|
Until you sign up you can't do much. Yes, it's free.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 | / / / Viewing Topic
|  |
| Choice |
Votes |
Percent |
|
| Europe is a continent. |
42 |
71% |
|
| Europe is not a continent. |
17 |
28% |
|
| Vote Now! |
59 Votes Cast |
|
|
|
( Bud2400 )
...
Patron
|
When looking at a map of the world, I often wonder why Europe is considered a continent. After all, the most common definition of a continent are "large, continuous, discrete masses of land, ideally separated by expanses of water." (Source for the definition) Indeed, Africa fits that definition. It is surrounded by water on all sides, except the small isthmus connecting it with the Sinai Peninsula to the rest of Eurasia. North America and South America fit that definition, being connected only by the small isthmus of Panama and the rest of Central America. Australia and Antarctica most clearly fit that definition by not being connected to any other landmass, but being large enough to contain more than one climate as in Australia's case (or just being a gigantic frozen landmass, as in Antarctica's case). But WTF is up with the split between Europe and Asia. Many people often consider the Ural Mountain range (just northeast of the Caspian Sea) to be the divider between Europe and Asia, but look at the Urals - they're puny mountains as they were formed aeons ago, around the same time the relatively small Appalachian Mountains were formed. Moreover, immediately east and west of the Urals has no real differences in climate; they both have that typical steppe characteristic. What makes the Urals a convincing boundary to divide Eurasia into Europe and Asia? Let's also take a look at plate tectonics: The Middle East has its own plate and India has its own plate, but Europe happens to be joined up with the rest of Eurasia. The cities of England and France lie on the exact same plate as the cities of China and Vietnam! Obviously, given these maps, you cannot use geography as a method to divide Europe into its own continent. So why is Europe divided into its own continent? Is it just another result of a eurocentric outlook on the rest of the world, where Europe is divided between the rest of Eurasia (while the dramatically different cultures of China and India are still considered "Asian" and not divided)? Should Europe even be considered a continent at all, or just another subcontinent / region of the greater continent of Eurasia, as India and the Middle East usually are?
|
8:28 pm on Aug. 27, 2008 | Joined Dec. 2004 | 1145 Days Active Join to learn more about Bud2400 Washington, United States | Straight Male | 6341 Posts | 24270 Points
|
|
| |
|
|
madrascal32
Wealthy Hobo
|
yes
------- put this in your signature
|
|
|
Ryan Potter
Wealthy Hobo
|
Physically, Europe is not its own continent, but politically, it is.
|
|
|
bluenight
Visionary
|
yes
------- ♥ friends are a great gift and i am glad that i have them ♥
|
|
|
Silenced Warrior
Dairy Product Addict
|
I don't think Europe should be it's own continent.
------- Pain is just weakness leaving the body.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Googoie
Connoisseur
|
Quote: from Ryan Potter at 8:29 pm on Aug. 27, 2008
Physically, Europe is not its own continent, but politically, it is. 
...indeedo
------- "Now I'm no expert, but I think he's putting it in the wrong hole..." ~~~I LOST THE GAME!~~~
|
8:36 pm on Aug. 27, 2008 | Joined Mar. 2008 | 170 Days Active Join to learn more about Googoie Michigan, United States | Straight Male | 3840 Posts | 6236 Points
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
( Bud2400 )
...
Patron
|
Quote: from piemaster at 8:40 pm on Aug. 27, 2008
I think it has somewhat to do with the history. When Europeans first started trading with Asiatic countries they just looked at them all the same. This then became refected in many European maps as Asia being a single contient. Europeans did not want anything to do with the foriegners and be classified with them. This later has becomed widely used here today and we have used the seperate Asian and European contients. 
I believe that to be the case as well (though do remember that ever since Herodotus first wrote about a contest between "Europe" and "Asia" (ie. between Greece and Persia), this division has been around for a lot longer than the Age of Discovery, though lost for awhile during the Roman era only to be picked up again during the Carolingian Renaissance around 800 AD). But Europeans distancing themselves from the cultures of the orient certainly didn't help any. If you ever read Edward Said's "Orientalism," you'll notice that he explains the process whereby those among Western societies often distance themselves from societies (primarily societies of the Islamic Middle East), and as a result, they see these societies as all the same. The same, I'd imagine, occurs with India, China, Siam, and Central Asia, too. The question, then, is not so much about the differences among these societies, but whether they're European or not European. And as a result of defining Eurasia in such a way, seeing the "continental" division between Europe and Asia seems only natural. Post edited at 9:02 pm on Aug. 27, 2008 by Bud2400
|
8:44 pm on Aug. 27, 2008 | Joined Dec. 2004 | 1145 Days Active Join to learn more about Bud2400 Washington, United States | Straight Male | 6341 Posts | 24270 Points
|
|
| |
|
|
The Artful Dodger
Dairy Product Addict
|
Similar cultures?
|
|
|
( Bud2400 )
...
Patron
|
Quote: from The Artful Dodger at 8:51 pm on Aug. 27, 2008
Similar cultures? 
Christendom has always been the unifying feature of Europe (at least untile about 500 years ago), and those who were historically a part of Christendom share quite a few similarities. Thing is, if you're going to use the argument that culture is the primary division of Europe from the rest of Eurasia, then why focus only on Europe? The cultures of the Middle East, India, and China are no less different from each other than Europe is to them. Why should Europe make its own "political continent" or "cultural continent" while they do not? And if you want an even starker contrast, I'd suggest looking at the differences between North Africa and Sub-Saharan Africa. Despite that, they're still considered the same continent. Is it just me, or are there a few inconsistencies here?
|
8:55 pm on Aug. 27, 2008 | Joined Dec. 2004 | 1145 Days Active Join to learn more about Bud2400 Washington, United States | Straight Male | 6341 Posts | 24270 Points
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
The Artful Dodger
Dairy Product Addict
|
Quote: from Bud2400 at 8:55 pm on Aug. 27, 2008
Quote: from The Artful Dodger at 8:51 pm on Aug. 27, 2008
Similar cultures? 
Christendom has always been the unifying feature of Europe (at least untile about 500 years ago), and those who were historically a part of Christendom share quite a few similarities. Thing is, if you're going to use the argument that culture is the primary division of Europe from the rest of Eurasia, then why focus only on Europe? The cultures of the Middle East, India, and China are no less different from each other than Europe is to them. Why should Europe make its own "political continent" or "cultural continent" while they do not? And if you want an even starker contrast, I'd suggest looking at the differences between North Africa and Sub-Saharan Africa. Despite that, they're still considered the same continent. Is it just me, or are there a few inconsistencies here? 
You forget its Europeans making the divisions. You're right though. Europe; that's where all the civilization's at. All the land in the West, lets just call that America. Australia's down. Africa's where all the black people are (easy enough). And what's left is Asia. That was likely the thinking. Does that work for a reason?
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Looking for something else?
|
|
|
|
|
|
 | / / / Viewing Topic |  |
|