>there are no lost continents
>there are no lost races
>annunaki are a meme
>we are more wise, fit and peaceful now than any point in history
>god is a human creation
>alexander the great would have traded his empire for modern ice-cream
>people will become wealthier and more prosperous by material conditions and end up like BNW
Understanding the whole of human history as groping for a transcendent meaning where there isn't any seems really bleak to me, and I feel like it shouldn't. I'm not religious, but I feel an almost kind of religious craving for a mystic glimpse at history that we've missed. Anyone else feel this way?
>>1370576
What I'm asking is, is it wrong to hunger for the numinous even in the bounty of modern luxuries? Has this sentiment occurred at other major epochs in the past?
>>1370576
A little. If you want real mystery just understand that the recorded history is still skewed to the point that what we know is interpretive.
Just as people write banal or sensational bullshit now, so too did people back then. Views can be optimistic, pessimistic or worse, omitted information. The further back you go the more mystery their is.
We are no more fit and wise than we have ever been. We're healthier for sure but I mean, there are feats of strength and fitness that only adversity can create that we will never seen in a western populace. Wisdom of course is no different. There is more stored and learned knowledge but I don't think people are REALLY that much smarter neurologically speaking and many people in this day and age have extremely specialised competencies.
We're certainly wiser as a collective, though
At least you can look forward to space, technological singularity and genetic manipulation. We mightn't get all three but at least ONE has to happen right?
>>1370649
Is hope for continuous technical achievement, particularly the "singularity", so much different from the faith in a Day of Judgement, Rapture, return to the Monad or so on characteristic of religious eschatology? All I can imagine is a gaggle of IT geeks in silicon valley praying to Kurzweil and Sagan for tech-gnosis as they wither away behind cubicles and in traffic.
>>1370576
>we are more wise, fit and peaceful now than any point in history
Not really.
>>1370665
>Is hope for continuous technical achievement, particularly the "singularity", so much different from the faith in a Day of Judgement, Rapture, return to the Monad or so on characteristic of religious eschatology?
You would probably be shocked by this answer, but no, it isn't.
>>1370674
On general, we probably are. However, there definitely were people who would intellectually dwarf all present-day "thinkers" and "philosophers". In my humble opinion, Lao-Tzu and David Hume would definitely be among these. Some Greek guys as well, probably.
>>1370678
Well, let's hope the sun rises tomorrow.
>>1370695
Better that than modern social science with its "p<0.05" meme.
>>1370711
Fuck you cunt. You leave statistics out of this.
>>1370717
Normal distribution in social science models is BS and you know it.
>>1370731
It merely measures likely outcomes. No one with a brain pretends it's an absolute or perfectly generalises to the population. What better method would you propose short of neurological mapping (which is a slow and ongoing process)?
>>1370576
But what happened to the bronze age civilizations? How did Vermeer make his paintings? Did all of Tesla's inventions really work?
>>1370753
>How did Vermeer make his paintings
What about this is mysterious?
>>1370743
At the very least, I would propose not using normal distribution models as sufficient justification for policy decisions. More generally, I would propose admitting that the "scientific method" does not work by default when studying social phenomena, and, instead of large-N generalizations, we should pay particular attention to each case, focusing on its complexity and idiosyncrasies. Yes, it would make social scientists really uncomfortable, because then, instead of introductory stats courses, they would have to study history, lots of history, but there's no other way. Modern political science (the field I'm most familiar with, and I do know it's meme science) is full of "discoveries" like "countries that fight with each other trade less with each other". What a fucking surprise! But it is properly proven by stats, so it gets published.
>>1370576
I agree with most of this though think it lacks nuance in some respects.
I do flat out disagree with the Alexander thing though. The compromises of modernity might disgust the action-oriented cultures from throughout history.
>>1370674
Yes. Minus the fitness part. That's a "sometimes" thing. The average person knows a great deal more, is less burdened by superstition, is presented with more opportunities and is much less likely destined for early death by disease, war, famine, or pestilence.
However we have compromised ourselves in many other respects.
>>1370811
I second this opinion. The pleasure of power is much better than almost all material comfort civilization can provide us with. The only expcetion would probably be modern medicine, which saves us from a lot of suffering and pain that used to be unavoidable in the past, but all other "achievements" of modern civilization are just tricky toys that do not improve quality of life per se.
