On 9/6/06, ScottL scott@mu.org wrote:
No I was just applying the logic that using the AD/BC system implies that Jesus is god means that using the names of the months imply that the Roman Gods were gods as well.
SKL
Ahh, I see your logic. I apologise for the misunderstanding.
However, I think your logic is flawed. Months have names, given names, that are pretty much universally accepted (I realise that they arn't completly universally accepted, but pretty much), the same as (for instance) weekdays are. I'm writing this here on a beautiful wednesday morning, but by recognizing that fact I'm not affirming the greatness of Odin (see [[Wednesday]]). My own name, Oskar, happens to mean "Spear of the Gods", but unlike most spears, I'm remarkably un-skinny (I am fairly pointy though). These are names, and even do they do mean something, they mean nothing. If you know what I mean.
However, this is not necessarily the case with AD/CE. I understand how someone might look at it that way, but there are some very crucial difference. First, and foremost, is that there are obviously people who do find it offensive. Many people. That's why the whole CE thing was invented (and btw, when I was studying history in English here in northern Europe, CE was all we ever used, so it's not like it's unheard of in academia), because many people find AD to be offensive.
I think a much better PC-analogy for the AD/CE thing than names of months is the introduction of the title (is it a title?) Ms. While it wasn't invented by modern feminists, it was certainly popularized because there is something blatantly sexist in English (and many other languages) titles. So we decided that this was wrong, and thus Ms. was introduced. And now everyone is comfortable with it, it's not in the least controversial at all. I think it's the same with years. There is something deeply eurocentric with using AD, since you are infact affirming the existance of God, so we have a nice little non-offensive alternative. Why not use it? Because people may have difficulty understanding it? Unless you are very thick indeed, it won't take long to understand. And it's not like we avoid using technical language and jargon for other subjects (pick a random non-trivial article on maths or chemistry, you'll see what I mean), so why not for history?
I realise that I may not be convincing anyone, but I this is how I feel. AD is obviously controversial, so why not use CE? It's so neat!
--Oskar