Why are so many schizophrenics religious?
>>1192774
Why are almost zero schizophrenics religious?
Why are so schizophrenics left-handed?
>>1192774
Hey I had psychosis, am either schizo or bipolar. But I only "believe" in nonsense when psychotic.
It is not like I'm delusional all day.
But some schizos are indeed delusional all day, every day. Mostly.
Can you recommend me any good education materials for the Battle for Berlin?
I'm looking for a thorough documentary or a thin book I can read in a hurry.
>>1192592
NOT FUCKING BEEVOR
>>1192854
Disregard. Read Beevor's Battle of Berlin.
>>1193816
Go to bed Antony Beevor.
Where did the Sumerians originally come from? Did they develop from local cultures like the Ubaid or did they migrate there or what?
>inb4 google
i like the way /his/panics explain thiings
Bump for interesting thread.
>>1192563
Well they spoke an isolated language that isn't Semitic or Indo-European and a lot of consensus on their origins and ethnicity seems to be based around believing they are descendants of neolithic farmers in the Near East that predate any Semitic ones who arrived later on.
>>1192563
>Did they develop from local cultures like the Ubaid
They were the Ubaid.
>History is written by the victors
How much true Is this line?
>>1192558
True, to a degree.
Example: every damn country who fought in ww2 with the exception of Germany.
Said some dudes on meth that jerk off to baby porn
>>1192558
>Historians disagree with my layman fringe views informed by wikipedia and pop history
>They must be part of a conspiracy to suppress me!
I want to read the books of the most important philosophers of history, do you guys have any list?
you guys can do it
>>1192550
let me google that for you cunt
>>1192671
thanks, any progress?
Is sub-Roman Britain a useful parallel to modern Sub-Saharan Africa?
A bit more to Colonial Sub-Saharan Africa.
You're saying they should hire foreign mercenaries to rape and subjugate most of the place?
Then starting a campaign of perfidy against the world?
>>1192207
That isn't sub-Roman Britain.
While http://www.historyfiles.co.uk/FeaturesBritain/BritishMap.htm may be suspect as fuck it gets somewhat close to representing how chaotic shit was.
What book would /his/ reccomend to someone who has lost all hope?
Top entry of the Truth Contest
What happened??
Too low population + surrounded by people who hated them
>>1192054
did you know that the king of norway was held as a slave by estonian vikings for 12 years?
>>1192072
>estonian vikings
Tell me about Saddam Hussein (pre-1991 of course). What did he do right? What did he do wrong?
a source on Saddam, with an out of the orthodox perspective, is As'ad Abukhalil a Lebanese sociologist in California. search his blog(using the search bar) for references to Saddam. Apparently Saddam was into secularism(gave hints of atheism) and for a time was warming up to Israel.
Also search his blog for atheism, Arab atheism and the history of it rarely gets mentioned in the west.
>>1191970
Right?
Spread the oil money just right.
Fought the Iranians.
Played the superpowers like a fiddle.
Put the Kurds in their place (literally).
Puts the Shi'i in their place.
Killed radical Sunni clerics.
Wrong?
Trust Bush Sr.
Invaded Kuwait
Stopped killing radical Sunni and Shia clerics.
Didn't just comply with UN and American demands.
I miss him so much.
Someone once told me people weren't allowed to own land in colonial times in the Americas if they didn't have facial hair as it was a sign that they had white mans blood in them.
Can't seem to find any references to this through google searches though, is it a myth and bs?
>>1191947
Not myth
Something much worse:
A meme
It was a meme
(Possibly, let's see what the others think)
>>1191947
Sounds total bullshit, the Spanish gave great privileges to allied Mexican peoples
>>1191947
Indian chiefs literally were kept in charge with the spaniards. They were the ones who decided what indians work with the encomenderos and what indians continue living the life.
Just what was his deal?
>>1191839
Can we conclude that he was autistic?
>>1191839
"M'Vestal."
