There are two very different ways of thinking about things; Cyclical and Linear. Western society is pretty much based on Linear thinking. In linear thinking, "time" becomes very important. We get up at a certain time, we go to work at a certain time, we eat at certain times, we go to bed at certain times, we set appointments and get upset if the other party isn't there on time. Time rules in our society, even when people aren't aware of it. Even sayings that we use show that some people are aware of it, though. For instance, "Take TIME to stop and smell the roses." When we concern ourselves with history, time is at least as important as the deed that was done, again, whether people realize it or not.

In cyclical thinking, time becomes more of an abstraction. To a cyclical thinker, like the American Indian, Ancient Egyptian, Jew, or Mesopotamian, everything occurs in cycles. We are born, live our lives, die, and someone else is born. We get up, eat, work, eat, go to sleep, and get up again. Group A fights with group B, a lot of people die, group A wins, group B fights with group A, a lot of people die, group B wins, group A fights with group B... ad infinitum.

Histories that are written show this pretty well, too. In western culture, if it isn't quantified and qualified, it is often rejected as invalid, even if it is completely valid. Western thought seems to have difficulty with the concept of using songs and poetry to relate histories, because that isn't as 'accurate' as writing a date down, and listing corroborating sources. And yet, very much of our current history is based on cyclical and 'inaccurate' history. Much that we know of the Greeks, Romans, ancient Egyptians, and other ancient peoples wasn't written down, it was told in stories and songs. A cyclical thinker isn't bound so strictly to time and isn't time's servant, so time isn't as important.

Do you think that the rigid linear thinker of todays western society can ever come to grips with information that isn't laid down in a linear way? Do you think that linear thinkers will ever accept that there is another major way of thinking, and that it is every bit as valid as their own, even though it isn't based on precise times and dates?

I believe nowadays since eastern thought is becoming a bit more prevalent in the western world, we are beginning to accept cyclical thought. As a whole though? I believe that may take some time, if not ALOT of time.

__________________
The only constant in this universe is change. Are you ready to change??

I agree w/ Master Vigil. It is very much like the Native Americans not seeing Columbus's ships because they had no concept of what a ship was, but once there was an understanding....

I think human socieities have occured cyclically. I think the point about history is a bit overstated though. Historical method does allow for oral histories as long as the authenticity of the tradition can be traced. It is further subjected to a vaster backdrop of corroborating sources. All it says is we cannot verify that songs and dance and epic poems relate actual historic events on their own.

For example, until Homer wrote them down, the events of Troy were passed orally. The battle of Troy may have very well taken place, but does that mean Achillies was real and dipped in the river Styx? Does it mean gods schemed against one another through the actions of mortals? Does it mean Aphrodite actually swooped down and saved Paris from the field of battle?

How man interprets their reality through the psychological screens it has available to them is just as important. People used to see the world "magically" and "mythically". Does a time period change how things actually occur or is it more likely our consciousness development influences how we interpret that world?