How did the heart-and-brain dichotomy emerge?
Is it older than the Christian dichotomy of body-and-soul? Or is it just the folkish interpretation of Cartesian dualism?
Is this split a strictly Western phenomenon, possibly being derived from the Apollonian and Dionysian dichotomy?
I would say that having certain body parts represent facets of character is certainly older than Christianity and maybe stems from prehistoric conception of limbs, hair, teeth, eyes etc that could be lost without dying. This shows the "person" is somehow different from their body parts. Perhaps this is why after death, mankind believed that some part of them remained a a ghost or spirit or star that watched from above. Being able to rationalize the memory of the living person with the dead (soon to be buried) body somehow.
>>1412519
>Is it older than the Christian dichotomy of body-and-soul?
Well, considering that the brain wasn't even recognized to be an organ governing behavior until the middle ages, predating Christianity couldn't be possible. The Egyptians and other peoples of antiquity (like the Aztecs) reasonably believed the heart was the seat of the personality, as we think of the brain now, because it was the only organ which moved when separated from the body, and thus clearly imbued with the essential living qualities of the animated man.
Though, I'm skeptical that the specific "heart-and-brain" dichotomy is as prominent as you might think, since the Wizard of Oz is using them not literally but as irrational passion and rational order, so closer then to the usage of the dionysian and apollonian. You could, if examining the Wizard of Oz specifically, substantiate this with how the scarecrow is closer to a cthonic, organic character made of entirely biological parts (straw and fiber) with stake in the earth (literally), and the inverse of the Tin Man, who is an inorganic (made of tin) woodsman carrying an axe, opposed to nature.
If you REALLY want to be Academic you could stretch his occupation as a woodsman into the archetypal opposition to the irrational, organic world represented by the tree, a phallic symbol...
Holy shit it's a sunny summer day and I'm writing an obtuse essay about the fucking wizard of oz on a mongolian puppetry board, I need to go outside
>>1412558
Well to be fair, considerations like that are critical when constructing deliberate and effective alegorical fiction, so those are perfectly valid analysis, 2bqhwUf
So I was recommended to read Adam Tooze`s The Deluge about the First World War.
Basically, the case that author makes in it is that
-decline of Europe began then, not after 1945
>Christianity shot itself in the foot back then, has and never will recover from that war
>US began it`s ascension as the worlds only superpower then (the period of ascension ending in 1991 - since then being the worlds only superpower).
How correct is that?
>>1412357
>Christianity shot itself in the foot back then, has and never will recover from that war
KEEEEEEEEEEEEK
Christianity shot itself in the foot during the Wars of Religion. It kept shooting its own foot and made Europe disgusted of religion in general.
The fuck does Christianity or religion have to do in WWII? It was just a bunch of edgy Nationalists versus the victors of the last war.
>>1412363
>The fuck does Christianity or religion have to do in WWII
First World War.
The argument author makes that while weakened, Christianity was severely undermined in all domains (politics,arts,social life etc). because all churches in the continent supported it.
>Christianity shot itself in the foot back then, has and never will recover from that war
What Christianity has to do with WWI?
are there any more examples of necrocracy aside north korea, historically papal states and pooland?
THIS IS NOT SHOPPED! THEY EVEN FED HIM WITH PAPAL CREAMCAKES XDDD
Lenin worship in soviet russia
>>1412302
>THIS IS NOT SHOPPED! THEY EVEN FED HIM WITH PAPAL CREAMCAKES XDDD
Nice meme
>>1412354
don't be joking! I was seeing it on my own eyes!
it's really a necrocracy, with G-d Popar Janus Paulus Secundus
How do I worship Egyptian Gods, /his/?
they've migrated into the hindu pantheon
they're still worshipped in egyptian villages
Watch the latest X-Men movie
Isn't history just a spook? It's really impossible to know for certain these things happened unless you were there yourself.
>>1412081
thats not what a spook is
*farts on u*
really makes u think
>>1412081
far as you can tell the captcha is a spook. you should stop filling it.
What did he mean by this?
>"Race war, gas the kikes" -Adolphus Hitlerium, consul of Roman Grossgermanium Empire
>>1412050
filthy commie
>>1412050
The National Socialist German Worker's Party was a socialist workers rights party.
Isn't the belief that everything can be answered by science requires a same leap of faith that used to claim that everything was answered in Holy Book of certain religion? Does it means that Scientism is just another form of the religion?
>>1411882
YOU ARE MUTUALLY CONFLATING RELIGION, AND DOGMA.
UNTHINKING BELIEF IN SCRIPTURE IS A FORM OF DOGMA; UNTHINKING RELIANCE ON SCIENCE (SCIENCISM/SCIENTISM) IS A FORM OF DOGMA.
>>1411882
Yes but the difference is that science changes everyday. So it has nothing to do with faith.
In science what is true today, it might not be tomorrow. Perhaps someday someone will come up with a better theory than the big bang theory.
Religion is nothing but superstition and dumbing the populations, saying the human being is incapable of doing great things and that we're all idiots and sinners that should fear hell and god. It was used to explain natural phenomena like raining and earthquakes, until finally someone came up with the real explanation.
Traditional religions are cancer and they will disappear on their own.
Consumerism and sports are the true religions of today's times. Shopping malls and sports arenas filled with people everyday, while sites of faith are getting emptier and emptier on western societies. Some even install wifi to pander to the youth people, but it's useless. The knowledge it's free, people don't need that superstition anymore
*Tips*
>>1411922
basically this and now this argument should be considered resolved
Who were the best hand to hand warrior civilisation before the invention of the firearm? Our current soldiers will probably be scared of the vision of an ancient warrior using a knife.
