>utilitarianism
>>1903633
>deontology
>>1903633
>fascism
Isn't utilitarianism just fascism?
If the sum of comfort is end goal, is seems justify to condemn 1% of the population to suffering in order to make 99% happy. It also seems justifiable to make 2% of the population suffer to make 98% happy. And so on
Historical events or people that you want a film or video game based on
>>1901267
Imagine a vidya or this shit, playing as the British and Voortrekker colonisers.
>inb4 they're all black à la battlefield 1
Islamic expansion
Rise of Mongols
Vikings VS Samurais
>>1901367
>Vikings VS Samurais
Give me your most esoteric and controversial thoughts and opinions.
There is no God but God, and Muhammad is his messenger
The polytheists were right all along
Life and existence is pointless because everybody will die one day and the universe will eventually end in a heat death.
Why is America's role in WWI do underrated? Without America bringing in two million men the allies shouldn't have had enough men to take part in the final offensive.
Without them the allies would have lost.
>>1899768
it isnt underrated, its general consensus that america joining the war won the war for the allies
>>1899768
Because America missed most of the suffering which the media focuses on. They pretty much came at the end of the war for the land few offensives.
>>1899768
What defeat germany was the bristish navy and the endless shitstorm of the western front, it was an attrition war and the german loose it, america just came at the end when the german were already defeated.
The greatest Indian rulers;
1.Ashoka Maurya
2.Chandragupta Maurya
3.Raja Raja Chola & Rajendra Chola
4.Samudra Gupta
5.Kanishka Kushana
6.Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj
7.Abu'l-Fath Jalal ud-din Muhammad Akbar
8.Ranjit Singh
9.Chandragupta II Gupta
10.Maharana Pratap
Are we all agreed on this?
>>1904936
What about Shah Jahan?
1. Poo Poo Poojet
2. Poojinder IV
3. Loojesh Rajpoo
4. Poojet the Elder
5. Poonathan Looswami
6. Singhjeet Ramdeep
7. Jindupoo Gurpreet
Why did the Romans name their gods after the planets?
Did the ancients know something about astronomy that we don't?
gonna hijack your thread for a second OP since i dont see another thread up and my questions is loosely related.
Did any of the greek Titans die? Memory is hazy and google isnt helping one bit. From what i remember Titans just cant die and the closest was Cronus being chopped up and thrown into the tartarus
it was the other way around actually, the romans named celestial bodies after their gods and western astronomers that came after the romans who discovered the outer planets and satellites continued that convention.
Jupiter was named thus because it was the brightest planet, jupiter the god was god of the heavens in addition to being king of the gods. Venus was named for the god of beauty since its such a beautiful body, Mercury was named for the speedy messenger of the gods because it is the fastest moving planet, and moves very quickly into and out of the horizon, only being visible for brief periods. Mars was named for the god of war because of its red color. Saturn's name meaning is a bit more obscure, I'm not really sure why that was chosen, but its named after the god saturnus who is Jupiter's father and the god of agriculture to the romans.
>did the ancients know something about astronomy that we don't
like what, I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Are you asking why they named the planets after gods but not the stars? Since atleast greek times it was noted that there were a few specific celestial bodies that moved around significantly more than the others. The greek astronomers calles these planetes asteres, or wandering stars.
>>1910164
Ouranus died. Though I guess you could argue whether or not the Father of Titans was one himself.
What's making Andrew Jackson frown, /his/.
>>1909355
Banks
His former slave's replacing him on the 20
Was imprisonment- like what we have today, long term, sentences of incarceration, including life sentence- present during ancient & medieval ages around the world?
Seems to me that its a death sentence for a premodern society. Actively keeping a bunch of people out of the workforce and locking them up in boxes instead.
>>1908840
No. No pre-enlightenment society I'm aware of (and damn few of them) used imprisonment as an actual judicial penalty for crimes. You'd have people kept as prisoners of war until ransoms or some other conditions were made, and you would have people held until a trial could be convened, but it was simply a way to keep the prisoner there until some further arrangement could be made.
Punishments themselves were usually either financial, corporal, or capital.
>>1908840
Both Rome and China used long term imprisonments as punishments.
However most of the time you spent incarcerated is done doing government manual labor. Like in mines, quarries, or transporting loads of stone etc. Ergo: outside bars. You are housed in a prison though.
Imprisonment truly is a luxury of centralized organized civilizations, and not tribals or feudalcuck states.
>>1908840
locking people up in boxes, cages, cells, throwing them into holes and so on, was the most normal thing for thousands and thousands of years
ITT: post songs that perfectly sum up a philosopher or historical figure
I'll start with an easy one
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z70EYITygrA
>>1908740
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQecF8k-T9I
>>1908740
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVTXPUF4Oz4
>>1908740
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vt1Pwfnh5pc
1) Do you, personally, not do things that are considered bad because you agree those things are bad and don't want to cause any kind of harm, or do not do those things simply because you fear being caught?
2) Do you believe humans are naturally good or evil?
I can honestly say for the most part if I choose not to do something bad it's because I dont want to get caught but it depends on what it is.
My own arrogant opinion on this is that I think innately we do things that benefit us simply for that reason but it all depends on the extremes that certain people take to be evil or good. I would say I think everyone has the capability to love and be compassionate and vice versa but your environment and many other factors can affect this. I think there is no conclusive answer to this question. Humans are too complex.
