What are some good /his/ approved Youtube channels?
Adam Curtis' Century of Self and Bitter Lake
Crash Course history is pretty good, watched it in school once
I'm just gonna namedrop a few of my subscriptions:
>Historia Civilis
>Reply History
>The Great War
>Epic History TV
>Real Crusades History
>GREAT MILITARY BATTLES
>Metatron
>Forgotten Weapons
Favorite out of these is Historia Civilis, i love his format with classical music + those animations, and the length of the videos is optimal. Metatron is a bit too ranty. "GREAT" channel is basically reposting some documentaries in AWFUL quality, not the best documentaries but interesting enough.
Is PIE and the standard theory of european languages really needed to explain why most european languages are related to one another?
They're all related to latin and greek and we have no record of other indo-european languages from europe until well after the romans had extensive contact with and influence on all the people who speak them. The further you trace back those languages the more they start to sound like latin and greek.
Conversely, PIE is a completely hypothetical, constructed language and there's no evidence of its existence. Doesn't it make more sense to just conclude that germanic, celtic and slavic languages are all based on the interpretation and adoption of latin by the people in those different areas of europe with the influence of their own native languages? That seems like the obvious, straight forward and common sense conclusion to draw. Why is any other explanation necessary, let alone one that's so speculative, hypothetical and fanciful, and without any physical evidence? It seems to have come about circumstantially and under the influence of political motivations and romanticism.
A lot of european nationalities had fanciful narratives of their origins in the orient that were formulated in medieval times or the renaissance, like the Scoti tribe being ruled by an egyptian queen who migrated to ireland or the British being descended from the Israelites. The Germans had their own origin narrative of being descend from persians.
>>1155943
Celtic languages still exist and are clearly from PIE, likewise with Germanic languages.
>>1155948
but PIE is not an actual language that is known to have existed, its constructed and hypothetical. There's no record of its existence at all. So its circular reasoning to say that celtic and germanic languages must descend from a language which was invented out of celtic and germanic languages
>>1155943
>Is PIE and the standard theory of european languages really needed to explain why most european languages are related to one another?
Yes
>Doesn't it make more sense to just conclude that germanic, celtic and slavic languages are all based on the interpretation and adoption of latin by the people in those different areas of europe with the influence of their own native languages?
Explain Sanskrit and Hittite
Sefer Yetzirah (Book of Creation)
- How did the Jewish Kabbalah Tree of Life become the Hermetic or Christian Kabbalah Tree of Life which Tarot users are so familiar? This post is not a forum on the eschatological soundness of either system, but rather an inquiry into the development of both systems with emphasis on the transition between the two systems and the Hermetic System’s subsequent use of Tarot.
>Sefer Yetzirah [is] the earliest extant Hebrew text of systematic, speculative thought. (Scholem, Kabbalah, 1966, p23).
- That is the place to start. It is the first discussion of the 32 “secret paths of wisdom”. Scholem believes the Sefer Yetzirah was written between the 3rd and 6th centuries in Palestine. It is attributed to a Rabbi Akiva, but this is speculation. At this early stage, there was no Tree of Life.
- While this is where I personally wish to start, if any wish to comment, you can jump in anywhere; pre Zohar, post Zohar, Reuchlin, Agrippa, Mathers, Levi et al. The floor is open. How did we as a species start with an obscure 2000 word document and end up with the New Age movement of today?
- (I am especially interested to the initially transition from the Jewish paths on the Tree to the Hermetic paths. Not all sources from that period are available in English and some have only recently been translated.)
- I am barely a novice in the study of the material. If only there were young females who would like to participate in a more personal study of this subject.
For the moment, I leave this to you /his/ ANONs. I’ll check back on your progress later.
>>1137819
why young females?
>>1138084
OP Here...
I would much rather hang out with some 20 something chick than some 20 something dude. Pretty simple really. Wiccan and other occult chicks can be pretty receptive to new ideas.
>>1138153
Do you believe that this knowledge can be achieved through some kind of scientific approach.
Why this kind of stuff can't be measured?
Sorry for the off-topic questions.
Thoughts on this man?
Some of his YouTube videos are enlightening.
>cocain
Pure ideology
>>1146948
and so forth
I'm reading about how Soviet Union constantly neglected agriculture in favor of heavy industry and i just don't get it. They were literally cutting on producing vital element such as food in order to build more steel factories, which were pretty much all profitless and didn't achieve shit except for dick waving and some minor export.
