---

I wonder.  Should anything beyond physical geography be put into consideration as to what constitutes as a continent or whatever?

---

---

A continent is one of several large landmasseson Earth. They are generally identified by convention rather than any strict criteria, with seven regions commonly regarded as continents

---

---

Well you can look at the way Wikipedia words its definition:

---

A continent is one of several large landmasseson Earth. They are generally identified by convention rather than any strict criteria, with seven regions commonly regarded as continents

---

---

Hah, that's just a clever way to say that a continent can be just about anything you want it to be, given whatever kind of criteria you wish to use.

Personally, I'd argue that because a continent is a physical geographic term, only physical geography should apply to the crtieria of what is and isn't a continent.  Culture and the like tend to define "regions," which isn't really a physical geographic term (though in terms of spatial analysis, it's "physical," but only in the sense that it exists in an abstract sense in a real location - whereas continents are not abstract in the slightest, hence why I think using abstracts like culture to define them is fallacious).

Post edited at 11:52 pm on Sep. 2, 2008 by Bud2400

---

Outgroup homogeneity bias (OHB).

Even non-Europeans are guilty of this. Having lived in African countries, I realized they do a massive amount of lumping. Generally they wouldn't distinguish between Frenchmen, Americans and Australians. To them we're just a continuum of white people, spread out in a vast diaspora. Of course the European peoples have largely shaped the modern world, which means that our OHB is more publicized than theirs.

---

Agreed.  I figured that's the main reason why, and that's also why eurocentrism is criticized more so than afrocentrism, sinocentrism, etc.

---

Geographically, you are correct. The ural river is technically a water divide and we're surrounded by seas everywhere except east & NE. It could be argued that Europe is "more" of a continent than China for instance. But you bring up good points and I think I'll have to agree with you.

---

Well, seeing how rivers are simply just paths of water going from higher ground to the seas, they aren't really defined as a "body of water."  But I suppose you would be right that Europe could be considered to be more of a "continent" than China, seeing how Europe has three main connections with Asia - at the Bosphorus (which is divided by water anyway), the Caucasus Mountains (mountains tend to be great barriers, hence why one side would feel different from the other culturally), and that big stretch of land between the Caspian Sea and Arctic Ocean, where there isn't a whole lot out there.

But from a purely physical geographic standpoint, there's no way Europe could be considered as anything other than a peninsula with a series of other peninsulas spreading from it.  Just about everyone at least seems to agree with that.

---

However "Continental Europe" is a common term used to distinguish, say, France and Germany, from the British isles. In most Scandinavian countries we also make this distinction. In this case we're not talking about Europe vs. other continents, but rather the mainland vs. the non-mainland.

---

Indeed, and you're right, it's used in exactly the same sense that separating Europe from Asia is.  The UK, Scandinavia, etc. are "European" in just about every single way you can think of.  There are some differences between them and France, Germany, and the rest of continental Europe, but the differences are grossly exaggurated, in my honest opinion, and are the result of nationalism.

In line with the whole OHB concept you brought up, I can tell you right now that Americans generally treat Europe as a single entity and disregard the differences between European nations (although how they perceive the UK is the only exception).

---

Hah, that's just a clever way to say that a continent can be just about anything you want it to be, given whatever kind of criteria you wish to use.

---

---

I know! It seems to try to justify the status quo after the fact, doesn't it? A bit silly I must say.

---

That's pretty much how people justify Europe being its own "continent."

---

 

Agreed.  I figured that's the main reason why, and that's also why eurocentrism is criticized more so than afrocentrism, sinocentrism, etc.

---

---

Indeed, and you're right, it's used in exactly the same sense that separating Europe from Asia is.  The UK, Scandinavia, etc. are "European" in just about every single way you can think of.  There are some differences between them and France, Germany, and the rest of continental Europe, but the differences are grossly exaggurated, in my honest opinion, and are the result of nationalism.

---

Anywho, there are many things which bind us together, not least our classical heritage. I'm just pointing out there are certain things that trancend nationalism.

---

In line with the whole OHB concept you brought up, I can tell you right now that Americans generally treat Europe as a single entity and disregard the differences between European nations (although how they perceive the UK is the only exception).

---

Post edited at 3:31 am on Sep. 3, 2008 by Radon

It is a continent.

---

The Japanese are pretty bad too, but yeah it is pretty odd how the Jews get a pass on their division between them and goy.

---

---

and Judeocentrism.

---

so the asians are goy or gentiles?

---

Don't forget the linguistic divide. Language is always a sure way to separate people. Listen to Dutch, Norweigan and German, and you'll find surprising similarities. They're all derived from the germanic tribes.

---

---

oh yeah thats right i forgot the jewish conspiracy shaping the world around. oh fuck man we should NEVER forget that!  

so the asians are goy or gentiles?

---

To answer your question, yes, all non-Jews are gentiles. "Goy" has meant different things historically though, so these 2 terms aren't always interchangeable.

---

ya sieg heil mine hair artung!

---

FAIL

Post edited at 3:44 am on Sep. 5, 2008 by Radon

---

No Jew ever has ever suffered the "chosen people" pathology.

---

---

The Judeocentrism thing is all a giant ploy I made up so I can kill Jews.

---

MAJOR FAIL

-------
"Everyone helpin' each other whenever they can we makin' it happen, from nothin' to somethin'
That's how we be survivin'" - BEP

---

sounds more lik you got a major stick up your ass about the jew thing and try to find little jewish devils everywhere and see them where they dont exist.  

 MAJOR FAIL

---

Jake, calm down.  He was comparing judeocentrism to eurocentrism, saying that Jews have looked at the world, as well as history, as either Jewish or gentile in the past and present.  And he's certainly correct - nothing "prejudiced" about it and I don't know why anyone would assert such, especially as you can find plenty of quotes in the Torah to support it.  Again, there's nothing inherently bad about it, like with eurocentrism - it's just a limiting view.