I'm interested in trying to take on the philosophical canon on my own while I'm on a break from school. How should I tackle this?
I've already got the works of the Greeks at my disposal, the pre-socratics, Plato, and Aristotle. After I finish those, where do I go from there?
Tbqh, everything you've ever going to read after reading the Greeks is basically commentary on their work.
>>910199
What about people like Kant or Wittengstein? Admittedly I only have a passing familiarity with the works of most philosophers, and as of yet have gained most of my knowledge from secondary literature, but I have been led to believe that most of philosophy goes a little farther than being mere commentary on the works of the Greeks.
I think Whitehead was being intentionally hyperbolic when he said that shit.
>>910218
I was being intentionally hyperbolic as well.
If you are really interested, I'd start with Descartes, and then do Hume and Kant etc. And after those perhaps do Hegel(if you can stomach it), followed by Schopenhauer and Nietzsche.
At least that's what I did.
>"My son is taking a course in philosophy, and last night we were looking at something by Spinoza and there was the most childish reasoning! There were all these attributes, and Substances, and all this meaningless chewing around, and we started to laugh. Now how could we do that? Here's this great Dutch philosopher, and we're laughing at him. It's because there's no excuse for it! In the same period there was Newton, there was Harvey studying the circulation of the blood, there were people with methods of analysis by which progress was being made! You can take every one of Spinoza's propositions, and take the contrary propositions, and look at the world and you can't tell which is right."
>>910043
>the intellectual limitations of STEMfags
>>910043
I would not pay any attention to the man who stifled a generation of bright young physicists interested in the foundational assumptions of their work through a pernicious propagation of the "shut up and calculate" dogma
>>910053
Why does this board foster such thirsty and butthurt tribals?
The blood pressure of obscurantist continentals is off the charts
>>909952
>looking hume up incognito
Didn't he actually get fired from a library for putting porn on the shelves or something of the like? Best philosopher.
More like the the Preposterous Pajeet (STEM student struggling with the humanities).
>>909952
Why are Scottish enlightenment philosophers so awesome?
>Hume
>Smith
>Mill
Would the Confederate states have turned out as modern day Mexico if the northern states accepted their declaration of independence or would they have been able to get roughly the same standards of living and governance they got today?
As I get it the south's economy was almost all based on plantations at the time, the plantation owners having quite a lot of power just like in many Latin American states.
Alternate history is a good way to give yourself brain cancer.
If the south continued to rely almost soley on cotton then eventually the cotton market would crashed (like it was heading towards when the primary buyers of southern cotton France and England started relying on Eygpt instead) and they wouldn't be in a position to transition to a different industry.
Or they could have diversified their portfolio before the crash which wasn't happening because cotton was just too good of a return on investment.
Or maybe if the South did succeed peacefully aliums would have taken it as a sign to decloak from their invisible flying saucers and conquer us puny, passive earthmen.
>>909888
The CSA would look more like South Africa than to moder day dixieland, Mexico and South America would be more prosperous since the US would be too busy fucking with the south instead of spending resources to desestabilice hispanic countries.
>>909888
No, slavery was already on its last gasps. Even if the Union was never formed to counter the Confederacy and allowed the South to secede, slavery would've eventually died out in several decades, maybe a century at long. But regardless I don't see the South turning into a shithole like Mexico.
Why north african enslaved 10 millions of their sub-saharian counter-parts?
Should they pay reparation?
No because they had the foresight to neutur their slaves. Whitey BTFO
Are Tutsis, Hutus and Twas just different social groups of one ethnicity (much like peasants and nobility in old Europe) or different ethnic groups that lived in parallel in one place?
>>909763
>much like peasants and nobility in old Europe
In a lot of places, the peasantry would've been made up mostly of former Roman/Celtic peoples and the nobility would've been made up of Germanic assholes (Goths) running protection rackets.
Has there even been a war with more than two sides?
Sure the reasonable thing to do is form alliances but has there ever been a non-compromise that resulted in a free-for-all?
Syria was few months ago.
FSA, SAF and ISIS
balkans
Mostly civil wars, here is some i know.
The Jewish Revolt of 66AD: Rome, Sadducees, Jewish Zealots and the Sicarii
The Fitna's (a long line of civil wars within Islam. Some like the second and fourth Fitna has 3 sides.)
Kongo Civil War (1665-1700) mainly a fight between The house of Kinlaza and The house of Kimpanzu but many minor faction as well as the Portuguese got in action to their own agenda.
Russian Civil war: Pro-Red, Pro-White armies, Allies, Pro-German armies, Pro-Socialists and numerous independence movements. (Rough map related)
Civil War in Lebanon: Don't know much about the war part from the Israeli intervention in 82' but it had factional warfare allover the place, and ceasefires that lasted only 30 minutes.
Second Congo war aka The second Congo civil war aka Africa's world war mainly a fight between the DROC and anti government militias but spawned many complicated conflicts after words such as the Kivu conflict witch currently stands with four sides.
Georgian Civil War: Between Gamsakhurdia's government, The state concil and South Ossetian militias backed with Abkhaz militias
Afghan civil war: (plenty of factions through the 70's till the present)
Syrian civil war.
Plenty more but don't know much about other conflicts than these.
Is anyone here well-versed in old-times ebonics? Because could someone explain what are they singin about:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1k8cJP22n8E
This version is by the Detroit Cobras but original is by Davis Jones & The Fenders
But the lyrics
>I’m boss in the hot sauce
>I’m a dreaming man
>I’m a lamplighter
>I’ve seen the promised land
Like, what does that mean? Is it all dirty innuendo or something?
Are whites really this stupid?
>>909367
friend, just think about them for a second, you'll get it
>>909367
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgsBc3_bXyU
this is easier to understand. And got me laid once.
What are you without your experiences?
>>909331
Chemicals.
Still on lvl 1
Was the Mexican revolution a well photographed conflict? And more importantly, could you recommend me some reading a source material for the conflict?
I'm mostly interested in the clothing and uniforms but pretty much everything goes. But other than that, you're free to discuss the whole thing.
I know very little about it but i've got some pics I saved. Will contribute.
>>909324
>Mexican revolution
It sent a relatively modern wealthy regional power back to the the poors club.
btw the Casasola archive is the main source for all the photographs and videos.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergeant_Stubby
>world war fun
I found this ring in a old trunk. Anyone know what this symbol is?
it's a fucking G
Isn't it a B ?
>>909112
looks like it's a similar style to the Diatessaron
What was it about Peter Abelard's ideas that got people so upset and caused so much arguing and controversy with him and then later people like Bernard of Clairvaux?
He's a very important thinker in that he basically founded scholasticism. He played a big part in the West and the Church embracing reason over blind faith, viewing the universe as something that should be understood logically, and also in turning Aristotle into the main intellectual authority.
But the opposition to him had less to do with his philosophical positions than with personal rivalries. The cathedral schools of France were a highly competitive environment, where teachers depended in their ability to attract and keep students. Some teachers would go to others' classes and heckle them, engage them in debates which could become vicious. Abelard was especially abrasive and especially good at putting down an opponent.
Can someone recommend me some texts on John Adams and Thomas Jefferson's disagreements on liberty and its relationship with law?
I need some perspective to really synthesize about their necessary entailment of each other, since Jefferson's idealization of liberty as being separate to law, and law being bad, seems naive and like it has been completely contradicted by the events of the topical events of the 20th century.
completely contradicted by the the topical events of the 20th century.*
>you cannot delete this post
What a shitty board this is.
Who was the Man in the Iron Mask?
>>908489
he was a big guy
>>908489
The brother of Louis XIV
Iron Man
