How can I make my own opinions on history and humanities without going full /pol/ or tumblr?

How can I make my own opinions on history and humanities without going full /pol/ or tumblr?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Chronology_(Fomenko)
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

By thinking.

Lots of study, avoid anything that says: "today's world is better than any time before" (tumblr) or "today's world is worse than any time before" (pol)

/pol/ and tumblr represent two ideological extremes, but manifestations of the same phenomenon: they provide easy answers to complex questions, and give their followers a sense of purpose, a sense of being part of a righteous movement larger than yourself. Most people have a part of themselves that finds this attractive. Identify it and ignore it. Forge your own path. Learn the limits of what you know, but boldly defend what you know is right, and always seek to improve yourself.

And take caution with other ideological extremes, likes the SCIENCE! fags or orthodox fags

It isn't easy. You need to find reputable sources, but of course nearly everyone has a bias of some kind, so ideally you need multiple reputable sources that each hold a different bias, so you can pick out the truth from between them.

take care, there are many shills and /pol/tards here

That pic gave me cancer.

I think the thing that triggers me the most about it is that the concept was "male feminists say what makes them good role models" and it started off as them being smugly unaware of their flaws, but halfway through the author got lazy or something so the ones in the bottom row just say "I'm a piece of shit!", it doesn't even make sense

It's easy in theory, but challenging in practice. All of us are biased in some way and try(unconsciously) to fit what we see into our worldview.
To combat it:

1. Always consider that nothing in this world is black and white, there are no absolutes. If someone tells you that all people of a certain kind are one way, they are an extremist and came to this information based on misinformed info or incomplete experiences.

2. Unless you're being actively persecuted(You or people like you are being thrown in jail or killed systemically), There is no grand conspiracy, you are not a victim. Life is generally shit and we're ALL suffering. A lot. Consider the Suicidal Billionaire, Consider the Cancer Patient surrounded by his family.

3.Never attempt to apply modern politics or ways of thinking on people before the modern age. They did not think like we do, they are not like you.

4. Intellectual dishonesty is the death knell for a society of dignity. Ask yourself, am I biased on this issue? Do I think this way about this issue, because of how I already feel?

5. The most important: REASON. Reason is your friend, be reasonable about how you view the world. Conservatives are mostly not nazis, Liberals are mostly not SJW. The only one who is your enemy is the one who says that reason is wrong, logic is wrong, due process is wrong.

actually it makes sense, it's probably because the author is so used to neo-maoist self-struggle sessions that she just falls into the routine

Isn't it supposed to be a critique of selfserving male feminists? I feel like they're all pretty good points
except for the x in Womxn. Seriously who needs that shit.

Follow this if you want to follow tumblr's path

You wanna expand on that?

I get the concept, and the first few fit the bill really well. The others don't and come off as nonsensical. I don't deny that these people exist but why is that guy bragging about how he's only a feminist at SJW meetings and so on? It's like they're literally just doing their mea culpa in some confessional.

did you mean /pol/'s path?

If possible search for older material, 1920-, it's far less biased than recent works

The communist "ally" didn't seem that bad.

Isn't talking about revolutionary gender politics 24/7 what they want?

OP's pic is what they all think of cis-gendered men like you. You will never be a 'true' ally to them. Believe me, I tried.

Great post.

They were biased in ways that aren't apparent to modern readers.

How do you feel for being used?

Most of it isn't, what people call bias in older history work is indeed the lack of modern bias

I guess used is the right word. I tried to educate myself on women's struggles and the patriarchy, but they always treated me as an outsider. And they would consistently say things like in OP's pic. It was actually really hurtful. Felt like nothing I did was good enough.

No. They're biased according to their then contemporary politics. There's a reason why people like Gibbon are memed on.

this actually works out pretty great because at least you can judge the works objectively and smell bullshit. For example you aren't emotionally invested in the guelphs vs ghibellines factionalism right?

(right?)

Have you tried the other side?

