[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 37 KB, 429x410, 1295124963368.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5798273 No.5798273 [Reply] [Original]

You people give Marcus Aurelius too much credit.

>> No.5798275

Yeah, he never pays his tab.

>> No.5798278

Well unlike you he managed to produce thoughts longer than a fart.

>> No.5798282

>>5798278
You don't know my farts.

>> No.5798285

>>5798282
Go away Nora.

>> No.5798291

>>5798278
He isn't on Plato or Hegel's level, though, and people here always say shit like
>HURR the Forms are retarded
>HURR muh continental bullshit
But then simultaneously say shit like
>HURR muh based Stoic Emperor, muh stoicism, muh Logos
even though Aurelius wasn't really a philosopher, he just wrote shit down in a journal and that journal was preserved because he was an emperor. He didn't contribute anything in particular, he just summarized a few ideas, probably without even intending to.
The ideology is just so pure. You people are like a Roman propaganda machine and don't even realize it.

>> No.5798295

>>5798278
>ΟΥΤΙΣ
Second biggest retard on this board. Kitty is first.

>> No.5798301

>>5798291
I haven't any of those so suck my dick.

>> No.5798306

>>5798301
read any*

>> No.5798310

>>5798291
>muh
You're not on Stefan Molyneux's level, you intellectual pissant.

>> No.5798319

>>5798310
I'm not trying to be on anyone's level, I'm on /lit/.
You and your stupid patrician/polyglot threads aren't on any particular level, either. You're swimming in the same shit as the rest of us, you worthless, cuckolded namefag.

>> No.5798321

>>5798295
You fucking moron, it's more than one person posting using that name. It's what the idiots that wanted to learn Greek together were using to recognize each other in threads for whatever reason.

>> No.5798344

OP is just mad because he wasn't an emperor

>> No.5798349

>>5798344
Bitch I'm a Nigerian prince

>> No.5798353

>>5798349
Do you need moneY?

>> No.5798373

he dun goofed once in 166

>> No.5798387

B-but muh Emperor

>> No.5798395

>>5798321
I always assumed it was one guy.
Why do they use that name?

>> No.5798493
File: 17 KB, 527x434, 1291076320456.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5798493

I agree, OP.

>> No.5798605

>>5798275
underrated post

>> No.5798781

/lit/ has shit taste.
Is anyone surprised?

>> No.5798950

I still don't understand how an emperor of rome could claim to be a stoic

>> No.5798954

>>5798950
The same way bourgoise, state-employed academics claim to be communists

>> No.5798980

>>5798954
I thought 'bourgeois' meant the class that owns the means of production? That words doesn't even mean shit anymore, just a leftist version of 'degenerate'.

>> No.5799070

>>5798980
There are division within the bourgeois stratum. Academics like >>5798954 described are quite bourgeois.

>> No.5799114

>>5798273
/lit/ has always been pretty clear that Epictetus, Seneca, and Zeno are the best Stoic writers. Aurelius is fine as an individual case study that plebs can pick up.

>> No.5799127

Was Stoicism basically the official pre-Christian Roman philosophy?

>> No.5799134

>>5799114
lol

>> No.5799156

>>5798980
The capitalists own the means of production.
You'll never learn Greek at this rate, you pretentious cuck.

>> No.5799159

>>5799070
Yes, there's people who own a lot of the means of production, the haute bourgeoisie, and there's people who don't own much, the petite bourgeois. I don't see how academics fit owning any means of production, the term 'bourgeois' is a fucking joke, it's just a leftist buzzword.

>> No.5799161

>>5798291
Damn, what a pleb you are.

>> No.5799168

>>5799156
>'bourgeois' is a meaningless buzzword like 'degenerate'
How is this pretentious?

>> No.5799170

>>5799159
Capitalists own the means of production. Academics control the discourse. The discourse is what keeps the capitalists in power.
Are you this much of an idiot?

>> No.5799174

>>5799168
Becoming a namefag so you can fit in with other namefags using the same name to fag while you all learn to speak Greek together sounds pretty pretentious and a lot like cuckoldery to me.

>> No.5799178

>>5799170
Are you that much of a fucking idiot? The police and the military keep the capitalists in power, that doesn't make soldiers and cops 'bourgeois'.

>> No.5799180

>>5798950
By agreeing with stoic ideas and following stoic principles. Stoicism doesn't make socio-political commentaries nor do they prescribe systems- the entire focus of Stoicism is universally-applicable individual soteriology.

