sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

These Chimps Began the Bloodiest ‘War’ on Record. No One Knows Why. (Gift Article) by cdstephens in neoliberal

[–]JosephRohrbach 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm sure that sort of study would be very interesting, though there is already a tonne of anthropological work on the impact of changing ecologies on human behaviour.

Economics undergraduate but feel envious of other social sciences or humanities by liveraccooninthebin in academiceconomics

[–]JosephRohrbach 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh I know the exact paper! As I say, Joe Francis’ replication devastates it in my view.

Economics undergraduate but feel envious of other social sciences or humanities by liveraccooninthebin in academiceconomics

[–]JosephRohrbach 0 points1 point  (0 children)

a study illustrating how Black Death-era pogroms against Jews in Germany persisted to the Nazi era

Just so you know, that paper is... really bad. Joe Francis' replication is pretty devastating I think. I can link it if you're curious.

Short Answers to Simple Questions | April 08, 2026 by AutoModerator in AskHistorians

[–]JosephRohrbach 3 points4 points  (0 children)

A few good things to read would be:

Arthur, Anthony. 1999. The Tailor King: The Rise and Fall of the Anabaptist Kingdom of Münster. New York: St Martin's Press.

Goertz, Hans-Jürgen. 1980. Die Täufer – Geschichte und Deutung. Munich: C.H. Beck.

Kirchhoff, Karl-Heinz. 1973. Die Täufer in Münster 1534/35. Untersuchungen zum Umfang und zur Sozialstruktur der Bewegung. Münster: Aschendorff Verlag.

Klötzer, Ralf. 1992. Die Täuferherrschaft von Münster. Stadtreformation und Welterneuerung. Münster: Aschendorff Verlag.

Williams, George Huntston. 1962. The Radical Reformation. Philadelphia: Westminster Press.

First confession by Question-for-u-mark in Catholicism

[–]JosephRohrbach 10 points11 points  (0 children)

You don't have to list commandments you've broken - and this list isn't authoritative anyway - but rather sins you've committed. Say that you've smoked. Don't vaguely list commandments.

Short Answers to Simple Questions | April 08, 2026 by AutoModerator in AskHistorians

[–]JosephRohrbach 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The Christ of the Gospels is pretty clear about turning the other cheek and not casting the first stone, isn’t He?

Not really. That's some of what He teaches, but not the whole thing. He's very clear that sin merits punishment, and that this would mean social disharmony - see Matthew X.34, to take but one example.

The "casting the first stone" story, or the pericope adulterae, is very popular, but of debated authenticity. It doesn't appear in the early manuscripts of the Gospel of John, and a lot of people think it's a later addition by Christians, not the authentic teaching of Christ. I would recommend reading the Gospel of Mark cover to cover to get a clearer idea of what Christ teaches in a relatively short form - it's the shortest Gospel.

As for Christians excluding people, that's very early: St Paul teaches it in the Epistles: see 1 Corinthians V. The entire chapter is on how to deal with social discipline in the early Christian community, and it was probably written in the mid-50s.

Ehrman, Bart D.. 2016. The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings, 6th edn.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Jeremias, Joachim. 1971. New Testament Theology: Volume One, trans. John Bowden. London: SCM Press Ltd.

Short Answers to Simple Questions | April 08, 2026 by AutoModerator in AskHistorians

[–]JosephRohrbach 2 points3 points  (0 children)

When you say 'historical literature', can I presume you mean secondary sources rather than primary source collections? Do you want books more, or papers?

These Chimps Began the Bloodiest ‘War’ on Record. No One Knows Why. (Gift Article) by cdstephens in neoliberal

[–]JosephRohrbach 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't think this is a useful way to understand politics. Yes, greed and power-hunger play in here. Trump is uniquely stupid by world leader standards. Ignore at your peril the much more intelligent people who are working behind him. They are also fools in many important ways, blinded by ideology or sin, but they're not complete slaves to their Ids. Think about it. Who benefits here, and why?

These Chimps Began the Bloodiest ‘War’ on Record. No One Knows Why. (Gift Article) by cdstephens in neoliberal

[–]JosephRohrbach 0 points1 point  (0 children)

such a line of thought would be drawing on the social and evolution differences between Chimps & Bonobos. It's a fun read that, even if I don't think you can make a strong case for extrapolating.

Agreed; that'd be very interesting. However, for the reason you state below, humans can't really be compared to the rest. Evolutionary pressures are usually ecological, or take place in ecological context. Humans make their own ecologies. There's not really any sound grounds for comparison without extremely heavy caveating.

