Greek and Roman Classics
|Line 2:||Line 2:|
Latest revision as of 15:31, 6 May 2012
Draft in progress
Just as too many babies are overcrowding our planet, and too many blogs, too many articles and too many books are overcrowding our minds. In almost all of them, what is new is not true, and what is true is not new, particularly as far as Classical Studies goes, but also in Religious Studies. In both cases, part of the reason is that the necessary ancient languages are no longer mastered by most, but only by increasingly small percentages of university graduates. Both fields have become sort of backwaters into which few brilliant scholars enter. Those who do, being increasingly women, racial and ethnic minorities, Marxists of various sorts, and certainly anti-elitists of every type, disapprove of both the ancient Greeks and Romans and the the Abrahamic religions.
Click here for a complete list of articles on Williamapercy.com in the category "What's What in Greek and Latin Classics and in Biblical and Patristic Studies."
| A Critique of Today's Classicists
Today the discipline of classics has deteriorated to such a point that hegemonic cliques overwhelmed by the "publish or perish" mentality pour out their new half-baked theories for the sake of raises and promotions. Knowing only bits and pieces of the basic field, these new, overly specialized arrivistes fill the journals and university presses with mostly worthless gibberish that few care to read.
In this discouraging situation, I want to see Classics survive.
Classicists saved themselves in the short run in the 18th century by stressing their association with studies of Christianity and by the same token, they damned themselves in the long run. Our scientific age has outgrown religion (though it distorts ever more horribly to the mind of the masses), and thrown out the Classics with the higher criticisms of the Bibles. [READ MORE] (link to current draft of Critique article)