>>5798954
Elements of the bourgeoisie can, have, will, and should be aligned toward the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat against their bourgeois compatriots. At any rate, to what extent an academic is bourgeois is up to case by case bases since academic work is also labor and if one sells their labor to earn a living wage they are proletariat.

>> No.5799191

>>5799178
The discourse also keeps them in power.
That isn't a qualification for being bourgeois.

>> No.5799201

>>5799191
My bad, I thought 'bourgeois' was defined in materialist terms.

>> No.5799202 [DELETED] 

>>5799201
Cuckold.

>> No.5799209

>>5798291
>He isn't on Plato or Hegel's level, though
Philosophically, he was never trying to be. No one said he was. Only someone who thinks and resents that he was on their level would bother making that claim. But he was still responsible for the more poignant work. Ignoring this, the fact that he was ruler of the world makes him more based than Plato or Hegel.

>> No.5799221

>>5799114
>plebs
>reading The patrician

>> No.5799229

>>5798950
What is it about the position of Emperor that you think is at odds with the tenets of Stoicism?

>> No.5799231

>>5799209
>But he was still responsible for the more poignant work.
>He's not as poignant as Plato at any point.
Ignoring this, the fact that he was ruler of the world makes him more based than Plato or Hegel.
Basedness is a spook.

>> No.5799306

>>5799231

Oh yeah, it's a symbolism, we all know it is an attribute that doesn't appear if we are not part of the game. Don't downgrade the conversation more, or should i say that also he doesn't exists anymore and you are wasting time on a computer replying to someone on a blank screen, about someone so irrelevant towards your lonely existance in a sunday night?

Aurelius was based, we affirm it, and there is nothing that you can do unless to acknowledge it or don't, but resorting to "can't know nuffin" to abandon is childish as fuck.

>> No.5799321

>>5798291
jelous butthurt greek detected

>> No.5799514

>>5799321
At least I'm not sticking up for some Emperor I only heard of because of a meme on /lit/.

>> No.5799534

>>5798291
>You people are like a Roman propaganda machine and don't even realize it.
carthage pls go

>> No.5799556

>>5799534
Dido 2016

>> No.5799565

>>5798273
I agree, they fall for the "emperor of rome" gimmick. I'll take a limping slave over him any day.

>> No.5799572
File: 1.59 MB, 3256x2336, marcy marc.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5799572

nobody ever said he was original. he was just summarising the stoic tradition.

but the way he did it was the most concise, poignant, and beautiful in that whole tradition.

the meditations is also one of the most extremely immediate, relevant, personal and inspirational works of philosophy. you can recommend it to people with no prior philosophical knowledge and they can instantly become inspired to be better people and to change the judgements and actions they make in their lives.

what other work can do this? hardly any. hence his genius and the credit which he deserves.

>> No.5799573
File: 40 KB, 300x460, commodus cunt end of tradition ruinboy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5799573

Thanks, Aurelius.

>> No.5799579

>>5799572
>what other work can do this?
The Bible, for one. Christianity is stoicism but better.

>> No.5799583

>>5799579
Christianity is Platonism for hippy sandpeople, anon.

>> No.5799584

>>5799565

he never claimed to be better than epictetus. epictetus was his hero, and he considered him superior to any emperor. but the meditations is superior to the discourses because it is more succinct and poetic, and superior to the enchiridion for being more than a bare checklist.

>> No.5799599

>>5799583
It's many things, including superior Stoicism and sexed-up Platonism.

>> No.5799601

>>5799579

the bible is a huge step backwards in ethics from greek thought, and you should feel bad for suggesting that.

>> No.5799606

>>5799584
>but the meditations is superior to the discourses because it is more succinct and poetic, and superior to the enchiridion for being more than a bare checklist.
You don't get the point of philosophy. Meditiations isn't even a proper philosophical work. If it had been written by anyone but an emperor, it wouldn't be nearly as big as it is here.

>> No.5799609
File: 31 KB, 325x500, Lucretius - The Nature of Things.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5799609

>>5799572
Shame he wasn't Epicurean.
>>5799579
That's a jumbled mess. A recent thread of devotees went the rout of "the bible is deep and scary! Du-du-duhhhh"

>> No.5799611

>>5799601
>Implying Jesus' ethics aren't better than any other ethics

>> No.5799612

>>5798295
Fedora tipping Butterfly is the first.