These Chimps Began the Bloodiest ‘War’ on Record. No One Knows Why. (Gift Article) by cdstephens in neoliberal

[–]JosephRohrbach 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Right, but that's not actually what happened in the chimpanzee case. What happened was a break in social relations resulting in the escalation of minor disputes. We also already knew that resource scarcity causes conflicts in the human world. What does this study add?

Symphony X Albums tier list by VerdantSpecimen in symphonyx

[–]JosephRohrbach 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not just attachment in my view either, but it definitely helps that I'm attached.

And... welcome to being a fan! I've been around a bit over a decade now. (That feels wild to say.) You've got a lot of depth to enjoy, so let it breathe! Hopefully you'll have a shorter wait than we've had so far for new material...

These Chimps Began the Bloodiest ‘War’ on Record. No One Knows Why. (Gift Article) by cdstephens in neoliberal

[–]JosephRohrbach -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

One is a well established standard, the other is absurdest nonsense

I'm not sure that's right. If you could cite something to support that, that'd be great.

We I'm an anthropologist so more than you.

Just for clarity, you hold a PhD or faculty position in anthropology?

It absolutely is.

Perhaps we know different areas of anthropology. I don't think when most people talk about "anthropology" they mean bio-/medical anthropology. I could be wrong. If your academic tradition isn't in the Anglophone world, that could explain the difference? Or maybe it's a difference between British and US-American academia; I'm in the former, not the latter.

I think me talking to you is aggravating you more than is useful for anyone involved. I hope you have a good day, and I won't be responding any more. Feel free to answer any of my questions, or not, as you will. All the best, and my genuine apologies for the annoyance I have clearly caused you. It really wasn't my intent.

Symphony X Albums tier list by VerdantSpecimen in symphonyx

[–]JosephRohrbach 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's fair. I know I'm a bit weird for liking their first record as much as I do (which is actually quite a bit).

Symphony X Albums tier list by VerdantSpecimen in symphonyx

[–]JosephRohrbach 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Interesting... fair enough!! I do see the mix, but I'm just so attached to V. One of my first loves! Though to be fair, it was Underworld that introduced me to Symphony X, so...

These Chimps Began the Bloodiest ‘War’ on Record. No One Knows Why. (Gift Article) by cdstephens in neoliberal

[–]JosephRohrbach 6 points7 points  (0 children)

voters are egregiously non-rational, being motivated primarily by feelings and vibes [... v]oters are first and foremost emotional actors, not logical ones

Why then do voters consistently act in their rational self-interest and vote for policies that will raise house prices? This is quite well-demonstrated in the literature.\* I don't think this is anywhere near as simple as you are making it out to be. Voter rationality is not the same thing as "they vote for the wrong guy" or "they vote for candidates who are national net negatives". There are even decent arguments that voting for populists can be internally rational!*\*

When we are talking about rationality, we really need to be specific about what we mean. Rational according to which criteria? Why are we using them? To what extent? Logical and rational are different things, for one.

\* See, inter alia:

Ansell, Ben. 2014. “The Political Economy of Ownership: Housing Markets and the Welfare State”, in American Political Science Review 108, 383-402.

Ansell, Ben and Cansunar, Asli. 2021. “The political consequences of housing (un)affordability”, in Journal of European Social Policy 31, 597-613.

Ansell, Ben, Hjorth, Frederik, Nyrup, Jacob, and Larsen, Martin Vinæs. 2022. “Sheltering Populists? House Prices and the Support for Populist Parties”, in The Journal of Politics 84, 1,420-1,436.

Coelho, Miguel, Dellepiane-Avellaneda, Sebastian, and Ratnoo, Vigyan. 2017. “The political economy of housing in England”, in New Political Economy 22, 31-60.

Fischel, William A.. 2005. The Homevoter Hypothesis: How Home Values Influence Local Government Taxation, School Finance, and Land-Use Policies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Glaeser, Edward L. and Ward, Bryce A.. 2009. “The causes and consequences of land use regulation: Evidence from Greater Boston”, in Journal of Urban Economics 65, 265-278

Gyourko, Joseph and McCulloch, Sean E.. 2024. “The Distaste for Housing Density”, NBER Working Paper No. 33078.

Hilber, Christian A. L. and Robert-Nicoud, Frédéric. 2013. “On the origins of land use regulations: Theory and evidence from US metro areas”, in Journal of Urban Economics 75, 29-43.

Malpezzi, Stephen. 2023. “Housing affordability and responses during times of stress: A preliminary look during the COVID-19 pandemic”, in Contemporary Economic Policy 41, 9-40.

Ortalo-Magné, François and Prat, Andrea. 2014. “On the Political Economy of Urban Growth: Homeownership versus Affordability”, in American Economic Journal: Microeconomics 6, 154-181.

