▲ 288 ▼ TIL there is no agreement on how many continents there are. (en.wikipedia.org) submitted 4 months ago by Quilotoa@lemmy.ca to c/til@lemmy.world 131 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] tea@lemmy.today 96 points 4 months ago (5 children) Europe being on a different continent than Asia always seemed like bullshit. I can forgive the isthmuses, but Eurasia feels like it's a thing to me. permalink fedilink source hideshow 10 child comments replies: [–] ViatorOmnium@piefed.social 52 points 4 months ago* (2 children) But then you run into the issue that the very concept of continent was invented to differentiate Europe and Asia (and Africa). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] tea@lemmy.today 15 points 4 months ago (1 child) Eh, words change and sometimes terms outlive their etymology or grow beyond it. We "hang up the phone" but no phone these days is actually hung up. 🤷 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ViatorOmnium@piefed.social 13 points 4 months ago (2 children) That's literally the same thing, we kept the expression even when we know it isn't accurate any more, because we still have the need to express the original meaning. If anything, we should split Asia in more subcontinents. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] tea@lemmy.today 3 points 4 months ago Yeah, fair enough. Still seems like, with the way that continent is typically defined, Eurasia should be the continent with subcontients of Europe, Asia, India, and the Middle East. permalink fedilink source parent [–] inari@piefed.zip 1 point 4 months ago Informally, we kinda do. Middle East, East Asia, South East Asia, South Asia. permalink fedilink source parent [–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago (1 child) The difference between Europe and Asia should also apply to Asia and India. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) How is India different from Pakistan? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 7 points 4 months ago (1 child) I think both pakistan and India are the subcontinent of India. Wherever the mountains are is the edge of it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) Pakistanis would fume at your comment lmao permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) Would the pakistanis be subsumed or uplifted by that comment? That's a geology joke. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago I know but they wouldn't like being called part of the Indian subcontinent. Nationalism has ruined South Asia. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Ek-Hou-Van-Braai@piefed.social 10 points 4 months ago Same, if they're different continents then Africa is also more than one continent permalink fedilink source parent [–] VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago (1 child) The Romans divided the world into three equal landmasses before they understood how it was actually laid out and it stuck. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Tudsamfa@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago Definitely not the Romans. It may have stuck because of them, but the Greeks divided the world that way long before Rome left Italy. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Wizard_Pope@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 child) Well by that logic then Europe ,Asia and Africa are all one continent. Just because someone dug a fucking suez ditch does not make them any less connected. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] tea@lemmy.today 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) Since continent doesn't have a strict definition, in my book, giving the isthmus of suez (and the isthmus of panama) a pass makes sense. Both of those were historically very difficult to traverse and not viable sustained trade routes compared to just sailing around them. Hell, there's still not a road that links North and South America through the Darian Gap, which is wild to me considering what seems like should be a vital connection point bottleneck. I understand "continent" a mercurial word and so people can define Europe and Asia as being different contients, but it does seem like it's the only continental division that doesn't make logical sense to me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Wizard_Pope@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) Well I guess. But there is a bridge across the suez and by a similar kind of logic you could split europe into 2 'continets' because of the donau-main kanal. Same thing as the panama one as far as I am concerned. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] tea@lemmy.today 3 points 4 months ago* (1 child) I think of it more as if you were to give a pen to an alien child and said "draw a circle around the main landmasses on this planet" they would probably logically draw circles around North America, South America, Eurasia, Africa, Australia, and Antarctica. They wouldn't look at the Ural Mountains or any sort of canal systems, just "these are the main blobs on this world map." But that's just the way I think of continents. 🤷♂️ permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Wizard_Pope@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago I guess. But in my mind still main landmass would encompass anything connected to it. So if you were to look at the earth before we built all those canals there would be like 4 continents. I don't personally think small things like a canal would be enough to actually separate 1 continent into 2. It would have to be quite a bit of distance for that to make sense. Like if the entire canal was the width and depth of the gulf of suez then yes, we have made a new continent. permalink fedilink source parent [–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago Sometimes things are defined by history, inertia, earlier understandings. There are six continents, because there’s always been six and it would be overly pedantic to find objective criteria with today’s understanding …… unless you want another Pluto controversy. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ViatorOmnium@piefed.social 52 points 4 months ago* (2 children) But then you run into the issue that the very concept of continent was invented to differentiate Europe and Asia (and Africa). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] tea@lemmy.today 15 points 4 months ago (1 child) Eh, words change and sometimes terms outlive their etymology or grow beyond it. We "hang up the phone" but no phone these days is actually hung up. 🤷 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ViatorOmnium@piefed.social 13 points 4 months ago (2 children) That's literally the same thing, we kept the expression even when we know it isn't accurate any more, because we still have the need to express the original meaning. If anything, we should split Asia in more subcontinents. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] tea@lemmy.today 3 points 4 months ago Yeah, fair enough. Still seems like, with the way that continent is typically defined, Eurasia should be the continent with subcontients of Europe, Asia, India, and the Middle East. permalink fedilink source parent [–] inari@piefed.zip 1 point 4 months ago Informally, we kinda do. Middle East, East Asia, South East Asia, South Asia. permalink fedilink source parent [–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago (1 child) The difference between Europe and Asia should also apply to Asia and India. