#historicity

[gravalicious]

“Faced with the daunting challenge of rewriting this distorted eurocentric history of the world, some pioneering and trail-blazing Black historians have tended to take the “we too were there” approach. Heroes, villains, saints, sinners, sadistic dictators, rulers and leaders of every discription, eminent men and women of letters and of the arts have been thrown together willy-nilly in what are more books of lists that [sic] history. J.A. Rogers, an outstanding self-taught Black historian, was often guilty of indulging in this potpourri syndrome. But his sound and encyclopedic research provided invaluable primary material for younger Black historians like Prof. Edward Scobie who followed in his wake. Prof. Scobie took some of Rogers’ raw material and with his profound insight into the essences of Black history, separated the important material from the bathos. When one reads Black Britannia, Scobie’s major work (a history of Black people in Britain beginning with the reign of Queen Elizabeth I and ending with that of Elizabeth II) one is able to understand very clearly that Black individuals in the face of seemingly impossible odds, were able to function with distinction in alien societies like that of Elizabethian Britain because they had brought their African civilization with them and kept its finest essences alive through epic struggles.”

Jan Carew - ESTEVAN: An African Soldier of Fortune in the Early Columbian Era (1988)

[craigtowens]

Links & Quotes

Some links and quotes that caught my eye this week.

Psalm 133 tells us that in order for us to sharpen others—and for us to be sharpened by them—we have to be around other them. Christian saints put a high priority on spending time with others. I have lots of new content every week, which you can check out on my YouTube channel. From Desiring God’s Here We Stand series comes this great snippet from the history of the Reformation: “[John] Calvin…

[nacapito]

“Nadie se salva solo, nadie salva a nadie, todos nos salvamos en comunidad”.

— Paulo Freire. Transformational popular educator, pedagogical thinker and radical practitioner.

(“No one is saved alone, no one saves anyone, we all save ourselves in community.”)

+ If we die, we'll die together. As ourselves.

— Fionna. "Cheers" the tenth episode of Adventure Time: Fionna & Cake. This episode is the second and final part of the season finale.

[cure-your-delusions]

The New Testament is not the only evidence that Jesus existed, was stirring up controversy, and was crucified. The claim that he rose from the dead was also documented, considering apostles were martyred over their refusal to refute this. But beyond that, the New Testament itself IS a historical document. Your argument that it is the only thing supporting the myth is like saying the only thing supporting the myth of King Tut are the writings and findings of his tomb - they are writings and findings, they are documents themselves. Some of history's most well-preserved at that.

the pauline epistles are generally dated AD 50–60, they are the earliest christian texts that include information about jesus, so 20-30 years after jesus’ death. and that story is really vague and fictional. jesus was never mentioned in any roman sources and there is no archeological evidence that jesus ever existed.

so all there is, is classical circular reasoning: “the bible is true because it says it is true”. just because the bible mentions cities that we know existed, does not make the protagonists of biblical fiction real; we know that london is mentioned in harry potter, that does not make harry potter real.

having found the tomb of king tut, including his mummy (!) is a whole different level of evidence for king tut’s existence, don’t you think?

[lesewut]

γνῶθι σεαυτόν ("Know thyself!")

Sijakovic, Bogoljub “The Presence of Transendece- Essays on Facing the Other through Holiness, History and Text.” Published 2013 in Los Angeles by Sebastian Press, Western American Diocese of the Serbian Orthodox Church in collaboration with The Institute for Theological Research of the Faculty of Orthodox Theology of the University in Belgrade.

As the title emphasizes, the book deals with "the presence of transcendence", the absence of which is so acutely felt throughout the rest of our world, that often seems disoriented and senseless. In Sijakovic's philosophical-theological conception, history plays a very important role.

As a relatively sceptical person, I often find revealing argumentations in countries of the world, that define history as a part of suffering (in Western Europe history is thought in terms of making -> Historical Achievements), like we can find in the Balkan (14th Chapter: A Critique of Balkanistic Discourse: Constribution to the phenomenology of Balkan "Otherness") . History and the interpretation is a huge and exciting topic, sometimes it is almost forgotten, how long past historical events are still instrumentalized and influencing our live :

"History is the battleground of our existence. It is that dimension of reality that demands our constant attending because it is both an indispensible constituent of our identity and a playground of virtually unlimited possibilities for deciption. Those who are powerful write the narratives that fill our history books. They "explain" to the rest of us all the "whats" and "whys" in history."