>> No.5799648

>>5799565
>"emperor of rome" gimmick.
This is a new one.
You guys constantly surpass each other in your idiocy. It's like it's a competition who can make the most asinine remark.

>> No.5799665

>>5799648
>Implying you're not defending Aurelius only because he's an emperor
>Implying you aren't a Hobbesian stooge of the sovereign

>> No.5799667

>>5799127
Yes, but without happy ending

>> No.5799672

>>5799584
Epictetus considered Diogenes pretty much the perfect person though, and we all know how he thought about rulers.

>> No.5799679

>>5799648
There is nothing idiotic about it. When people new to thinking become interested in Stoicism they are attracted to the notion of the noble philosopher emperor with nice retweetable quotes.

>> No.5799728

You're just mad because you weren't born into a royal family.

>> No.5799753

>>5799127
I don't think stoicism, or any philosophical school for that matter, was as widespread and ingrained Christianity became. The latter was a religion and so experienced by the common man, although Christianity was only practised by a minority in the Empire. Stoicism on the other hand would have been the preserve of the intellectual class, I think. It's not as if stoicism was the default cultural position of the average farmer or urban worker.

>> No.5799763

>>5799679
>they are attracted to the notion of the noble philosopher emperor
So they should.

>> No.5799777

>>5799763
Why, exactly? Because he's an emperor and he claims to be noble? Are you a NRx cuckold?

>> No.5799784

>>5799127
There were competing schools. Epicureanism was very popular as well. And packs of Cynics roaming the streets of the cities of the Empire weren't an uncommon sight either.

>> No.5799791

>>5799763
Judged by his philosophical contribution, they shouldn't really.

>> No.5799802

>>5799665
Read through this post again and recognize the amount of presumption you've managed to cram into it.

>> No.5799808

>>5799802
You realize you're defending an emperor because he was an emperor, right? Any fallacies I may commit are valid reasoning compared to your falli.

>> No.5799814

If Aurelius wasn't an emperor nobody would have cared what he had to say. He's the Paris Hilton of philosophy.

>> No.5799830

>>5799763
Because an emperor is rarely responsible for philosophical contribution of any kind, never mind one of the most personal and relevant works of antiquity. Their energies are directed elsewhere. To be the most powerful man on the planet, noble, and the author of such a work is pretty deserving of admiration.

I don't know what NRx means, but you need to get over this cuckold obsession of yours. You've used it a few times itt where it had no relevance whatsoever; people are going to get suspicious.

>> No.5799842

>>5799814
Just because he's an emperor doesn't mean he doesn't have any merit
I mean, he's a fucking emperor, so he should at least have SOME merit

>> No.5799844

>>5799814
what other stoic philosopher wrote an instructive diary of his or her philosophy?

>> No.5799854

>>5799830
>To be the most powerful man on the planet, noble, and the author of such a work is pretty deserving of admiration.
Look at all these cuckold-killing spooks you've thrown my way. Well, I'm not a cuckold, unlike you; you've let an emperor fuck your wife--your philosophy, that is, and you stood by to watch him do it.
Aurelius is a shit philosopher. The Meditations is poetic and inspirational, but it's nothing special as a work of philosophy. It's a piss-poor synthesis of Stoic ideas. Putting him in the same category as Plato and Wittgenstein is doing everyone involved a disservice.
>>5799842
>I mean, he's a fucking emperor, so he should at least have SOME merit
Look at all these spooks.

>> No.5799856

>>5799854
Isn't the idea of cuckolding grounded in spooks?

>> No.5799859
File: 45 KB, 320x240, 1408530626170.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5799859

>>5799854
what

>> No.5799863

>>5799844
Probably plenty, but theirs went into the trash because they had no imperial privilege to check.

>> No.5799868

>>5799856
Yes. I've stated my case on nothing.

>> No.5799871

>>5798980
Are you saying such people don't exist now? Because if so, you dumb.

>> No.5799873

>Literally ended the streak of good emperors by putting Commodus on the throne
>Fucking Commodus
>This nigger raised Commodus
>People are somehow still seeing this guy as a role model and a teacher.

Even ignoring that ,the guy was a liar.
The emperor of a republic, the philosopher who persecuted ideas, and the lover of reason who continued a 200 year old war.

>> No.5799882

>>5799842
>I mean, he's a fucking emperor, so he should at least have SOME merit

Elagabalus.
Your move.