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) How is India different from Pakistan? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 7 points 4 months ago (1 child) I think both pakistan and India are the subcontinent of India. Wherever the mountains are is the edge of it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) Pakistanis would fume at your comment lmao permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) Would the pakistanis be subsumed or uplifted by that comment? That's a geology joke. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago I know but they wouldn't like being called part of the Indian subcontinent. Nationalism has ruined South Asia. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] tea@lemmy.today 15 points 4 months ago (1 child) Eh, words change and sometimes terms outlive their etymology or grow beyond it. We "hang up the phone" but no phone these days is actually hung up. 🤷 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ViatorOmnium@piefed.social 13 points 4 months ago (2 children) That's literally the same thing, we kept the expression even when we know it isn't accurate any more, because we still have the need to express the original meaning. If anything, we should split Asia in more subcontinents. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] tea@lemmy.today 3 points 4 months ago Yeah, fair enough. Still seems like, with the way that continent is typically defined, Eurasia should be the continent with subcontients of Europe, Asia, India, and the Middle East. permalink fedilink source parent [–] inari@piefed.zip 1 point 4 months ago Informally, we kinda do. Middle East, East Asia, South East Asia, South Asia. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ViatorOmnium@piefed.social 13 points 4 months ago (2 children) That's literally the same thing, we kept the expression even when we know it isn't accurate any more, because we still have the need to express the original meaning. If anything, we should split Asia in more subcontinents. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] tea@lemmy.today 3 points 4 months ago Yeah, fair enough. Still seems like, with the way that continent is typically defined, Eurasia should be the continent with subcontients of Europe, Asia, India, and the Middle East. permalink fedilink source parent [–] inari@piefed.zip 1 point 4 months ago Informally, we kinda do. Middle East, East Asia, South East Asia, South Asia. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] tea@lemmy.today 3 points 4 months ago Yeah, fair enough. Still seems like, with the way that continent is typically defined, Eurasia should be the continent with subcontients of Europe, Asia, India, and the Middle East. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] inari@piefed.zip 1 point 4 months ago Informally, we kinda do. Middle East, East Asia, South East Asia, South Asia. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago (1 child) The difference between Europe and Asia should also apply to Asia and India. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) How is India different from Pakistan? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 7 points 4 months ago (1 child) I think both pakistan and India are the subcontinent of India. Wherever the mountains are is the edge of it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) Pakistanis would fume at your comment lmao permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) Would the pakistanis be subsumed or uplifted by that comment? That's a geology joke. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago I know but they wouldn't like being called part of the Indian subcontinent. Nationalism has ruined South Asia. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) How is India different from Pakistan? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 7 points 4 months ago (1 child) I think both pakistan and India are the subcontinent of India. Wherever the mountains are is the edge of it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) Pakistanis would fume at your comment lmao permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) Would the pakistanis be subsumed or uplifted by that comment? That's a geology joke. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago I know but they wouldn't like being called part of the Indian subcontinent. Nationalism has ruined South Asia. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 7 points 4 months ago (1 child) I think both pakistan and India are the subcontinent of India. Wherever the mountains are is the edge of it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) Pakistanis would fume at your comment lmao permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) Would the pakistanis be subsumed or uplifted by that comment? That's a geology joke. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago I know but they wouldn't like being called part of the Indian subcontinent. Nationalism has ruined South Asia. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) Pakistanis would fume at your comment lmao permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) Would the pakistanis be subsumed or uplifted by that comment? That's a geology joke. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago I know but they wouldn't like being called part of the Indian subcontinent. Nationalism has ruined South Asia. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) Would the pakistanis be subsumed or uplifted by that comment? That's a geology joke. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago I know but they wouldn't like being called part of the Indian subcontinent. Nationalism has ruined South Asia. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago I know but they wouldn't like being called part of the Indian subcontinent. Nationalism has ruined South Asia. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Ek-Hou-Van-Braai@piefed.social 10 points 4 months ago Same, if they're different continents then Africa is also more than one continent permalink fedilink source parent
[–] VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago (1 child) The Romans divided the world into three equal landmasses before they understood how it was actually laid out and it stuck. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Tudsamfa@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago Definitely not the Romans. It may have stuck because of them, but the Greeks divided the world that way long before Rome left Italy. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Tudsamfa@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago Definitely not the Romans. It may have stuck because of them, but the Greeks divided the world that way long before Rome left Italy. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Wizard_Pope@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 child) Well by that logic then Europe ,Asia and Africa are all one continent. Just because someone dug a fucking suez ditch does not make them any less connected. