Archived threads in /his/ - History & Humanities - 864. page
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
I'm tired of being merely above average when it comes to the subjects I'm interested in such as philosophy, history, and economics (mainly theory).
Can anyone recommend some good, basic books for laymen that covers everything needed to advance to more advanced books?
>be interested in a historical subject
>read primary sources
>I'm tired of being merely above average
I got bad news for you, bud...
>>533837
>subjects I'm interested in such as philosophy, history, and economics (mainly theory)
Could you be a little bit more specific? If you're giving that vague directions you might as well stay average in all these fields.
Analytical Philosophy Megathread
>>533753
http://www.philpapers.org/archive/sinPG
Scientism and I Fucking Love Science types are incredibly annoying, but the fact that all philosophers can offer in response is myticism and solipsism is pretty damning.
>>534622
Because most philosophers seem to try to apply their extremely deeply thought ideas to argue against scientism when all it takes is to point out that simple everyday life is enough to do it.
Would a german soldier under the wehrmacht be considered a nazi? thank you in advance.
Although he would have felt sympathy for the party lines of the NSDAP, members of the German armed forces before and during the Second World War were not permitted any political suffrage and were forbidden from joining a political party, and therefore technically could not be considered a Nazi.
>>533694
They were fighting for the Nazi state and their policies.
>>533694
Depends on what part of the Wehrmacht.
Heer?
No.
Luftwaffe?
No.
Kriegsmarine?
No.
Waffen-SS?
Yes.
Could Nazism have been a cohesive ideology without racialism? Would it have been more like pre racialist fascism? Or is non-racialist Nazism an oxymoron?
>>533624
How could you have a unified national identity without race?
>>533648
Fascism managed to do it. They had a Jewess as their propaganda minister.
>>533624
Did you even read anything about Nazism? Its based on the superiority of a race of people over others.
What were weapon laws like in ancient times? I know there were restrictions on blade size etc but say I am a British commoner in the 15th century, could I go out and just buy a halberd or arqebus if I had the means?
>>533550
Well I know blacks weren't able to have guns except the Creole community of Alabama thanks to the Adams Onis treaty that the government actually accepted to respect. Allowed them to have their own schools too.
>>533550
Yes, although there were laws about strangers possessing them in towns and going out at night. Men were required by law to possess certain weapons and armour for military service.
Check out the Coventry Leet Book online for some interesting bit's and pieces about the practicalities of daily 15th century life.
oi! hope yev got a shovel license!
Celts had the biggest empire in Europe. Better than Roma.
Why does it never get talked about? Matter of fact why are celts so lost in history and never talked about when they are the true Europeans and the ones who civilised Europe before Roma? They invented Art.
>>533531
> celts
>empire
They were a culture... not a united empire
There was no empire, just a bunch of people conquering shit and establishing small local dominions.
>>533531
>They invented Art
>As far back as I can remember, I always wanted to be a Khan. To me, being a Khan was better than being Emperor of China. Even before I first wandered into Samarkand with a Mongol army, I knew I wanted to be a part of them. It was there that I knew that I belonged. To me, it meant being Persian in an empire that was full of Arabs. They weren't like anybody else. I mean, they did whatever they wanted. They invaded and looted entire villages and no one ever raised a sword. In the summer when they raped the female populaces all night, nobody ever called...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>533410
>To me, it meant being Persian in an empire that was full of Arabs.
Failed meme friendo... most of Timur's empire would have been Turko-Persian
>>533410
>called himself the sword of Islam
>almost all campaigns aginst fellow Muslims
>>533468
The Abbasid Caliphate's most prestigious people were Persians.
They filled the sciences, government, philosophy, economy, etc.
Daily reminder that celts were washing with soap (which they invented) in lakes once a day while anglo-saxons were filthy mutts.
Anglo saxon hygiene:
>As with the Elizabethans, the anglo-Saxons didn't really believe in washing their bodies much. In fact, monks were said to have a maximum of five baths a year, and that was considered to be overdoing it. It appears that at least one commentator of the time may have cottoned on to something when he observed that the Danish habit of bathing and combing the hair every Saturday seemed to score...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
The word 'hygiene' in the first millennium, certainly among the Anglo-Saxons, was an oxymoron.
For instance, people would dig their latrine pits outside the backs of their houses, apparently untroubled by the odour, which would have mingled deliciously with the droppings from their animals and perfumes of similar pungency.