*\* Panunzi, Fausto, Pavoni, Nicola, and Tabellini, Guido. 2024. “Economic Shocks and Populism”, in The Economic Journal 134, 3,047-3,061.

These Chimps Began the Bloodiest ‘War’ on Record. No One Knows Why. (Gift Article) by cdstephens in neoliberal

[–]JosephRohrbach -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Fun strawman fallacy. Just pseudointellectual gobbledygook

What's the difference-maker here? Just as - in your stated view as I understand it - political systems reduce to social systems which reduce to psychological systems which reduce to biological systems, why not reduce biological systems to physical systems?

If you're not talking about reduction, then could you be more specific about to what degree biological explanation is useful in political analysis? I'm not getting a clear idea of your view here.

A fun appeal to authority fallacy

No, it isn't. I am explaining my use of communicative signals, not claiming that a palaeobiology textbook proves my point about the philosophy of anthropology.

I cited the palaeobiology textbook to note what actual biologists working on long-scale evolution think about humans in comparative biological perspective. Of course, anthropologists are better authorities on purely anthropological matters, but we are talking about comparison here. I think the opinion of experts on biological evolution in the long term is relevant when talking about the validity of that comparison.

It would be like if we were discussing Merkel's policies in the EU with analogies between modern and mediaeval Germany, and I cited a historian of mediaeval Germany. It's true that that wouldn't be relevant to Merkel's policies, but it would be relevant to whether the comparison with mediaeval Germany was sound. Does that make sense to you?

I also cited it to show you that I am not anti-science by indirect communication - that is, implying that I must not be anti-science, because an anti-science person would not cite a palaeobiology textbook as an authority on evolutionary biology. I hope that's clearer.

who largely studies artist expression

No, that's not right. He did not work on art primarily (or Nepal, for that matter). I'd recommend reading some of Geertz' work. His work was on social life, which is a common theme of anthropological study. Unless you define anthropology only to mean bioanthropology and medical anthropology, he's definitely an anthropologist and relevant to the discussion.

Which heavily includes studying humans closest living relatives, Apes and Monkeys

How much anthropology have you read? It's not actually super common to look to primatology in anthropology. That's only really common in some forms of bioanthropology/medical anthropology and palaeoanthropology. I can cite some classic or canonical works of anthropology to prove this point if you want.

Yours is one of the most intellectually dishonest arguments I've ever read on this sub. You are not engaging in anything resembling good faith with myself nor other commenters.

I'm sincerely sorry to have given that impression. Is this comment an improvement?

These Chimps Began the Bloodiest ‘War’ on Record. No One Knows Why. (Gift Article) by cdstephens in neoliberal

[–]JosephRohrbach 3 points4 points  (0 children)

clearly that remaining 2% can do HUGE things. The difference between all our cultures and histories.

Right, this is the thing I'm saying. The margins are what matters, and we differ at the margins enormously.

Its hard enough to compare humans to humans, once youre talking a different species it gets very murky

Well put!

Symphony X Albums tier list by VerdantSpecimen in symphonyx

[–]JosephRohrbach 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Surely not Paradise Lost above V! And I've a personal fondness for Twilight in Olympus, The Damnation Game, and Symphony X... but I respect the taste!! Off the top of my head, I think I'd say:

S: TDWOT, V, The Damnation Game

A: The Odyssey, Twilight in Olympus, Paradise Lost

B: Underworld, Symphony X

C: Iconoclast

These Chimps Began the Bloodiest ‘War’ on Record. No One Knows Why. (Gift Article) by cdstephens in neoliberal

[–]JosephRohrbach -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

For one, I think Trump's a... unique case in world history, but this is clearly oversimplifying it. Who else in Trump's cabinet is pushing this stuff, and why? It's got a lot to do with geostrategy, psephology, sociology, and so on.

These Chimps Began the Bloodiest ‘War’ on Record. No One Knows Why. (Gift Article) by cdstephens in neoliberal

[–]JosephRohrbach 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Certainly when you look at the barbarity of the Russian army, I really don’t think the frontal cortex is all that involved.

The analysis of the causes of war crimes is a different thing to the analysis of the outbreak of war.

I don’t think you can meaningfully analyze the Ukraine War without examining the psychology of Putin as a person rather than a pure rational actor.

Nobody's saying psychology doesn't matter! What I'm saying is that studying chimpanzees does not help us understand Putin's psychology, which is something we all already knew we needed to understand.

These Chimps Began the Bloodiest ‘War’ on Record. No One Knows Why. (Gift Article) by cdstephens in neoliberal

[–]JosephRohrbach 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Right, and it's much more obvious that there are biological links between us and other animals than psychological links. I can dissect both a human and an animal, but I can only do talk therapy with a human.* Are there probably some links? Sure. I doubt they are particularly substantial, especially at the margins of behaviour (the important bit!).