>>1411860
Why?
Average Roman was like 160cm.
I'm 186cm, 84kg, 10% BF. I could swing a 20kg barbell like it's nothing. I trained MMA.
If I got some cool armor and didn't die of disease, I'd be unstoppable in Ancient Rome. And I'm not even a soldier.
>>1411881
You'd die immediately just like all the other buff barbarians who thought they could take on the little Romans.
>>1411898
Facing a Roman formation, probably, but in individual combat, armed or unarmed, I'd probably wreck 95% of Roman soldiers.
Does efficiency exist or is it just an abstract we use to try to place ourselves above taking sides?
Wat.
>>1411671
Efficiency is quantifiable in most cases.
>>1411700
Explain.
Why do people think the crusaded were a bad thing? The Arabs had been viciously slaughtering Christian populations for four centuries before the Catholic Church called the first Crusade, and from what I was after all of the initial conquests Europe started experiencing a golden age akin to Te Rennisance. Jerusalem was also relatively peaceful after Te Crusade was over.
>be lord of bickering fiefdom
>pope calls a crusade
>levy additional taxes from overworked peasants to equip my fighting men
>prepare baggage train with my royal fineries
>rally knights and footmen to march
>instead of going to the holy land, loot and pillage my fellow Christian rival's land
>be captured, baggage train and valuables ransacked and carried off
>my former knights become brigands and terrorize Christian lands for months
>peasants pay even more taxes to secure my random
>ride home in disgrace
>repeat several times per decade until I die
>>1411543
Really it's not different from any other wars though, just that it was waged in the name of God, same shit different name
Why do people make such a big deal of the crusades particularly anyway
>>1411556
It's the white guilt meme.
I rememmber people writing about some report in the soviet union, in the 60's i think. Something about computerization and how it was refused by the top brass which set the voiet union back.
Does anyone know what im talking about? Can anyone elaborate.
>>1410960
yes
"informatics" (as computer science is called there) for some retarded reason was branded as "bourgeois science" and not worth pursuing for millions of soviet engineers and scientists.
It wasn't until 80s IT industry could somewhat recover from that decision and programmable calculators and Tetris was ultimately all SU it could contribute while it was dying
>>1411036
So what do you think would have happend if they did adopt computer science?
>>1411121
survival
The holocaust never happened
>>1410950
Behold!
Bait!
Our daily shitpost has returned.
Right click
Hide thread
>>1410966
Not an argument
hello nazi my old friend
>Guys believe me Im a Roman
>Turns Parthenon into a mosque
>>1410879
Bow to your sultan!
But how's that any worse than the Romans themselves closing the philosophical schools and outlawing paganism?
>>1410879
>Guys believe me I'm a
>Holy
>Roman.
So , was Nazi Germany right wing or left wing ?
>>1410839
Reich wing
>>1410839
By retarded modern definitions, right wing.
By classical definitions, liberal.
By commie definitions, reactionary.
The most reasonable placement would be absurdly authoritarian centrist with strong racial ideals.
They nationalized a fuckton of industries and restricted many freedoms. With that being said Hitler himself spoke poorly of Soviet Socialism and American capitalism. Economically they were definitely left of center, culturally they were very conservative, and socially very authoritarian
Why is intuition pumps guy famous? Is it because he pretends subjective experience doesnt exist? Or did he just pigge back ride on the backs of the other three atheist memesters?
His lectures are so boring. I have no problem listening to 20 hours of roman history or a course on logic but listening to this fool lecturing is unberable.
>le consciousness don't real man
materialism was a mistake
>>1410544
I've heard if often claimed that he claims you don't have subjective experience, but I'd really like a citation on that. So far as I've read, he just claims that consciousness makes it seem as though it's more significant than it actually is, making it seem as though there's a non-physical basis to its function.
>>1410544
>Big Boys of English Speaking academia
>Singer
The philosophical equivalent of Judge Judy, Singer's self-contradictory pap ("abortion and infanticide are acceptable because these immature humans are incapable or rational preference" vs. "rationality is not a requirement for ethical conduct. Any irrational being will avoid pain, which is why cruelty to animals is unethical", which are flatly contradictory positions). Makes money by writing books that tell Liberals 'doing what you want is A-OK"
A buffoon.
>Chomsky
A decent linguist, his work in every other field is no more (or less) than self-serving rent seeking which he publicly admits that he, himself, does not believe.
Darn good at making a buck of gullible college students, but (unless you are speaking of linguistics, where he is very good) not a big academic.
>Dawkins
A mediocre-at-best scientist who will leave exactly zero mark on actual science, he became popular as a writer of PopSci books. When that income source dried up (because his theories were soundly thrashed by scientists) he switched to a series of popular books trashing what he thinks religious people might believe.
Never was a great thinker, never will be.
>Rorty
A man who counted on his readers having never heard of Gorgias, Rorty took facile rhetoric, relabeled it neopragmatism, and sold it like snake oil.
>Chalmers
About time an actual academic appeared. although, to be fair, while he does a fine job of reminding everyone of the hard problem, he has no answers. Which is no one's fault.
>Dennett
Refuses to use proper terms, mainly to hide that, deep down, he he knows any clear statement of his theories leads to eye-rolling
Not a serious academic.
.
This list is a list of "People that stupid people think are smart"