The KOREAN Civilization: Things Every Civ Player Should Know

[yin26]

You know that I mean where are those cultures in as uninterrupted a civilation as Korea. Nowhere. Sure, their influence is still alive and strong. But that's not the same thing.

And Korea? It didn't survive anymore than any other ancient nation.

Wow. Your most uninformed statement yet. Rethink that statement if you like.

It's even split in two now.

Yes, and this is tragic. But that is not the END of the Korean civilization. By the way, care to guess Japan's role in this division? Again I mention Japan because its leadership categorically denies any such harm...

[yin26]

Well, I am off for the day. I salute your efforts so far. But until and unless you do more research, I can't really give much weight to your conjectures. Surely you understand. However, you have a good start going here...and I will gladly look at any deeper research you might do, and I hope to learn from it just as I hope you have learned a great deal about Korea.

I'm realistic.

By the way, I really want you to consider how "I won't do the research" and "I'm realistic" go together? If you mean by 'realistic' that Firaxis won't put anything but the expected civs in, the I understand you. But if you mean 'realistic' in the sense that you feel your thoughts are based on historical facts, clearly that isn't true.

One of the great moments on Poly is when somebody finally realizes that a lot of what they have been thinking is, in the end, NOT based on facts and the hard work of research. It is at that point that you must either admit that you don't really know what you are talking about OR go out there and inform yourself from a variety of sources.

Of course, this is 'just a gaming site,' but why can't it serve to get you fired up to fill in some of the gaps in your view of the world. I certainly have many such gaps and look forward to closing them as much as possible.

[Saint Marcus]

Ho there horsie. Let's backtrack for a sec. Let's go back to your original claim.

Your claim:

Korea deserves to be among the 16 civs in civ3

Your arguments:

1. Korea has an old and unique culture that survives till this day
2. Korea's language is the basis for Japan's language
3. The Koreans invented the Ironclad
4. The Koreans invented the printing press

That are your reasons for wanting Korea in Civ3. Now let's not talk about Holland or Norway or China or Japan or Germany in detail. Just Korea. Now, let me get over your arguments one by one.

1. True. Great accomplishment, no doubt. Something to be proud off, for sure. However, there are dozens of nations who can make the same claims.

2. Ok, could very well be, I believe you. However, Korea's language was based on Chinese. Also, laying the basis for one other language isn't a real accomplishment. Just look at the masive influence the German, Latin and Greek languages had. Korea's influence compared to those is rather minimal.

3. True, but Korea's Ironclad wasn't fitted with a steam engine like the American one. Furthermore, Korea's Ironclad wasn't more than a Trireme-like ship fitted with Iron Armor. So I wouldn't exactly call it an Ironclad, since Ironclads are associated with Steam Engine powered battleships. Also, Korea did almost nothing with this technology, and nobody even copied it. It's just a really nice, but in the end unimportant invention like so many others in the history of the world.

4. This one is significant. No doubt about that. But again, Korea did not revolutionise the world with this. Germany deserves credit for that one. Let's take another example...glass. An important invention, right? Without glass a lot of things could never exist the way they are now, the invention of glass clearly had a huge influence on the world. Do you know who invented glass? Well, they're not in Civ3...it's the Phoenicians. And why aren't they in Civ3? Cause their invention didn't revolutionise the world. Other nations used their invention and improved on it, and they did revolutionise the world. Same can be said for the invention of cement by the Byzantines (I believe).

Conclusion:

Korea is a worthy civilization...just not worthy for a top 16 spot.


Oh, one more thing. Before you go saying that other nation's culture didn't survive till this day let me give you some examples. Turks, Greeks, Serbs (yes, the Serbs), Dutch (Batavians and Frisians), France (Francs), Chinese, Japanese, Icelanders (Normans), Maltese (yes, even they), Arabs, etc, etc, etc. Certainly, a lot of cultures have been lost forever, like the Carthagians and Babylonians...but many of them still remain, even visibly (just take the Serbs). And please don't ask me to explain the complete history of the Serbian culture...that takes forever! (did a graduation paper about it...57 pages long)

Face it Yin...Korea isn't one of the top 16 civs of all times. Deal with it

[YefeiPi]

Imran:

I'm sorry your ulterior motive of trying to include the Koreans in the game over the Japanese has failed (actually I'm not sorry), but you just have to accept it. The Koreans just aren't WORTH being in Civ3!!!

