Tell me about the Hittites
>>506229
they had good treaties 2bh family
In Hittite law, it was illegal to copulate with animals, except horses and donkeys
>>506229
Celts with awesome advanced bows and actual cavalry techniques who #rekt the Egyptians, but they fell to infighting and dynastic dispute before burning down their capital and shuffling on.
Was Marx a Satanist?
>>506096
No. Atheistic, but not satanic despite what /pol/ would like to think.
if he wrote everything facetiously and actually did want to cause the destruction societies and cause millions of deaths; potentially.
i personally think his ideas may have had good intentions, but the ideology creates nothing but chaos.
>>506915
>i personally think his ideas may have had good intentions, but the ideology creates nothing but chaos.
Yolu know, I think I prefer fascists and reactionaries to this pathetic liberal, (supposed) centrism.
Why are some countries more developed than others /his/
Historically speaking, what was different?
>>505939
Circumstances and luck, frankly.
There's no real consensus on the specifics, but generally due to favorable geography and happenstance some regions got their things in order and were able to capitalize on that success over and over. Other places either were exploited by more successful regions, or became complacent with early success.
>Why are some countries more developed than others /his/
Are you implying they all should have the same level of development?
>>505939
>Why are some countries more developed than others /his/
why would they be the same? seems like a big coincidence
Who killed JFK?
Why?
Was Lee Harvey Oswald working for the CIA? The KGB? Was he a lone wolf? Or a patsy?
YOU killed JFK!
Lee Harvey Oswald
was crazy.
No.
No.
Probably.
No.
>>505919
You got me!
What did he believe? I see him get posted a lot, especially in regards to monarchists, and I'm genuinely interested. Also De Maistre thread.
Seems like a swell guy.
>>505583
He believed in Catholic UN, since he didn't find Kant and his Perpetual Peace good.
Just read him for the prose.
>>505583
He was a Martinist and a Mason, which as as unorthodox as you can get as a catholic. It's sometimes said that he was "catholic without being a christian".
I'm not trained in philosophy, and what I read from this was directly from wikipedia:
>In inductive reasoning, one makes a series of observations and infers a new claim based on them. For instance, from a series of observations that a woman walks her dog by the market at 8am on Monday, it seems valid to infer that next Monday she will do the same, or that, in general, the woman walks her dog by the market every Monday. That next Monday the woman walks by the market merely adds to the series of observations, it does not prove she will walk by the market every Monday. First of all, it is not certain, regardless of the number of observations, that the woman always walks by the market at 8am on Monday. In fact, Hume would even argue that we cannot claim it is "more probable", since this still requires the assumption that the past predicts the future. Second, the observations themselves do not establish the validity of inductive reasoning, except inductively.
Regarding this example, what do you call the fact that a person making a guess about the women walking her dog every monday ends up being right about 95% of the time? Hume says it can't be more probable, yet by that person's observation alone it actually turned out to be probable that she would walk her dog every monday until the woman's dog died. Is it called 'luck'?
>>504954
Hume wasn't a statistician, he didn't understand how well we can model reality and predict things.
Philosophically arguing against facts is pointless. I'm sure some anon here can give a metaphysical argument for why gravity isn't real
>>504954
If it happens that you flip a coin every day, and by some stroke of chance, it has turned up heads every time you flipped it before, that doesn't mean tails is less likely on the next flip. The actual chance is independent of observed chance.
>>504973
And yet the person flips the coin and ends up getting heads every day until his death. What would you call this?
Did any of you guys have History teachers back in the day that told blatantly incorrect facts?
I remember my old History teacher once told us Finland used to be communist and part of the warsaw pact. She even told me I was wrong when I politely questioned if it was true.
Does anyone have any similar old stories?
A history teacher once told me "The Nazis we baaad mm'kay?"
Brazilian History has plenty of stupid Conspiracy Theories taught as facts.
Example: Paraguay War.
We are taught: Brazil went to war against Paraguay because the British Empire was threatened by Paraguay and wanted it defeated.
What happened: We didn't have any diplomatic contact with Britain at the time. Paraguay was the one that attacked Brazil, we had a shitty army and the first part of the war consisted on Brazil being invaded and losing.
>>503777
Fact: This never happened.
What can /his/ tell me about the Silk Road? I'm doing a project on it.
You should try the homework board >>>/hm/
>>503603
Thatnevergetsold/10
Can anyone recommend a book about the silk road and people who travelled on it?
