Robert, slavery is evil!
From my point of the view the abolitionists are evil!
WELL THEN YOU ARE LOST!
>>492842
TIS THE SEASON, THEN.
>>492842
Sherman was a fag that simply committed atrocities after the CSA had finally lost. Lee regularly kicked ass while outnumbered and outgunned.
>>493024
Go home confederaboo
Why would anyone willingly fight in a war? Ever?
Seems a little gay to me even if propaganda does their utmost to convince us that it's manly.
You are surrounded by sweat, blood and filth... you have to participate in sadomasochistic shit and you can literally become disabled or an eunuch.
Even worse, you are fighting for the upper classes and for their right to be superior to you.
Rapists have a good reason to
Dunno about the rest
>tfw you live in an era where people don't understand fighting for their nation
>>492702
Or maybe they're starting to understand that fighting for "the nation" is pointless.
He made Libya great again
Infuriating Commie subhumans from beyond the grave.
>>491273
lol k
>>491273
libya was never great so thats not saying much senpai
"Atlantis is located beyond the Pillars of Hercules." What did he mean by this?
Atlantis was west of Gibraltar.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pillars_of_Hercules
USA is Atllantis
>>491043
Which book does he say this in?
It is reasonable to predict that an accurate method, a method that leads significantly more often than not to the discovery of genuinely true and false propositions, will exhibit two particular features, which an inaccurate method will not exhibit: predictive success and convergent accumulation of consistent results. We can even expect that a more accurate method will exhibit these features more often than a less accurate one. And this is how we can test out different methods and choose the best from among them, and throw away the ones we don’t need.
First is predictive success. If we use an inaccurate method we should expect our desires and expectations to be routinely frustrated, as what our trusted propositions predict fails to transpire. This failure, in fact, is what it would mean for those propositions to be false, so this conclusion follows necessarily from the very meaning of truth itself. Therefore, if our method is correct, then we can expect to routinely produce propositions whose predicted experiences do in fact take place
This is especially true for those experiences that would otherwise be a complete surprise. Why should we expect this? Because this sort of result would not likely occur if our trusted propositions were false, but could easily occur if they are true. Either way, a bad method will lead us to conclusions that fail to anticipate the future. In short, its results will fail every real test. A good method, because it succeeds in getting at the truth, must necessarily produce assertions that do successfully anticipate the future, to a degree and with a frequency not at all possible by chance.
Of course, we can always explain such success as the machinations of a Cartesian Demon, but this eventually becomes quite implausible, for two reasons. On the one hand, there is no reason to believe there is such a demon. Even the view that we are that demon, constructing the world subconsciously, has no evidence to give it any credit.
>>486190
On the other hand, if the demon were really this consistent in giving us results, through which we satisfy our every goal and desire, there would hardly be any intelligible difference between what we call “reality” and the world the demon is inventing for us. Such a construct would be reality, in every sense of the word we normally use. And since we observe some methods to work better than others, and indeed some work best of all, a Cartesian Demon would have to be arranging it this way, constructing reality for us solely in accord with a fixed plan it has chosen. In that case we have just as much reason to pursue the relevant methods for discovering that plan, and to abandon the bad ones, so we can gain the reward of a successful life experience from this mischievous demon. In other words, there is no reason to trust that any Cartesian Demon theory is true, and even if it is, nothing significant changes for us regarding method.
The second criterion of good method is convergent accumulation of consistent results. If we use an inaccurate method we should expect that when we investigate a proposition from several angles we will get inconsistent results, and the more propositions we accumulate the more contradictions we would encounter and the more complex our belief-system would have to become to accommodate them. But if our method is correct, we should expect that when we investigate a proposition from several angles we will get the same results, which would be an improbable coincidence if there were no stable truth being hit upon. At the same time, the more propositions we accumulated, the more consistent our system of propositions would become, with researches in various areas all confirming and supporting each other and permitting cumulative advances in practical knowledge. In contrast to a bad method, with a good method we would find ourselves eliminating rather than accumulating contradictions, and our belief-system would become less convoluted.
