If history is written by the victor then how do we know it is

File: 1485404744690.png (81KB, 324x471px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 324x471px

>>2320394
>it is not

History isn't written by the victor, that's a stupid meme

>>2320394
Your power level is rising young frogger but the true redpill is that nothing can be indisputably proven even if there is "proof"
The only real evidence we have of past events is the present
Thought is the though of thought
evidence is the evidence of evidence

Time itself is a meme all that we can be sure of is the present and we can reasonably expect that there more of the present later, but not forever

>>2320394
Because truth is what the victor decides.

If company A is competing with company B, and A has a certain business model, and B has a different business model, which was the "right" business model?

The business model of the company that stays in business

File: 1485966455414.jpg (59KB, 768x1024px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 768x1024px

>>2322308
Nigga what? The truth is what actually happened.

There is no his truth or my truth. There are only real events and fake ones.

What is spread and what is true is not the same thing.

Plus thats a stupid analogy.

>>2320394
Because victors probably wouldn't lie about their victories. Why would they need to?

>>2320394
It isn't written by the victor, it's written by the scholars.

See Genghis Khan's portrayal in most histories that weren't directly written for his successors; he was probably one of the greatest victors of all time but the texts are usually far from flattering. Or the American Civil War for another example; the United States was the victor but the butthurt Confederate losers had the biggest voice in the history books and have lots of people believing the "Lost Cause" narrative to this day.

>>2320394
>What is archaeology?

>>2320397
/thread

>>2320394
Most of it Is. It's gonna get worse from now on.