Parmenides

[Anonymous No.11694331]

Was he right?

[Anonymous No.11694922]

>>11694331
ask ur mom

[Anonymous No.11694986]

>>11694922
no

[Anonymous No.11694987]

>>11694331
about what

[Anonymous No.11695005]

>>11694331
i just realize there’s so many phil and incel and roastie and life advice and /soc/ threads because while novels are both for brainlets and written by the niggers of genius, they actually require: focus, a soul, the ability to enjoy oneself, an imagination, vaguely good spatial reasoning and higher verbal, commitment and most importantly to talk about them in a way that redeems the unspeakable time sink that is a book one has to actually remember scenes, characters, dialogue, descriptions of setting, style, symbolism, relations w/culture and other novels, religious-poetic significance, and usually, if the reader is a man of logos, a desire to emulate or surpass or compete with the author in one’s own work and style. What kind of disgusting faggotry has /lit/ fallen into? You people don’t read at all.

[Anonymous No.11695016]

>>11695005
If you've actually read the surviving text from On Nature you would know that it actually has everything you just described. It's an epic poem where Parmenides is told the true way by a goddess after being led by maidens to a sacred temple. It is packed with dialogue, setting, style, symbolism, relations with greek culture and of course religious and poetic significance. All in just 150 lines. So basically you don't know what the fuck you're talking about and just want to shit up a potentially interesting thread just because you're assmad about the general state of /lit/. Unironically kys.

[Anonymous No.11695394]

Why were ancient Greeks so handsome ?

[Anonymous No.11695489]

>>11695394
superior med genes

[Anonymous No.11695788]

>>11695489
But today's Greeks are ugly.

[Anonymous No.11695823]

>>11695788
That's what racemixing does.

[Anonymous No.11695833]

>>11695823
There's no such thing as a pure race.

[Anonymous No.11695905]

>>11695833

The leftist let's his brainwashing permeate every facet of history and science, I see.

Pure is something that you summoned to the discussion and attempt to use it to effectively 'throw the baby out with the bath water', the baby being any racial distinguishably.

Because nothing is 'pure', you assert, then preservation or distinction of any race is absurd, I presume would follow?

Well regardless of purity and origin, it is inarguable that certain groups possess prevailing phenotypes that each have distinctive traits, be it physically, mentally, culturally.

The subsequent wars in from the 7th century onwards to the ottoman complete conquest, made the region a hotbed of racemixing of Arab and south Asians with the Mediterraneans.

This explains why their distinctive look has varied so much from antiquity, and is the same reason people fail to understand descriptions of fair hair and pale skin and eye variations in ancient sources from regions that are black eyed/haired and brown skinned in our modern world.

To not think this matters because we share similar genes from some point in our ancestors is like arguing that the death of your blonde child in a school shooting is ok because another blonde child survived.

The genes, the racial features are just a hallmark of loss of lineage, and culture.

Notice how the Greeks faded out of relevancy completely alone with the Italians and are now borderline retards after hundreds of years of mixing with Islamic conquesters?

[Anonymous No.11695946]

What you attribute to "race" can actually be attributed to politics, history, religion, changes in climate, linguistics, philosophy, economics, military conquests, social narratives, propaganda, etc. etc.

Biological ethnicity may have a minor (**MINOR**) impact on the workings of a society, but it's so insignificant it's as functionally important as say, whether a society can role their Rs.

[Anonymous No.11695980]

>>11695946

I'll assume that was in response to the previous post.

Once again, you don't deny the difference, but you won't allow yourself to go that one step further that would brand you as muh evil racist.

But let's assume your claim is true, why is nationalism always seen as racist, despite its irrelevancy or distance to an ethnostate policy?

Because innately we know that the I'm group prevails. And to stay patriotic and traditional is also to stay a majority phenotype.

Race is the catalyst for all culture.

[Anonymous No.11695992]

>>11695980

In group*

[Anonymous No.11696003]

>>11695905
>alone with t
Looks like your mother was interested in race mixing a lot too.

[Anonymous No.11696007]

>>11695980
>Race is the catalyst for all culture.
Not at all. The ancient world was remarkably interbred. The classical Greeks routinely mixed with and took ideas from the Phonecians, the Egyptians, the Persians, the Hebrews, the Latins, etc. for instance.

To reduce everything to "race" ignores about 99.99% what makes human culture so remarkable. Physical appearance obviously has an impact on this, but so does an accent, or the use of colloquialisms, or the method of worship one is brought up in.

[Anonymous No.11696008]

>>11696003
Along with*, I'm reduced to phoneposting and apologize for the inevitable typos

[Anonymous No.11696013]

>>11696007
They also forget that ancient greeks themselves were mixes with pelasgians and anatolian populations

[Anonymous No.11696037]

>>11696007

Yes the Greeks took from other cultures, but they had a fierce nationalism and sense of superiority in their doing so.

Also you mention physically appearance, as if that is the matter and not only the easiest signifier.

What I am saying is that race defines much more than that genetically, which is why not only were appearances changed over the 800 year period of conquest and mixing from the middle east, but cognitive potential also.