The country that included such grain-rich and fertile lands as Ukraine lived on from famine to famine and had to import grain instead of exporting it because no one actually bothered to invest in what was surely the most important resource. Instead they were desperately trying to turn 100% agrarian society into an all-out industrial utopia their whole existence.
And then you had Khrushchev who actually recognized the agricultural problem but fucked up as well by trying to plant corn in the Arctic.
What the fuck were those people thinking. Why would you even have planned economy if you don't know how to plan it properly.
>no response
Fuck your shitty reddit board
I don't know OP, but I am also interested in seeing some responses
bump
>>1171854
It's a slow board, I don't know much other than Lysenko being a mistake.
One thing every bad reader of Nietzsche seems to get wrong is they think he advocated selfishness.
Nietzsche did not advocate selfishness. He basically looked down on base egoism as being what literally everyone in the herd does. Your average family is filled with people satisfying base urges and not contemplating morality.
Nietzsche actually liked people who could be irrationally moral, he even liked Christians like Dostoevsky above your average herd person.
Can we discuss other common misconceptions of Nietzsche?
Nietzsche sure liked looking down on things
Nietzsche like Dostoevsky because he only read Notes from Underground. If he read more of Dosto, he'd have cried out in alarm that Dosto advocates for remorse and contrition.
>>1162640
Well yeah, Nietzsche wouldn't be able to tolerate Dosto's stupidity with religion. But I think he earned Nietzsche's respect as a thinker as far as he could.
And I do still think Nietzsche would esteem Dosto above common people.
>>1162652
I would hope so, considered Dostoevsky addresses most of Nietzsche's ideas before Nietzsche does.
The following isn't a sarcastic request: Please introduce me to Christianity, /his/.
If that's too broad, I have a few questions I'd like to have an answer from those who are generally more well-read in terms of history instead of Wikipedia. Also, I heard that religion threads don't go well, so I'm very well prepared for a shitstorm.
Question #1: What are the connections between Christianity and Judaism?
Question #2: Is Jesus really the "Pacifist Hippie" that everyone portrays him as?
Question #3: In a rough percentage, how much of the Bible (excluding Genesis and Revelations) are historically accurate?
Question #4: Why did Christianity gain popularity and not just stay a Jewish mystery cult?
Question #5: On a scale of "no man's land" to "landmine field", approximately how many interpolations are possibly still left in the Bible?
Question #6: In your own opinion, how good (in terms of morality) is Christianity compared to other religions?
Feel free to add anything more, any additional knowledge is always appreciated.
Also, to the guy who always ruins every Christianity thread: Please, I beg of you, do not shit this thread up.
>>1161675
Read the fucking bible
>>1161686
The Bible doesn't really answer questions 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, though. I've read it, I just want to hear a historian's opinion on it, that isn't sugarcoated to fit mass media.
>>1161675
>Question #1: What are the connections between Christianity and Judaism?
A better question is: What are the connections between Judaism and Zoroastrianism?
>Question #2: Is Jesus really the "Pacifist Hippie" that everyone portrays him as?
Not really, he was a Jew. Guy told his apostles to arm themselves, and he wasn't very keen about the corrupt Temple Priests and Roman Occupation.
>Question #3: In a rough percentage, how much of the Bible (excluding Genesis and Revelations) are historically accurate?
You have to read the Bible with other sources to get the clearer picture. If you just read the Bible, you aren't getting the full history, just a theological interpretive history. Any good historian will tell you to read multiple sources and cross reference them. Read Roman historians as well as the Bible.
>Question #4: Why did Christianity gain popularity and not just stay a Jewish mystery cult?
Sort answer: Pauline Theology.
>Question #5: On a scale of "no man's land" to "landmine field", approximately how many interpolations are possibly still left in the Bible?
Every time the bible is translated into another language, there is always interpolations.
>Question #6: In your own opinion, how good (in terms of morality) is Christianity compared to other religions?
I don't go there. I'm more interested in the historical, secular, and sociological aspects of religion. A question like this just leads to a mess of proselytization; I'm not interested in that crap.
/his/ related tattoos?
I've been thinking about getting a tattoo for awhile with some historical context behind it and have come across some interesting tattoos to look at.