Imran, please calm down. I understand why you place Japanese over Koreans because after all, they gave you video games to play and anime to watch. I can also understand your ignorance about what the Japanese have done to Asian countries, since you are an American (I might be wrong about this). However, if Japanese were included as a playable civ in Civ3 because of what they had done in WW, then I would strongly disagree with having them.

How about let's look at Japan from a civilization standpoint. Besides the monstrous atrocities Japan has committed during the world war. What other achievements does it have that are worthy to be mentioned? Throughout its ancient history, it's like a province of China, using the same language, sharing the same culture, and generally didn't do much. I mean what important inventions or contributions did this country give to the world besides misery and pain. (Before they invented the Video games and their electronic gadgets of course).

So from a civilization standpoint, Japan hasn't achieved much in the past and so why it is included besides Korea is something people have to ask Firaxis.

However, I do believe, when Japan is stripped of its World war atrocities, it's not got much left to deserve a place in Civ3. Then again, if it is included for the same reason, well... it's probably a marketing choice made by Firaxis.

[yin26]

However, Korea's language was based on Chinese.

Wrong. Korea's language is a native one. However, Korean scholars (representing a VERY limited percent of the Korean people) were sent to China on periodic trips for cultural exchange and study. When I mentioned earlier that 70% of Korean vocabulary is from Chinese, I should explain that more:

** That 70% is viturally all for scholarly words, which a vast number of Koreans don't use and wouldn't understand on first hearing anyway.

** Since the Chinese pronunciation of those words didn't fit the native Korean pronunciation (Chinese is tonal, Korean is not), they made their own pronunciation. Only the Chinese character used is the same, but since learning Chinese characters is considered by many Koreans (especially the younger generation) to be a waste of time, even that influence is waning.

** King Sejong saw that the vast majority of his subjects could not and likely would not ever use Chinese characters, so he had a group of his scholars invent Hangul.

As for your telling me to "deal with it," I can handle the fact that if we set out all the civs that ever were, Korea by many measures might not be in the top 16. This is fine. However, Korea is certainly ahead of Japan...it is only the last 2 centuries where the dynamic changed, so I don't blame Firaxis for going with what the West's experiences were the past two centuries. This is natural.

I wonder: Did you learn anything about Korea that surprised you? It is an honest question. I am prepared to shake hands and salute you for a debate well done, but I wonder if this thread at all made you wonder why your history courses haven't represented Korea more clearly?

History goes to the victor, as they say, and Korea's history has been buried. It will resurface, however, which I think will help people have a much more balanced view of world and particularly Asian history.

[Gangerolf]

Originally posted by Mark L

Partly true. Maltese flag is influenced by both the Normans and Hospitaliers. The Hospitaliers used the colors blue and white, not red and white. That are Norman colors. When Malta declare independence from Britain they took the Cross from the Knights of St.John, and used the colors from the Normans who ruled the country in early medieval times.

OK, you are right about the origin of the flag's colours. Legend has it that the original white and red come from the Norman Count Roger's flag wich was chequered in white and red. Before he left Malta he cut out a corner and gave it to the Maltese.

But I'm still 99,99% sure the Knights of St John also used the colours red & white (NOT blue%white), at least in their uniforms and symbols. Here's their flag: (no it's not the danish flag)

[Saint Marcus]

But I'm still 99,99% sure the Knights of St John also used the colours red & white (NOT blue%white), at least in their uniforms and symbols. Here's their flag: (no it's not the danish flag)

I checked, you're right. Red and white was also used by the Hospitaliers, along with blue and white. Though the origins of the colors in the flag come from the Normans, as you have said.

As for your telling me to "deal with it," I can handle the fact that if we set out all the civs that ever were, Korea by many measures might not be in the top 16. This is fine. However, Korea is certainly ahead of Japan...it is only the last 2 centuries where the dynamic changed, so I don't blame Firaxis for going with what the West's experiences were the past two centuries. This is natural.

Hmm, I thought this thread was about including Korea in Civ3, and not if Korea is really "better" than Japan. Franky, IMHO neither the Koreans, nor the Japanese would be included Both aren't worthy of a top 16 spot.

I wonder: Did you learn anything about Korea that surprised you? It is an honest question. I am prepared to shake hands and salute you for a debate well done, but I wonder if this thread at all made you wonder why your history courses haven't represented Korea more clearly?