Reminder that God exists, and he is willing to give sublime transcendent meaning to anyone who seeks him.
>>1370863
Indeed. Why don't you accept that Odin is the Allfather and that meaning resides in the endless cycles of creation and destruction?
>>1370897
Odin doesn't exist. Jesus of Nazareth was a real person who was raised from the dead, proving that God was with him.
>>1370907
>Jesus of Nazareth was a real person who was raised from the dead
That's your opinion
>>1370913
But it's also true. You do not have to spend your life in the mire of existential dread. God is calling you anon, and you need only answer.
>>1370907
Odin definitely exist, otherwise who defeated the Vanir?
>>1370930
How do you know you're not wrong? What, according to you, would demonstrate without a single doubt that what you believe in is definitely not true?
>>1370938
It's not just a philosophical idea. God performs miracles all the time. I have had spiritual experiences before, and I know others who have had visions of the Lord. There are also many documented historical miracles. I recommend you look into Marian appearances and the lives of the saints if you aren't convinced.
>>1370970
>God performs miracles all the time.
How do you know that their miracles? What's your definition of a miracle? What would demonstrate that your experiences were definitely not miracles?
Also, why are miracles from other religious traditions not valid? What specific requirements don't they meet?
>>1370977
You're being too pedantic. You know a miracle when you see it - events like being healed of cancer or having an angel appear to you cannot be confused with everyday events. Other faiths do not have miracles (except Judaism), and this is plain to see. In Islam, for example, they claim that the only miracle their prophet performed was writing the Quran. As far as I know, only Christianity has strong evidence for the miraculous, from it's scriptures and the testimony of history.
>>1371001
>You're being too pedantic.
If by 'pedantic' you mean not gullible, then yes, I guess I am
>>1371010
>investigating evidence makes you gullible
Well OK anon, but I hope you come to reconsider your position. 'There are more things in Heaven and Earth', and all that.
>>1371020
>>investigating evidence makes you gullible
No, mindless accepting it without any criticism makes you gullible, which is what you do.
Your knock-down reason for accepting something extremely unlikely is, in your own words, "You know a miracle when you see it", which is about as valid as saying that something is okay because "Come on, it's current year"
>>1370970
Hinduism and Buddhism do have miracle stories. Why should I believe in Christian miracles, but not in their ones?
>>1371029
I don't quite understand. If Jesus appeared in your room right now and showed you a vision of heaven, you would not consider that a miracle? Would you not recognize something like that as supernatural without having to resort to some rigid definition?
>>1371038
Of course they have stories, but no corroborating historical information. Only Christianity has a strong tradition of verifiable miracles i.e. multiple eyewitnesses, archaeological evidence etc.
>>1371054
>Christianity has archeological evidence for miracles
>>1371046
>If Jesus appeared in your room right now and showed you a vision of heaven, you would not consider that a miracle?
No, because I know that my sense can be wrong. Accepting that you don't know everything and that what you know may very well be wrong is the core of critical investigation.
If such a thing were to happen to me, I would do everything to try and prove it wrong. If I've tried and tried, exhausted every possibility and the phenomenon I'm trying to prove wrong is still occurring, only then can I say that there's a certain level of truth to it.
The only problem with all the scenarios you've posted is that you don't attach any cases in which you're certainly wrong, which makes it completely meaningless as a question of knowledge
>>1371083
Gonna need some evidence pal.
>>1371083
>This is a ridiculous level of skepticism.
No, this is in fact seldom good enough as a level of skepticism. You won't believe some of the ways humans have been horribly and inescapably wrong.
If I'm going to subscribe to an idea, it better be good enough to stand up to scrutiny. Why should I accept an idea that can't even handle critical investigation? If your ideas can't even survive those, then they're pretty weak to begin with
>>1371130
>I wonder if any abstract/philosophical idea can stand up to your extreme levels of criticism.