>> No.5799883

>>5799808
>You realize you're defending an emperor because he was an emperor, right?
No, you asserted this earlier on with not a single reason, and now you continue to do so. You latched onto some illusion and ran with it. I'm not defending anyone because of anything. Aurelius achievements as emperor are certainly notable, and that's why he is praised. But I'm not going to defend his son simply because he inherited the position. On the other hand you're certainly attacking Aurelius because he was an emperor.

>> No.5799886

>>5799854
>you've let an emperor fuck your wife--your philosophy, that is, and you stood by to watch him do it.
I can't stop laughing

>> No.5799887

>>5799814
You've already posted in this thread, haven't you?

>> No.5799888

>>5799883
I've given other reasons to not put him on a pedestal. His philosophy wasn't innovative, and it was nothing but a summary, and a mediocre one, at that.
Also, just because he was an emperor and did some "epic" meme shit that you probably think you remember reading on wikipedia, it doesn't follow that his philosophy is good.

>> No.5799894
File: 19 KB, 960x540, plebius maximus.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5799894

>>5799791
kek

>> No.5799896

>>5799883
You realise he went out of his way to break custom and install his spoiled little shit, right?

>> No.5799903

> a bunch of people fighting about some faggot who was written about a few thousand years ago.

The roman empire was no golden age, nor was it especially progressive or forward-thinking. The only thing that makes it so is a bunch of colonial imperialists trying to give some sort if moralistic purpose to vapid greed and ruthless expansionism by emulating previous examples in history; a proverbial Cassius belli against the entire free thinking world.

You should all be ashamed. The romans were nothing special, neither has any imperial power ever been.

Their value is measured in the egos of tyrants and dictators.

>> No.5799910

Does his choice to install his son as heir really invalidate all his other achievements and his philosophy?
Nigga was regarded as one of the Five Good Emperors by Machiavelli

>> No.5799914

>>5799888
I've given other reasons to not put him on a pedestal.
No you haven't.

>His philosophy wasn't innovative
For about the third time, no one is claiming that it was. That's not why the Meditations is so good.

>and a mediocre one, at that.
That's incorrect, you need to check your sources.

>Also, just because he was an emperor
It wasn't *just* because he was an emperor, it was because he was one of the most notable emperors. No one praises Commodus just because he was an emperor.

and did some "epic" meme shit that you probably think you remember reading on wikipedia, it doesn't follow that his philosophy is good.
I have no idea what this Marcus Aurelius meme is. Also you're continuing to presume out your ass; you were called out for it once, this isn't impressing anybody.

>> No.5799921
File: 309 KB, 940x1150, smug seajew.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5799921

>>5799903
>The romans were nothing special, neither has any imperial power ever been.
Actually, they were all special. You don't become an empire without being special, anon.

>> No.5799924
File: 81 KB, 200x200, Guys+This+is+bait+Is+it+_3ecad0fad34092afa722d48f886dd579.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5799924

>>5799903
If anyone falls for this...

>> No.5799931

>>5799888
His philosophy aside, I think it's difficult to not consider him one of the examples of the quintessential stoic man; his position as emperor should be irrelevant when considering this. Stoicism had no class restraints.

>> No.5799936

>>5799914
The Marcus Aurelius meme is the meme that he has a place in the canon of philosophers next to people like Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle.
>>5799921
The Romans were the neoconservatives of the ancient world and didn't accomplish much philosophically, aside from developments in Christianity, which can't be attributed to the Romans exclusively.
Everything the Romans believed was just Greek with more swords and iron.

>> No.5799937

>>5799910
That's like praising someone for being a good manager in the years before he bankrupted the company. The latter outweighs the former.

>> No.5799939

>>5799910
>Does his choice to install his son as heir really invalidate all his other achievements and his philosophy?
Of course not, only the plebeian trash think so.

>> No.5799940

>>5799921

What made them special was a set of specific characteristics that allowed for unrivalled greed and unopposed brutality.

The romans were no pioneers of humane thought, nor were they of social consideration. Their entire system was run by reactionary cause and effect.

To argue they were special for being different makes the mundane appear miraculous.

>> No.5799945

>>5799924

I openly condemn the romans and all imperial ambitions.

>> No.5799952

>>5799931
His philosophy is the reason /lit/ recommends him to people who want to read philosophy books, and if it isn't, then they shouldn't recommend him to people who want to read philosophy. He's more relevant as a historical figure than as a philosopher.

>> No.5799956

>>5799936
>>5799937
>>5799940
How long have you been on /lit/, because I would surely have noticed you before.