Sure I learned some new, but nothing mind blowing cause I'm not all that interested in Asian history to be honest And our history courses may not give a lot of information about Korea, they also give little information about Japan (the sole exception being WW2). Our history textbooks usually only cover Indian and Chinese history, other Asian nations usually don't get more than a paragraph at most (again, the only exception being WW2 Japan). The history we learn in courses mostly covers the ancient powers (Egypt, Greece, Persia, Rome, China, India), the Middle East (Turks, Arabs, Israeli), the USA and Europe (obviously). The only times other countries come up is when they were European colonies (Americas, Africa, South Asia...though only a handful of colonies was really covered, most were also left out) or when they conquered a large area (Mongols, Japanese). Since Korea is not an ancient power, is not located in the middle east or in Europe, wasn't a European colony and didn't conquer it's neighbours. To put it bluntly, Europeans couldn't care less about the history and culture of Korea, Mali or Guatamala. More than a footnote in the annals of history in Europe they'll never get.

[yin26]

More than a footnote in the annals of history in Europe they'll never get.

And the West will remain woefully ignorant of the world beyond itself, I'm afraid. I encountered this personally at UCLA and challenged my professors routinely. An example:

"The first novel was written in blah blah blah century."

"Professor: Isn't the 'Tales of Genji' written in Japan in the 11th century the first novel written?"

*clears throat and turns red "Weeeelll, this is a class about WESTERN literature, so I assume when I say 'first novel,' you'll know what I mean."

No professor. I don't. Neither do any of the other students.

Pathetic.

MarkL: Don't settle. If you want half the facts and half the truth, then by all means only learn about half the world. I would expect a serious philosopher, however, to be more intellectually honest.

Tale of Genji info: http://jin.jcic.or.jp/kidsweb/japan/d/q1.html

[Saint Marcus]

And the West will remain woefully ignorant of the world beyond itself, I'm afraid.

Tell me, do they teach anythig about the Habsburgers in Korea? Korea's textbooks probably don't go much further than Asia either. Also, "ignorance" is better than changing the facts. In Japanese schoolbooks WW2 is justified...certainly not something you'll see in Germany. And China and North Korea are a hundred times worse than that.

MarkL: Don't settle. If you want half the facts and half the truth, then by all means only learn about half the world.

Can't learn everything...have to filter some out

I would expect a serious philosopher, however, to be more intellectually honest.

Sadly, when it comes to philosophy, Asia is stuck in the middle ages. Modern philosophy is something that isn't often found in non-western countries.

[yin26]

Sadly, when it comes to philosophy, Asia is stuck in the middle ages. Modern philosophy is something that isn't often found in non-western countries.

I think you understand I am talking about YOUR intellectual standards, not Asian philosophy. Filtering out is fine. Coming to conclusions based on what you know to be massively missing information is not.

As for your other points, yes, as I have argued, the Japanese textbooks and most textsbooks from most contries are horribly "filtered." I agree.

Does that mean you should throw up YOUR hands and remain ignorant? It is, of course, your choice to make.

[yin26]

So let's recap.

Mark L says:

** He will not do the research, knowing full well his schools haven't taught him.
** He is 'not interested' in Asia anyway and is happy to 'filter' out their history.

And yet, he feels qualified to rank the world's top 16 civs. Is that arrogance or stupidity? He doesn't seem stupid, so it must be the first. I hope he won't be surprised when people from the non-Western world find him rather repulsive when he talks on with his great knowledge of world civilizations.

Mark: I certainly hope your professors demand more from you...and from somebody studying "Modern philosophy" (which you intimate is so superior to that of Asia's...as if you'd know...being the Asia expert you are), admitting you are talking out of your a$$ and yet continuing to rank things you don't understand makes you:

A TROLL

I think we're done as far as this thread is concerned. If you want to go educate yourself and come back here, I'll glady see you then. Take care.

P.S. In contrast, I never said Korea is a 'top 16' blah blah blah. What I DID say is that Korea has done more for the world than Japan. I've also said that Korea is NOT a China knock-off. And I've pointed out several major accomplishments from a Korean civ that continues to do great things.

[ruckus9]

From observing this thread I would have to say, MarkL, that you do come off sounding quite narrow-minded and arrogant for a philosopher. I don't mean this as an insult; I don't know anyone here personally so I can't judge. I just wanted to point out that you seem to be implying through your posts that only Europeans have really accomplished anything and are the only ones worthy of being in the top 16 or whatever in Civ 3.

.