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] tea@lemmy.today 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) Since continent doesn't have a strict definition, in my book, giving the isthmus of suez (and the isthmus of panama) a pass makes sense. Both of those were historically very difficult to traverse and not viable sustained trade routes compared to just sailing around them. Hell, there's still not a road that links North and South America through the Darian Gap, which is wild to me considering what seems like should be a vital connection point bottleneck. I understand "continent" a mercurial word and so people can define Europe and Asia as being different contients, but it does seem like it's the only continental division that doesn't make logical sense to me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Wizard_Pope@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) Well I guess. But there is a bridge across the suez and by a similar kind of logic you could split europe into 2 'continets' because of the donau-main kanal. Same thing as the panama one as far as I am concerned. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] tea@lemmy.today 3 points 4 months ago* (1 child) I think of it more as if you were to give a pen to an alien child and said "draw a circle around the main landmasses on this planet" they would probably logically draw circles around North America, South America, Eurasia, Africa, Australia, and Antarctica. They wouldn't look at the Ural Mountains or any sort of canal systems, just "these are the main blobs on this world map." But that's just the way I think of continents. 🤷♂️ permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Wizard_Pope@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago I guess. But in my mind still main landmass would encompass anything connected to it. So if you were to look at the earth before we built all those canals there would be like 4 continents. I don't personally think small things like a canal would be enough to actually separate 1 continent into 2. It would have to be quite a bit of distance for that to make sense. Like if the entire canal was the width and depth of the gulf of suez then yes, we have made a new continent. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] tea@lemmy.today 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) Since continent doesn't have a strict definition, in my book, giving the isthmus of suez (and the isthmus of panama) a pass makes sense. Both of those were historically very difficult to traverse and not viable sustained trade routes compared to just sailing around them. Hell, there's still not a road that links North and South America through the Darian Gap, which is wild to me considering what seems like should be a vital connection point bottleneck. I understand "continent" a mercurial word and so people can define Europe and Asia as being different contients, but it does seem like it's the only continental division that doesn't make logical sense to me. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Wizard_Pope@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) Well I guess. But there is a bridge across the suez and by a similar kind of logic you could split europe into 2 'continets' because of the donau-main kanal. Same thing as the panama one as far as I am concerned. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] tea@lemmy.today 3 points 4 months ago* (1 child) I think of it more as if you were to give a pen to an alien child and said "draw a circle around the main landmasses on this planet" they would probably logically draw circles around North America, South America, Eurasia, Africa, Australia, and Antarctica. They wouldn't look at the Ural Mountains or any sort of canal systems, just "these are the main blobs on this world map." But that's just the way I think of continents. 🤷♂️ permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Wizard_Pope@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago I guess. But in my mind still main landmass would encompass anything connected to it. So if you were to look at the earth before we built all those canals there would be like 4 continents. I don't personally think small things like a canal would be enough to actually separate 1 continent into 2. It would have to be quite a bit of distance for that to make sense. Like if the entire canal was the width and depth of the gulf of suez then yes, we have made a new continent. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Wizard_Pope@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) Well I guess. But there is a bridge across the suez and by a similar kind of logic you could split europe into 2 'continets' because of the donau-main kanal. Same thing as the panama one as far as I am concerned. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] tea@lemmy.today 3 points 4 months ago* (1 child) I think of it more as if you were to give a pen to an alien child and said "draw a circle around the main landmasses on this planet" they would probably logically draw circles around North America, South America, Eurasia, Africa, Australia, and Antarctica. They wouldn't look at the Ural Mountains or any sort of canal systems, just "these are the main blobs on this world map." But that's just the way I think of continents. 🤷♂️ permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Wizard_Pope@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago I guess. But in my mind still main landmass would encompass anything connected to it. So if you were to look at the earth before we built all those canals there would be like 4 continents. I don't personally think small things like a canal would be enough to actually separate 1 continent into 2. It would have to be quite a bit of distance for that to make sense. Like if the entire canal was the width and depth of the gulf of suez then yes, we have made a new continent. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] tea@lemmy.today 3 points 4 months ago* (1 child) I think of it more as if you were to give a pen to an alien child and said "draw a circle around the main landmasses on this planet" they would probably logically draw circles around North America, South America, Eurasia, Africa, Australia, and Antarctica. They wouldn't look at the Ural Mountains or any sort of canal systems, just "these are the main blobs on this world map." But that's just the way I think of continents. 🤷♂️ permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Wizard_Pope@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago I guess. But in my mind still main landmass would encompass anything connected to it. So if you were to look at the earth before we built all those canals there would be like 4 continents. I don't personally think small things like a canal would be enough to actually separate 1 continent into 2. It would have to be quite a bit of distance for that to make sense. Like if the entire canal was the width and depth of the gulf of suez then yes, we have made a new continent. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Wizard_Pope@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago I guess. But in my mind still main landmass would encompass anything connected to it. So if you were to look at the earth before we built all those canals there would be like 4 continents. I don't personally think small things like a canal would be enough to actually separate 1 continent into 2. It would have to be quite a bit of distance for that to make sense. Like if the entire canal was the width and depth of the gulf of suez then yes, we have made a new continent. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago Sometimes things are defined by history, inertia, earlier understandings. There are six continents, because there’s always been six and it would be overly pedantic to find objective criteria with today’s understanding …… unless you want another Pluto controversy. permalink fedilink source parent