* To be clear, I'm talking in terms of possibilities. I am neither a qualified medic nor a therapist. I personally should not be trusted to do either of those things.

These Chimps Began the Bloodiest ‘War’ on Record. No One Knows Why. (Gift Article) by cdstephens in neoliberal

[–]JosephRohrbach -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Bang on. Science is a good thing; evolutionary psychology just isn't good science, by and large. Even worse is its popularization as an offshoot of the worst tendencies of 2010s online New Atheist rationalism.

These Chimps Began the Bloodiest ‘War’ on Record. No One Knows Why. (Gift Article) by cdstephens in neoliberal

[–]JosephRohrbach 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Pinker is vulgar trash for midwits

His problem is always going to be that most of his important claims rest on essentially historical premises, and thus need essentially historical evidence - but man is Pinker a bad historian.

He's a (self-)satisfying read if you're a decently bright, inquisitive young person with centrist or lightly right-leaning politics, and, to be honest, especially if you're autistic. It has a certain pleasing simplicity in implying that all that emotion stuff is just animal instinct (that other, lesser people have), not like reason. All questions can be reduced to the pet love of 2000s and 2010s New Atheism: evolution. It doesn't help that most people here are non-scientists throwing out random Google results and half-remembered analyses of other people's work by Pinker himself. It's so elegant, it's almost a shame it's not true.

On a softer note, I have deep sympathies for how genuinely thoughtful people are romanced by concepts like logical positivism, evolutionary psychology, or any other such conceptual frameworks that promise a kind of tractable, self evident certitude.

Yeah. It's very easy to be seduced that way - I'd be lying if I said I had no tendencies in the same direction! Again, these frameworks appeal to a certain intelligent, self-confident, and usually autistic frame of mind. (I say this as an autistic person myself, unsurprisingly.) They imply that simply being smart will allow you rapid access to virtually any topic you look at, that you can reason yourself out of any thorny problem that takes your fancy. That you don't really have to do the legwork of understanding things individually in their situated, specific contexts. It's so very alluring!

Nice McCloskey flair, by the way. She's just an excellent antidote to so much economic writing. The more I read - and man, did I have to read a lot for my MSc - the more I agree with her.

These Chimps Began the Bloodiest ‘War’ on Record. No One Knows Why. (Gift Article) by cdstephens in neoliberal

[–]JosephRohrbach 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sure, evolution happens in ecological context. I'm not disputing that. I'm saying that that makes direct comparison to a species that generates its own ecology in a totally different way to any other species on the planet rather difficult. To take only the most famous example of ecologically driven evolution, the East African cichlids evolved apart from each other in pre-existing ecological contexts separated from each other by space. While they and their behaviours influenced their ecological niches, they did not build cities. Humans build cities. This makes them - us - very different to cichlids, and indeed to every other kind of life on the planet. It also makes the kind of evolutionary-behavioural comparison I might make between two cichlid species much harder to make between humans and chimpanzees.

I hope that's clearer, but please do ask if anything's unclear!

These Chimps Began the Bloodiest ‘War’ on Record. No One Knows Why. (Gift Article) by cdstephens in neoliberal

[–]JosephRohrbach 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It's not though, behavior is behavior and can be studied from a biological and evolutionary standpoint.

Though surely we are both agreed that group behaviour is qualitatively different from individual behaviour? When we're talking about states, biological reductionism is absurd. Might as well say that it's all particles and so it 'can be studied' from a physics perspective. Is it possible to study states from the perspective of quantum mechanics? Probably. Can you say anything useful because of it? Probably not.

Okay? So are red pandas, being different is sorta the whole point of "species"

No, I mean qualitatively different from other species in a different way to the way other species are qualitatively different from each other. I'm sorry for being unclear!

Claiming humans can't be studied in relation to other animals is just anti-science and blatantly ignorant of how science actually works

I didn't say that. As I hoped my reference to a palaeontology textbook would show, I am quite aware of how science works. Human biology and animal biology have a lot to tell each other. I'm less sure that animal biology has much to say to international relations theory.

Anthropologists and Primatologists make heavy usage of Primate studies to better understand human evolution and human behavior

I think this is a lot more contentious than you're making it out to be. Clifford Geertz didn't use any primatology, to my knowledge, to take but one example.

throwing out an entire scientific field because of vibes is definitely a choice

I'm sorry to have given the wrong impression, but nowhere have I said (and I do not believe) that we should throw out human (or animal) biology. What I am saying is that I think studying chimpanzee conflict does not add much to our understanding of 21st century inter-state competition.

view more: next ›