With the help of theology and philosophy, it is possible to reconstruct the past instructively. Beside sorting the facts and offering appropriate accounts, we need to know ourselves and our "nature" , to learn how to react and respond adequately, as we have a responsibility on the interpretation, as it can advance to identification. However, the philosophical aspiration to comprehend the "reality" as a whole, is a very ancient idea. Historical science is complex and there is no object of history completely independet from historical knowledge (T. Litt: "The theory of historical knowledge is simultaneously the theory of historical reality, vice versa." Cf. "Geschichtswissenschaften und Geschichtsphilosophie"). Also the concept of history decided what is to be an object of history, which is again determined by the conceptualization of history, especially by the major interpretative concepts, such as "longue durée" (Braudel) ; "episteme" (Foucault) "unsurpassable horizon" (Satre) ; "Paradigm" (Kuhn). There are many other concepts of interpretation of historical "facts" (there is no objective history, it is always about our understanding and explaining), interesting is also the theory of Nietzsche, who uses the perspectivists approach to history in order to stand against both the positivsts ideal of objectivity and the teleological historical constructs of Hegel ("Weltgeist") and Eduard von Hartmann.

Requirements for the Historian are also compared and interlinked with the social power (my recommendation by Popper: "The Open Society"): History of humanity is the history of the political power. And also Foucault connects the narrative of the Historian with the ritual of power, as those terms are congenital for a long time, the history of the mighty is tying people legally to power, the speech of the power that establishes order. "It is the fascination generated by the glory of reknowned people and deeds: The light of law and the radiance of glory are the functional principles of history [Foucault "Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the College de France, 1977 - 78]. Both law and glory issue forth from power, and power issues forth from war. Also an important role of historical science is the formation of the identity of a given community, so it cannot be "over-valued" (in the sense of national identity).

So what is true and correct? It is very difficult, as historical knowledge is always a self-knowing and in the historical science, the self-understanding of man is manifested:

"The ends that he follows and the image of himself are discerned by man in the mirror of history. That mirror is held for us, as she calls us to memory and remembrance (Burkard Liebsch "Probeleme einer genealogischen Kritik der Erinnerung: Anmerkungen zu Hegel, Nietzsche und Foucault") , by the muse Clio whose mother is the goddess of memory, Mnemosyne. He who memorizes and remembers- he knows himself."

So it is just logical, that Sijakovic is also highlighting: “The Anthropological meaning of self-knowledge: Toward the Apollonian precept "Know Thyself!"

But also other cornerstones of Sijakovics view are presented, like the confrontation of the human-being in any forms of communication and continuing processing aims at truth and authenticity, which will never end in accomplishment. But maybe in a less aggressive world?

Just a little throw-in, because very informative are also Sijakovics speculations of the “Metaphysics of Light” the theories about “The Paradigmatic and Tautegoric Nature of Poetry”

[anaxerneas]

Still, in the matter of their common rejection of the transcendental tradition, these disparate figures [the existentialists, Frankfurt school, etc] also agree on a fundamental reason for that rejection. Expressed in widely differing terms, and with different emphasis, it comes down to this: transcendental philosophy in all its traditional forms is rejected primarily because of its inability to come to terms with history or historicity.

[The transcendental philosopher] can claim that the emphasis on historicity, once it is taken seriously, leads to a particular sort of relativism or skepticism which, like all skepticism, will ultimately contradict itself. He can attempt to show that the argument for the historically limited and thus changeable character of his a priori concepts must presuppose those very concepts as unchanging, since they involve concepts of all possible change. Such rebuttals, however, concede the major point of the objection, which is that transcendental philosophy is unable to admit the importance of history or historicity into its account. Is there no way that transcendental philosophy can yield to the compelling demand that it take history seriously without seeing itself destroyed? It seems that the philosophical importance of history must be denied - a difficult task in our day - or the transcendental inquiry must be given up. Such, in broad outlines, is the conflict between transcendental philosophy and what I have called history-oriented philosophy.

David Carr, Phenomenology and the Problem of History

I'm trying to read this alongside Brian O'Connor's book on Adorno. I don't have to look very far in there to find passages like this -

[Adorno] specifically criticized formalism, positivism, phenomenology and irrationalism on the basis of the differing ways in which, allegedly, their methodologies are unable to grasp the specific nature of particular, historical reality. Adorno dismisses naturalistic methodologies and proposes, in line with his historical conception of theory, that philosophy take on an interpretative dimension (a radical hermeneutics, in effect).

