Has there been an invention or innovation in history more important to mankind than the invention of the fork?
Has there been an invention or innovation in history more important to mankind than the invention of the fork?
Wyatt Young
Other urls found in this thread:
Oliver Gonzalez
>forks.
Jace Campbell
YES, THE INVENTION OF THE SPOON.
Jaxon Taylor
>cutlery
Xavier Myers
Spoon is more useful
Hudson Bell
Spoons are magnificent, invented during the Neolithic era for use in conjunction with bowls (also a Neolithic invention). All other eating utensils are post-Neolithic inventions. The spoon should be the main eating utensil of proper meals. Consider the multifaceted role of the spoons; notice how they may hold liquid of any sort, how it many hold any powdery or grainy foodstuff, how it may hold small peas, rice, syrup, honey, that it is not only used in eating, but also in making the food, in measuring, tossing, stirring, mixing, and mashing ingredients. Observe how universal and ubiquitous the spoon is, found from the pre-Columbian Americas to Ancient Egypt to Southeast Asia. Notice that young children do not need to be taught how to use a spoon; they just need to be given a spoon and they will figure it out by themselves. On the other hand, all other eating utensils require instruction to use in the intended way, as the physical motions involved are non-intuitive. Thus cultures which use eating utensils other than spoons are degenerate cultures. The more emphasis a culture places on “table manners”, the more degenerate it is.
Brayden Cox
DO I KNOW YOU FROM SOMEWHERE ELSE?
Nathaniel Green
>not feeding upon the carcass of the animal you bested in a hunt with your bare hands
The weak should fear the strong
Aiden King
IRONIC HOW THOSE WHO VAUNT THEMSELVES AS "STRONG", "MIGHTY", "POWERFUL", ET CETERA, VALUING POWER AS AN END IN ITSELF, ARE PATHETIC CRAVEN BEINGS, LIVING IN PERPETUAL FEAR.
Benjamin Gonzalez
I meant to quote in my post but oh well. I've seen your trip around a lot(saw you get called Ray), you always have interesting things to say, but no, we've never interacted before this. Also are you Iranian?
Aiden Taylor
>The weak should fear the strong
TRANSLATION:
>"WEAK... FEAR... STRONG..."
>"I AM WEAK, I HAVE FEAR, I WISH TO BE STRONG."
Carter Sanchez
>Also are you Iranian?
NO; WHY DO YOU ASK THAT?
Joseph Jenkins
>ري كظ
Points to markedly Middle-Eastern words because Perso-Arabic script
>Ray
Common Iranian name
>Swastika
Emblematic of ancient Iran
I assume you're Arabic then? Perhaps something European?
Blake Brooks
>being this triggered
>being this weak
Weak in body and mind, you shall not degrade us to your level, you will not make weakness into a strength, you shall continue to fear for you are weak.
Jaxson Williams
>ري كظ
>Points to markedly Middle-Eastern words because Perso-Arabic script
I LIKE ARABIC SCRIPT.
>>Ray
>Common Iranian name
"RAY" IS A "NICKNAME" THAT SOME HAVE ASSIGNED TO ME DUE TO THE VISUAL SIMILARITY WITH "RY", OR DUE TO THE HOMOPHONY WITH "REI" (MY ACTUAL NAME AS I WRITE IT); "RAY", "RY", AND "REI", ARE ETYMOLOGICALLY MUTUALLY COGNATE ANYWAY.
>>Swastika
>Emblematic of ancient Iran
THE SWASTIKA IS AN ARYAN SYMBOL; IT WAS USED BY ALL ARYAN PEOPLES WORLDWIDE, NOT JUST BY THE IRANIANS.
Levi Harris
>SWASTIKA IS AN ARYAN SYMBOL
Correct, but only Iranians are Aryan.
>Unlike the several meanings connected with ārya- in Old Indo-Aryan, the Old Persian term only has an ethnic meaning.[35][36]
>Strabo mentions the unity of Medes, Persians, Bactrians and Sogdians:[39]
>The name of Ariana is further extended to a part of Persia and of Media, as also to the Bactrians and Sogdians on the north; for these speak approximately the same language, with but slight variations.
>The trilingual inscription erected by Shapur's command gives us a more clear description. The languages used are Parthian, Middle Persian and Greek. In Greek the inscription says: "ego ... tou Arianon ethnous despotes eimi" which translates to "I am the king of the Aryans". In the Middle Persian Shapour says: "I am the Lord of the EranShahr" and in Parthian he says: "I am the Lord of AryanShahr".[40][46]
>The Bactrian language (a Middle Iranian language) inscription of Kanishka the Great, the founder of the Kushan Empire at Rabatak, which was discovered in 1993 in an unexcavated site in the Afghanistan province of Baghlan, clearly refers to this Eastern Iranian language as Arya[47][48]
>In Iranian languages, the original self-identifier lives on in ethnic names like "Alans", "Iron".[37] Similarly, the word Iran is the word for land/place of the Aryan.[25]
David Clark
>Correct, but only Iranians are Aryan.
NO.
