What is the difference between revenge and justice
Revenge is subjective, justice is objective.
revenge is justice without mercy
Justice is a broader concept, it doesn't necessarily involve punishmnent.
An angry misogynistic misanthrope who couldn't get laid or a great philosopher whose profundity we have yet to fathom? What are your thoughts of Friedrich Nietzsche?
>>497250
He ate two kilos of fruits a day and had massive digestion pains due to it.
>muh false dichotomy
He made some good points, and he made some shitty ones.
>wut is critical thought tho?
>>497250
I'm still new to Nietzsche, but I don't recall him being either angry or misanthropic from what I've read of him so far.
Do societies progress, or simply change from one side of the spectrum to another? Will the west ever go back to hating gays?
There's no biological imperative to hate them anymore.
>inb4 they spread AIDS
Yeah, among themselves. So if you hate gays you should actually ENCOURAGE fag behavior so they wipe each other out.
>>497208
Why do they need to hate gays?
Societies progress over the course of centuries, not decades or years where cultures can shift slightly. The "spectrum" is far wider than 'right: conservative', 'left: liberal'
Also 25 year rule and
>>>/pol/
You would get more replies there desu
Gays are such a small part of the population that it would seem petty to hate them.
The Romans were one of the worst empires that existed. Only the Mongols were worse. Why are they nonetheless so popular?
>>497194
>The Romans were one of the worst empires that existed
>>497194
>the first true empire
>multicultural, centralized, long lasting
>literally invented the word Imperium
Maybe you just don't like empires, you Carthaginian shit
>>497238
>the first true empire
Hey /his/, my first thread here, just wanted to ask you, can someone tell me what king is depicted on the left side of this pic? I know that on the right is the statue of Hadrian, but can't seem to search my way for the right side.
Charlemagne, I think.
>>497138
Ohh thanks, fuck, how did i not thought of him sooner
>>497138
>>497155
It's Charlemagne's grandfather, Charles Martel, and pic related tells you why he's in the picture.
Post the most beautiful work you have seen.
Antinous, Gay Slave to Roman Emperor Hadrian.
guess
Did the atomic bombings prevent many extra casualties in Japan because they avoided a ground war in mainland Japan, or is this just a myth? Some argue the Japanese government was about to surrender anyway.
>>496722
Japanese government minutes show that the shocking pace of the Soviet invasion of manchuria swung the government, and that the atomic bombardment was considered less important than the fire bombing of Tokyo.
Not that the Yank policy makers knew this.
>>496729
[citation needed]
>>496736
Not this time of night, also it is {{cn}} or [[wp:citation_needed]] IIRC
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alchemy
This is actually really interesting.
Did you know Medieval/Renaissance Alchemy derived from Islam, who kept Hellenistic Alchemy alive after the burning of Alexandria?
It returned to Europe through Spain, which belonged to the Muslims back then.
Also, it was the Renaissance that really enhanced the Hermitic side of Alchemy and made it more esoteric than scientific, because they were trying to make it fit with the views of the Church.
But it was in fact Islamic Alchemy that created the Scientific Method.
>tfw Religion ruined Alchemy
Greek/Islamic Alchemy is the best Alchemy. Leave it to Christians to soil it with their spiritual woo-woo crap.
>>496715
> The Scientific Method.
> The
My son, there's several.
>>496715
>Leave it to Christians to soil it with their spiritual woo-woo crap.
This is how I can tell you've never actually read an Arabic grimoire.
>Also, it was the Renaissance that really enhanced the Hermitic side of Alchemy and made it more esoteric than scientific
Alchemy was never about science. The whole transformation and turning things into gold was just to show the principle of a bad person turning into a noble person.
It's all about symbols.
![JiangHuThreeKingdomsep16v2mp4_000570369[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/IZyXlP1.jpg "JiangHuThreeKingdomsep16v2mp4 000570369[1]")
Could any part of European history after the fall of the Roman Empire and before the First World War be made into an epic even half as interesting as the Romance of the Three Kingdoms ?