I'm not saying that Greeks were pure, or the best or whatever and they weren't matched in other respects by other races, but once their phenotype inevitably changed, so did their culture and intellectual capacity.

It's funny how you mention Egypt because the exact same thing happened to them by the same races and look how irrelevant they are now from the magnitude of their influence in ancient times.

Keep putting your fingers in your ears, but three great nations, Egypt rome and Greece, having been reduced to rubble several times but reforming, rebuilding, will never have the same cultural impact they did a few times each in their prime, before attempts and success of Islamic conquest.

[Anonymous No.11696062]

>>11696013

No I didn't forget, but to allude to the post I mentioned when the notion of purity was mentioned, I said that no race is pure , but a solution, a type of attunement is found in which that person can fit as a Greek, or Chinese etc.

It's like saying just because yellow and blue come together to make green, that green isn't a colour, and adding red didn't change a thing.

But if you look into history, you'll see that the adding of the red brings about inevitable traits that affect the people and the nation for the worse. But green was never pure so that's okay...

[Anonymous No.11696068]

>>11696037
>What I am saying is that race defines much more than that genetically, which is why not only were appearances changed over the 800 year period of conquest and mixing from the middle east, but cognitive potential also.
Again, you're attributing to race what can better be attributed to historical, economic, social, religious, linguistic, etc. changes in a society. The Greeks didn't loose their pre-eminent position in European civilisation because they fucked a bunch of Arabs, they lost their pre-eminent place in European civilisation because they were slowly pushed back by invading Slavic, Arab, Turkic and even Latin forces until eventually their empire was overturned and they then became subjects to the ascendant Ottoman authorities. Such a monumental shift in geopolitical realities would have incredibly far-reaching impacts on the way a people interact with the world.

>Keep putting your fingers in your ears, but three great nations, Egypt rome and Greece, having been reduced to rubble several times but reforming, rebuilding, will never have the same cultural impact they did a few times each in their prime, before attempts and success of Islamic conquest.
Does the concept of "change" mean nothing to you? Do you seriously expect the world to live in a universal stasis?

[Anonymous No.11696083]

>>11695005
blah you can't categorize blindly. you've qualified NONE of that wanton harsh-lipping. gosh, go learn how to write you shit pleb

[Anonymous No.11696102]

>>11696068

I'm not asserting that every civilisation is brought to ruin because of genetics, what I'm saying is that race is a huge catalyst for those things being subject to change.

You bring up economics and war and whatever else as of it's detached from genetics and in group preference, it's not.

Also I don't mean to claim that a racial equilibrium is ever achieved and it's changing always brings about devastating effects but in this particular historical case, the Arabic invasion has forever hindered the intellectual capacity of the region's it affected.

The appearance of the phenotype changing since antiquity is just a symptom, not the crucial point. Their average intelligence has been forever dampened.

I know full well the ancient Greeks didn't fall because of the Arabs but you'll never see the second kind of spring of culture and philosophy, of general intelligence in those regions that particular invasion affected, ever again.

Not to imply that all racemixing is detrimental or against the straw man impurity, but it has affects that can be either beneficial or detrimental and we need to own and up, understand and docent when one of these has happened.

And look at the swathes of land from the Iberian peninsula, north Africa, the Mediterranean and the middle east and tell me the addition of these particular Genesee I am discussing was a positive one.

[Anonymous No.11696110]

>>11696102

God I hate having to phone post. Obviously the last mistake was genetics

[Anonymous No.11696117]

Nobody gives a shit about you two autists arguing. I am just surprised that all these busts of ancient Greeks are always handsome (Socrates excepted).

[Anonymous No.11696118]

>>11696102
>I know full well the ancient Greeks didn't fall because of the Arabs but you'll never see the second kind of spring of culture and philosophy, of general intelligence in those regions that particular invasion affected, ever again.

And where ARE you going to see these "springs of culture" these days? Northern Europe? Japan? China?

I wouldn't say so. The world has unfortunately been infected by the disease of materialism, and as a result any true philosophy or enlightenment has become all but impossible, as humans have bonded themselves to the immediate gratification of the senses. You could remove all the Arab, Berber, African, Turkic, Semitic. etc. from a society today and it would be no better off, so long as it refuses to let go of material prosperity and comforts. The answer to our social woes isn't to create group identities and expunge those who don't conform, but to reject the things that have degraded man and find the inner courage to overcome them.

[Anonymous No.11696155]

>>11696062
>But if you look into history, you'll see that the adding of the red brings about inevitable traits that affect the people and the nation for the worse. But green was never pure so that's okay...
Greeks didn't get raped into inexistance anyway, so I don't know what's your deal.

[Anonymous No.11696256]

Leave it to american mutts fixed with white supremacism to ruin yet another thread.
Basically the same as niggers larping as Egyptians, only they try to pretend they're straight from the Wotan's ballsack instead of Tutankhamon's.
BRAISE DOR

[Anonymous No.11696286]

>>11694331
yup