Franky, IMHO neither the Koreans, nor the Japanese would be included Both aren't worthy of a top 16 spot.

If there is no Japan or Korea then that only leaves us with China to represent far eastern Asia. I hardly think that's right.

Anyway I'm just a highschool kid though and not even a very studious one (just a little bit more when it comes to history). But I do try to keep an openmind even though it may lead to me being sometimes TOO easily convinced by another's arguments. That's all.

[Saint Marcus]

"Modern philosophy" (which you intimate is so superior to that of Asia's...as if you'd know...being the Asia expert you are),

If you'd understood anything about philosophy after the middle ages you'd find out that non-western philosophers have virtually nothing to contribute to philosophical discussions. Where is the Asian Kant? Or the Asian Hegel? Or the Asian Wittgenstein? They simply don't exist. There aren't any great philosophers from Asia in industrial times.

And yet, he feels qualified to rank the world's top 16 civs. Is that arrogance or stupidity? He doesn't seem stupid, so it must be the first. I hope he won't be surprised when people from the non-Western world find him rather repulsive when he talks on with his great knowledge of world civilizations.

Hmm. I'm afraid you got things a bit wrong. YOU provided the facts of the Korean civ, and based on that it's clear that they can't be compared with most other civs. Why should I do the research in Korean history when you provide it for me? Makes no sense at all

Mark: I certainly hope your professors demand more from you

No they don't. In the philosophical world Asian nations simply are considered to be too backward.

A TROLL

My my...the maturity of your reply is amazing. Anyway, I can say that you are just an ignorant nationalist and an anti-japanese bigot...but I won't lower myself to your level.

And I've pointed out several major accomplishments from a Korean civ that continues to do great things.

One mayor accomplishment.
What great things? It's economy is crap (both north and south) and half of Korea is starving under the commies.

Does that mean you should throw up YOUR hands and remain ignorant? It is, of course, your choice to make.

You are also quite ignorant when it comes to Viking/Norman history. But now we're at it...how much do YOU know about Holland?

[yin26]

It's economy is crap

Can't remember back to the 13th largest economy in the world, eh?

Anyway, do you know what a troll is?: Somebody who is just talking to get a rise out of somebody. You admit you know only part of the world's history yet claim to know which civs are Top 16. That's a troll.

they can't be compared with most other civs.

And yet you provide no good evidence to the contrary. Ah, forget. The library is closed.

"I certainly hope your professors demand more from you."

No they don't. In the philosophical world Asian nations simply are considered to be too backward.

That makes no sense. Language barrier? I'll rephrase: "I hope your professors don't let you go around spouting things as if you actually know what you are talking about when you yourself admit to ignoring a good half of the facts." Clear?

ignorant nationalist and an anti-japanese bigot

"ignorant" -- hmmm, you've taken on that title on your own with all your 'filtering' I'd say.

"nationalist" -- Well, I'm not Korean...and I love my native United States, so look for another word.

"anti-Japanese" -- anti-Japanese right-wing goverment that visits the burial sites of convicted war criminals, you bet. Anti-Japanese propoganda that looks to hide the past, you bet. Anti-Japanese on a personal basis. Nope.

"bigot" -- "a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices" Obstinate? A bit. Intolerantly? Perhaps. Unwilling to change my views given solid facts to the contrary? No way. Unfortunately your Encarta CD is only so big, I guess.

You are also quite ignorant when it comes to Viking/Norman history.

Why, cause I don't buy your 30 second search on the Encarta CD? Did you even know that his opinion is a minority, revisionist one? Sorry, I know. The library is still closed.

how much do YOU know about Holland?

How much do you want to know? You had better believe that if I were going to start deriding Holland, I'd at least do MYSELF the favor of going and researching more about it. Oh, but they must not teach basic research in your ultra-cutting-edge philophy classes. Good thing for you, I guess.

[yin26]

Since you had to prove your ignorance again, here are some economic comparisons, Neatherlands v S. Korea:

Neatherlands:

GDP: purchasing power parity - $365.1 billion (1999 est.)

GDP - real growth rate: 3.4% (1999 est.)

S.Korea

GDP: purchasing power parity - $625.7 billion (1999 est.)

GDP - real growth rate: 10% (1999 est.)

Hmmmm. Let's see. S.Korea's economy is "crap" yet it has nearly twice the GDP purchasing power parity and nearly 3 times the GDP real growth rate. Look what happens when you spout crap without knowing your facts first.

Care to keep going?