>> No.5799960

>>5799945
Then you're a child with a poor grasp of history.

>> No.5799961

>>5799956
I've been here since day one.
These aren't controversial opinions. Once you get over the "Muh SPQR" meme the truth of the Romans becomes clear.

>> No.5799962

>>5799956

I pass through from time to time, never stopping for too long though wondering why I keep moving on.

Like a bird investigating an open window.

>> No.5799968

>>5799960

History is constantly changing and assuming you have a grasp on it at all is tantamount to cultural ignorance.

>> No.5799970

>>5799968
History isn't constantly changing, actually. History is eternal.

>> No.5799979

>>5799940
A lot of greed and brutality orgies lead to all kinds of innovations beneficial to mankind.

>> No.5799980

>>5799970

History, as understood by humans, changes from one moment to the next.

Study archaeology if you want the truth.

>> No.5799985

>>5799979

I would rather centuries of peaceful consideration than a moment of violent hubris.

>> No.5799993

This was a shitty bait thread, even by /lit/ standards.

Let it die.

>> No.5799994

>>5799979
Sometimes.
Not under Roman rule, though.

>> No.5799995

>>5799985
Then you want the Romans.

>> No.5799996

>>5799952
He's certainly a historical figure first and foremost, but his life as an example is vital to Stoicism, and is one of, if not the main reason, Stoicism remains somewhat relevant, in comparison to the other classical Greek philosophies such as Cynicism and Epicureanism.

>> No.5799999

>>5799980
All I meant was that the past is by definition unchangeable.
>>5799996
All those philosophies are relevant to the same degree and would have been relevant to the same degree with or without Aurelius.

>> No.5800000

>>5799995

No. I want the celts.

>> No.5800005

>>5800000
>>5799999
nice gets lads

>> No.5800007

>>5799999
>>5800000
You both got the Quints instead.

>> No.5800013

>>5799999

History by definition does not mean the past.

>> No.5800015
File: 16 KB, 380x300, 2114.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5800015

>>5799999
>>5800000

>> No.5800017

>>5800013
The notions are bound up together.

>> No.5800019

>>5800005
>>5800007

Omega and the Alpha.

>> No.5800023

>>5799910
The non-inherited succession existed by necessity, if Aurelius had tried to install someone other than his son, there would have been yet another civil war down the line. It's also tough to argue that he knew or could see clearly his child's faults and exactly how they would influence his reign.

>>5799936
There is no meme that he is a philosophical giant, you're just assuming there is because he is generally recommended.

What makes Meditations recommended is how it is written, how accessibly he summarizes and presents the ideas, as well as the undeniably fascinating historical perspective.

>> No.5800028

>>5800017

Define history.

I might point out that you can only do so much with written testimony.

>> No.5800034
File: 28 KB, 331x319, 1288760965924.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5800034

>>5800000
>celts

>> No.5800036

>>5800023
>There is no meme that he is a philosophical giant
There's a meme that he has philosophical merit, which is what I'm arguing against. People should stop recommending him in philosophy threads.
>>5800028
History is the mental and discursive reconstruction of the past.

>> No.5800039

>>5800023

If scholars had a more clear minds less befuddled by pretext they would see that same fascination wherever they looked in the ancient world.

>> No.5800045

>>5800000
You like your war more chaotic and small scaled?

>> No.5800048

>>5800034

Their lands were more savage according to roman documents, but they were around for much longer.

>>5800036

And taking it as fact is therefore wrong, yes.

>> No.5800052

>>5799996
>Epicureanism
>not relevant

Materialism and moderate hedonism seem a lot more relevant than living by some arbitrary notion of "Nature".

>> No.5800053

>>5800045

Compared to the conquests of imperial Rome the skirmishes if the celts were nothing more than ritualized tradition.

>> No.5800056

>>5800048
The material weight past that is being reconstructed doesn't change. For example, you can't deny that the American Civil War was fought, and if you do, there's archaeological and written evidence to attest to the fact that it happened.

>> No.5800057

>>5800036
>There's a meme that he has philosophical merit
This isn't as funny as you think it is, no matter how many times you repeat it.

>> No.5800066

>>5800057
That meme is common here, though. People suggest reading the Meditations in philosophy threads all the time.

>> No.5800067

>>5800053
So Rome started the process that led towards Nuclear Peace rather than remaining stuck in Africa tier tribal warfare?

