Hi

Ok i understand if the comments where too many

but i'm interested why you followed this question regardless of the obvious mistakes it contained

Is it fair to talk about ethnocentricity in a world without ethnos=nation?

Is it fair to say that western philkosophy is represented by white people?

In the ancient world.

It is known that ancient greek philosophy has taken a lot of elements from ancient egypt

Of course yes i can also do it myself

Please leave the "all nations are created after the 16th century"

Anyway, thanks for chatting. The born of the nations and modern racism (because racism is a "modern" bad habit) is a very interesting matter. I have studied a lot of texts regarding how this process took place. Perhaps i will raise an answer in the forum

Good bye

Thanks

@JohnAm I wanted to point out that I specifically addressed your concern about the anachronism of modern conceptions of race in my own answer. My recent edit highlighted it, but it was in there even before you made your objections

I also question your principle that there are no good answers to bad questions. It's entirely possible to address flaws in a question's formulation in your answer

As far as the subject of whether there can be ethnocentrism before nations, however, of course there can be --it just might not line up with modern national boundaries. Aristotle battled anti-Macedonian prejudice throughout his career, and even had to flee Athens during a particularly ethnocentric political period.

But i didn't down voted your answer, but virmaior's.

"As far as the subject of whether there can be ethnocentrism before nations, " But the question focus on the "racism" element and the philosophical canon "represented by white man". In this context it is known that the ancient world contained only sperms of what is identified as racism.

@Chris Sunami It said in the OP there is a "restriction" limiting people from other countries to distribute to the philosophical canon. Was ever a prohibition about who can make philosophy (not including the genders problem). Was this the right was to address socio economical problems of access to education of different economic classes. Did anyone treated the economic aspect of the question (affluent)?

The question was provocative, badly phrased, ahistorical, anachronistic

It pretended that it had a interest about equality, diversity, expression of the minorities but it started questioning the value of the people/philosophers that raised the awareness and the level of culture of our common world.

I don't think it was quite as bad a question as people thought, but at any rate, I removed most of the editorialism

@JohnAm I had assumed you downvoted all the answers because of your comment about "problematic questions." If that was a wrong assumption, I apologize.

BTW in chat people only specifically get notified of new posts if they are referenced by name

@Chris Sunami Thanks

@Little

@LittleAlien Part of what you learn when you study philosophy is that there are very few truly anonymous ideas. Much of what we take as commonplace or common sense can be traced back to an original thinker.

The reason we push you to do so is so we can be sure what you are talking about and what we are talking about is the same thing.

Nevertheless, this is not a site for discussing or debating philosophy. It is for answering questions about the field of philosophy. meta.philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/474/…

I'd also advise you to not take any of this personally. Everyone gets pushback in philosophy, that's what philosophers do.

Yes, the ignore the essence and trample upon it.