How did men pitch woo in olden days?
>>1337382
this isn't r/atheism, fuck off wacko
They grabbed the cunt and fucked her. Men were based back then, unlike the mincing metrosexuals of today.
>>1337382
Relationships were business and political arrangements. Lovers were had as needed and appropriate based on status.
However if you were a female from anything other than a powerful family you were just plain old fucked no matter what you did. More money meant being raped less often.
ITT giga autists only
Pic definitely related
>>1337155
"The propositions of mathematics are devoid of all factual content; they convey no information whatever on any empirical subject matter."
Carl Gustav Heppel
So what is a giga autist and is OP one?
(pic related)
After all, I consider it to be fulfilling and in my self-interest to act on the commands and will of what I consider to be the highest entity in the universe, and hopefully seek union with His energies.
It's about choosing your spooks instead of letting the spooks choose you, right?
Can't really be a Christian without considering sin to be morally wrong.
>>1337135
Right, within a Christian context.
Supposing there is a god introduces considerations like that, but a Stirnerian context doesn't have a god.
So while the Stirnerian context would obviously be seen as immoral from the Christian view, the Stirnerian view really can't put any value judgements on Christianity.
I suppose you could say you can be a Christian Stirnerian, but not a Stirnerian Christian.
>>1337120
>what I consider to be the highest entity in the universe
>highest entity in the universe
You can't be free of spooks and worship something you consider higher than yourself at the same time.
Will we see human cloning in our lifetime? At least on an experimental level?
>>1337010
ask /sci/
>most famous artistic Protestant work, the King James Bible, bears the name of a rampant homosexual who justified himself by insinuating Christ and Saint John were a homosexual couple
>most famous artistic Catholic work was made by a rampant homosexual who inserted homoerotic scenes throughout the work (pic related)
Really, guys?
>>1337006
This is why I'm Greek Orthodox.
ATTENTION /his/ WE ARE BEING RAIDED BY FAGGOTS!
First the Pope Francis thread now this?
>>1337006
oh my YHVH i'm so tired of the christian sects constantly arguing with eachother on /his/
Redpill me on the Renaissance, /his/.
Are the memes about nothing happening in the Middle Ages true?
Or was the Renaissance just a culmination of all the progress made in the High-to-Late Medieval Period?
The high middle ages had trade, but very little artistic or political development outside of the religious realm.
With the Renaissance, you start to get lay literacy and much wider political awareness.
Thank the printing press.
The Renaissance connotes a moment of blossoming art, genius and above all discovery. And indeed, from roughly 1450 to 1550,Genius flourished, as evidenced by the roll call of luminaries who left a permanent mark on civilisation: Copernicus, Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and .Galileo. It shaped the early modern world.
>>1336903
The so-called dark ages are an invention of the Enlightenment. The middle ages had their own good-szied share of scientific and intellectual progress. This image is from /pol/ and I apologize for that, but the book it's about is quite well-referenced, and just about anyone who knows anything about the middle ages will agree with the great majority of its content especially as concerns the scientific progress made in the middle ages. (imo, the author shits a little too much on later period humanists, but taken with a grain of salt it's pretty good.)
Or, if you'd rather take the information in condensed edutainment format, this episode of Terry Jones' medieval lives has some nice tidbits about medieval science: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTf2EzTd1TE
The Renaissance did see some very significant advances, especially in the fields of art and mathematics, but it wasn't exactly the transition from eating mud and sleeping and shit to enlightened humanism that some people bill it as. You've also gotta understand that a lot of modern ideas and attitudes about the middle ages come from the time of the French Revolution, when people played up the barbarism and ignorance of the middle ages to an absurd degree as a slur against the feudal aristocracy who would then be barbaric and ignorant by association. The right of the first night, for example, seen in movies such as Braveheart, was first described at that time, despite having no basis in the historical record.
>the space for unfalsifiable thoughts is infinite
>within this infinite space some potential thoughts that have been thought have gone through the reflexive echo chamber of academia
>I now have to know about, agree with, and worship those particular ideas or else I am alleged to be an uncultured idiot
Why is this allowed?
life is shit, get used to it
>academia
o I am laffn
>he didn't include what ideas he's referring to because we would make fun of him
We try to function on pieces, when the pieces are parts of a whole. We rely so much on the fish given to us, that we don't look at the source of the fish. Some say "Our greatest fundamental is that we have no fundamentals".
I've debated so many times, and I'm just tired of it. I said "I believe in this" and someone would say "Why", so I explain to them why, and they reply "Why is that?", and I'd go further into detail to realize that my piece was perfect, and it was perfectly laid out among other perfect pieces, but my fundamentals were imperfect; and a piece of an imperfection remains nevertheless imperfect.
I'm tired of hearing the old cop out "Morals are subjective" or "Morality doesn't exist". That's just being lazy. We come up with theories like libertarianism or communism, or whatever, to try to explain morals, but when we base civilization on it, and civilization falls, we're left devastated, because we relied solely on a perfect part of an imperfect whole.
