>>899536
>sacrum
>"forced"
>"""meme"""
>>899570
>reich
Kantian Ethics or Utilitarianism /his/, which is the better moral theory?
They're both articulated primarily by subjects of autism
>>899237
the dhamma
>>899237
Aristotelian ethics.
Is it REALLY true that Aristotle said that men had more teeth than women and he didn't bother checking because the scientific method hadn't existed yet?
Is knowledge of the greeks just used as a tool for people to look cultured?
Aristotle didn't really know much when it came to science, his philosophy still holds up though
>>899075
No one really cares about Aristotle's science.
This is the equivalent of saying that Einstein is pointless to read because his poetry sucks.
Does anyone know how common it was for a civilian to own a sword in Puritan New England in the 1600's? I ask because I have an ancestor who died in the 1650's in Massachusetts, who in his will left two guns and a sword behind to his sons. He wasn't in the militia, though he served as town constable, and the representative to the general court for his town a few times. There is a story though repeated in branches of the family and in a lot of genealogy books from even the 1800's saying that he had fought in the 30 Years War, that he had gone from Britain to Leiden, Holland (where a lot of Puritans ran), then served in some Protestant continental force or another for a while before going to Massachusetts from Leiden around 1636. I was wondering if that sounds plausible or if it was just some story developed to rationalize his leaving a sword behind. How common was it for a regular citizen to have a sword in that time and place? The South I can get, being a little more martial and Cavalier influenced, but I thought the Puritans might think a civilian sword a mark of pride or something, I don't know, I don't know that much about their everyday practices.
New Englanders who fought in the Pequot War were armed with swords, as John Underhill relates, "our men being compleatly armed, with Corslets, Muskets, bandileeres, rests, and swords (as they themselves related afterward) did much daunt them".
Swords were cheap enough that anyone but a servant or beggar could afford one if he wanted one.
The story of fighting in the 30 years war before going to Massachusetts does no seem unreasonable at all to me. Lots of British fought in the TYW. Wikipedia; "Frederick V's cause became seen as that of Elizabeth Stuart, described by her supporters as "The Jewell of Europe" leading to a stream of tens of thousands of volunteers to her cause throughout the course of the Thirty Years' War. In the opening phase this saw an Anglo-Dutch regiment under Horace Vere head to the Palatinate, a Scots-Dutch Regiment under Colonel John Seton move into Bohemia, and that to be joined by a mixed "Regiment of Brittanes" (Scots and English) led by the Scottish Catholic Sir Andrew Gray."
In 1640 it was ordered in Massachusetts that in every township the attendants at church should carry a "competent number of peeces, fixed and compleat with powder and shot and swords every Lords-day to the meeting-house;" one armed man from each household was then thought advisable and necessary for public safety. In 1642 six men with muskets and powder and shot were thought sufficient for protection for each church. In Connecticut similar mandates were issued, and as the orders were neglected "by divers persones," a law was passed in 1643 that each offender should forfeit twelve pence for each offence. In 1644 a fourth part of the "trayned hand" was obliged to come armed each Sabbath, and the sentinels were ordered to keep their matches constantly lighted for use in their match-locks. They were also commanded to wear armor, which consisted of "coats basted with cotton-wool, and thus made defensive against Indian arrows." In 1650 so much dread and fear were felt of Sunday attacks from the red men that the Sabbath-Day guard was doubled in number. In 1692, the Connecticut Legislature ordered one fifth of the soldiers in each town to come armed to each meeting, and that nowhere should be present as a guard at time of public worship fewer than eight soldiers and a sergeant. In Hadley the guard was allowed annually from the public treasury a pound of lead and a pound of powder to each soldier.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_Librorum_Prohibitorum
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_book-burning_incidents
B-But look at all the stuff they DIDN'T b-burn...
>>898288
Amy Adams is mai waifu
Fukou Da!
Someone post the Irish Monk picture, I don't have it
Question to other STEM fags. When did you give up on the dream of doing anything related to history in your life and why?
