User:Foula/Sandbox
Support
[edit]Supporters of Common Era notation promote it as a religiously-neutral notation suited for cross-cultural use.
Arguments given for changing to the Common Era designation include:
- The label Anno Domini is almost certainly inaccurate; "scholars generally believe that Christ was born some years before A.D. 1, the historical evidence is too sketchy to allow a definitive dating."[1]
- Foula: Hard copy reference. Ought to check. It's unclear why a book on astronomy would want to support BCE notation.
- It is simple to change from BC/AD to BCE/CE notation, since the years are numbered identically in both (e.g., 33 BC becomes 33 BCE), Documents with years that do not have AD designation do not need to be changed at all (e.g., 1066 remains 1066 in AD and in CE systems).[2]
- Foula: The source does not give this argument in support.
- Both BCE and CE are used as suffixes, unlike BC/AD where BC is used as a suffix and AD as a prefix. This can be beneficial for computer usage.[2]
- Foula: The source does not say this. Instead it says "This has distinct advantages for computer generated lists and tables". It compares this to "to the proper prefix and suffix usage, respectively, of "AD" and "BC"." There are plenty of examples of AD being used as a suffix, so it is important to note that this argument only looks at the "proper" (Espernak's word) prefix usage.
- "Forcing a Hindu, for example, to use AD and BC might be seen by some as coercing them to acknowledge the supremacy of the Christian God and of Jesus Christ."[3] The Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance further state: "We use the terms CE and BCE throughout this web site because they are less hurtful to non-Christians."[3]
- Foula: Religious Tolerance articles are not reliable sources (see talk page of Common Era) and see the WP page too.
- Evidence that AD and BC have not lost their religious significance is the fact that much of the opposition, some of it intense, to switching to usage of CE and BCE has been on religious grounds.[4]
- Foula: The source does not present this argument in support of BCE/CE notation (it is a resolution of the Southern Baptist Convention recommending its adherents to continue to use BC/AD notation). So we are left with an unsourced counterargument to the point that we needn't change from BC/AD notation because they no longer have any religious significance - a point which isn't even cited in opposition against BCE/CE.
Opposition
[edit]Efforts to replace AD/BC notation with CE/BCE notation have given rise to opposition. Arguments against the Common Era designation include:
- While a person using BC/AD may not hold Christian beliefs, the calendar itself has Christian roots. The substitution of BCE/CE for BC/AD is, in this respect, offensive. [5]
- Foula: The quotation does not support the claim that "the substitution of BCE/CE for BC/AD is, in this respect, offensive". Wentz was bothered by it, but there is no suggestion that any offence was caused. On the other hand, it is an interesting source, which appears to be well-researched, with the main limitation being that it is restricted to the views of Utahns.
- Since the calendar in use has Christian roots, the alteration of BC/AD to BCE/CE partially effaces an important contribution of Christianity to world culture. [6]
- The use of BCE/CE may be seen as a type of intolerance in its own right, as non-Christians seek to remove reference to the religious figure upon whom the calendar's years are, in fact, based.[7]
- The BCE/CE promotion distracts from the adoption of the system already used by astronomers, i.e. 0 for 1 BC, -1 for 2 BC, etc., which does resolve this problem and does not use any of the contentious acronyms ".[8]
- "If we do end by casting aside the A.D./B.C. convention, almost certainly some will argue that we ought to cast aside as well the conventional numbering system itself, given its Christian basis."[9]
- It is inconsistent to remove this "religious" reference from our nomenclature and not remove other religiously derived words such as the days of the week and months of the year which are named after various pagan deities: January = Janus' month, Thursday = Thor's day, et cetera.[10]
- Foula: Religious Tolerance articles are not reliable sources (see talk page of Common Era) and see the WP page too.
- The use of identifiers which have common spellings is more ambiguous than the use of identifiers with divergent spellings. Both C.E. and B.C.E. have in common the letters "C.E.", which is more likely to cause confusion than identifiers with clearly different spelling.[10]
- Foula: Religious Tolerance articles are not reliable sources (see talk page of Common Era) and see the WP page too.
References
[edit]- ^ Doggett, L. (1992). "Calendars". In P. Kenneth Seidelmann (ed.). Explanatory Supplement to the Astronomical Almanac. Sausalito, CA: University Science Books. p. 579. ISBN 0-935702-68-7.
- ^ a b Fred Espenak. "Year dating conventions". NASA. Retrieved 2007-09-07.
Fortunately, there is an alternative which preserves the year numbering established by Exiguus and now an unavoidable legacy of the historical record.
- ^ a b "Controversy over use of "CE" and "BCE" to identify dates in history". ReligiousTolerance.com. Retrieved October 4, 2006.
- ^ Southern Baptist Convention 2000, Resolution 9
- ^ Whitney, Susan, "Altering history? Changes have some asking 'Before what?'" The Deseret News, December 2, 2006. Whitney, for instance, quotes Lori Wentz, who argues that, "Whether or not someone believes in Christ, the culture and politics of his time eventually came together to form our way of keeping historical time...It's 2006 this year for anyone on Earth that is participating in day-to-day world commerce and communication. Two thousand six years since what? Most people know, regardless of their belief system, and aren't offended by a historical fact." http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4188/is_20061202/ai_n16891064
- ^ Rodriguez, Nancy C. and Peter Smith, "Ky. school board to look at replacing A.D., B.C. in dates", The Courier-Journal, April 11, 2006.
- ^ Safire, William, "B.C./A.D. or B.C.E. C.E.?", On Language, The New York Times, August 17, 1997, p. SM22
- ^ History Today, June 1999, p. 60, Darian Hiles, letter: "Of Dates and Decimals"
- ^ "The Columbia Guide to Standard American English". Retrieved July 10, 2007.
- ^ a b "Controversy over the use of "CE" and "BCE" to identify dates in history". Retrieved July 18, 2007.