>> No.5800070

>>5800056

Actually I can deny anything that happened even a second ago, but you make a value point.

Written records actually mean very little without accompanying primary evidence.

>> No.5800076

>>5800070
Indeed they do.
I'm a history major, this isn't news to me, really.

>> No.5800078

>>5800048
>Their lands were more savage according to roman documents
Of course it was, the were barbarians.

>but they were around for much longer.
The Romans didn't die out. They're still there.
If you're referring to the collapse of the Western Empire, well it could be argued that the Celts were never around at all, given the disparity in sophistication in culture, political structure etc of the two peoples.

>> No.5800080

>>5800067

Tribal warfare is fine until you put assault rifles in their hands and teach them how to use explosives.

The romans did wonders for the pursuit of warfare, I'll say that much.

>> No.5800084

>>5800078

Longer as in they were there when the romans were still infants.

>> No.5800086

>>5800066
That's not what a meme is.

What you've observed is a well-regarded work of philosophy on this board.

>> No.5800088

>>5800086
What is a meme?
This board's regards mean nothing at all.

>> No.5800093

>>5800088

> what is a meme.

A meme is a meme.

>> No.5800095

>>5800084
Yet the Celts never progressed beyond infancy, while the Romans masters of the Mediterranean.

>> No.5800096

>>5800093
Stupid answer.
Just what I would expect from someone who gets cuckolded by an Emperor.

>> No.5800104

>>5800088
>>5800093
This is just silly

>> No.5800106

>>5800080
>The romans did wonders for the pursuit of warfare, I'll say that much.
Of course they did, they were technologically beyond anyone else. Part of the reason why they did wonders for peace as well.

>> No.5800107

>>5800066
He is a clear, easy to digest example of stoicism. Wether or not he contributed greatly is irrelevant to its merit as a good recommendation for those exploring the concept.

Your complaint is like saying that philosophy textbooks shouldn't be recommended to philosophy students because the authors aren't philosophers who significantly contributed to the field.

>> No.5800113

>>5800095

The celts and their ancestors lived in lands from Albion to the Aegean. The only reason it isn't common knowledge is because they were there first.

>>5800096

Emperor is of barbarian blood.

>> No.5800116

>>5800107
If you want to introduce people to stoicism, why not just have them read the Enchiridion? Everything Aurelius says is there, and it isn't harder to understand. It has more philosophical merit, too. No one ever recommends it, because they're too busy being cuckolded.
>>5800113
Whatever his blood, he's a bitch.

>> No.5800117
File: 100 KB, 600x413, goth wrecking brigade.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5800117

When a nation turns philosophical it means it has become degenerate and full of self-doubt. A people with healthy instinct isn't philosophically but mythologically oriented. Once you start second guessing yourself you're on the road to nihilism.

Socrates was the greatest poisoner to ever live.

>> No.5800122

>>5800106

Peace through forcing the submission of your rivals, sure.

>> No.5800123

>>5800117
>>>/pol/
>>>/b/

>> No.5800125

>>5800122
>implying there is any other kind

>> No.5800127

>>5800080
>Tribal warfare is fine
No it isn't, because it is incessant and the defining cultural trait of tribal people.

The Roman war wonder used violence put an end to that, and far-sighted administration to bring them out of the stone age.

>> No.5800129

>>5800117

Except he was killed by the people he was trying to save.

>> No.5800131

>>5800125
You don't bring peace and civilization to tribal people who are only disposed to violence any other way, anon.

>> No.5800132

Was Rome the greatest Empire ever? Or was it Britain?

>> No.5800136

>>5800132
Britain.
More land area, more innovation, mother of the USA.

>> No.5800137

>>5800131
That was my point, anon.

>> No.5800139

>>5800132
Greatest in terms of what?

The Roman Empire inspired the British and preserved Greek thought from barbarian plebs for hundreds of years.

>> No.5800141

>>5800131
meant for >>5800122

>> No.5800146

>>5800129
*trying to corrupt

He even succeeded.

>> No.5800149

God damn it, you people are stupid.

>> No.5800150

>>5800125

Peace through the mutual respect if one another's ability.

>>5800127

A small number of fighting men test their mettle against those of another tribe in ritualized combat vs. The total mobilization of an entire nation towards the eradication and subjugation of entire continents.

Choose wisely.

>> No.5800151

>>5800149
great contribution, beacon of reason award goes to you

>> No.5800152

>>5800116
>Whatever his blood, he's a bitch.
Did Marcus bully you in school?