Even stuff like the thirty and hundred years wars seem a bit tame in comparison.
I prefer more familiar European territory. Thirty Years War and Revolutionary/Napoleonic Wars would be enough for me. And some smaller stories too.
>>496484
>Napoleonic Wars
This, OP.
>>496484
But from late medieval till early modern era is filled with big wars and plots.
Is Catholicism the only rational choice?
Catholic love of reason might have been what lead to its excessively high regard in the West, and thus the very undoing of religious hegemony, unfortunately.
>what is the induction fallacy
Denomination is largely unimportant so long as you're not a part of one of those whackjob churches in the midwest and southern US that espouse young earth creationism and snake whispering. Or a Mormon.
What historical mysteries have been solved recently?
>>496400
The Baghdad battery.
>>496400
The one of the Druids.
>>496428
So the secret of the magic potion?
From a historical perspective, what is the single most important factor that allows nations to become great powers?
Bonus point: what is the single most important factor in their decline?
>>496303
Resource management and development
Easy (for both)
>memes
>>496303
>From a historical perspective
This is a code phrase for "I am a stupid cunt."
>the single most important factor
Not being a reductivist cunt.
>their decline?
Loaded. "Ceasing to be a great power" is unloaded.
Take your ignorant, ahistorical troll post and shove it up your arsehole.
You've asked a baited IR question, you know IR belongs on >>>/pol/ and you can fuck back off there.
I was eating dinner with my parents and somehow we started discussing the Papacy. During the conversation I learned they have a lot of weird historical conceptions, like that Roman emperor Constantine and Charlemagne were both popes and that classical Romans were still fighting Germans (or "Gallians") in the post-millennial middle ages.
I didn't mean this to be a blog, but I'm curious as to what bizarre historical beliefs people close to you have, and whether history education 30+ years ago was as bad as I'm starting to believe it was.
>>496047
>whether history education 30+ years ago was as bad as I'm starting to believe it was.
I don't think that generally it's bad history education per se, but the attitude people have towards knowledge of history.
Think of your class, back in high school, about those chads and pretty girls or whatever and what kind of an interest they had in history.
Now add on 30 years of folk myths, misinformation in media and the brain just conflating concepts, no wonder you end up with a Charlemagne pope.
tl;dr People just don't care that much about exact historical knowledge.
>>496047
My ex-wife and her mother both believed in the Pope Joan story.
In college a lot of my friends believed that weed was made illegal in the 30s to keep Mexicans away.
>>496093
so when was weed made illegal in the land of the free?
Is it fair to say that Protestant work ethic (salvation through hard work) created the new/modern world?
How come traditionally catholic countries/empires (ie France and Spain) left relatively unsuccessful colonies in comparison to protestant ones (British empire)?
Why is this?
Because the Americans genocided the non-whites.
>>495978
>Is it fair to say that Protestant work ethic (salvation through hard work) created the new/modern world?
It is reductivist bullshit. Fuck off and read 5 monographs.
>>495978
Go.
Fuck.
Yourself.
>Asks hundreds of questions that nobody can figure out the answers to because they rely on unproven but useful assumptions
>Convinces himself that only he is smart because he knows that his questions can't be answered
Is there any more overrated philosopher?
>>495975
NOT QUESTIONING ONE'S "UNPROVEN BUT USEFUL ASSUMPTIONS" —A PRIORI ABSTRACT NOTIONS— IS THE PRIME FACTOR IN THE PRECLUSION OF REALIZING TRUTH.
A NOBLE PERSON WOULD RATHER CERTAINLY KNOW NOTHING THAN CERTAINLY KNOW SOMETHING UNCERTAIN.
>>495993
>Implying philosophers ever get close to truth
>Implying they don't just prove that they know less that the fools who understand basic facts.
>>496002
YOU DO NOT EVEN KNOW WHAT TRUTH, AND PHILOSOPHY, ARE, NOR IN WHAT THEY CONSIST.