The flies, of course, must have had a field day. A good tramp in the latrines, followed by a stroll across any food they might find lying about in the house, no doubt made their day.
For some reason, the Anglo-Saxon thought it...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>smelly saxon savages
>It almost goes without saying that bathing wasn't the most popular pastime around, either. The monks of one 10th. century European monastery were ordered to bathe 5 times per year. Now to your average Anglo-Saxon, this was fanaticism. Once a year, fine. Twice, if you were one of those fastidious types, but five times? Come on!
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/4310657
Tell me about the Proto-Indo-Europeans
>>533254
Daily reminder that the British R1B L21 lineage was in Ireland from at "least" 2000BC. They may have been there from up to 3000BC.
>>533254
This graphic is very bad, anon.
>>533254
Well for starters your map doesn't show the Proto-Indo-Europeans.
Is this the only Nietzschean superman in history?
No, he was the only true Nietzschean superman.
That would be Rasputin.
>>533038
Not at all. When Nietzsche spoke of the Übermensch he though of Alcibiades, Caesar, Cesare Borgia and Napoléon.
What do you know of Dionysus?
Everything. Why?
originally a thracian deity
>>533006
Did he really exist?
Is anyone else here fascinated by pre-Russian Siberia?
>Xiongnu people
>"Tall, green eyed, red haired" Yenisei Kyrgyz described by Tang Dynasty records
>Pre-Hungary Hungarians
>Emishi/Ainu
>Uighurs as pagan animist pastoralists before they became Muslim urban desert dwellers
>Gokturks, Rourans, Scythians (they were sacking Chinese cities before they went west), Black River...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>532919
It was one of the first big steppe hordes and as far as I know the chinese were eventually able to destroy them which made them go west and kill all the iranian steppe peoples in central asia claiming it for their own.
>>532919
There are still plenty of people around like this. They weren't wiped out or anything. Ignorant people always assume they're "mixed" people, rather than unique gene pools of independently evolved phenotypes.
>>532948
lmao get so mad you genocide someone else
![techprog[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/Nz2loyM.jpg "techprog[1].jpg")
Does material and technological progress measure societal progress? If not then why do both capitalists and Marxists dogmatically believe this to be true? Both ideologies take industrialization and increased abundance of material goods to be a good thing, the only differences between them revolve around who owns the means of production. It's not like Marxists reject industrial society, they just want to be the ones running the show.
Are both capitalism and communism unsustainable in a finite world?
>>532883
The problem is they want to advance society by inventing more technologically advanced materials even though the physical life they live is finite.
What goal do they have spending millions of dollars?
People are dying of hunger but they are trying to send people to Mars.
If they believed they only lived once, then why are they trying to make all these "advancements" rather than benefit the survival of all beings?
>>532903
>People are dying of hunger but they are trying to send people to Mars.
>People are dying of hunger because technological advances in medicine and agriculture allowed for the overpopulation of marginal lands.
If they believed they only lived once, then why are they trying to make all these "advancements" rather than benefit the survival of all beings?
Because the people in charge think that once they develop advanced enough technology...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>532883
Does material and technological progress measure societal progress?
I would say there is a correlation between technical progress and social progress. Advancements in technology preceded many social advances but not all.
>the only differences between them revolve around who owns the means of production
Not at all, Marxists believe the rights of society should be championed over the rights of the individual.
>Are both capitalism and communism...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Do any of you guys know any ancient languages and know how to speak them?
>pic related its sabean script
It's possible to read hanzi from long ago.
The one true advantage over alphabet.
Ge'ez and barely, it's been supplanted by liturgical Hebrew in my community though
I think I know quite a bit about Proto-Indo-European. AMA.
Where does this naive conviction that 'we don't need philosophy anymore' come from in the minds of the pop sci speakers? Is it the fault of the American education system?
>>532742
We don't need philosophy. The only problems that philosophy "solves" are the ones it invents. If we did need philosophers there would be demand for them and they would make a lot of money.
>>532757
Without philosophy you wouldn't even be able to interpret the results from quantum mechanics. You'd just end up content with a bunch of equation that turn out right and 'make prediction' without being none the wiser what actually happens in the real world. This utilitarianism destroys physics as classically defined.
It's the fault of their brains.
