• owatnext@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 days ago

    That’s a debate that transcends culture. Some cultures say there are seven, some say six, and yet others say five.

    • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Seven is wrong no matter your definition of continent, unless you count New Zealand or “because racism.”

      Depending on your definition there are between four and nine continents, but the definition that includes Europe to make a total of seven necessitates India being its own continent without racism being the primary reason why Europe is a continent and India is not.

      (Also if it transcended culture it wouldn’t depend on culture for the answer)

      (Also some people do say there are seven, because India is a continent with a land barrier and a tectonic plate and Europe is not)

        • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2 days ago

          And that’s valid, if your definition is just continuous land masses. However, some definitions incorporate ideas of notable narrowings such as the African and Central American connections and continental plates, or even projected drift.

          For example, some day the Americas and Africa/Eurasia will separate from continental drift. Some even argue the Americas already are separated thanks to the Panana Canal, humans just hurried the process along.