Talk:George G. M. James

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

From Stolen Lagacy

With regards to Socrates and Aristotle and the majority of pre-Socratic philosophers, history seems to be silent on the question of their travelling to Egypt like the few other students here mentioned, for the purpose of their education. It is enough to say, that in this case the exceptions have proved the rule, that all students, who had the means, went to Egypt to complete their education. The fact that history fails to supply a fuller account of this type of immigration, might be due to some or all of the following reasons:

(a) The immigration laws against the Greeks up to the time of King Amasis and the Persian Invasion, (b) Prose

p. 45

history was undeveloped among the Greeks during the period of their educational immigration to Egypt. (c) The Greek authorities persecuted and drove students of philosophy into hiding and consequently, (d) Students of the Mystery System concealed their movements.

Let us remember that Anaxagoras was indicted and imprisoned; that he escaped and fled to his home in Ionia, that Socrates was indicted, imprisoned and condemned to death; and that both Plato and Aristotle fled from Athens under great suspicion (William Turner's Hist. of Phil. p. 62; Plato's Phaedo; Zeller's Hist. of Phil. p. 84; 127; Roger's Hist. of Phil. p. 76; William Turner's Hist. of Phil. p. 126).Macative (talk) 03:59, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So..... Let me get this straight... George James (a black man) debunked one of the biggest historical inaccuracies of all time in 1954 and shortly after publishing his revolutionary findings..... he dies.....? ...... hmmmm...... I wonder what the cause of death could have been?

So, George James made "dubiously historical assertions?"

         du⋅bi⋅ous
         –adjective
      1. doubtful; marked by or occasioning doubt: a dubious reply.

......could someone please tell me why someone who has never read the book, Stolen Legacy feels compelled to critique it? It's very simple people: Read the book, AFTER reading the book do your OWN research so that you can find out for yourself that that the greeks never had any original concepts save for there own blatantly homosexual, pedophilic nature.

Don't be afraid to educate yourself. Racism is no longer trendy. 65.80.180.239 (talk) 10:18, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And those claims fully establish you as a champion among the idiot race. Congrats! Why don't YOU open a book in your life? You might even learn a thing or two, like the fact that the library of Alexandria was founded AFTER Aristotle's death. But I guess you are too busy eating bananas to bother...

Nor is homophobia in intelligent circles, but it appears that stupidity is in your area; racism is not anti black commentary, but that which denigrates any skin colour, ethnic group or national identity - which you casually did with the ancient Greeks. LessHeard vanU (talk) 16:23, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

templates[edit]

The article is singularly unsourced, and has a hideous bias (it may be the correct pov, but without cites to specific sources it comes across as anti-European polemic) regarding the published work of the article subject. LessHeard vanU (talk) 16:31, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The assertions in the passage from Stolen Legacy indicate a profound ignorance of history. The Great Library at Alexandria was founded 20 years after Aristotle died. He did not plunder it; he never went to Egypt at all. Alexander did not plunder Alexandria; he founded it.

Let me respond to the two statements made above. Martin Bernal's three volume work, Black Athena, supports the gist, if not the specifics, of James' argument. . . There seems to be sharp disagreement as to whether or not Aristotle went to Egypt. However, Aristotle's nephew, Callisthenes who was a disciple of Artistotle, and a philosopher, doubtless did travel there as a member of Alexander's entourage. And I was under the impression that other students and disciples of Aristotle did go there and live there. In fact, Alexander himself was a student of Aristotle, and though he had a deadly disagreement with Callisthenes, I thought that Alexander was quite fond of Aristotle and would have done anything that he thought would have pleased him.

Isn't Aristotle credited with having written more than 500 books without benefit of a word processor or a typewriter? And has it not been said that "all philosophy is but a footnote to Aristotle?" Aren't these two assertions clearly false? Even if the library at Alexandria was not formally established until a number of years after the death of Alexander, Greek scholars, among which followers of Aristotle would have received pride of place, were researching and translating older works in Egypt in the interim. Weren't they? I am not so sure that we can dismiss James' claims out of hand.Ramsees7 (talk) 18:02, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Spurious and Subterfuge Eurocentrics[edit]

First, the article is biased and provided a plethora of Eurocentrics exponents trying to refute Dr James' compelling argument. While it presented little opportunity for debunking the "so called" European scholars. The article becomes a sham and extraneous in fact and theory. 208.59.227.28 (talk) 01:13, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]