What motivates conquerors?
>>3211798
Conquest
>>3211798
Fun
>>3211798
A variety of things
Any good documentaries on him? Also thoughts on him?
what's the most aesthetic protestant religion?
>>3211736
Presbysterianism
It's like Christian Islam
Dutch Reformed
I had a hell of a time googling to figure out what they called their priests
>>3211742
>>3211748
Reformed/Presbyterian a best.
Does Confucianism count as a religion?
Only metaphysics-intensive Neo-Confucianism can
>>3211687
CONFUCIANISM IS AN IDEOLOGY, NOT A RELIGION.
>>3211687
None of the Asian "religions" count as actual religions, they are just philosophy,
They aren't organized enough, nor all-encompassing enough, nor give all the answers.
*Note: Zoroastrianism here is not considered "Asian", as the region was always part of the Europe-North Africa-Near East theater of civilization, and not the China-Japan-Steppes one.
Is the Hegelian Dialectic still a valid form of historiography and historical analysis?
YES.
Can someone understand the Dialectic to me?
As I understand it, its idea is that the world-systems don't continuously improve, but instead are unraveled by internal contradictions that arise in reality, inspiring alternative world-systems that run in direct conflict with the original one until after a period of crisis one of those new systems is determined as the new world-system. It's something akin to Popper's view of scientific revolution, only political.
However, that way of looking at it seems to bring a lot of attention to the period of crisis and the agencies of individual actors in picking a world-system and ensuring it becomes the dominant one, whereas most people professing faith in the "Dialectic" I know seem to think individual decisions and moments matter very little and that material conditions determine everything, which seems like the opposite of what the Dialectic is to me if I understand it right.
>>3211634
>still
It never was.
In response to the question "what happens when we die?" a lot of the responses are something along the lines of "remember what it was like before you were born? it's like that."
But is this coherent?
'What it was like before I was born', whatever that was *produced* my existence. Life came from that.
So why do people assume that the nature of this void changes after death, in relation to before? Before your birth, the nature of the 'void' was to produce your existence. Whereas after your death, people assume the nature of the 'void' is to produce nothing, forever.
Why are people making this assumption about the 'void'?
We know, 100% that non-existence produced a lifetime for us once before. So what would prevent non-existence from producing one?
Why would the nature of non-existence change post death?
I say that it wouldn't, and that when we die, non-existence will bring forth another lifetime or some sort of existence for us again, just as it did with the production of this lifetime now.
I don't know what sort of life it would be, or whether it would even in any way be related to this reality at all, but I assert that another existence will follow this one, because the nature of 'non-existence' is to produce lifetimes.
>>3211609
Because our existance isn't a product of "nature of void", but of our body.
Our body is the hardware on which our software (soul) runs. Once the hardware breaks down, software can't run anymore, thus we stop existing
>>3211665
t. filthy materialist
>>3211948
better that than being massively confused by your own incorrect categories and false conclusions.
Are there any actual moral or philosophical arguments against homosexual sex?
I get certain utilitarian arguments like it leading to less babies, but that only applies if gay marriages are a thing and isn't an argument against the act itself.
Also, why were Christians so zealously against it to the point where it was considered a reason to burn people alive like in Ghent, or a valid accusation to levy against the Templars?
Pic related.
it's bad
>>3211522
Eventually it all boils down to gynocracy. Females cannot stomach having to compete for men with other men. I'm not even going to shill for faggotry but you can see the discrepancy between attitude towards male homosexuality and female homosexuality, even though both lead to zero children. Females are fully responsible for the hostiliy.
>>3211522
No, but I have heard the idea the homosexuality is just a sexual fetish, like transsexuals. Which is why you'll see them be more mentally ill or have other fucked up fetishes as well.
he got his shit pushed in by a 16 year old leper
>>3211504
Yes and no, mostly yes.
>>3211504
His portrait looks like a elementary school drawing
So... was he a fag or not?
>>3211457
Probably not, but you definitely are.
Majorly. He was almost certainly a top though so it's not gay.
>>3211478
That's also what T*rks and P*shtuns think... are they right?
what is your favorite time period in history /his/?
The one where I have someone who loves me.
let's talk about the Crimean war /his/
Eternal anglo betrays again.
>>3211310
If Anglos and frogs didn't get involved we'd now have Arabs and Turks writing in Cyrilic.
>>3211319
Is that a good thing?
What are some Elagabalus-like historical figures?
>ywn be Elagabalus
>>3211288
Why would you want to be a degenerate tranny getting pounded by sweaty men and then killed by his own guards? Are you a faggot?
>I hate prussians but I hate napoleon even more
What did he mean by this?
Every post deserves a reply
Why the natives never invented shields?
I mean ok you dont have iron so at least make a huge wooden shields to defend against conquerors swords. Were they just too stupid?
Every post deserves a reply.
>>3211244
you scare me = /
>>3211244
BRAAAAAAP
Cortes was plagued with nightmares after the execution of Cuatemoc. But why would this event have this effect on cortes, I mean after all the battles, blood, sacrifices everything he saw why would this grief him?
was it some kind of remorse?
Every post deserves a reply..
>>3211246
Now I will have the nightmares
Wow Cortes was a fucking faggot