site banner

Small-Scale Question Sunday for January 12, 2025

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

3
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

What three historical figures would you bring back to do the talk show/podcast circuit? Assume they disappear after their last interview.

I’d pick Timothy Dexter, because entertainment value at least would be guaranteed. I’d also go with Frederick William of Prussia- he seems like the sort to throw out some left field ideas we just might could need. Finally I’d pick the Venerable Bede, because sometimes obsessive categorization can reveal an obvious truth we’ve all missed.

For semi-historical, Mohammed, Jesus and Confucius.

For 100% historical, Cardinal Armand Jean du Plessis (Richelieu), Cardinal Jules Mazarin and Charles Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord.

I didn’t know russians had a thing for french men of the cloth. Longing for a historical counter-weight to the autocrat, perhaps?

I’d take Hannibal, Leo, and Lavoisier.

Longing for a historical counter-weight to the autocrat, perhaps?

All three of them advanced the goals of French autocrats, so not really. I could've picked three English statesmen, but I didn't know who to add to Pitt the Younger and Churchill.

Talleyrand supposedly served France, not any one man or crown. Can't think of any influential russian clergymen, but that's probably on me - o wait, rasputin, lover of the russian queen! I need to switch one of my podcast choices!

Can't think of any influential russian clergymen, but that's probably on me

Patriarch Nikon. Patriarch Filaret. His great-grandson, Peter I, subordinated the church to the state, which explains the absence of eminent figures after that.

He wasn't a clergyman, though.

In Tsarist Russia, the cloth makes the man.

I'll restrict myself to people who can speak modern English.

How about Henry VIII, Abraham Lincoln, and Friedrich Hayek. (I was also considering Oliver Cromwell or James I/VI in place of Henry.)

I think for the purposes of this hypothetical, we can assume that whoever you pick has a universal translator.

Hitler, Michael Jackson, Jesus.

Of course, when Jesus comes back, we've hit the end times, so you have to price that in.

Can I bring back semi-historical figures? Because I would love to bring back Saul of Tarsus (aka Saint Paul), Judas Iscariot, and Jesus of Nazareth, and have them simultaneously do the talk-show/podcast circuit to promote their various new books:

  • "The Art of Sacred Sass"
  • "Kiss & Tell"
  • "Loaves and Fishes: a Cook Book"

Why would they not just be historical figures? Do you think they didn't exist?

Let's say that for two out of the three of these figures, there is a lack of evidence outside of biblical literary traditions, which could well be apocryphal.

Which two? Judas obviously, but are you saying that there's external evidence for Paul, or Jesus?

Anyway, it's pretty implausible to me that Jesus or Paul would just be made up.

I'm fine with accepting that Saul of Tarsus is not only a historical figure, but that the legends about him are sufficiently close to what happened to that figure in reality (+/- miracles). I am fine with having a high likelihood of a historical Jesus, and that this man was an object of a cult following, though I find it unlikely that the historical Jesus would match the Jesus of Christian mythology to any reasonable degree. I doubt the existence of a historical Judas, he's too convenient as a one-stop-scapegoat literary character.

For the purposes of the game hydroacetylene proposed, I am primarily interested in the literary characters of Jesus, Paul, and Judas, and I would consider their historicity only because it makes the read-the-Bible-as-if-it-has-unreliable-narrator more plausible. They can then write some "tell it like it really was" books.

The historical figures I would most like to see on Rogan are William the Marshal (the first GOAT candidate in combat sports) and Casanova (for obvious bro-shit-shooting reasons).

More generally, I think seeing any of the pre-1800 pioneering scientists and industrialists' reaction to the society they created would be fascinating.

Because of their polymathic tendencies, Frederick the Great and Napoleon would be the most interesting former world leaders.

Thoughts on Fellini's Casanova?

The first one that comes to mind is François de La Rochefoucauld, whose discomfiting aphorisms about the human condition seem just as relevant in the social media era as ever:

We often pride ourselves on our passions, even the most criminal ones; but envy is a timid, shamefaced passion, which we never dare to acknowledge.

If we had no faults, we would not derive so much pleasure from noting those of other people.

It seems that nature, which has so wisely arranged the organs of our body for our happiness, has also given us pride to spare us the pain of knowing our deficiencies.

To gain status in the world, we do all we can to appear as if we had already gained it.

Nothing is less sincere than the procedure of asking for advice and giving it. The asker seems to display a respectful deference for his friend’s feelings—though his only thought is to get approval for his own, and to make the other person answerable for his conduct.

Will reply when I think of two more.

Basic bitch choice, but Orwell, in large part because so many of his essays have aged so gracefully. "Politics and the English Language" and "Notes on Nationalism" should be required reading for anyone interested in history, politics or journalism.

Carl Panzram and dealers choice twice.

"hurry up and bring on your electric chair I want to leave here and take a nose-dive into the next world just to see if that one is as lousy as is this ball of mud and meanness. I am sorry for only two things. These two things are I am sorry that I have mistreated some few animals in my life-time and I am sorry that I am unable to murder the whole damned human race. "