what are the main differences between sunni and shia? ibadi?
Sunni: Caliph should not be related to Muhammed, Imams are just mosque leaders
Shia: Caliph should be a descendant of Muhammed. Shia supported Ali as caliph after Muhammed's death, but Ali and his followers were killed. Also, Shia believe Imams have considerable power.
Ibadi: All I know about Ibadi is that they apparently supported Ali as successor to Muhammed but had some disagreements with Shia
Shia's think that the leaders who came after the Prophet did not have the right to rule, that his son in law, Ali, should of been the guy to inherit the Muslim caliphate after his death. He got it at the end of his life, but he was usurped pretty quick.
They also believe that the ability to be able to speak to god is passed down, and that there is always one individual on earth who is in direct communication with god.
This does not get on well with Sunnis because Mohammad said he was the last prophet
>When you want aphoristic philosophy but get obscurantist sophistry
>when you want to get into socrates but you're only intelligent enough for memes
My theory is that Native Americans are actually polynesians. Inuits (who look like mongols) might actually have come from the land bridge. Native americans on the other hand (who look more like indians/polynesian) probably landed in South America and migratiled north. Seperated from the sea, the Polynesians became isolated and developed their own culture. Polynesians in general were hardcore sailers conquoring from Hawaii to The Easter Islands so a journey to south america shouldn't be a problem.
The presence of a peculiar breed of chickens in South America supports your point, oh great Satan.
A contact was likely, full blown population movement is not likely. For one thing south America was already populated on the pacific side well before the Polyneasians decided to leave Taiwan and embark on their journeys.
Is Cynicism inherently a primitivist philosophy? Would civilization or technology exist in a Cynic world? Is Cynicism basically a more philosophical and ancient form of anarcho-primitivism?
That's true, but there's still the question of what would happen if everyone ultimately became a Cynic. Or is Cynicism only applicable in civilization and a different philosophy would be needed elsewhere?
>is Cynicism only applicable in civilization
I guess you could say that, since it separates the Cynic from his society and its values. A society of Cynics would probably not have any sort of structure to separate from or criticize, but since Cynicism isn't the kind of ideology that grows alongside a developing civilization anyway I don't see the point. It's like asking what the world would be like if we were all Stirnerists or adherents of Sextus Empiricus.
Am I the only one who thought that Goebbels looked like the stereotypical Jewish person? He had a lot of the very same features they seem to have... was it possible that Goebbels had Jewish heritage?
This is the phenotype of a lot of Europeans who don't have jewish or arab/trukish ancestry.
It's really typical on Western Europe and specially the British Isles. Of course you see people like him all around other parts of Europe (South especially) but that would be argued by most people as having recent origins related to the Islamic conquests which wouldn't necessarily be true.
Most probably it's due to neolithic migrations influence, although most tribes in history had an already significant percentage of non-homogeinity so there was never...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Were there ever any Jewish gladiators?
I'd be comfortable being anything other than the retiarius tb.h, from my understanding deaths were actually pretty rare but the odds are definitely greater being that much more exposed
Did Rome ever have contact with the Slavic Tribes?
Does anyone do HEMA here? I have been interested in it for a few years now, but I have been reluctant to take the initiative and start. My reluctance comes mostly from my schooling (takes up a lot of time and the closest instructor is ~30 miles away), and my body type (5'10" 125 lb. Little to no fat at all, but I still have barely any muscle).
I'm just interested in other's opinions about it, and if anyone has any advice to me, that would be appreciated.
I do eat a lot, I actually have a hyperactive metabolism, I take medicine for it, and that's the only reason I'm not less than 125. It makes gaining muscle or fat horribly difficult, which is my secondary reason for doing HEMA; if I am constantly doing training for something I enjoy, maybe it'll assist with weight gain.
Who /actuallybelievesthebible/ here?
Did Uesegi Kenshin die a virgin?
Also sengoku period thread.
How did Martin Luther King end racism in America?
What was the religion of the Balkans before Christianity? Particularly around Bosnia and Croatia.
Did Mongol conquests have any positive side-effects, like some advances in culture or science?
It seems to me they were an extremely negative force in absolute terms, even if you take into account the period they were happening. Of course, I'm not that knowledgeable about this subject so I could be wrong.
The mongol occupation had a nice influence on persian miniatures that gave it it's characteristic "chinese" look.
Though they also rekt'd the country to the ground killing countless innocents and caused Timur, who did the same again, to exist. So yeah, it wasn't worth it.
They reopened the Silk Road.
They brought over technologies from China to Arab/Europe. Printing press is a direct result of such.
They also gave Europe the notice on the "outside" world like China again, thus fueling their exploration age.
Hello /his/. Let's talk art history.
Today's subject is the Northern Renaissance.
Who is your favourite Northern Renaissance artist and why?
Which subject matter do you find intriguing in Northern Renaissance art?
What parallels or differences can you make comparing the Northern Renaissance to the Italian Renaissance?
Have you read any fascinating literature regarding artists from north of the Alps from the early 15th to late 16th century?
Of course, it is appropriate to discuss art history beyond the thread's theme....
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Here comes the big dawg.
I love the little St. Margaret topping the bedpost, and the oranges scattered across the windowsill and table. This painting is absolutely packed with details despite how small it is. The texture of the ermine robe and each individual hair on the dog always astound me. Jan van Eyck is probably my favourite painter of all time. It's no wonder he's mistakenly credited with inventing oil paint.
Has anyone read the Panofsky analysis of this painting? It's absolutely insane.
What is your opinion on Hardcore History?
Is Dan Carlin really vastly more popular than all other radio and digital only podcasts, or is there some concerted shilling going on?
Nearly all the threads have had the Hardcore History image as the OP