Many of them do, actually. For instance, it doesn't matter what my opinion of the color of a clear sky is, for some odd reason, it never ceases to be blue. That is demonstrably already a much more reliable piece of knowledge than "This is a miracle, just accept it, because it's obviously one when you see one", which is a piece of knowledge that appears to be really subjective, depending right down on what your opinion of a certain holy text is. The veracity of a clear sky being blue hardly ever varies, and yet the veracity of Muhammed riding a winged horse to Jerusalem seems to differ wildly, depending on who you ask the question to and where the person was born. What does that tell you?
>>1371166
Ok man, I get it, it's not enough for you. I cannot stay up all night arguing on this chinese basket weaving forum. We can agree to disagree.
>>1371182
>Ok man, I get it, it's not enough for you.
Nor is it for any intellectually serious person. Anyone with even a mild sense of critical thinking wouldn't accept your arguments
>>1370897
>Why don't you accept that Odin is the Allfather and that meaning resides in the endless cycles of creation and destruction?
Hearken, sons of the forest! No blood shall flow this night save that which pity has drawn from a mother’s breast. For this is the birth-night of the Christ, the son of the Almighty, the Savior of mankind. Fairer is He than Baldur the Beautiful, greater than Odin the Wise, kinder than Freya the Good. Since He has come sacrifice is ended. The dark, Thor, on whom you have vainly called, is dead. Deep in the shades of Niffelheim he is lost forever. And now on this Christ-night you shall begin to live. This blood-tree shall darken your land no more. In the name of the Lord, I will destroy it.
>>1371130
Well since you read that book you surely can give me some examples?
>>1370863
You know the drill lads.
>>1370576
>there are no lost continents
ok
>there are no lost races
ok
>annunaki are a meme
ok
>we are more wise, fit and peaceful now than any point in history
no
>god is a human creation
no
>alexander the great would have traded his empire for modern ice-cream
no
>people will become wealthier and more prosperous by material conditions and end up like BNW
probably not
>>1370863
Right here is where this thread went to shit.
This board is too autistic to ignore even the most obvious of baits.
>>1370576
Lots of people. Most archaeologists become interested in the field due to fascination with the unknown and dreams of discovery. There's still tons upon tons of stuff out there waiting to be discovered, there's just not enough money to fund all of these excavations because doing it right is so expensive.
>>1370632
I don't know anon.
But maybe those pangs are genetically selected in you: society got by through theism and selected for progeny who had religion in their blood - it was the impetus for societal cohesion and advancement.
Now that has been revoked and you're left like a lost child.
>>1370731
interesting.
Having studied social science it was basically a commandment to believe in it. I was skeptical and left the farm to hard science, and never thought to disprove it. Do you have anything that could point to me as to why?
What about a social science like economics?
>>1370795
I disagree. The concept of distributions can be seen in nature a lot especially the normal distribution. It's not a stretch of the imagination to suggest that it should also be applicable to many psychosocial constructs.
Further, from what you study you think history is a sufficient tool with which to make judgement. The issue here is that the conditions and contexts of history are vast and various. If one is measuring idiosyncratic behaviour history plays very little role.
More importantly the social phenomena is also context base like 'emotional display'. Certain cultures will do things in certain ways and history is not a good foundation, in this sense, to predict modern reactions precisly (while it may give general understanding).
Statistics is super important but if you're afraid of numbers and theory that's fine too.
To me something collective like sociology would be better suited to historical analysis (but still needs stats).
>>1372277
>irony
We're about post irony now grandpa. Can the old Gods even compete?
>>1372298
Now that's the spirit.
BNW?
>>1370576
Allow me OP
>Certain it is that work, worry, labor and trouble, form the lot of almost all men their whole life long. But if all wishes were fulfilled as soon as they arose, how would men occupy their lives? what would they do with their time? If the world were a paradise of luxury and ease, a land flowing with milk and honey, where every Jack obtained his Jill at once and without any difficulty, men would either die of boredom or hang themselves; or there would be wars, massacres, and murders; so that in the end mankind would inflict more suffering on itself than it has now to accept at the hands of Nature.
>>1370930
>>But it's also true.
No it isn't, why? Because there is no reliable evidence for any of it.
>>1371236
You realize that doesn't mean that Asartru isn't the one true faith right? That's just one dumb christcuck's opinion.
>>1372375
Brave New World.
