LISTEN TO ME: LOGIC IS WRONG!!
Logic is highly illogical!
A premise can only be valid as long as it is true.
A premise itself can be interpreted as a conclusion of former premises.
For example:
>an apple is red
And these former premises are the conclusions of former former premises, which are the conclusions of former former former premises, and so on.
So what's the original premise?
Certainly this loop will lead us to a beggining, a place where all premises, all valid observations and claims, come from.
What is that premise, then? How can we know it exists? Prove me it does!
In other words, if you say anything, and I ask you "why is that" repedeatly over and over you'll eventually hit a point where you won't be able to give me an answer.
So your whole statement, regardless of how simple it is, has been debunked from its deepest core.
Logic may work at first glance, but when you look deep inside it, that is only because its operating within its own logical framework.
IN THE END, THINGS HAVE NO MEANING.
There is no thing such as "logic", this doesn't exist in the Universe. It's only a mental creation of humans to fullfill their existentialist feelings, which themselves are the mere results of meaningless hormones that are made of meaningless atoms which are made of meaningless quarks and leptons.
LIFE IS ESCAPISM.
Prove me wrong.
>PROTIP: you can't
What I'm trying to say is that the one original logic premise that should have logically originated all others cannot be logically proven to be valid, because there are no other premises to prove it, and therefore, everything that comes after it is very likely to be untrue.
>>1126755
Read Wittgenstein.
Who the fuck do you think you are?
Logic has been studied since Greco-Roman times.
> Logic is highly illogical
Doesn't means that is wrong.
You can be illogical but right in the end.
Do you think that it is impossible to live a 100% logical life, and at the same time, be happy?
I'm starting to think yes. If you really do question everything arround you, you'll find out you can't answer a lot of things, and this will cast a shadow of doubt over your life.
In the end, happiness is just escapism, and things have no meaning.
What do you think?
I think that it is impossible to live a 100% logical life at the first place.
>>1126623
> happiness is just escapism
What does it even means? For example, it can be said logical life is also just an escapism. How you know what is escapism and what is not.
>>1126623
'logic' is interchangeable within cultures. For instance Chinese kill people as a way to save money on hospital bill (you have probably seen videos of many Chinese people doing heinous things which are simply accepted).
Happiness is a simple illusion, it's not static it's always changing so why bother even pursue it in the first place?
Been studying the first World War for a while and I just got to the Gallipoli Campaign. Is this film worth watching? Should I watch it before or after studying the campaign? Any major historical inaccuracies?
>>1126314
Have you tried asking Google?
is a good film with a very young mel gibson
>>1126314
Try "the water diviner" film
Why didn't the Turks scramble for colonies like the other powers in the 18th and 19th century? Not just in Americas, in Africa and Asia too.
Cuz they were dum-dum
>>1126091
>Americas
Too far away. If you noticed, all the nations who colonized the new world were at the edge of the Atlantic, perfect for setting sail without issues.
>Africa
Well they sort of had Africa and even went down to the Horn as your map shows.
>Asia
By the 17th century they started stagnating that went to full on decline in the 18th and 19th century. They couldn't possibly have hoped to defeat Qajar Persia or India.
By the time colonialism really started to catch on, the Ottomans were already weak as fuck.
The height of their power was in the 15th and 16th century.
I've heard plenty of WWII horror stories about the Japs and Nazis, but what about the Italians? Where they too lazy to even commit their own atrocities, or where they simply overshadowed in scope by the other Axis powers?
>>1126087
Axis war crimes are basically non existent and mainly propaganda.
There's a lot more to study about Allied war crimes.
they sprayed ethiopians with mustard gas
(to be fair, ethiopians were using hollow point bullets)
>>1126112
Can we get a thread going for counteies that have literally never done anything wrong?
>Genocide is more stylish than other countries:manly battles
>Will invade countries over ethics
>average 800,000 enemy pows every war all well fed
You cant lose with this country.
England?
Iceland
>Literally never participated in military conflict
>Has some cool writers and artists
>BTFO'd bankers
>>1126026
>btfod bankers
Themselves?
>you can't disprove Solipsism
>you can't disprove Idealism
>you can't disprove Nihilism
Why do philosophy?
Because even if you can't prove or disprove unfalsifiable concepts, you can still discard them.
There are good arguments against all of them. Solipsism is funny in that it doesn't matter if it's true or not.
Alien here. I can.
I've spoken with dozen philosophy majors and literally no one understands Heidegger. Why is he so influential? What is he saying, for Gods sake.
>>1125662
i think he tried to cover his idealessness with convoluted language intentionally out of vanity -
many philosophers ánd sociologists fake originality like this
>>1125662
>forget about becoming(something) and just revel in your Dasein
Sorry OP. Most people who even try to understand him are usually leftist materialists who only read him to see what their leftist idols saw in him. You need to have randomly experienced Lichtung to truly understand.
