Difference between revisions of "Talk:Hawaii"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Am I getting you right?) |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
:Okay, your point is that being Eurocentric is bad because it's inaccurate. ''Discovery'' implies (in your mind) that the lands were uninhabited? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 23:16, 11 July 2007 (EDT) | :Okay, your point is that being Eurocentric is bad because it's inaccurate. ''Discovery'' implies (in your mind) that the lands were uninhabited? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 23:16, 11 July 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | Well, yeah - why would we not say that the '''original inhabitants''' are the people who "discovered" the place? Unless my command of English is poor, I take the word to imply "first one there." [[User:PFoster|PFoster]] 23:31, 11 July 2007 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 03:31, July 12, 2007
Anyone with a quibble about discovered, please make your point here first. --Ed Poor Talk 22:25, 11 July 2007 (EDT)
Alright - here's my point: There were people living there already - "discovered" implies that it didn't exist until Cook got there, or at least that Cook's appearance legitimised something. Just because Europeans hadn't been there doesn't mean it was "undiscovered." Just because this wiki is conservative, that doesn't mean it needs to be Eurocentric - and thus inaccurate. 23:03, 11 July 2007 (EDT)
- Okay, your point is that being Eurocentric is bad because it's inaccurate. Discovery implies (in your mind) that the lands were uninhabited? --Ed Poor Talk 23:16, 11 July 2007 (EDT)
Well, yeah - why would we not say that the original inhabitants are the people who "discovered" the place? Unless my command of English is poor, I take the word to imply "first one there." PFoster 23:31, 11 July 2007 (EDT)