Archived threads in /his/ - History & Humanities - 578. page

sounds like one big propaganda piece against the right wing, full of fluff and just enough buzzwords and misleading statistics to let left-wing pseudo intellectuals feel enlightened fuel their egos higher than it already is.

also unfiltered democracy is and was a mistake, if there was a conspiracy to get rid of it (there isn't) I would support it.

>>3104396
If you're liberal, it will reaffirm your views. If you're conservative, you're surprised to see it on the same shelf as Coulter, Hannity, and Palin. If you're moderate, you aren't picking it up.

>>3104396
It seems like reddit shit
>Le need to /r/esist the republicans trying to take over
But I also haven't read it and maybe it does make some good points but seems a bit silly to me

File: Substance Dualism is false.png (533KB, 1280x800px) Image search: [Google]

533KB, 1280x800px

Substance Dualism is laughed at nowadays.

The idea of a ghost in the machine absurd giving the interactions of mind and brain. Destroy a part of the brain and you destroy conscious mechanisms. If the mind were like a ghost piloting the machine then the ghost should remain intact whether the machine is damaged.

However, people take this to imply materialism/physicalism: that we are nothing more than our physical makeup and our mind is either housed in our brains (almost like dualism) or is identical to our brains and/or its functions. This is a non-sequitur. This only implies that substance dualism is false.

More to come on materialism/physicalism (from here on known as physicalism)

File: Hard problem_of_consciousness.png (111KB, 800x719px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 800x719px

Physicalism suggests that all of reality is composed of matter or the physical, which is supposed to be non-mental and exists independently of consciousness (objective). However, consciousness exists (subjective). We know consciousness exists more certainly than anything at all. Even if you're skeptical about whether you're in the matrix or if this is a dream, you're still aware that you're aware in each scenario. No matter what you're still conscious, this you definitely know for sure if there is anything that can be said to be known for sure. However, this is impossible if all of reality is supposed to be physical, which is non-mental. If all is non-mental how can there be the mental? This is where reductionism fails on its face given the hard problem of consciousness.

From here the only way out for the physicalist is to a) deny consciousness, which is simply contradictory given we are most certain about the our aware of our awareness more than anything in our perceptions or ideas or b) embrace non-reductive physicalism.

However, this cannot work as noted by Jaegwon Kim in the Exclusion Problem. You will either end up lapsing right back into a substance dualism or you will fail to account for mental causation and you're right back to the mind-body problem of substance dualism all over again.

Reductive and non-reductive physicalism fail.

File: Immaterial Monism.png (494KB, 1280x685px) Image search: [Google]

494KB, 1280x685px

Idealism works as a perfect alternative to Substance Dualism and Physicalism. Idealism embraces the reality of consciousness without trying to reduce it, thus avoiding the hard problem of consciousness altogether, and embraces an non-physicalist monism which faces no exclusion problem whatsoever so there's no issue of mental causation. No mind-body problem, and no skeptical problems if all of reality is consciousness. This works as a perfect ontology and epistemology and could provide fertile ground for a meta-ethics given morality seems tied to conscious agents most of all rather than non-conscious agents.
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBsI_ay8K70

File: 1490064224744.png (194KB, 591x462px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 591x462px

Sorry I'm not contributing more but I forgot to save them all when I saw them

File: char2.png (3MB, 1670x2000px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1670x2000px

Here I got some more

Jews

Fuck off

Nigger

>Pick one

>>3104275
I pick Jews

File: 278945789280.jpg (43KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 500x500px

>>3104293

Sandniggers can't have peace and unite, they will always fight together, good for us

1. Opposition from the West. The US and Europe opposed Arab nationalism because Arab nationalists were anti-Western and aligned with the Soviet Union. The US backed conservative monarchies in the Gulf states, as well as Morocco.

2. More importantly, Arabs are not a unified group. Arabic can hardly be considered a single language and there are vast cultural and genetic differences between "Arabs" in Morocco, in Syria, or in Oman.

Good idea in theory not in practice was ruined by the high level on Nasser Egyptians who treated a united arab union as an egyptiian empire which as you might expect did not go down well.

>>3104150
During the medieval ages it definitely had a larger population and it did have a more advantageous position for commerce.

File: 023546.jpg (185KB, 1000x634px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 1000x634px

>>3104150
Cause it was all fucking destroyed by It*lians and T*rks

It was a shithole by 1453 and then was revitalized after.

>>3104127
they didn't

Fidel first measure was to launch a massive alphabetization campaign. 16 years old uni students were sent to rural villages as teachers (they got insane amounts of pussy btw)

>>3104127
By killing them.
duh

Niggers, Indians, Asians were turned against one another and those who had grudges against one another before colonial times such as rival Indian Kingdoms rarely united.

The Irish even if they hated a rival Gaelic clan would unite their forces all the time, could put aside past grievances in order to fight a common enemy.

>>3103913
Close proximity to the rest of Europe made it more difficult to put down rebellions

>>3103932
Because of the smaller tech gap, sorry forgot to add that

politics is a profession, you need to know how it works, and sure, it can get you killed

>>3103839
>teleports behind u
>heh heh nothing personnel socialist

>>3103859
You don't have to do it professionally to be involved.
I'm helping out campaigning for my party in the run up this September's election. Not doing much, but I guess every little helps.

>>3103759
>pious
>italian
>centralized

>>3103759
It was "neither Holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire." - Voltaire

File: xir341903.jpg (67KB, 467x600px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 467x600px

>non-Christian
>non-Roman
>decentralized

Because they shit in the street and worship cows

There's literally another thread about this on the front page. Fuck off.

>>3103571
I didn't realize that until I posted because that thread is related to Hindus getting butthurt at Buddhism, not claiming Buddhism is a branch of Hinduism.

>Greek view of 'Asians': ancient and cultured but effeminate, servile, degenerate and pretentious
>Roman view of Greeks: ancient and cultured but effeminate, servile, degenerate, impious and pretentious
>Latin view of Byzantines: ancient and cultured but effeminate, servile, degenerate, impious and pretentious
>English view of French: ancient and cultured but effeminate, servile, degenerate and pretentious

There seems to be a pattern here.

>>3103372
>Latin view of Byzantines: ancient and cultured but effeminate, servile, degenerate, impious and pretentious
>impious
Not even a little bit.

>>3103847
The Latins barely considered the Greeks to be real Christians. Of course it was the same the other way around.

agree, should be /her/ as in her-story

Like all of 4chan, /his/ is /pol/ish lebensraum.

>>3103099
No matter how much you throw a hissy fit and claim all boards are /pol/ it will never happen my 15 year old friend.

File: 1500313094621.jpg (293KB, 1327x674px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 1327x674px

No these are

File: IMG_1781.png (47KB, 417x353px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 417x353px

Good choice, I'd say British Raj

File: MapGermany1945.svg.png (230KB, 1200x1019px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 1200x1019px

Not really aesthetic but it makes me laugh so +1

>>3102067
>Roman Empire not only accepted other race/cultures but they also encouraged them to mix it up, giving religion freedom and a new notion about unity

What's the shock? Only stating the obvious. Or you are triggered that the "ABSOLUTELY BARBARIC" views on other cultures were about the ones who REFUSED to be part of the Empire?

>>3102067
nigger what. the Romans were fucking Caucasian and you know it. Take your race bait to pol faggot

>>3104096
>Responding to trolls

You're part of the problem.