>>1125662
He argued reality is not composed of "things" so much as subject-dependent-contextual-possibilities. He tried to avoid the blind faith in the modern scientific world view, and he failed, unfortunately.
I admire the way they defeated the Hungarians in Lechfeld and ended their raids in Europe
>>1125646
>Nice things about germany history
it'll end soon.
Even if it failed, the HRE at least tried to be Holy, Roman and an Empire
>>1125646
They had pretty cool military uniforms throughout history
what's the deal with the septuagint? why do they translate passages so differently in some cases? is the septuagint a translation of a different hebrew bible than the one we have today? do jews hold it in high regard at all? how did it originate?
also what's with those dead sea scrolls?
>>1125644
>what's the deal with the septuagint?
It's the oldest translation of the Bible.
>why do they translate passages so differently in some cases?
Because different translators were working on it with different processes and mastery over the languages. Sometimes they're more literal, sometimes they go for an interpretive translation.
Please refer to the New English Translation of the Septuagint - I'm referring to both the To The Reader of The NETS and the introductions of each book - for further, specific questions:
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/nets/edition/
>is the septuagint a translation of a different hebrew bible than the one we have today?
They didn't have the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia back in the day.
If Qumran is of any indication, you would find versions agreeing with the MT ("proto-Masoretic Text", the majority), or the Septuagint, or something else ("Qumran Bible").
The Masoretes weren't there to standardize the texts.
>do jews hold it in high regard at all?
Hebrew Bible or nothing.
>how did it originate?
Go to the paragraph on the Septuagint here:
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/3269-bible-translations
A Greek translation of the Torah would allow a foreign king to understand what this Judaism thing is about.
>>1125740
>The Masoretes weren't there to standardize the texts
Are you saying that before the Masoretes there were more versions of the Hebrew Bible commonly found? Not sure if I'm understanding you.
>>1126046
Yes, and Qumran shows that.
It seems to me that everything we do, feel and say is of a rather superficial nature. I'd be interested in reading philosophical approaches on how to deal with the apparent lack of meaning in everything.
So, any good recommendations?
>>1125627
>It seems to me that everything we do, feel and say is of a rather superficial nature.
Put some more effort in it.
Foucault, Derrida, and Althusser went into how ideology is created and sustained, so that might be what you're after
>>1125638
Fair enough. It seems to me that we only harbour and express our feelings in an attempt to create a narrative of some sort in our lives. It seems to me that all of it is just so we have something to occupy ourselves with, because otherwise life would be too plain. It may also serve to justify the actions dictated by some of our most basic instincts such as self-preservation and reproduction. So, despite all of our grand and noble concepts such as love, justice, etc., I only see a mechanical behaviour fighting desperately to stay alive.
can you imagine how progressed the world would be if we had no religion.
Ye m8, the dark ages
There's a chance there would be no society.
>>1125544
>John Lenin quote
>edgy pic with tumblr filename
Can we compare Britain leaving the EU to the time we left the Catholic Church under Henry VIII? What similarities/differences are there?
Well there's no qts getting beheaded
Henry VIII recognized that there were two Empires: Europa and Britannia. The establishment of a national faith in England was well overdue by his time. Today there is Britain, Europe, and Russia, each with their own destiny. The establishment of a national destiny is well overdue in Britain.
Anybody know anything about the Ottoman trade deal we had under Elizabethan rule that Catholic nations couldn't get because Islam was considered evil by the Church?
This Spring marks the 100th anniversary of the Asia Minor Agreement (Sykes-Picot) that split up the Arab remnants of the Ottoman empire between France, Britain and Russia.
The agreement wasn't honored in full, particularly by the Brits, and laid the foundation for the past century of instability in the region.
>>1125365
Gee I wonder why..
>>1125365
I love it, its karma. The Arabs betrayed the rightful Caliph, now they get the kaffir's reward
>>1125376
>the rightful caliph who painted nude-females.
Who are the great historians?
I'm an ausfag and recently really got into J. Rufus Fears, watched a whole boatload of his videos on Rome, Greece and liberty. I would like to read/see more from people such as himself. Which historians are impressive for information and the telling of history?
Wish all professors were like this man, he was insightful, engaging and timeless.
>>1125318
Titus-Livus, Sallustus and Taine
They were writing about living things, not dead ones. I hates these fucking old historians with their old books.
>>1125568
>They were writing about living things, not dead ones. I hates these fucking old historians with their old books.
For about thirty seconds I thought about explaining why this is wrong. But then I realised that your mental development must have halted at six, so I'd be wasting my time.
>>1125318
Georges Duby
Runciman
Le Goff
All top-tier for the medieval period, some people will detest Duby though