>>486194
All this would be a very good sign that our method is sound and successful and gaining us access to what is really true. For this result could never happen by chance. And even for a Cartesian Demon to pull it off, it would have to have from the very beginning a set, preconceived idea how everything will turn out, or else make everything, including our memories, conform as if that were so. For only in such a way could everything accumulate and coincide so well over a long period of time, or appear to have done so. But if the demon has such a complete game plan already in place, or is so adept at inventing one at any given moment, then there would again be no practical difference between this “truth” and a truth that was just “there.”
On the other hand, a method that meets both criteria would also stand as evidence of a truth that was not of a Cartesian Demon’s manufacture. Not only would there be no reason to believe a demon was at work (for merely being possible does not make something credible), and not only would there be no advantage gained by believing so (for insofar as our happiness is procured anyway by mastering the rules of the universe established by a fixed reality or by a Cartesian Demon, our propositions always remain true in an operational sense), but it would be altogether improbable. For it would be hard to imagine what the motive of such a demon would be, or why it exists, or how it acquired or employs its powers in the first place.
>>486197
>The Method of Reason
The reason why the logical-mathematical method is supremely successful is that it has, in respect to the two features of an accurate method, produced the broadest, most complete, and most consistent success. Moreover, when a proposition of logic or mathematics is challenged and seriously debated, the most widespread and solid agreement is achieved in comparison with any other method or subject. This is because the predictions entailed by such propositions are comparatively few, simple, and precisely defined, as well as thoroughly interrelated, and therefore these propositions are very easy to test. For example, to test that a proof is valid one need only validate by direct experience each step of the proof, including its axioms and the steps by which each step leads to the next. In effect, by being the least ambiguous or laborious of all the sciences, it has made the most progress the quickest.
On the one hand, we ourselves can in most cases duplicate the investigations and thus directly confirm logical-mathematical propositions. On the other hand, propositions of logic and mathematics only make claims about the meaning of concepts. So the only empirical inquiry they require is conceptual, and therefore inexpensive and immediate. For they can all be tested in the laboratory of the mind, where concepts exist.
What does /his/ think of Native American culture? Favorite tribe? Most interesting conflict?
>>482552
Talking about native american culture is much like talking about European culture - you've got to get more specific.
>>482552
I quite liked this one paper I read on indigenous capitalism in the long distance fur trade in canada. Continent spanning reaction to contact in trade.
>>482552
Is alcoholism and drug abuse considered culture?
>No, I meant in the past
Oh, okay.
Is pillaging, raping, and cannibalism considered culture?
Post your favorite historical films (doesn't need to be a war film)
Not enough anarchist films these days
>>482279
>anarchist
>POUM
Trial by jury, or trial by judge? Is one better than the other?
Do non-common law countries use juries? I know Germany doesn't, not sure of the rest of Europe.
Also, law thread
>>476013
Judge. Juries are unreliable, unrepentant criminals shouldn't get off scot free because they managed to make half a dozen citizens or so with barely any understanding of the law sympathetic of their sob story.
>>476013
Depends on whether the Judges are corrupt or not.
>>476055
>criminals shouldn't get off scot free because they managed to make half a dozen citizens or so with barely any understanding of the law sympathetic of their sob story.
the criminals never address the jury directly though. It's their attorney. Also with proper jury instructions, I think juries are more fair.
That's a big problem though, is jury instructions and understanding reasonable doubt
What's wrong with Communism? Why does everyone hate it so much?
>>496860
>What's wrong with Communism?
It's an unachievable fantasy
>Why does everyone hate it so much?
Attempts to implement it led to the death of roughly 100 million people during the past century and the suffering of hundreds of millions more.
>>496872
/thread
Why is this guy not considered one of the worst kings in history?
