonehenge and Newgrange were 'proven' to have connections to the civilisations of Myenea, Ancient Greece and Egypt? Is he referring to a common preoccupation with astronomy and the movement of celestial bodies? Is it accurate to call this a connection? Who has proved this? How?

   2. First of all, Pythagoras was born in the 570s BCE, not around 500BCE, that's 70 years difference and the fact that you have a slide with the accurate date on it visible whilst Ben is talking only serves to highlight this discrepancy. Also, what on earth is Ben talking about with claiming that Pythagoras' theory of light one based on 'feelers' travelling from the eye to the object? He has this exactly wrong. Empedocles was the first one who articulated some rudimentary concept of 'emission theory', wherein light is cast from the eye to the object. Pythagoras was in fact an early proponent of what became 'intro-mission theory', which postulated that objects cast off images which were then captured by the eyes. This is not even a mild error, this is just flat out wrong.

   3. Aristotle was born after Mo Ti died. They were certainly not born around the same time. There wasn't even any chronological overlap. This would be the same as me saying that Galileo and Newton were born at around the same time. Also, I know this is a brief clip and so brevity is the idea here, but it's also not strictly accurate to describe Aristotle's conception of light as being in the shape of waves, he did have an influence on later optical theoreticians who developed wave theory, but he was personally more invested in the idea of an invisible ether through which light moved.

   4. 'Wayang' is an Indonesian word! Not an Indian one! 'Indian' isn't even a language!

   I don't want to bombard you with criticisms, on the whole I think this is a wonderful idea, but I think it would do your course a great service to go back and review your sources. If you rewrite your text and ensure that the clip you put up is not only factually accurate, but is also easily understood and well-written, I believe you would have a much stronger module. :)

   Posted 11 months ago #

2. boris
   Administrator

   Dear Tim,
   thank you very much for your comments and digging so deep into the subject. It is a pleasure to have such an educated and intelligent audience as you.
   First of all, please allow me to clarify some things. Ben Sheppee is not the author, but the narrator of the course.
   The video you are talking about was created by the Professor of the University Rey Juan Carlos (Madrid) Dr. Blanca Regina Pérez-Bustamante Yábar, who is widely accepted as the leading European historian and researcher on audiovisual arts and culture.
   As we were (and are) trying our best to provide our students with the best lecturers, specialists and resources possible we have asked her to prepare this course - which is, in fact, a short compilation of the course she reads at the University Rey Juan Carlos combined with the thesis of her dissertation.
   So, any possible inconsistency or mistakes with historical and scientific data should be attributed to her, not Ben Sheppee.

   Having say that, I would agree that many points of view in this module are arguable, but not entirely unbiased.
   While I will be sending your entry to her for the comment, as an editor of the site I would like to reply on your remarks too -
   1) surely talking about such connections to academic archeologists may be risky and similar to waving a red cloth in front of a bull. Nevertheless, there are actually some curious facts which can be called connections - or can hardly be explained otherwise.
   We are not talking here only about the method and established practice of astronomical observations. For instance, how else the Mycenaean daggers of peculiar shape that are carved on some of the Stonehenge stones could be explained? Such occurrences and links are plenty. I will provide just a few -
   http://www.ancient-wisdom.co.uk/greecemycenae.htm
   http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sitchin/whentimebegan/whentimebegan02.htm
   Surely one can not call them proper academic sources, but the bare facts are hard to ignore.
   2) The wrong attribution of Pythagoras date of birth was corrected by us in the slide as you could see.
   Talking about "feelers" - let me quote words that for centuries are attributed to Pythagoras himself: "light consists of rays that acting like feelers, travel in straight lines from the eye to the object, and the sensation of sight is obtained when these rays touch the object".
   Well, it's difficult to deny that his theory is based on this observation and he did, indeed, mention feelers.
   Talking about Empedocles - it's slightly off the topic, and on the top of that Empedocles hardly could be "the first one" - simply because he was born nearly a century after Pythagoras.
   3) Aristotle was born 10 years after Mo Ti died, it's true. So it's not exactly a contemporary - but keeping in mind slow pace of scientific advancements in the ancient times and that they were born so far from each other in the civilizations that were not connected, I guess we can say that they were born around the same time.
   And the example with Galileo and Newton is different, even if the difference is roughly the same - 70-80 years, as Newton most probably was aware of Galileo's research.
   I can absolutely agree with you about Aristotle investing in the idea of invisible ether. Still, in his works he concluded that "light travels in a manner similar to waves in the ocean", thus putting the foundation for the wave theory.
   4) You are absolutely right. "Wayang" is an Indonesian word. This is what our video, subtitles and the slide say. I guess the narrator didn't pronounce it correctly the second time.

   And finally, I would like to mention that despite mistakes and glitches I do believe that it gives an overview of the process of the light culture and human thought development. Possibly such a grasp and understanding are more important, then little questionable knots - which will always be there if we are talking about things so remote.

   I hope my reply clarifies the issue a bit and hope you will stay with us.
   Thank you once again - and the very best wishes from Moscow,
   Boris

   Posted 11 months ago #

3. vlad
   Administrator

   Hi Tim,

   many thanks for your comments. being the "founding father" )) of audiovisualacademy.com i and my team have tried to do our best to provide correct information in the areas we're covering.
   i apologize for any imperfections and your feedback is very much appreciated as it'll help us to become more professional.

   cheers

   Vlad

   Posted 11 months ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.