More than it, political and ideological discussion in academia was far weaker that time, many works of that time are true unbiased

It requires a certain understanding of historiography. A brainlet would take it at face value rather than think "oh this guy is trying to justify invading xyz shithole"

Take a certain understanding to don't try to rationalized what the author says to make it fit in a modern ideology, like "he said it because he was trying to justify invading xyz shithole", like the critical school do

That isn't true either. Works like An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States (1913) are absolutely partisan.

I think "reputable sources" are less important than being highly aware of the stories those sources are trying to tell. Sources will rarely lie outright, but many will be picking and stringing together facts to persuade the audience to adopt some value-laden perspective. A good student should be aware of the tendancy and approach history first with utter detachment. The Civil War was an historical event.

That's why you need several, with different biases. Bias is unavoidable, but a good source will at least give you the facts.

But far less partisan than any Marxist or libertarian text on economy

Take a lot of care, the way that leads to tumblr is that where you start seeing what people are trying to say and not saying, you start to put your world view over the facts.

varios bias indeed, but if a source say 2+2=4 and other says 2+2=6, don't jump in and say that both have bias so 2+2=5

You haven't actually read it have you.

You don't have to be part of the critical school to see that The Significance of the Frontier in American History (1893) was used to justify taking the Philippines and Puerto Rico.

You have to take a lot of caution to make most of the claim modern history do. It's not rare to a modern paper on a renown journal talk about woman's right in anciente Greece or imperialism claims in non imperialist works

It helps to be well read in history and historiography. Just read everything (past and present) and hope for the best.

And if you want to follow a bad path, try this one: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Chronology_(Fomenko)

Civic nationalism is as right wing as I ever am willing to go. Racial thinking is cancerous to the human identity.

So no.

Civic nationalism is as right wing as I ever am willing to go. Racial thinking is cancerous to the human identity.

first you have to make sure you're not already /pol/ or tumblr? It won't do you any good to examine a historical document if your mindset is fucked up to begin with.

You'll never turn into a /pol/tard, but caution with tumblr, you're already half way

Read this OP. The quality of Veeky Forums would shoot straight up if everyone read this.

if by straight up you mean highly biased in a way you like, then you're right

Start with "western civilization" from Burns

truth

Hell no, tumblr gets incredibly misanthropic whenever they talk about the environment. I can give less a shit how many animals die from our ravaging of this world. I just replace white identity politics with pan-human identity politics.

Because at the end of the day, you've got to realise that more that more than 3/4 of these women were abused by a male relative in their youth and nothing will ever make up for that.

If one held /pol/ opinions without being an antagonistic, paranoid, petty vindictive dick, like the artist who did OP's picture, then that would be okay. A good start would be not posting this kind of material

Watching this picture really made me think if some day "male feminist" are going to snap out of this shit and kick away the banshees shouting at them for trying to "help".

Might be fun actually, unless they have been drinking soymilk too long and are at the point of no return.

Those men and Cletus will have to realise that they are closer from Tyrone and Muhammad than from Stacy. No matter your background you will always want to impress females and prove yourself worthy to reproduce

Maybe if you tell a girl you cried while watching a movie she might have sex with you.

I'm not a virgin, nor do I hate women.

this specifically by recognizing your own biases, gathering information and not leaping to conclusions

importantly, do not be "open minded"

you have to look at things from different perspectives, however once you have run through a topic left, right and center and you can only conclude something or at least confirm that it is a major factor, stick by it, don't treat meme opinions full of holes as equal and valued

if someone else happens to know better than you after all this they had better have a very good explanation and show that they understand your conclusion and can thus show why you were so hugely mistaken

the gates are closed but you can talk to the gatekeeper

middle ground fallacy

You CAN give less of a shit?

>t. Brainlet
Everything is the middle ground when you're between extremes you moron.

Naming a fallacy is
Not an argument

This, they use politics to cope with trauma or mental illness.
Show your throat and they bite into it because some one throttled theirs long ago

Woah! Reading works by white men Who naturally believe in an ethno-state. That's a no-no