What theories exist for European global domination? Is Jared "muh geography and disease" Diamond correct?
>>812500
Well yes, Diamond is right specifically about geography and disease, and how it helped expand European/Near Easter societies, but it wasn't exactly a good thing. Keep in mind that the mass use of livestock mixed in with clustered populations pretty much created the plague in Europe, which may have helped in the long run, could have completely destroyed the social structure of Europe had it not been for what I consider the more important factor to European dominance: the Church.
Through the Middle Ages the Church pretty much served as a unifying political force which maintained communication and the spread of ideas between all Catholic realms across the entirety of Europe, and also set a standard of laws such as how and when to carry out wars, and how to treat the peasantry.
I think people fail to respect just how unique a system like that would have been in the Ancient and Medieval world, and the peace plus the spread of technology brought upon by the Church massively contributed to the ability of Christian kings to spare their wealth and manpower in sailing to India and later America, thus beginning European domination.
>>812528
what about the reformation?
>>812533
I'm not really sure. I suppose the arguments for the continued communication and cultural spread between Catholic and Protestant regions could be attributed to them all still obviously being Christians, or just that people still stuck secularly to the long established systems of communication and Catholic culture in newly reformed regions.
Nevertheless, it was way too late to really stop Europe from dominating the world. Virtually all the realms of Western Europe had already discovered and were traversing massive routes to America, India, and China.
Has your heart ever been strangely moved?
>>812431
No, my heart only moves according to well-established physical laws.
I used to captain a freighter near Alaska. One night we encountered the northern lights. And as I gazed, astonished at their lustrous brilliance, I turned to my first mate and I said, "We are looking into the very eyes of God."
>>812483
top edge
Is Allah the new Woden ?
>inb4 Allah=God
Yes that is true but just as Germanic barbarians that immigrated into the Roman empire held on to their old god until deciding on Christianity , is it possible that Muslims immigrants will hold on to Islam fiercely until at a point their descendants will mold themselves into the superior European belief system..( in this case secular humanism)
>is it possible that Muslims immigrants will hold on to Islam fiercely until at a point their descendants will mold themselves into the superior European belief system
Nope, it's not possible.
>>812291
No, faggot.
Hedonism is everyone's god. Hop on board.
>>812305
Why not ?
What would have happened if Tokugawa Iemitsu didn't close the ports of Japan and allowed extensive foreign trade with European powers throughout the 1600s, 1700s, and early 1800s, eliminating the closed country (Sakoku) policy from the equation of Edo Period Japan?
>>812254
The Shimazu and Mori fucking hated the Tokugawa, so they would've started shit way sooner, they probably would've lost any war they tried to fight especially in the 1600s, assuming they don't have foreign troops fighting for them
>>812254
I read that before that policy he was considering an invasion of the Philippines.
>>812271
Considering how fucking awful the invasion of Korea went, I doubt it
>What was the single most important event that led to the collapse of the Roman Republic?
I think it was the First Settlement by Augustus when he took pro consul power.
Discuss
The refusal to recognize Ricimer as western emperor by the East. If they had treated him like a completely legitimate political actor, he probably wouldn't have sabotaged the re-invasion of North Africa.
>>812259
He's talking about the fall of the REPUBLIC, mate.
>>812265
I got confused cause he started by saying the end of the republic led to the collapse of the republic
Why do most people psychologically try to reject the idea of karma?
Not physically?
Because it's a juvenile concept.
Still waiting on them Jews to be defeated
I'm not sure if this is an appropriate board to ask but I wasn't sure where else I could besides a local museum
Anyway I found this years ago out in my back yard and never thought much of it but does this look genuine? I'm not hopping to stumble upon riches I just wanna know more about it looks like a spearhead obviously but input is appreciated.
>>812123
Far from a spearhead, but those ripples along the edge kind of look like those done when knap flint.
The thick portion looks decent for a handle. Can we get a few more pics at different angles?
So not a spearhead? Damn
Few more
What the hell are humans?
It doesn't make any sense.
>>812098
How doesn't it make sense? What confuses you about humans?
>>812098
humans are mammals
>larger sauce on that pic?
>>812098
wow man that's deep
In terms of military prowess who was the better commander Caesar or Alexander the Great?
Cesars greatest victory
Battle of Alesia
Strength
60,000 Legionnaires vs 180-300 thousands Franks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SU1Ej9Yqt68
Alexanders greatest victory
Battle of Gaugamela
47,000 Greeks vs 52,000 -100,000 (modern estimate) 250,000–1,000,000 (ancient sources)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOin08k4KFc
Seems like in terms of raw battle coordination Alexander wins but in terms of cunning Caesar does.
