It's not a matter of dividing history into chunks, it's a matter of observing repeatable events. "X1 slew Y1 in order to gain Z1. Three hundred years later, X2 slew Y2 in order to gain Z2." The threads aren't the same, but the weave is very familiar.
-
-
En réponse à @ChrisWarcraft
how would you know if your observations are merely the result of historians collecting and narrativizing events to create a history that gives you the impression that empire is cyclical? and who told you that empire is the main way of understanding past events?
2 réponses 0 Retweet 0 j'aime -
En réponse à @a_man_in_black
As before, we do the best we can, and I'm open to new evidence. Also, empires tend to exert the most change on their surrounding environment (as relates to the continued survival of the species), and as such, are likely our best understanding of what we have to look forward to.
1 réponse 0 Retweet 0 j'aime -
En réponse à @ChrisWarcraft
History is written by empires to aggrandize themselves. Why would you trust it to tell you the importance of empire? Why would you trust assertions about the importance of human behavior before the invention of the contemporary sociological understanding at all?
1 réponse 0 Retweet 0 j'aime -
En réponse à @a_man_in_black
I mean, sure, we can get into the whole discussion of "what is truth," but I'm comfortable in what I've studied compared to what has been unearthed compared to what other accounts of the time said, and none of it is dependent on a single account.
2 réponses 0 Retweet 0 j'aime -
En réponse à @ChrisWarcraft
yes. asserting an immutable human nature that is available to be observed by any non-dumb person is gonna run hard into "what is truth", lol
1 réponse 0 Retweet 0 j'aime -
En réponse à @a_man_in_black
"Truth" is that atoms will spin, matter will decay, and entropy will eventually win. Anything else is what we bring to the table. That being said, what we bring to the table has turned out to be pretty predictable (again, with exceptions).
1 réponse 0 Retweet 0 j'aime -
En réponse à @ChrisWarcraft
you changed the subject to particle physics rather than address the problem of there being no basis for the empirical existence of immutable human nature
2 réponses 0 Retweet 1 j'aime -
En réponse à @a_man_in_black
The empirical evidence is that we're currently engaged in the same stupid, bullshit behavior our ancestors engaged in. Dunno what more you want me to say.
1 réponse 0 Retweet 0 j'aime -
En réponse à @ChrisWarcraft
that is something commonly asserted by people who want to make naturalistic appeals justifying their behavior, up to and including The Actual Nazis.
2 réponses 0 Retweet 2 j'aime
Fact - People before us justified terrible short term decisions that would benefit themselves over others, often at the cost of their society. I don't know how you can argue this. We're currently doing the same. Our children will likely do the same.
-
-
En réponse à @ChrisWarcraft
is that because we will teach them to do so, or because of some inherent immutable human quality?
0 réponse 0 Retweet 0 j'aimeMerci. Twitter en tiendra compte pour améliorer votre fil. SupprimerSupprimer
-
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.