Does /his/ want a tattoo similar to this or have one?
This one would be cooler maybe if it wasn't so geometric
>>1169354
By tattoo similar to this I mean /his/ related tattoos, not pic related
I was always interested in American history too but since I'm just an immigrant over here I'm kind of reluctant getting one since I'm not actually American
Is it acceptable for someone with no Norse heritage to identify as a nose pagan?
It isn't even acceptable for someone with Norse heritage to identify as a Pagan.
>>1163721
No.
>>1163721
You cannot change your blood heritage but you can change your cultural heritage.
Was he the greatest?
>>1161615
Why not?
>>1161612
The only great thing about him is how much fucking he did.
Throughout history, which culture has been the most masculine? I'm talking manly men doing manly things like getting buff and fighting a lot while being incredibly heroic and honorable.
Jews
>>1155913
Every ultra manly culture also had a hell of a lot of gay sex.
Every effeminate culture bans homosexuality.
I personally put more stock into the idea that Christianity is just a sham, but I'm still not sure. I feel like the only arguements in support of the religion that I've heard are little more than "muh faith". I do want to hear the other side of the issue, so please feel free to discuss
Define "Validity". The historical veracity of Jesus's existence is pretty much accepted as a fact. Every legitimate historical scholar accepts that Jesus was a man who lived in Galilee at the time that the bible says he did, that he was baptized by John the Baptist, that he traveled the land as a preacher and spoke of Salvation and the Coming Kingdom of God, and that he was eventually Crucified under the orders of Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate. This is much is basically considered irrefutable by modern historians.
As for validity of "Jesus Christ is the Messiah" beyond simple faith, it IS worth noting that Jesus was hardly the only figure at the time who was considered to be the Messiah by his followers. It was actually relatively commonplace at the time; Roman Occupied Judea had scores of men claiming to be the Jewish Messiah who would lead God's Chosen People to overthrow their oppressors. The real difference is that most of these Messianic Sects either fizzled out or just extinguished after the head of them died, but Christianity only grew stronger and more popular after Christ's Crucifixion. There are numerous reasons you could give for this, but you can probably guess which ones followers of Christianity go for.
>>1154919
Both of these are correct, though you have to keep in mind that 'The Messiah' was supposed to create a new Jewish state immediately. Not die on a cross as some bullshit sacrifice.
That said, you could argue that the destruction of Rome by Christianity was miraculous and fulfillment of the prophecies saying Rome would be destroyed.
>>1154963
>though you have to keep in mind that 'The Messiah' was supposed to create a new Jewish state immediately. Not die on a cross as some bullshit sacrifice.
That's subject to interpretation though; Christians will point to the idea of the "Kingdom of God" that is attributed to Christ, and the idea that a universal kingdom of the Lord in which all believers are a part of was established through him.
In this context, many passages that were meant to predict the coming of the messiah ("Once he is King, leaders of other nations will look to him for guidance", "He will include and attract people from all cultures and nations", "Knowledge of God will fill the world", "He will be a messenger of peace", "Death will be swallowed up forever", etc.) seem to be fulfilled.
Why did Nazis think Jews were racially inferior? What even led them to come to that conclusion?
Because Jews secretly control the entire world. How they could pull that off without being racially inferior?
Jews are fucking ugly as they stink. You tend to think of people like that as inferior subconsciously even if they're actually smart.
>>1169419
They're aesthetically unappealing and bodily unfit, in addition to a general inclination towards treachery and tribalism.
Did she deserve it?
>>1157848
Yes.
Nobles can suck on Lenin's mummified dick.
>>1157848
Only lonely reactionaryfag virgins will say no
>>1157853
>only lonely reactionaryfag virgins will say no to a young woman being murdered in cold blood
pinkos are soulless
you'd enjoy the gulags
What are you planning on watching, /his/? Gonna start pic related and Blackadder soon, hope they're good.
>>1152614
The Tudors is good but don't expect historical accuracy. From the same dude involved in the one good Elizabeth movie and that one bad sequel.
If you're into interpretation of history on TV watch the Showtime Borgias and than the European Borgia. Its weird.
>>1152624
HBO's Rome is my favorite, what would you recommend?
Also, why doesn't Byzantium or the HRE ever have any good movies about them?
>>1152624
It's pretty accurate, granted he doesn't get grossly fat but there's no egregious history snafus.
