Jump to content
UNRV Ancient Roman Empire Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Onasander

The Strengths and Weaknesses of Historical Mathematics

Recommended Posts

History is often unscientific. We're not dealing with rationality, or categorisation, but the actions of people,  the individuals who inspire them, and the enviroment the lived in. As much as you might claim that climatology, cosmology, geography, psychology, archaeology, or any other scientific discipline is relevant, there is always going to be a part of history that is intuitive.

 

In any case, anyone who claims that they know the answer and those who don't accept are less intelligent knows rather more about arrogance than history. In fact, it has the faint odour of the same sort of debating style used by religious cultists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Can I not say this about the vast majority of works out there?

Nope. Pair up any 2 books in the history of literature and you will not find any human passover lamb. Group up the gospels with Josephus and suddenly you have not one but TWO human passover lambs. And the 2 human passover lambs occur at the same point within the dual allegorical storyline, proving that one book is based on another or there is a common source for both. Simple logic. Can't get your head around that one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you explain the Passover Lamb analogy a bit more, I think I only got part of that.

 

The lamb's blood on the doors? I'm guessing something about a sacrificial lamb analogy. I assume your trying to make a claim of sacrosanct and congruence-incongruence trying your idea somehow into it being the right one.... but I literally am missing the mechanics of how you think this is so. Lamb Bloods = Your Right? I Dunno. Maybe, but you gotta explain that a bit more.

 

Caldrail..... no, it can't explain everything, those Disciplines and Professions. But it presents a Metric to the Dialectic. Not everyone is going to agree in what kinds of principles or methods should be used..... hence why I am giving Gilius a chance to develop his position and work out a challenge once he grasps with time our assorted assertions.

 

I am 30 years old. I am translating a latin work on History into English, a very important work.... but still one work. After this, it will be a military text. After that, another important philosophy work....... I am 30.

 

Someday I will be 70, in theory with 40 years of background. I will be unavoidable as a authority on many subjects, because I will be the only English translation, period.

 

I get to sit here and watch the transition already underway where history was dominated (but never fully) by college graduates. I learned how to make books by hand, good quality ones. Likewise, I can do the netherworld and sewing for older works. I take a lot of pride in this. I take a lot of pride in the diversity of my background, and how well rounded I turned out.... and look to the future.

 

However, Gilius is Herald. Movies like 300 or Spartacus that like to change aspects, bend and wobble in ways I can't consent with. I gotta deal with a future of print in demand, where people are going to sell their works on Roman Alien Autopsy or Flavians Invented Christianity alongside of more legitimate works.

 

If I have any responsibility, any duty as a soon to be, like it or not, December facto authority, it will be to the needs of explaining your position, via peer review, just as Descartes did.... and discuss the methods used, and the reliability of such methods.

 

I don't see History Degrees dying out overnight, but I do see them beginning, as of now, beginning increasingly vestigial. I'm not jumping into the group chorus of pompous assclowns belittling a historical enthusiasts, hoping to scare them away to legitimize History Degrees of to improve our group feeling and sense of legitimacy. That's backwards and laughable, and smells of the method of the inquisition. 

 

I say it now, will die saying it, and people after me will say it, we will critique via method. Only way to deal with the tide of insanity to come. Eventually guys like Gilius will dramatically outnumber us. I intend to continue to assert the need for methods.

 

I'm a Cynic. We teach for free, and make an effort. I'm not going to further ostracize the guy, I'm going to get him to adopt our methods. If he still finds aspects of his ideas valid, and can defend them, so be it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The gospels and Josephus both build up an image of a human Passover lamb, and the initial points of reference occur at the same place within the dual allegorical storyline of Jesus' ministry and Titus' military campaign. One of the human Passover lambs is Jesus, so the sick joke is that Jesus gets eaten by his mother, Mary, but that is only the start of the satire. Oh, and Titus gets told about the story afterwards!

http://www.caesarsmessiahproven.com/conceptual.htm

 

 

GOSPELS

 

And he took bread, and gave thanks,
and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which
is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.



Luke 22:19



 

 



 

And as they were eating, Jesus took
bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to them and said,

Edited by gilius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although not as bad as the post I have just removed this post is now locked for the same reason as that one.  Can we keep thing polite in future please folks md keep external links to material relevant to a sensible discussion of Roman related topics - not to vanity sites or interpretations of such

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Map of the Roman Empire

×