>> No.5800156

>>5800141

War and conflict are a necessary part of human society.

"Barbarian" tribes provided a safe outlet for it without industrializing.

>> No.5800157

>>5800150
The Romans did not eradicate and subjugate entire continents.

Time to get off the computer and read a bool.

>> No.5800159

>>5800150
>Peace through the mutual respect if one another's ability.
That's a euphemism for mutually assured destruction. But that works as well, yes.

>> No.5800164

>>5800157

They were entirely fucking willing to on more than one occasion and were only stopped when it got complicated.

>> No.5800173

>>5800156
>War and conflict are a necessary part of human society.
Incorrect

>"Barbarian" tribes provided a safe outlet for it without industrializing.
Tribal societies could never move past the waste of constant fighting. It took that industrial scale of war from a foreign people to stimulate the barbarians into cultural, political, and social development.

>> No.5800175
File: 40 KB, 550x368, aquaduct.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5800175

>>5800156
so you're anti-rome because you're a luddite and prefer old fashioned violence?

>> No.5800181

>>5800164
Please stop making things up anon.

>> No.5800191

>>5800173

Allow me to correct myself; conflict - as in the very struggle to overcome opposition - is part if the essence of what it means to be alive.

War is the manifestation of this twisted out if all sense and reason by modern industrialized society.

>>5800175

If seeing clearly makes me a Luddite, I guess it does.

>> No.5800193
File: 67 KB, 432x288, 1289030754451.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5800193

>>5800156
>safe
Except when they murdered plundered and raped each other.

>> No.5800197

>>5800181

> conquer the Iberian peninsula, all of Italy, Greece, north Africa.
> attempt to conquer everything you can find.

>> No.5800200

>>5800193

Provide evidence of this in iron-age society where such cultures attacked other villages.

>> No.5800204

>>5800191
>If seeing clearly makes me a Luddite, I guess it does.
so you'd really rather see all of humanity living tribally without technology beyond what the celtic tribes had at the time?

>> No.5800208

>>5800204

I'd rather see humanity advancing much more slowly without the atrocities of the modern era if possible.

>> No.5800210

>>5800191
>War is the manifestation of this twisted out if all sense and reason by modern industrialized society.
Christ you're warped. Tribal warfare wasn't or isn't poetic or romantic.

>> No.5800213

>>5800210

Implying that ritual combat has no place in society when it occurs in pretty much every other living being on the planet.

>> No.5800223

>>5800197
> conquer the Iberian peninsula, all of Italy, Greece, north Africa.
Neither of those by themselves or in any combination makes a continent.
There was almost no eradication involved in the subjugation of those territories.

>attempt to conquer everything you can find.
The Romans were the most reluctant of any ancient society to establish foreign territory. Their very institutions curbed expansion, or even long term, overseas conflict. And when expansion did happen, those institutions changed or were replaced. You would know this if you didn't spend your time shitposting on the internet.

>> No.5800227

>>5800200
I didn't say attack other villages. European tribal society depended on the devastation and theft of other tribes' agricultural produce. They were stuck in perpetual, stagnating ass-raping.

>> No.5800228

>>5800223

If you're as informed as you think you are Menai should mean something to you.

>> No.5800230

>>5800208

The atrocities of the modern era helps you to survive. You are just a parasite of the contemporary world. If you didn't had the technology of today, you wouldn't be able to survive nor live in your comfort zone.

>b-but i have survival skills!

Those that you learn with internet or people that had the time to teach you? Those skills that use modern tools to be more efficient? That logic based on years and years of language that helps you to learn and structure knowledge? That food and teachings from others that made you a human without you realizing it?

>> No.5800232

>>5800227

If they get their shit taken from them, then they were weak.

They should have been stronger.

>> No.5800235

>>5800230

I have far more survival skills for living in the urban jungle than I do the tamed countryside, anon.

>> No.5800237

>>5800232
The Romans took their shit. Guess they should have been stronger.

>> No.5800240

>>5800237

Difference is that the romans took far more than material possessions.

>> No.5800241

>>5800228
>reading comprehension: what is it

>> No.5800246

>>5800240
Actually they didn't. In fact, they gave more than they took, which is more that can be said for what the tribes did to each other.

>> No.5800249

>>5800235
Your urban jungle exists because of power hungry Imperials.

>> No.5800251

>>5800223

Menai was a particular historical event involving the slaughter of the elite of another culture resistant to roman occupation.