THE ORIGINAL ARYANS SPREAD TO ALL CONTINENTS, EXCEPTING ANTARCTICA; THE IRANIANS ARE MERELY ONE OF THE MANY PEOPLES DESCENDED FROM THE ORIGINAL ARYANS.
Bentley Brooks
I can't tell if you're one of the crazies who believe in the Hyperborean/Pleiadian bullshit like Evola and SS, or mean the Indo-European peoples. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you mean the language family spoken by numerous peoples. In such a case you would be conflating Aryan, a word exclusively reserved for ethnic Iranics, with Indo-European, languages related to the proto Indo-Europeans and their descendants.
Caleb Diaz
Agriculture.
Chase Smith
oh my god, I know exactly who you are, I didn't follow you into your new website, but one of the earlier websites you were an editor for, I enjoyed. Holy shit, that's why you asked me if I was someone you knew, I've frequented part of your work. It is so nice to finally meet one of you. Two questions
Was there a falling out or something?
Are you a girl?
Xavier Cruz
>I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you mean the language family spoken by numerous peoples.
NO, I MEAN THE ARYAN RACE.
>In such a case you would be conflating Aryan, a word exclusively reserved for ethnic Iranics, with Indo-European, languages related to the proto Indo-Europeans [SIC] and their descendants.
1. YOU IGNORE WHAT THE ARYANS ARE/WERE, AND WHAT "ARYAN" MEANS.
2. IRONICALLY, YOU ARE THE ONE CONFLATING RACE WITH LANGUAGE —"INDOEUROPEAN", AND "PROTOINDOEUROPEAN", ARE LINGUONYMS, NOT ETHNONYMS, NOR RACIONYMS.
3. THE ORIGINAL ARYANS SPOKE "PROTOINDOEUROPEAN", BUT IT WAS NOT THEIR OWN LANGUAGE —THEY ACQUIRE IT—, THUS, THE ARYANS WERE INDOEUROPEAN LANGUAGE SPEAKERS, BUT NOT ALL INDOEUROPEAN LANGUAGE SPEAKERS WERE ARYAN.
4. "IRANICS" ARE A SUBRACE OF THE ARYAN RACE, NOT AN ETHNICITY —SUBRACE, AND ETHNICITY, ARE NOT MUTUALLY EQUIVALENT; A SUBRACE IS A PARTICULARIZATION WITHIN A RACE; AN ETHNICITY IS PARTICULARIZATION IN ITSELF, ARISING VIA ETHNOTRIBALISM.
William Howard
see 2. Proto Indo-European were an actual ethnicity of people though. Indo European, as I stated earlier is a linguonym
4. Iranic is the linguistic grouping. Irano-Afghan is the subrace.
Carter Peterson
>Was there a falling out or something?
THE MOVEMENT IS IN A MOMENT OF CRISIS; CRISES SEPARATE THE MEDIOCRE, FROM THE RADICAL, THUS, MANY MEMBERS ARE DISTANCING THEMSELVES FROM THE MOVEMENT; THE TRUE REMAIN, WHILST THE FALSE ARE PRUNED.
>Are you a girl?
NO.
Gavin Phillips
It's so interesting, I haven't read one of those articles in years, but when I did they were fairly profound to me in high school.
Here's what I remember liking
>Spoons
>Beauty
>Unity
And has anyone else figured you out? Or am I the first on this site?
Connor Young
>2. Proto Indo-European were an actual ethnicity of people though.
NO.
1. "PROTOINDOEUROPEAN" IS STRICTLY A LINGUONYM.
2. THE "PROTOINDOEUROPEAN" LANGUAGE IS ORIGINAL TO THE TURANIAN RACE; TURANIANS ALSO SPREAD WORLDWIDE, HENCE, ARYANS COMING INTO CONTACT WITH, AND ACQUIRING, THE LANGUAGE, AND THE UBIQUITY OF INDOEUROPEAN LANGUAGES.
3. IT IS MOST PROBABLE THAT THE ORIGINAL ARYANS DID NOT HAVE A LANGUAGE PRIOR TO ADOPTING "PROTOINDOEUROPEAN", DUE TO NOT NEEDING LANGUAGE TO COMMUNICATE, COMMUNICATING EITHER TELEPATHICALLY, OR PURELY VIA IMAGES.
>4. Iranic is the linguistic grouping. Irano-Afghan is the subrace.
"IRANOAFGHAN" IS A PLEONASM; "IRANIC" IS A BETTER TERM, OR MORE ACCURATELY "IRANID".
Jeremiah White
BESIDE YOU, I AM NOT AWARE OF ANYONE ELSE IN THIS WEBSITE THAT HAS COMPREHENDED, OR EVEN READ, OUR CONTENT.
Jaxson Scott
The wheel
Kayden Gray
This right here is correct
Only took 26 replies
Well done people
Logan Garcia
Haha you're just as crazy as I remember my friend with the veganism, the environmentalism, the childcare, etc. Truly, you are a madman in our times.
Why do you post and use the internet when you are aware of the harm industrial society causes to the environment? I suppose it would happen anyway and this is a way to spread information, but what good is knowledge if not acted upon or applied.