>>1191848
He even has a neckbeard
ITT: Empires/Kingdoms which were once huge and powerful and feared worldwide that are now dying or irrelevant
>>1191419
> If the British Army landed in Europe, I'd get the Belgian police to arrest them
>t. Bismarck
Not really that feared
>>1191426
>Haha those Brits are pussies!
>lose two wars to Brits
>>1191430
>British """"""Empire""""""""
>Wales, England
>Scotland which almost voted to leave
>A tiny corner of Ireland, an island which has never once had a generation which hasn't witnessed at least one anti-uk uprising since they first set foot there
>Some irrelevant islands dotted around the globe
GG
How were people communicating with each other before english become international language?
Inb4 latin
I doubt they knew latin in Asia
>>1191315
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_lingua_francas
Literally seconds.
Italian without the spoken part
>>1191322
>communication solely through autism
Truly, our ancestors were advanced.
1/2
Bear with me here /his/
Wouldn't it be right to say that each and every healthy human being has an end that guides each one of his actions?
that end can be called many different things but the most common is happiness, and if happiness is a state of mind that can be achieved by being the best possible version of you, shaping and honing your virtue's which can be defined as Aristotle define them as the states of mind which concern man and which also warrant praise, such as bravery, temperance, liberality etc, dictated by our common ability to empathize and reason, and also the Buddhist concept of happiness that suggests peace and clearness of mind as the basic requirement for a state of true happiness to manifest itself in the human soul, if we can define that happiness is the wholesome and natural state each human strive to reach and have such detailed and clear formulas as to how to achieve it, wouldn't it be true to say that happiness = good and as such to an extent morality is objective?
sure I'd argue that humans as subjective beings can understand their reality and situations from many different points of view, for example consider that I am a 40 year old infertile lady and I'm visiting my nephew's 7th birthday party, I see him smiling and from one point of view I can feel very sad that I'd never had children of my own and if that's the state of mind I choose to give meaning to, that will also be the reality I experience,but if I go outside of my ego, and choose to empathize and feel the happiness of seeing my nephew smiling and give that meaning wouldn't it be a good? wouldn't it be an objectively better state of mind and reality to experience as per the values we have set above?
so my point is that we have an incredible power to give meaning to different concepts and thoughts that make up our internal subjective reality and filter the input of information we get from the outside world in either(to simplify it):
a positive way
a negative way
2/2
so couldn't it be said that, knowing all of this, objective morality truly does exists?
sure we can argue about it to no end like the solipsism vs realism argument of 2+2=5 or 4,but if for all practical reasons it equals 4 every time we test it against our experience of reality it equals 4 isn't it objective enough to be considered true?
I'll go even one step further and suggest that if each and every person would dictate to himself a healthy code of ethics, no bad to the extent we have today(wars, poverty,homicide, etc) would exist in the world and we will live in a much more stable environment, in other words if humans would seek harmony within themselves, without even trying they will find it outside of them, it's truly sad that the formula for a good, beautiful and wholesome life was invented as long as thousands of years ago but we are still enslaved to ignorance.
>>1191267
>Wouldn't it be right to say that each and every healthy human being has an end that guides each one of his actions?
No.
>>1191300
why than do you wake up from your bed at morning?
why don't you kill yourself?
obviously you must have a certain end which drive to do your actions throughout the day, that's relative to your idea of happiness.
Is there a definition for people who are culturally, religiously, ethnically and linguistically mixed (when it comes to hereditary)?
Example: Grandparents from China, Mongolia, Kazachistan and Russia, parents born in USA and Bhutan then have a child who grows up in Swizerland (Which speaks English, French, Italian and German).
i.e. You can't call them a "Russian" even though they speak it, nor an "American" even though they speak English.
Definition for these kind of people?
Mongrel
>>1191085
When it comes to race and breed, yes.
But nation, religion, ethnicity and linguistics... not so much.
>>1191072
Creole is the closest thing I can thinking depending on its context.