> 18
> decided I wanted job security and money
Never had it in the first place. Although when I was a child I wanted to do paleontology as much as I wanted to do astrophysics, even made a schedule splitting up my work hours through the week.
When I grew up I stopped caring about the humanities and developed a passion for history only after I started studying Physics.
>>898260
Comp sci major here.
Well I was really interested in both philosophy and comp sci, so I choose comp sci for financial security, I still study philosophy on my own and don't regret my decision at all.
>he doesn't draw in his spare time
rofl
Have we solved the Problem of Universals?
>>898174
Are there universals at all?
When someone says "horse", like all words it's subjective to context. A certain society might decide zebra are included in the category, but ours doesn't. So there is no universal of horse, there are only linguistic/cultural norms.
I still don't get the problem of universals.
>>898196
The universal word is "huh."
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/everybody-almost-every-language-says-huh-huh-180949822/?no-ist
What are some historical subcultures and/or counter-cultures?
Things like the Incroyables and Merveilleuses in 1795-1799 France, who dressed and behaved in exaggerated, decadent ways as a reaction to the events and end of the Revolution.
Swings Kids
>>898248
>Swing Heil! Swing Heil!
god I love early 90s teen historical dramas: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwU4AGGZi9E
>saint
>...<
>...<
>...<
This agglomeration which was called and which still calls itself the Holy Roman Empire was neither holy, nor Roman, nor an empire.
What can you tell me about historical traps
All I know is that there was a roman emperor named Elagabalus who offered gold to anyone who could make him a woman, and that the prophet Muhammad traveled with MtFs
>>897813
>the prophet Muhammad traveled with MtFs
Source for this? I've never heard that
>tfw not a Roman Emperor with easy access to qt femboys
>>898303
>Source for this? I've never heard that
Sounds hypocritical enough tho.
Also, seeing as Islam considers homosexual relations a big no no, what's the reason for Afghan pederast practicises? Lingering Hellenic culture from the times of Alexander the Great?
Why did old school style imperialism stop? Why did Europeans say to themselves "well instead of slaughtering them all with our superior tech and taking their resources outright well let them govern themselves and actually pay for the stuff". Like what was going through their heads.
1) Many colonies initially started as coaling stations and trading posts. Steamships needed to make frequent stops to get more coal. Might as well put the land to use around them, right? I mean it's costly b- oh no the military we stationed there just conquered all of the natives, now we have to do SOMETHING with it!
2) By the time imperialism started to come apart the colonies were bleeding money. Colonialism benefited the private sector (either directly or indirectly benefiting everyone from the poor to the super wealthy), not the public sector. Eventually, especially after WWI and WWII, the drain on the public sector was just too much. Teach some of the locals how to govern themselves then book it. If they succeed, hey, the White Man's burden paid off :^) if not oh well they can't rule themselves without superior European governance, no skin off our bones :^)
3) The US and the USSR stomped out European colonialism to make way for their own non-colonial empires (inb4 hurr durr the USSR was a Marxist state so it can never do anything I perceive as bad durr hurr)
Because Europeans aren't psychopaths and actually believe in Jesus
Seriously, everyone in Europe freaked out when they learned of Leopards private house of horrors
>>897759
>Why did old school style imperialism stop?
Stalinist democratic centralism, the AK-47, and the war debt of Japan, France, UK, Holland, Netherlands and the economic failure of Portugal and Spain.
So I just watched Aferim, and I'm interested in learning more about gypsy slavery. Can anyone recommend some good books on Romanian gypsy history, especially ones that focus on slavery?
They got freed in 1910 and have failed to integrate ever since.
They deserved it
Where can I learn more about the craft of convincing propaganda?
I noticed that good propaganda tends to induce an emotional shock and makes the person question their most fundamental values, then presents what seems as cold, logical, calculated arguments. What is this technique called?