Millions of immoralities will occur, equal to the death of millions for some, or maybe it might occur as the feeling of a loss of a loved one; either way, somewhere down the line, all of you will experience an unnecessary immorality, because someone wasn't perfect enough. If you're going to support some ideology, anything, even at the smallest level, you better have some fundamental moral principle that is perfect, to justify it.
Morality is neither objective or subjective. there are only degrees of awakening
>If you're going to support some ideology, anything, even at the smallest level, you better have some fundamental moral principle that is perfect, to justify it.
Ultimately all your angst is pointless, the truth is there is no "perfect moral principal". Moreover even if there was, people would still not apply it in their lives. So better to face cold hard reality than to pine away for an impossible fantasy that wouldn't matter anyway.
Civilization isn't based on morals anyway, that's just after-the-fact observation by moralists
Was ancient egypt culturally related to the rest of the ancient near east like armenia was to greater iran?
>>1336853
No. The ancient east were aryan people, while egypt was connected to african ethiopian culture.
>>1336867
ayo hol up so you be sayin we wuz kangz n shit?
>>1336867
end this meme
egyptians were Phoenician
does nationalism inevitably lead to war ?.
what was Germany like a year or two before Nazism ?
NOT ANOTHER NAZI THEAD THERE ARE A MILLION BILLION ALREADY
STAAAAAAAHP IT
>>1336861
this isn't about nazism, its about nationalism and populism and their catastrophic results.
this is a also about current times, history seem to repeat itself indefinitely
>>1336842
Japan was unarguably the most nationalist country on Earth.
They seen a horde of invaders trading, and Japan was becoming different, so they stopped all trade to remain a peaceful country. Their nationalism was a source of their piece. It was colonialism and globalism which invaded it.
The only reason Germany ended up in war, was because they were invading German parts of different countries to form a new Germany, a German Germany, but they got a little airheaded and occupied a bunch of countries (non-nationalistically) The British empire, for example, wasn't nationalist; rather than keep to themselves and their nation's land, they invaded other lands on the premise of prosperity. Progress is something relatively new, the idea that technological advancement is a moral, and that type of greed is what created the globalist world.
>you will never live in a comfy Ottoman village
Just kill me lads.. I'm ready
>>1336791
>you will never liberate Arabia from the bastard t*rks with your Arab friends
>>1336836
>to be buttfucked by Europe later on
"Doing Katyn, that is shooting in 1940 few-teen thousands Polish prisoners-officers, Stalin did not foresaw that their burial grounds shall be taken by Germans, who in turn dig out the graves, make noise and embarass uncle Joe before the allies. Due to that, in 1944 second Katyn, even though much needed to Stalin, wasn't possible to be performed by his own hands. However, you can always count on Poles. By starting uprising they provoked the killing of about 20000 young Polish inteligentsia with military training and pro-London orientation. Moreover, murdered were also 200000 of their parents, relatives and friends. All of that with not one Soviet bullet, truly by German hands - it wasn't required to lie to anyone about it. Complete political higiene. They'd gone as stones thrown by God for a rampart. In general God was really an ally to Stalin back then, must've really liked him.
London provoked death or dispersal of Varsovians and destruction of the city in a naive faith, that it is possible to drive Germans away, just to create a homewarming committee for Red Army with different political composition than Stalin wanted.
In Warsaw Uprising killed was few-teen times more than in Katyn. Around the number of Polish soldiers killed on every front of WWII and all of its battles: September '39, Lenino, Monte Cassino, Narvik and North Africa, over London and on the Atlantic, in the fights for Pommerian Line and Oder."
What does /his/ think about Warsaw Uprising?
Just as retarded and senseless as polish cavalry charging german tanks in frontal assaults during the 1939 campaign
>>1336752
Useless act od bravery
>>1336945
>polish cavalry charging german tanks in frontal assaults during the 1939 campaign
Can free speech exist in a Fascist society?
Why should it? It's not necessary really.
The illusion definitely, I would do it like now except less obvious thought control
>>1336728
yes but only if it fits with the glorious leader/junta speech
You're a foreign dignitary on a visit to the court of King Louis.
How do you keep from dying of laughter, and causing a war with France?
>>1336649
You can't
Why do you think pic related happened?
Think about France kicking your backwards shitholes ass and eyeing up all the hot fat bottomed girls
>>1336649
But anon that's Leopold I of the Holy Roman Empire
Aside from WWII, which other wars had such "glorious victories", as in the victors marching into the capital of the losers, fighting until the capital was taken completely and the defeat was absolutely decisive?
>>1336633
> victors marching into the capital of the losers, fighting until the capital was taken completely and the defeat was absolutely decisive?
Practically, every real war. WWI was a bit of an exception, since nobody was ready for Trench War.
>>1336633
Punic Wars
Germany vs France in 1871. Paris was besieged and buttfucked from all conceivable angles by the prussians and their allies for literal months. They could've easily marched in but this would have been against the humble prussian mindset.
