I was trying to think of the right word to describe a reoccurring feeling I have. The feeling is a mixture of disgust and awe. Examples of things that give me the feeling are Lavar Ball, the Kardashians, the TV show "My 600lbs Life", etc. I'd call it 'awesome' or 'terrific' but I don't feel like those convey the right amount of disgust. Is there a word that suits my needs in English or any other language?
>>3009528
Astounded lacks the connotation you described, but it's not explicitly positive and fits better than, say awesome (which has an older meaning that holds connotations of terror). It can also just be used as a modifier to disgust. "Astoundingly disgusting" for example.
>>3009559
I think the word disgusting might even be too extreme. It's almost like contempt-ful awe.
>>3009528
Stupifying.
Tell me about Christianity in China's empires.
It lead to some pretty cool syncretic art
>>3009438
All I know was that there was a huge controversy around whether ancestor worship was permissible or not among China's Christians.
[kills 30 million people]
Tell me anons, why should i share my knowledge with you for free, instead of selling it to others and make a lots of money? Or in short form: Why sould i be a philospher and not a sophist?
Set that i have something of worth to share.
>>3009349
Knowledge is invaluable.
Therefore, you can't put a price on it, neither trade it like any other merchandise.
>>3009406
But every day books are sold. Certainly most people want something for their work, at least so much that they can live from it.
>>3009415
Selling the container isn't the same than selling the content. Neither selling the effort behind it is the same than selling the object itself.
I could sell a biography of some random dude, like Epicurus, but that doesn't mean I'm selling Epicurus himself, or his knowledge. Otherwise, it would be like those chinks who sell and buy, literally forest air.
A strange, ephemeral being awakens you in your sleep and presents you a gift.
You may choose any war in history, and alter the outcome of it's most critical battle. You would essentially be choosing to make the losers of a war the winners.
You retain your memories and existence if the alteration would threaten them. The world would change, but you cannot influence that change, only the war. What war do you choose? Bonus, which battle?
Hardmode: No WWI, WWII, American Civil War, or Vietnam.
Anons, feel free to postulate the outcome of other anon's answers.
The second Punic war.
I wonder what kind of poster makes a thread like this.
The rebellion of america from britain.
Alternatively the boxer rebellion.
Why did the Roman Empire decline and what were the differences between the early and late legions?
>>3009041
I think the decline began around 300 AD when women got introduced to the empire.
>>3009041
It declined because all the fossil fuels they were burning and forests they were cutting down changed the climate. They then denied refugees coming into their countries and lost out on the beautiful bounty of diversity.
Early legions were made up on misogynistic, elitist assholes who had impossible height standards. The later legion finally relaxed those standards and stopped exploiting their vertical privilege.
The early legions were like "Ah man we gotta fight Etruscans, Greek, Carthaginians, Gauls..."
The late legions were like "Ah man, we gotta find us an emperor who will pay us or else we'll kill him."
In the mid-late period, the armies just had too much power. As for why it declined: Weak emperors, barbarian migrations, stagnating economy, the works.
Interesting thread from last night that I wanted to continue:
How truthful is this claim?
>>3008972
>3 = 1
What did he mean by this?
>>3009091
>He
Fixed
>>3009091
Who?
What would have happened to Germany if Rohm was able to assassinate Hitler in 1934?
>>3008971
Rhineland never getsd remilitarized
Sudeten Germans remain oppressed
Czecholovakia remains indepdents
Himmler/Goring run Germany into the ground and it becomes a Monarchy again before 1950.
Stalin gets a stronger hold on Europe (not as strong as post ww2 but still a strong grip for not having to sacrifice 10s of millions)
Under the leadership of someone not quite as messed up as Hitler, Germany would fare a lot better and the war would run into the nuclear age with disasterous consequences for humanity.
This is why time travelers won't kill Hitler
When will they finally atone for their crimes against humanity?
being Polish is both the crime and the punishment
>>3008916
Kek
Yeah, they built death camps so they could collectively kill themselves. It was a very sad time for Polan
You get to ability to travel to the past at any point of time. You also receive immortality. You do also not need to eat or drink to survive.
What point in time do you travel and what do you do up until 2017 comes?
>>3008887
510bc in Greece, chill with Socrates and later Plato at the academy, fuck Hellenic girls (I have a toga fetish but specifically a fetish for the female dresses of Greece, particularly in Athens)
>>3008887
Under those conditions you might as well start at the beginning of civilization.
>>3008928
But who would want to sit around for 7000 years?
Why were the Hapsburgs so obsessed with bloodlines and inbreeding even though it created horrible medical defects and disgusting features
To preserve their political power.
If they had to intermarry with other royal families, their wealth would go into other family coffers.
The church had laws banning marriages within like 8 degrees of consanguinity, but the Royals pretty much ignored it.
>>3008835
The Spanish crown wasn't under Salic law. Titles could pass through the female line. When one of your titles is in control of virtually all of South America, you do what you can to keep it in the family, even if it means fucking your 1st cousin or your aunt.
>>3008835
To preserve political power in order to unite Europe under one jaw.
Ever notice how cool Diogenes was? Why isn't he taught about more these days?
haha ye bro diogenes, renounch modenr society dude totally radical haha xDD
You think homeless bums are cool? You should go hang out downtown under a bridge, its full of people just like diogenes
Did they really make pots that big?
I just got done going over to my grandma's house and we brought up family history and she mentioned that her father served in World War One in France in 1918. She mentioned he was an excellent shot and a he was gassed during the war. Not much is known else though about his time in the army during the war. It sounds clichéd kind of but that's the best description of him she gave to me.
>>3008639
great great whatever was a captain in the cavalary got mustard gas and fought at flanders.
>>3008674
Which country did he serve under?
Great great grandfather got dragged of by the Gendermerie into AH service.
He died later because he was impaled by two train wagons.
We all know the normie answer '' Yes'' but from a /his/ perspective is war really bad?
>>3008558
Define "bad"
>>3008558
Depends on why is the war fought and what will it lead to. Fighting a war to preserve your existence is a necessity, but shit like WW1 was literally pointless.
>>3008558
It depends on the war.
Post rares charlies
i made this
OOOOOMMMMMMMPPPPPP IDDDDDDD FHHHHHHHHHHGGGGGGGGTTT BEEP BEEP
>>3008541
>whomst the fool now?
How did he fuck up so bad?
He had the biggest empire known to man, the best military units of that time, fortified cities, huge reserve of manpower and he still managed to loose against a single army.
>>3008529
Alexander's men were more disciplined and technologically advanced, and Darius never tried to adapt in any significant way. He tried to adapt by making bigger armies and preparing the battlefield to his advantage but the inherent strengths of his army never changed and as such Alexander kept beating him across his empire.
>>3008529
He made the same mistake Hitler and Napoleon made: he didn't listen to his generals at several key points.
>>3008529
>the best military units of that time
Are you excluding the actual best military units of that time that defeated him or what?