Also, what manuals and teachings did the Nazis and the Soviets use to craft good propaganda?
>>897601
Much of it is psychological, but there's a lot of aesthetics behind it
Let's go fampais.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdDtc9KQLcs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZvpdJ42wYE
>schubert died before finishing the 8th symphony
Utter tragedy.
That being said i perfer his string quart/quintets.
Do you feel that philosophy and reading in general (which the internet has made far more accessible than ever) has made you useless? As in, it made you spend so much of your time developing skills in areas that, really, only individuals backed by wealth are able to take advantage of, rather than developing skills that are more practical for your social/economic/family status? Is this a problem with extending access to higher subjects to the lower echelons of society, or just a personal problem?
>>897293
>Do you feel that philosophy and reading in general (which the internet has made far more accessible than ever) has made you useless? As in, it made you spend so much of your time developing skills in areas that, really, only individuals backed by wealth are able to take advantage of, rather than developing skills that are more practical for your social/economic/family status?
I DO NOT THINK SO.
PERSONS TEND TOWARD ACTIVITY THAT IS SUITABLE TO THEMSELVES, AND TO THEIR PERSONALITY; ACTIVITY DOES NOT DEFINE PERSONALITY, AND PERSON, BUT RATHER, PERSON, AND PERSONALITY, PRACTICE WHAT IS SUITABLE TO THEM.
AN INEPT, OR LAZY, PERSON WILL BE INEPT, OR LAZY, REGARDLESS OF HIS/HER EDUCATION, WEALTH, OR PRESTIGE; PERSONAL QUALITY IS NOT DETERMINED BY THE EXTERNAL, BUT BY THE INTERNAL; ID EST: APTITUDE, OR INEPTITUDE, ARE QUALITATIVELY IMMANENT.
ONE MUST ALSO CONSIDER THE RELATIVE ASPECT OF APTITUDE, AND INEPTITUDE; INEPTITUDE CAN BE MADE APPARENT, OR IT CAN BE INTENSIFIED, IF THE ACTIVITY IS UNSUITABLE TO THE PERSON, OR THE PERSONALITY, AND CONVERSELY, APTITUDE CAN BE MADE APPARENT IF THE ACTIVITY IS SUITABLE TO THE PERSON, OR THE PERSONALITY.
SUITABILITY IS NOT DEPENDENT ON TRANSEUNT CRITERIA LIKE "LEARNING ABOUT CERTAIN TOPICS", OR "HAVING GREATER INTELLECTUAL ACCESS", ETCETERA, BUT IT IS DEPENDENT ON CRITERIA IMMANENT TO THE INDIVIDUAL.
ALSO, IT IS FALLACIOUS TO CLASSIFY SECTORS OF HUMAN ACTIVITY BY SOCIOECONOMIC CRITERIA.
>>897341
But what if the ready access of endless data enables otherwise energetic people with potential to success, as defined by society (i.e. wealth, status etc), to pour that energy into the pursuit of knowledge that won't elevate them as it would've before, when academics was a rarer but certain road to success?
Sorry no caps
>>897382
AN INDIVIDUAL WITH A CERTAIN KIND OF PERSONAL POTENTIAL WILL CONSCIOUSLY, OR UNCONSCIOUSLY, TEND TOWARD ACTIVITY THAT WILL DEVELOP THAT POTENTIAL, RATHER THAN TO ACTIVITY THAT WILL STYMIE THAT POTENTIAL, SO THE HYPOTHETICAL SCENARIO THAT YOU ARE DESCRIBING IS VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE.
FAILURE OF ACTUALIZATION IS NOT DUE TO HAVING ENGAGED IN UNSUITABLE ACTIVITY, BUT DUE TO HINDRANCES EXTERNAL TO THE PERSON; ID EST: TO DETRIMENTAL, OR ADVERSE, CIRCUMSTANCES, NOT TO ENERGY DIVERTED FROM SOME FICTITIOUS PREDETERMINED DESTINY.