I don't do them because I consider them bad and I don't want other people doing it.
>>1908703
Social pressure mostly, I don't want other people thinking badly of me
ITT:Your favorites empires and civilization.
>Empire.
Roman empire.
>Civilization
Romans.
>>1908652
Empire:
Irish
Civilization:
Irish
>>1908652
>Empire
The Inca
>Civilization
Babylonians
>>1908652
/his/ has made me painfully aware of how little history I actually know about. My entire life is a lie.
What was his endgame?
Opening a successful milk shop
did stirner have the most retarded childish philosophy ever?
>MINE MINE MINE!!! I WANT IT!!!
A world without spooks
(1/7) The Race its self
What is a Native American? Native Americans genetics are very strange, but the truth is very strange about their origins
https://youtu.be/rLV9A8P00bw
>blue eyed natives
Automatically you'll say it isn't true that native Americans aren't of white decent however they are a mix between white and Asian
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beringia
The Asians however came over later and because of the dominant traits of dark hair and dark eyes it's very hard to believe, but you can still find white traits such as strong square jaws, lighter colored eyes ,some Native American tribes averaged a 5'8 tall height.(please note 5'8 was extremely tall for that time period)
https://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/tallind.htm
And even more so Amerigo Vespucci records a tribe of white giants that domesticated deer and used fire works. (I'm not basing the mixed races of what native Americans on his records, but it is interesting)
http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/256022-giant-native-tribes-of-ancient-america/
And finally modern Mexican in no way represents native Americans. The modern Mexican is a mongrel mix between African and mainly apache.
(Note that apaches were sometimes regarded as the most violent tribe). The reason for this breed is because of the slave trade that relentlessly funneled Africans into South America and Mexico (see picture). Also to note many South American natives have been bombarded with the race mixing. For example places like Haiti who have near 100% black populations are some of the worst places on earth.
Also interesting you can find blonde haired tribes in South American that allegedly had no contact with whites
>>1908143
(2/7) Advancements
>native Americans were subhuman degenerates and on the same levels as the aboriginals of Australia, or the natives of Africa
http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2014/06/29/10-native-inventions-and-innovations-changed-world-155541?page=0%2C1
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_contributions
https://www.google.com/amp/s/theworldismysterious.wordpress.com/2013/09/27/mayan-civilisation-inventions-and-achievements/amp/?client=safari
http://www.aztec-history.com/aztec-inventions.html
http://www.ancient-origins.net/ancient-places-americas/unravelling-mystery-behind-megalithic-stone-walls-saksaywaman-001470
The links provided show that native Americans had many contributions to modern society. And we're not simply banging rocks together and running with the wind. They had the most accurate calendars of the ancient world and intricate architecture
>>1908143
(3/7) civilization
>B-but native Americans were savages they didn't even have cities only villages and they were nomadic
This is also untrue Hollywood for some reason has completely skipped over all notable Native American cities and painted them as chasing buffalo.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cahokia
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2011/01/cahokia/hodges-text
http://www.legendsofamerica.com/il-cahokia.html
http://www.museumofthecity.org/project/cahokia-the-native-american-city-of-mounds/
>bigger than NY in the 1750's
https://youtu.be/0h9WlozwiTQ
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesa_Verde_National_Park
>city built into side of a mountain
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumapunku
>archeologist still cant figure out how they did it
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aztec_Empire
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_city
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_civilization
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machu_Picchu
There's many more links but as you can tell the original natives of American were almost if not on the same level as the ancient Greeks and Chinese.
The main reason for this divide was the forging of weapons. Iron and steel played a huge role in the development of the western world. The reason this was prominent is that two of the most advanced ancient civilizations were within trading distance and this ability to trade allowed advancements the happen very rapidly and also horses played a big role in shaping the western world. However Native Americans still became very advanced with what they had
http://www.aztec-history.com/ancient-aztec-weapon.html
>the Maquahuitl was so powerful it could decapitate a horse in one blow according to Spanish records
http://www.spike.com/video-clips/2nv66c/deadliest-warrior-
http://www.native-net.org/indians/american-indian-bows.html
>>1908143
(4/7) Animal domestication
Native Americans also had very good relationships with animals. You can usually track how advanced civilizations were with the domestication of animals
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_dogs
http://www.dogbreedinfo.com/nativeamericanindiandog.htm
South Americans also domesticated alpacas and Guinea Pigs. And if you read the link above about domestication of deer then you could clearly see it in the white tail deer who obviously looks very genetically superior to other deer.
/his/ Meme thread. Let's get this rolling. Does anyone have the picture of the different countries' armies lined up against each other, denoting worst to best?
Were the Ottomans Turks?
Was there really a ruling class who saw themselves as ethnically distinct from the population? It sounds like fantasy novel shit
>>1907716
bump for interest
>>1907716
>It sounds like fantasy novel shit
That's precisely the point. Almost every national myth is romantic.
The devilish system really did make the majority of the powerful men in the Empire non-Turkish but it really did not matter for the Ottomans. As a side note the final sultan of the Ottoman Empire was not even 1 percent Turk so I can agree with you on some aspects.