Trying to read about the Napoleonic wars, but the scale and scope is much larger than anything else I've read about and I feel like I have some difficulty understanding everything. Or the dry text makes it boring. Anyone else ktf?
Read 1812 by Zamoyski. It's very accessible and enjoyable and gives a solid background to the Napoleonic period in the first few chapters as well as a study of some of the major personalities.
>>502657
Read the Sharpe novels by Bernard Cromwell. I know reading fiction to understand history is pleb tier but there it is, at least you will have fun, they're good books.
>>502711
>Cromwell
kek.
I mean Bernard Cornwell.
Any gradschoolfags in here?
I'm a philosophy/psychology double major, minor in Asian studies, and I'm graduating with a 2.9 GPA. I'm sure no top tier graduate schools are going to accept me, but is there still hope?
>I'm a philosophy/psychology double major, minor in Asian studies
Just curious, why did you decide on these majors?
>>501891
>philosophy/psychology double major, minor in Asian studies
was it worth it?
>>501959
Yes, I learned a lot.
>>501912
Psychology because of my interest in theories of mind, philosophy to expand on that (contemporary psychology does not often have much to say about subjects such as consciousness), and Asian Studies because I thought Japanese would be a fun way to do my 2-year language requirement and once I was done with that I was only 3 classes away from completing the Asian Studies minor.
>/his/ - History & Humanities
Cultural Marxism / Frankfurt School
Is it real?
Are there actually people in influential positions pushing society towards particular goals, or is it just a diffuse ideology?
Asking on /his/ because there is slightly higher chance of a meaningful discussion.
>>518910
>Frankfurt School
>Is it real
Of course it's real.
>Are there actually people in influential positions pushing society towards particular goals
I would say yes, there's generally a neoliberal consensus amongst high politics and big business and it's in their interest to keep it that way
>>518910
No. The Frankfurt school was a small group of theorists that had a small hand in the creation of what would metastasize into modern PC culture.
/pol/ freaks the fuck out and blames everything on them because most of them were Jews.
Yeah that kinda stuff happens, but its not as surgical as youd think. Imagine bill nye in politics
Give me the story on crimea
From Greece to Russia, its history seems really interesting, like some fringe territory on the outer rim of an empire.
>Random ancient steppe people like Scythians, Cimmerians and shit
>Greek colonies
>Cimmerian Kingdom
>Roman client
>Byzantine
>Hordes passing through like the Huns, Avars, Cums and shit, even some Goths with a special dialect
>These guys became the Crimean Tatars
>Genoese had some business there (Kaffa)
>Crimean Khanate
>Ottomans
>Russia wins it from Ottomans
>Bolsheviks take over Russia and append Crimea to Ukrainian SSR
>Commies fall and break up
>Degenerate Americans stage a coup in Kiev
>Pro-Russians revolt and call for Russian annexation
>>517653
You forgot to add that it's the last place where Goths as a thing existed [spoiler]Until late 18th century[/spoiler]
>>517653
Found the russian
>Claim your state is called Scotland, because it's inhabited by the Scots, who speak scottish
>Not even 5% of the people can speak scottish
Can someone explain this to me? Scottish language was the dominant language of the native people, before being just swept away by the english with the english language (today called scots dialect)
Are Scottish people aware they're at this point just England with a funny accent?
Pic 1 is a language map of Scotland in the 12th century
Pic 2 is a language map of Scotland in the 21th century
So what do you propose, that we rename it to northern England you fucking idiot?
They save face by calling the local variety Scots and claiming it's a different language.
Why does /his/ hate atheism?
Isn't it just the logical and scientific way to view the world?
Christians shitpost better.
>>516922
Every. Fucking. Day.
>>516922
but anon, atheists don't do the right thing
Why is it "the United States is" instead of "the United States are" in grammar?
I have an American friend that told me that it used to be the second one, but it changed after the Civil War as the US centralized, possibly with political motivation. Is this true?
Painting unrelated
They taught the same in my schoolbooks and I'm Dutch. Before the civil war the states were referred independently, you'd often find letters which said: we the states of New York, Massachussets, New Jersey etc. After the war it was referred as a single entity that was the federal goverment of the USA.
>>516524
Idunno about that, but these two always trigger me:
>THE Ukraine
>The Czech REPUBLIC
>>516524
I don't know about the whole political thing (could be, for all I know), but yeah, in antebellum writing, you normally see "these united States", " the various united States", and other such structures where the states in United States were understood in the plural.
![goodvsatheistgood[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/C450GFB.jpg "goodvsatheistgood[1]")