>>1371001
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splitting_of_the_moon
Shut the fuck up.
What flavor of ice cream?
>>1370576
>Understanding the whole of human history as groping for a transcendent meaning where there isn't any seems really bleak to me, and I feel like it shouldn't. I'm not religious, but I feel an almost kind of religious craving for a mystic glimpse at history that we've missed. Anyone else feel this way?
I did, for a while. Then I heard a Mahatma Gandhi quote and it got me thinking.
>"Whatever you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do it."
The universe around us is mundane and boring, yet we can take that mud and shape it into something useful. If there is anything with meaning at all, grand bridges, engines and ships are among them, or weed, thick booties and on point hip hop if you prefer. Regardless, necessities like bridges should be somewhere on your list of priorities and folks like Isambard Kingdom Brunel here helped bring them into existence. We can follow in his example.
>>1372277
Can hardly be blamed now that we know all the gods we once revered so intensely are in all likelihood just memes. I'm not certain the experience of the common person has really changed all that much due to this knowledge, though.
Did the average person in the past really spend all that much time searching for an ultimate meaning or truth in their religion or did they just sort of drift through life not really thinking too hard about it or caring as people do now?
>>1371166
>For instance, it doesn't matter what my opinion of the color of a clear sky is, for some odd reason, it never ceases to be blue
fun fact about that:
names for colors are a thing that only develops in languages when the people speaking it are properly able to manipulate color and also have some length of civilized history. for example, in the illiad, homer speaks of an ocean that is oinos, which means "wine-like", so generations and generations of scholars thought that ocean had to be dark red and it was supposed to be "wine red", but in reality, they just didnt have proper words for colors since those were there, but also relatively unimportant as you couldnt do anything with them. so they only had words for dark and light, oinos being a word for dark, like in "the ocean is dark". the order in which color words are developed in a language is actually surprisingly specific and comparable between most.
point being: black and blue often share the same word for a long time. and the sky is always there, its so present in fact that you dont really pay attention to its color when you live in that kind of culture. some linguists did tests with natives and they answered that the sky was "black".
so, in a sense, the sky isnt always blue. thats a cultural construct.
>>1370576
>there are no list continents
>no lost civilizations
Continents - No
A missing Ice Age Pre Deluge civilization in the Black Sea Basin - Yes
>>1371083
You know this is also a philosophy board right?
You're gonna need to improve that level of argumentation.
Human beings have always glimpsed the One God and his purposes. The Greeks with their philosophy contemplated him from afar, the Jews knew him as a historical, personal presence. In the East, there was rumour of him among the Hindus and the Chinese. Pursuing Him was difficult, so lesser gods and lesser goods dominated human culture instead. It was a world without hope, for even the very best could only hope to see more clearly than others the gulf that lay between man and his Creator. Despair festered in the pagan heart, and it lurks there still.
But then a great thing happened: it began to be known that the One God had come upon the earth, entered into history, and reconciled human nature to himself. He joined himself to humanity and killed its frailty once and for all. The dark bargains men made with the petty powers of the world, or the finite sacrifices to the true God, were utterly redundant in light of God's gift of Himself. In the Christ man achieved a dignity he had never yet known, for he was to be the friend of God, and the inheritor of eternal life. History now had a horizon, and it was glorious. There were wars and heresies still to be fought, of course- for some the meaning of God's act in history was too sublime, and they wished to return to the old distance, which seemed simpler. The pagans, moreover, didn't disappear at once, and there lingers some remnant of the old order in every human heart, even Christian ones.
Gradually, more signs of the New Order emerged. The One God gave us an ordered cosmos, so understanding it and mastering it were acts of worship. Our faith in the Logos gave us a Method, and that Method produced wonders which still dazzle us. But the old idolatry reasserted itself. In the flood of finite goods, we lost sight of the infinite good. God cannot be driven back into heaven, however. The New Order will swallow every resurgence of the Old, as is the way of things, until Heaven and Earth themselves are new again.
>>1374136
Why is Turkey so green
>>1374565
Turkey isn't that desertic as far as I can remem-
>pic related
Oh. I guess the green is to differentiate the hinterlands from the sandy coasts. I mean, northern greece shouldn't be that green either.