This is clearly distinct from the outlook of an evolutionary epistemologist who would chide the humanities for neglecting our biological reality and evolutionary history (they would really go further and insist on its relevance for every serious consideration of ourselves, that's the imperialism many see in literary Darwinism, memetics, etc), but I guess the transcendental philosopher would say that philosophical historicism opens the door to exactly that. How would Adorno or others respond?

[aquietwhyme]

We should, actually. It'll probably be confusing in to many people, but as one of the people above said it helps put historical periods in perspective with one another, and can piggyback a broader, global perspective onto the eurocentric mess many of us in the West are brought up with.

For example, it's interesting to know that the year of five emperors in Rome, a period where there was great uncertainty, coincided with the fall of the eunuchs and the period of great uncertainty in the Han dynasty that led to the three kingdoms period. Or that the English Magna Carta was signed during the rise of the Incan empire. Or that the rise of Mali as a powerful empire in West Africa coincided with the conquest of China and most of Asia by the Mongols.

Or any number of events or inventions that could be considered era-defining, really. History is so much easier to remember, so much more interesting to learn when you don't worry about the dates that can be easily looked up, and instead of focus on when and where things happened in relation to one another.

I mean dates are important, but only insofar as they inform and provide the context around events, and an establishing the historicity of events by tying them to dated documents. For a real lay understanding, context is king.

Whenever I see someone refer to "Victorian era-" for places outside the UK I'm tempted to start saying shit like "Han Dynasty era Rome", "Soviet era Australia" etc

[anteregem]

Some fanart of this ancient figurine! Also got commissioned to draw her hanging out with a friend!

[sidecast]

i looove the miku trend. nomadic horselord hungarian miku be upon you

[marzipanandminutiae]

"hey why are all the barrier garments like linen shirts or chemises or combinations going away?"

"oh we have more washable fabrics now! you don't need to worry about sweat reaching your outer clothing when you can just chuck it in the washing machine!"

"cool!"

[100 years later]

"so uh all of those new washable fabrics are leaching microplastics into our water, and the constant machine-washing wears garments out faster. they're also not really sturdy enough to be mended, so we keep having to throw them out and now the planet is covered in plastic fabric waste that will never break down. also it turns out that the new washable fabrics hold odor-causing bacteria VERY well. so could we get those barrier garments back please?"

"sorry babe linen now costs $100000/yard and since it's been so long without them, nobody knows how to adapt barrier garments to the current styles anyway"

"..."

"maybe try this new $50 undershirt made of Special Sweat-Wicking Plastic Fabric! :) :) :)"

[gravalicious]

Question and Answer session

Dr. David V. Browne - Seed for Protest: Barbados in the 1920s and 1930s.

[craigtowens]

The Confirming Details

When we cross-reference biblical passages, the confirming details build both out trust in the divine inspiration of the Bible, but also its historical reliability. Check out one example that Luke gives us in the Book of Acts.

Listen to the podcast of this post by clicking on the player below, and you can also subscribe on Apple, Spotify, or Audible.  https://craigtowens.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/the-confirming-details.mp3 A couple of years ago I was in a car accident, but I never saw the car that hit me. Fortunately, the driver in the vehicle right behind me, a driver who was nearly hit by the car who hit me,…

[tariah23]

White people are miserable, racist losers period. They’ve even been getting mad at Japanese people for correcting them about Yasuke as well.

[alexandriad]

jumping on the bandwagon with an ancient greek miku

[errantabbot]

On Gods and Lizard Tails

God(s) refuses to be captured by conceptual restraint. When we attempt to grasp infinity with finitude, at best we come up with lizard tails, that is, those self-severed bits that the lizard easily leaves behind when threatened, knowing it can grow another. Meanwhile, we humans enshrine those tails as the whole lizard, and then wonder why it is that they refuse to walk around or flick their tongues.

Archetypes and metaphors guide us into the mysteries of being, chiefly by being comprised in large part of that same mystery. When we work too hard to bind them to the temporal world in hopes of somehow capturing them, we often render them listless.

The real efficacy of these forces exists in their stories and inferences, in their images and allusions, which is to say with their chief occupation in the liminal space outside of the realm historicity and literality.

Zen Master Dae Hae once said that “the blue dragon is the most powerful being in all of existence precisely because it does not exist…if it did exist it would be finite, and therefore limited.”

~Sunyananda