I have an example of the romans subjugating entire cultures.

>> No.5800253

>>5800240
Guess they were extra weak. They deserved it twice over, according to your logic.

>> No.5800263

>>5800208
>if possible

but it isn't. technology is a double edged sword and someone will use it to wreck someone. you can't have progress without that.

>> No.5800267

>>5800246

Post examples.

>>5800249

And what happens in it is arguably worse than anything that would have happened in an iron-age village.

>> No.5800274

>>5800251
What relevance does any of this have to anything I said?

>> No.5800282

>>5800253

Strength without restraint is the sign of true savagery, in my eyes.

Just because you dress yourself in finery and build monuments to your ego doesn't make you any less savage.

>> No.5800285

>>5800274

Plenty, in that it supports my argument which you have cleanly ignored.

>> No.5800288

>>5800267
Examples of what?

>> No.5800292

>>5800288

Iron age atrocities comparable to the acts of total war seen in modern times.

>> No.5800312

>>5800282
>Strength without restraint is the sign of true savagery, in my eyes.
Which is precisely what the tribes participated in and perpetuated. Never-ending, crippling warfare. The only reason they didn't eradicate each other was because they lacked the means.

The Romans certainly had the means, yet they incorporated the tribes into the very machinery of their state. Not as vassals as any other ancient society would have done, but as members and active participants. They prospered as a result and this stimulus allowed the creation of their medieval identities.

You have an unbelievably romantic distortion of what really went on.

>> No.5800320

>>5800312

I could say the same to you, anon.

Except in your case I see that many of the historical proponents espousing the Roman empire were themselves colonial imperialists.

>> No.5800327

>>5800285
Your argument was that The Romans subjugated and eradicated entire continents. (>>5800150)

I corrected you (>>5800223)

I didn't ignore your argument, I refuted it. Pointing to the massacre of a tribal elite does not back up your original argument, not does it counter my refutation.

>> No.5800345

>>5800320
>colonial imperialists
This term as a negative is entirely meaningless when discussing the ancient world. Had one tribe possessed the technology and vision to conquer its neighbours and move on to foreign lands, you would call them colonial imperialists, which is just as ridiculous.

>> No.5800348

>>5800327

I'm arguing that was the intention and that evidence shows they had the capacity for it.

I'm not arguing this was a constant in roman society, however I will point out that you're acting like it would have been impossible for individuals to have this kind of ambition.

>> No.5800353

>>5800292
That has nothing to do with what was said in >>5800246. The topic of Iron age atrocities comparable to the acts of total war seen in modern times is never brought up. I thought you were asking for examples of what the Romans gave to subjugated tribes.

>> No.5800354

>>5800345

Except I didn't call the romans colonial imperialists, did I?

Selective reading much.

>> No.5800360

>>5800353

I thought I was having more than one conversation with other anons.

>> No.5800368

>>5800354
Not him, but your phrasing "were themselves colonial imperialists" suggests that you consider the Romans to be such as well. The "themselves" does it.

>> No.5800380

>>5800368

If you force the grammatical nuance, then yes.

But then that seems rather pedantic when the original point was a criticism of historians completely ignoring literary bias.

>> No.5800390

>>5800292
Not precisely the subject that is being discussed, but might be interesting:

>From the !Kung in the Kalahari to the Inuit in the Arctic and the aborigines in Australia, two-thirds of modern hunter-gatherers are in a state of almost constant tribal warfare, and nearly 90% go to war at least once a year. War is a big word for dawn raids, skirmishes and lots of posturing, but death rates are high—usually around 25-30% of adult males die from homicide. The warfare death rate of 0.5% of the population per year that Lawrence Keeley of the University of Illinois calculates as typical of hunter-gatherer societies would equate to 2 billion people dying during the 20th century.

>At first, anthropologists were inclined to think this a modern pathology. But it is increasingly looking as if it is the natural state. Richard Wrangham of Harvard University says that chimpanzees and human beings are the only animals in which males engage in co-operative and systematic homicidal raids. The death rate is similar in the two species. Steven LeBlanc, also of Harvard, says Rousseauian wishful thinking has led academics to overlook evidence of constant violence.
http://www.economist.com/node/10278703

>> No.5800407

>>5800390

The anthropological perspective is a key point of reference in the study of war, and you are quite correct to raise it.

>> No.5800442

>>5799572
Epictetus is nice too in a similar way. Seneca is also fun as well as his plays