>other humanities such as philosophy
This kind of discussion pops up all the time on other boards, it's cool to have a place where it's not totally off topic.
I wanna talk art, specifically what makes something art, and whether different works can be "better" or "worse" than another.
Like, we all have this idea in us that Beethoven (for example) is a better composer than, say, a kid learning piano. And that more experimental works are of more value than something cliche and unoriginal. What makes that so?
Interesting point. It puzzles me that I can't even think of a reasonable definition for what is art.
However, for the Beethoven vs. the kid, I suppose music needs harmony.
If I'm not mistaken, some musicians attempted to make music without harmony in the early 20th century, but everybody gave up because they couldn't listen to it
>>9803
>I suppose music needs harmony
See, this causes all sorts of problems though.
Like, in terms of just music you've got all sorts of improvisational genres, atonal music, John Cage's shenanigans, and so on.
For the rest of art, this would mean that there's some kind of ruleset an art form must abide by in order to be art, limiting experimentation and the like.
I mean, maybe that's the case, but it doesn't sit right with me.
>>8446
experimental works are only seen as valuable now because we are in a post-modern age of art. before it was seen as degenerate, but now with the world changing so fast, at least some experimentation in art gives it credence. What is considered art is a reflection of the time from which it comes.
What would have happen if the Roman Empire somehow invaded China
>>8421
Probably would be shortly defeated because he would be facing the only other as massively centralized empire of the world in their home turf, while months away from their home with a possibly hostile Iranian population on his back fucking with their supply lines.
>>8421
Better question would be who would win between a Roman Legion or one of the armies of the various Chinese dynasties.
Asking who would win invasion wise is retarded either way because the geography puts neither close for a practical war.
how difficult is to understand once for all:
holding a huge empire like Rome was not possible with ancient infrstructures.
Why is it the best philosophy?
It's not just pure hedonism, prior to what some people think. There's actually a lot of thought behind it. It's also not entirely antithetical to Stoicism. Both philosophies have similar views on death for example.
>>8416
I agree with a lot of what he had to say. Modern philosophy will never agree on his shit or anything for that matter because "le what if you take what he's saying to it's logical end?" crap.
Is this the most embarrassing military defeat in History?
>So great was the shame, and the ill luck thought to adhere to the numbers of the Legions, that XVII, XVIII and XIX never again appear in the Roman Army's order of battle. The Battle of the Teutoburg Forest was keenly felt by Augustus, darkening his remaining years. According to the biographer Suetonius, upon hearing the news, Augustus tore his clothes, refused to cut his hair for months and, for years afterwards, was heard, upon occasion, to moan, "Quinctilius Varus, give me back my Legions!" (Quintili Vare, legiones redde!)
>>8359
It was a serious blunder, that would set them up for centuries of barbarian dickings in the future.
>>8359
There's also Crassus losing 34-40,000 men against the Persian-Parthian army under Surena who numbered made a quarter of their own troops at Carrahe.
Why did Jews get Israel after WW2, /his/?
They have fought for it and won
France (diplomacy) and Czechoslovakia (arms shipments and training) helped
Bad UK policies, people wanting to screw the UK, nazi germany and those jew refugee ships sinking made the world few bad for the jews.
Also, >>8396, Zionists were much more competent at terrorism than Muslims.
>>8558
Not only at terrorism
Modern Arab armies are useless for some reason
Was rapid, post-WW2 decolonization in Africa, Arabia and Asia a mistake? Considering the wealth of nations such as SA and Rhodesia, which kept colonial structures (somewhat) in place, and the instability and poverty that occurred elsewhere, would it have been preferable to keep the colonies, and slowly pull out over say, 50 years?
Ever since racial theory was thrown out of the window it became hard to make a good point for people staying under the rule of some foreigner group.
It would just keep on hogging resources while the population would be as unwilling as ever.
>>8235
I read a book on the African decolonisation processes a few months ago. It really did seem that it was just the Africans' anger at the idea of a slow orderly withdrawal which fucked them in the end and left them in the hands of corrupt dictators in artificial countries.
>>8235
Why dont we ask rhodesia?
Even if they were able to militarily defeat the US Navy somehow, did Imperial Japan ever have enough actual manpower to occupy and pacify the whole West Coast of the United States on top of occupying China and Southeast Asia?
>>8224
No. Imperial Japan knew that their only strategy was to bleed the US so badly in initial engagements (a single decisive engagement, they hoped) that it would make peace.
>>8271
This. By 1942 they were already hopelessly overstretched.
>>8271
>such obsession with a single decisive engagement
Well, one can't blame them since that's how they won the Russo-Japanese War.
ITT: We post historical leaders who would have been ashamed of their countries if they saw them today
>>8109
Almost all of them really.
>>8155
This
We should do the opposite. Which leaders would actually be proud of the current state of their nations?
Can it be fixed?
After all the bullshit conspiracy theory and doomsday programs, I don't think so
It's dead Jim.
One day I looked at their program, and they had 1 (one) show about history.
>PAWN STARS
>ALIENS
>lumberjacks
its beyond saving
/his/ humour thread
Who is it /his/?
How come Mussolini never got the same success as Hitler? Why didn't Mussolini get a cutting edge military to kick British ass? I would say he could, at least a good navy!
Italy isn't nearly as powerful or relevant as Germany.
Focused too much on irrelevant shitholes like Africa.
>>7873
Italians had a good navy in WWII
Italy lacks German industry
Let's discuss this great empire.
It was overshadowed by Roman state, but it was pretty interesting.
I do wish some of their histories had survived. Seeing everything from their perspective would have been great.
>>7856
>overshadowed by Roman state
Wut?
Neither persians nor romans/greeks could defeat each other.
>>8782
Rome was a more impactful state, he means.
How does this make you feel?
Upset and legitimately triggered when I first saw it.
mad
History in the making. They'll regret this.
I'm glad that the names are all recorded so they can be punished when the time comes.
Favourite British Monarch and why?
That guy who stood on the Hastings Bridge and killed like 40 people. He's the real king.
Henry V because 100 years war
>>7825
>implying that happened
Henry VIII for giving literally 0 fucks.
Post old flags that don't exist anymore.
![9402[2].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/o1kg5Yf.jpg "9402[2]")