There seemed to always be certain Maoist tendencies, it was never workers of the world but peasants of the world and yet there was still a volk. It almost seemed to me like you were advocating for Nationalist Bolshevist Maoism. You do seem to be bourgeois to me too, but do you know much of farming?
Anthony Hernandez
The toilet bowl.
Luke Turner
>IT WAS USED BY ALL ARYAN PEOPLES WORLDWIDE, NOT JUST BY THE IRANIANS.
It's also used by ancient Chinese.
Zachary Fisher
>3. IT IS MOST PROBABLE THAT THE ORIGINAL ARYANS DID NOT HAVE A LANGUAGE PRIOR TO ADOPTING "PROTOINDOEUROPEAN", DUE TO NOT NEEDING LANGUAGE TO COMMUNICATE, COMMUNICATING EITHER TELEPATHICALLY, OR PURELY VIA IMAGES.
David Collins
In an attempt to salvage the thread... Roads?
They are simple and accepted concept to us. But the impact they have changed the world forever -
First you have the beginnings of the 'race' to shorten distances. Armies, trade, migration, rather than dependent on waterways and oceans (more limited and dangerous), all become freely available. Think what that first leap meant to the lives of the people who used them, and their natural evolution - advancements in wheels, horses, engines, railroads etc.
With the shortening of distances, you have helped the spreading of ideas and inventions, leading to civilization where before there wasn't. With greater developments, you have bigger and better communities, supported from a wider area, which in turns fuels more developments as centers that can support craft, learning, etc.
Think about human building even in the modern age. As the species crafts the land to better suit it, you can define something as a 'place' or a 'dwelling', or as a 'road'. Roads are how you get around the world from place to place. They are the most important infrastructure out there.
Roads are awesome.
James Peterson
Based caps poster
Blake Baker
You are even more autistic than he is
Landon Hughes
>COMMUNICATING EITHER TELEPATHICALLY, OR PURELY VIA IMAGES.
Every day you manage to make me even more confused about who you are, have you ever learned anything?
Evan Long
>when white people try and eat rice with a fucking FORK
Liam Reyes
In a general economic sense i have doubts about roads being useful in a modern sense, surely having roads that run through commericla hubs just means that consumption is less likely, i mean unless i'm deliberatley going out for something, i rarely stop when driving to buy a thing from my city centre, so i have to wonder if that lost income (if i was walking past a store i'm more likely to go in) is worth the economic benefits in increased freedom of movement around a city.
Liam Lee
But would you get an a 4x4 and cross country tracks in order to get to the nearest town (on the coast, or on a river, and there are only 1/5th the towns, so its quite far away) in order to purchase something?
Think just how many towns are infact crossroad towns. Maybe not modern crossroads, but they exist because they once were crossroads that were important, usually as markets for farms (think pre-trains).
So roads are essential to post-agriculture development, and mean more towns and cities.
Ryan Phillips
Jack Carter
You were an editor for aryanism.net?
Doesn't the owner of that site hate you, AS or whatever his name is?
Landon Foster
>You were an editor for aryanism.net?
NO.
>Doesn't the owner of that site hate you, AS or whatever his name is?
HE MISTRUSTS ME DUE TO SOME MUTUAL CONCEPTUAL DIFFERENCES.
Oliver Allen
>CTRL F: Knife
>0 of 0
wtf
Blake James
i know right, its a weapon, a tool and a
Oliver Clark
Can I ask why you guys focus on jews instead of tribalists in general?
I agree with most of the ethical stuff espoused by that site, and Israel is a fucked up state for sure, but I have a very hard time believing that all jews are genetically predisposed to being evil, just as I have a hard time believing similar claims made about blacks/whites/arabs/etc.
Adam Green
1. ARYANISTS OPPOSE TRIBALISM IN GENERAL, AND JEWISH TRIBALISM IN PARTICULAR, BECAUSE JEWS ARE THE MOST TRIBALISTIC PEOPLE ON EARTH.
2. THE SOURCE OF "GOOD" IN BEINGS IS NOBILITY; THE LACK OF NOBILITY —IGNOBILITY— IS THE SOURCE OF "EVIL" IN BEINGS.
NOBILITY HAS A GENETIC BASIS, AND IT IS INHERITABLE; JEWS ARE GENETICALLY PREDISPOSED TOWARD "EVIL", BECAUSE THEIR GENOTYPE IS THE ULTIMATE RESULT OF IGNOBLE SELECTION VIA ETHNOTRIBALISM.
3. REGARDLESS OF GENETIC CONSTITUTION, ONE SHOULD JUDGE INDIVIDUALLY, BASED ON PERSONALITY, THUS, ONE SHOULD NOT MAKE ETHICOMORAL JUDGMENTS ON ETHNICITIES, RACES, GROUPS, COLLECTIVES, POPULATIONS, ET CETERA, BUT ON INDIVIDUAL PERSONS.
4. THE TERMS "BLACK", AND "WHITE", ARE MEANINGLESS.