>Didn't do anything that great throughout most of his reign policy wise except wage useless wars to make him self feel awesome, the worst one for the city of Boulogne
>Creates a shitty church by taking advantage of anti Catholic sentiments only to make himself head of it so he can get married 6 times until he produced a male heir to keep the Tudor dynasty strong; it turned to shit anyway since the son died and one of his daughters ends up ruling better than he did
>In the process lost vital support from Spain and his subjects by ousting the beloved queen
Catherine just because she gave him a daughter
>also created a psychopathic daughter due to a shit she had thrown at her that set half of England on fire
> was a general asshole on top of that and usually found the dumbest reason to execute people for treason, even his own wives.
>Often a whiny bitch and overall obviously insecure especially as he grew older.
Seriously, fuck this guy.
>>495015
>Catholic Church, I'm VIII
>>495015
All he's known for is his 7 wives and that's all we learn about him in school. Our time could have been better spent learning about Edward I
>>495079
I chuckled
7/10
Bunny has read many books and has learned many, many things about history. Ask Bunny anything, and Bunny will do best to answer your questions.
>>494225
How many dicks has OP sucked in the past year?
>>494225
How many dicks can I fit in my ass
>>494251
One fewer than one.
>>494257
Bunny doesn't know, and cannot know without inspecting your anus.
Bunny is quite disappointed, these are not history questions.
We always discuss Great Man history and military history. How about something different for a change.
Anyone feeling the mood to discuss agricultural and social history?
Is there a correlation between the grain and cereal crops of the Americas and the technological development of the native populations?
I hate to sound too Guns-Germs-And-Steel, but I do have to wonder if the reason the Native Americans didn't develop the mechanical expertise of Europe and China is that they had corn instead of wheat or rice. Or something like that.
>>492009
But corn, potato, peppers, etc. are much more efficient crops to farm which would have helped sustain a larger population.
Old world population skyrocketed after new world crops were introduced and implemented on old world farming communities.
>>491989
>Anyone feeling the mood to discuss agricultural and social history?
Significantly it is about relations of production, compare the Serb's land redistribution to the static English monestaries.
I suppose this question could be posted on /tv/ but that is literally the worst board ever so im posting it here.
How much do you care about historical accuracy in blockbuster movies? I can understand it bothering people in a movie like Anna Karenina or Braveheart, but personally i fucking love 300 despite the massive inaccuracies.
Also how accurate is pic related?
>>491907
>Also how accurate is pic related?
No turtle ships.
Mostly never but there's some stuff I get annoyed at. Roads that looks like car have used them and modern wheat.
I care about historical accuracy to the extent the movie attempts to represent itself as telling a real story, and how much of it's emotional resonance is dependent on that fact.
Also, you get some leeway when actually constructing a story, rather than being lazy, like sticking LCVs in Robin Hood, or everything that happened in Valkyrie.
Looking at America today it's surprising how much Marx got right about the future of industrial societies:
>Productive forces being suppressed by productive relations
>Alienation
>Increased concentration of wealth by the few accompanied by the impoverishment of many
And yet Americans are still among some of the most opposed people to Marx's theories in the world.
Why?
>>490041
Marx didn't think about how capitalists would defend themselves and their capital, nor did he provide a better alternative.
>>490041
Because this
>>Increased concentration of wealth by the few accompanied by the impoverishment of many
hasn't happened, and likely will never happen. Marx was fundamentally hampered by the misunderstanding in economics inherent in the LTV that he worked with: wealth is not static, and can be generated in ways that don't involve the stealing of it from others.
So while it's true that the tippy top rich have enorsmously more than the poor do, and you can argue that as an overall slice of the total wealth pie, they've increased their share, in terms of actual, personal wealth, even the bottom strata of society are moving up.
"Poverty" no longer means, in a first world country at any rate, that you sit in a gutter, wondering whether you'll starve or freeze first.
>>490070
Get a load of this jew
ITT: Historical events Hollywood will never bother making a movie out of.
>>487938
Do you have autism or are you just illiterate?
Read the OP. This isn't a Bosnian war thread, friendo.
>>>/trash/
>>487917
Japanese internment camps in America