>>811991
Alex is undefeated and accomplished victories on a much larger scale, plus he seized an empire while Jules quashed tribal chiefdoms.
Alexander
how is this even a question? any cesar victory is more of a roman victory
All alexander victories are alexanders
Tactically, I'd say Alexander. Logistically and Strategically, Caesar.
What was one of Alexander's biggest skills was his very energetic movements with his army and his plans. Caesar himself should provide a match for this, as he famously was very bold and a very much "suprise" commander, plus the Legionaries were far more superior in terms of deployment, fortifications and supply trains.
>>812045
He also crushed several German alliances, the entire Egyptian army, and managed to defeat the enemy Roman Legions with minimal casualties to the civilian populations (in Rome's case anywyas, not so much for the Gallic fucking shits). That's a lot of playing fields.
> everything is like shadows on the cave
> except my theory about how world works
Why do people believe in platonism again?
>>811843
It's almost like platonism has a kind of higher significance beyond its mere appearance
>>811843
>Dude Plato wants us to believe every word Socrates says lmao
Platonism is for hipsters too hipster to go along with the current cultural Christian meme. They liked Neo-Platonism before it was cool, thus Platonism.
>>811675
Do it yourself you leech
muh smokes
Should we start a /his/ mailing list?
>>811612
AYY GUYS MATT EASTON HERE SCHOLA GLADIATORIA
>>811612
Don't you see enough dicks a day?
Yeah, there are some smart people here. We could develop a school of thought.
Is it any good?
What are the common criticisms of his thesis?
Are there any books or articles that address his argument?
What alternative arguments and authors would be ideal to read alongside/instead?
>asking for a review of Guns, Germs and Steel on /his/
>>811382
>not responding to the OP in a constructive fashion
>>811378
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Ny338t8pts&t=1392
What countries have the most boring history?
Cyprus.
Canada
>fuck all
>1812 enjoy your toasty white house
>fuck all
There's nothing boring about Irish history
Even when there isn't any war going on in Ireland itself it's fun to read about all the trouble Irish bishops got into on the continent, the rascals
Some people are saying this might be a new sokal hoax. What does /his/ think?
http://phg.sagepub.com/content/early/2016/01/08/0309132515623368.full
>Glaciers are key icons of climate change and global environmental change. However, the relationships among gender, science, and glaciers – particularly related to epistemological questions about the production of glaciological knowledge – remain understudied. This paper thus proposes a feminist glaciology framework with four key components: 1) knowledge producers; (2) gendered science and knowledge; (3) systems of scientific domination; and (4) alternative representations of glaciers. Merging feminist postcolonial science studies and feminist political ecology, the feminist glaciology framework generates robust analysis of gender, power, and epistemologies in dynamic social-ecological systems, thereby leading to more just and equitable science and human-ice interactions.
>Glaciers are icons of global climate change, with common representations stripping them of social and cultural contexts to portray ice as simplified climate change yardsticks and thermometers
>A critical but overlooked aspect of the human dimensions of glaciers and global change research is the relationship between gender and glaciers. While there has been relatively little research on gender and global environmental change in general (Moosa and Tuana, 2014; Arora-Jonsson, 2011), there is even less from a feminist perspective that focuses on gender (understood here not as a male/female binary, but as a range of personal and social possibilities) and also on power, justice, inequality, and knowledge production in the context of ice, glacier change, and glaciology (exceptions are Bloom et al., 2008; Williams and Golovnev, 2015; Hevly, 1996; Hulbe et al., 2010; Cruikshank, 2005).
>>811185
This was published in a peer reviewed journal by the way, unlike the case in the sokal incident. So obviously this is a bit more important. Didn't have character space to put this in the OP.
>Tyndall, on the other hand, argued that glaciers moved more like a solid substance flowing over bedrock. He eventually triumphed in this debate, contends Hevly (1996), because Tyndall mobilized his greater fame as a mountaineer – having achieved many pioneering first ascents – and deployed a rhetoric of manly risk and exertion. There was what Hevly calls a ‘culture of field science’ in the 19th century that favored ‘authentic, rigorous, manly experience’, and scientists – let alone women – who did not explicitly demonstrate that their glaciological conclusions stemmed from heroic, manly adventures struggled to make their scientific claims credible. Glaciology was for muscular gentlemen scientists. Women could read about glaciers in the Alps, but they were not fit for glaciological research, field science, or even alpine tourism. And men like Forbes who lacked the manly heroism of risk-taking mountaineers lost scientific credibility that hinged on masculinism.
>>811185
>the relationship between gender and glaciers
"""""""""""humanities""""""""""""
