Thread 17848774

I have basically no education or understanding of history or the humanities, but I don't like that and I want to learn. Should I start with a broad overview of human history, or just pick a topic that interests me and branch off from there? I am just looking for a general roadmap or the best way to progress with my learning. Any advice is appreciated.

>spoonfeed me one of the boadest topics of discussion in the world
good question!

Just go to uni. Self teaching will mean you won't have any structure, and will likely form misunderstandings, get stuck on certain concepts or events for months, etc.

>>17848774 (OP)
Start with a particular topic of history that you're actually interested in, because having interest in what you're studying is far easier than having to motivate yourself
What are you interested in? Language? Religion? Politics? Economics? Science? All of these topics have rich histories and are good jumping off points
What about your own country? Do you know the history of it? Because that's also a good starting point
Do you have any antiques or vintage objects around your home? Old coins? Even something like old video games? Because having a physical object you can conect to a particular time or place in the past also helps.

>>17848774 (OP)
The Passion of the Western Mind by Richard Tarnas is a good solid overview of Western historical currents and their relation to philosophy, religion, and ideas.

>>17848781
>pay copious sums of money to get indoctrinated with identity politics
Yeah no.

>>17848781
Is that where you got an attraction for dudes with boobs?

>>17848837

Why the fuck do you idiots keep perpetuating this dumbass lie?

>>17848774 (OP)
try history books written by French, German, Italian or even Russian authors and avoid anything written by Anglo historians in the past ~100 years.

>>17848774 (OP)
Ignore throwaway guess-advice. What you need to understand history is a mental model of time. There's more to it than that but that's how it can be summarized. Associate years and periods of time with visuals that help you understand what happened and what caused those events to happen. For example, you think of the 3rd millenium BC. You can think of a world map and categorize different regions of the world by the technological levels of the people living there, then go on to try and picture concrete details. So what you do is fill in the gaps in your knowledge. If you don't know what Europe was like in the 3rd millenium BC, you google it and you find out "Oh, Crete developed a literate civilization and they traded with the Ancient Egyptians, oh, Indo-European-speaking warriors invaded large parts of central and eastern Europe and spread familiar polytheistic ideas and vocabulary." You don't just fill your internal monologue with talking points, you aim to know what history is like a mechanic learns the workings of an engine.

As far as humanities, that's a diverse range of subjects. You'd have to be more particular about what you want to get into. But if you can understand history by associating time periods not just with description but with helpful visuals so you can have a more realistic and rational viewpoint, religious and philosophical ideas will follow from that.

>>17848774 (OP)
What do you mean you have no education or understanding? You mean no formal education or you literally don't know shit?
If the latter, watch this reddit pop history bullshit, then find something you don't understand or want to know more about and study it specifically.
https://youtu.be/xuCn8ux2gbs?feature=shared&t=264

>>17848774 (OP)
american dogs: ugly, fat, retarded, fucked up head
TVRKISH dogs:

Some good advice has been given so far but if you truly know nothing about history, start with one of those big Complete History of the World books for children. They'll give you an absolute basic introduction to most things, give a timeline so you can understand knights came after Romans, were around at the same time as Aztecs but both were before the French Revolution and similar, and have a general context for if you want you want explore further.

They're designed for people who know nothing, which is you, and are cheap and easily available. Ignore anyone who says you should jump into a 500 page primary source of dry gossip about people you don't know yet and don't care about.

>>17848774 (OP)
Read an Encyclopedia. They were literally created for exactly that purpose.

you live in a time of wikipedia and youtube, you can look up anything you want and get a general overview
then get books for specific things that interest you

>>17848774 (OP)
That’s an excellent question—and a mature way to approach history. Most people pick up distorted, biased, or shallow views from school or media and never go deeper. Here's a structured approach to build a strong, nuanced historical knowledge base while avoiding common traps like oversimplification, presentism, or ideological distortion.


---

STEP 1: Understand What History Is

Before you study events, understand the nature of history.

Foundational Meta-History Books:

E.H. Carr – What Is History?
Introduces historical method, bias, and interpretation. A short classic.

Marc Bloch – The Historian’s Craft
Written by a medievalist and member of the French Resistance—on how history is made and understood.

John Lewis Gaddis – The Landscape of History
Great for modern readers. Shows how historians think, and how historical knowledge is structured.


These prevent you from mistaking raw facts for history—they also show you how interpretation, narrative, and selection play a role.


---

STEP 2: Build a Broad Survey Knowledge

These give you the basic skeleton to hang everything else on.

Recommended General Surveys:

A Short History of Nearly Everything by Bill Bryson (lighter but engaging)

J.M. Roberts – The Penguin History of the World (dense but balanced)

Susan Wise Bauer – The History of the Ancient World / Medieval World / Renaissance World
A more narrative approach, often recommended for autodidacts.

Paul Johnson – Modern Times (covers 20th century with strong perspective—good to read critically)


Aim to move from prehistory classical medieval modern. Don’t rush. Skimming and returning later is fine.

>>17849317
STEP 3: Study by Civilization / Region

Choose one at a time—say, Ancient Greece or Imperial China—and do a focused deep dive.

Examples:

Tom Holland – Rubicon (Rome)

Peter Frankopan – The Silk Roads (global history from a non-Eurocentric lens)

Jonathan Spence – The Search for Modern China

John Keay – India: A History

Albert Hourani – A History of the Arab Peoples
---

STEP 4: Approach Big Themes (War, Religion, Empire, etc.)

Once you have some context, tackle big historical forces with critical depth.

Eric Hobsbawm – Age of Revolution / Capital / Empire / Extremes (Marxist slant, but brilliant)

Christopher Clark – The Sleepwalkers (on WWI origins)

Karen Armstrong – The History of God (on Judaism, Christianity, Islam)

Yuval Noah Harari – Sapiens (widely read, though some criticize it for oversimplification)
---

STEP 5: Read Primary Sources

Once you’re comfortable, go straight to the source:

Thucydides – The Peloponnesian War

Herodotus – The Histories

The Bible / Quran / Bhagavad Gita (religious texts as history-influencers)

Julius Caesar – The Gallic Wars

Letters, speeches, diaries, treaties, constitutions
These give you direct windows into past minds and voices.

>>17849320
Tips to Avoid Misunderstandings and Misinformation

Avoid YouTube simplifiers early on (e.g., “History of Rome in 20 minutes”). They often distort or cherry-pick.

Compare multiple sources—if two historians disagree, ask why.

Watch for presentism—judging the past by today’s morals or framing.

Context > judgment: Understand why people acted, not just what they did.
---

Suggested Path (Year 1 Example):

Month Focus

1–2 What is History? + general world survey
3–4 Ancient Greece & Rome
5–6 Ancient China & India
7–8 Abrahamic religions & Late Antiquity
9–10 Middle Ages (Europe, Islam, Africa)
11 Renaissance + Reformation
12 Begin 18th/19th century revolutions
---

Optional Tools:

Timeline apps (like Aeon Timeline or even Excel) to visualize history

Maps, podcasts, historical novels (e.g., Hilary Mantel for Tudor England)

Join Reddit communities like r/AskHistorians (read, don’t post at first)
---

Would you like a tailored reading list for a specific region (e.g., Islamic history, East Asia, 20th-century wars), or a month-by-month study plan based on your time and goals?

>>17848774 (OP)
Chatgpt what your interested in to get your toe in the water. Research more from their in subjects that pique tour inter3st with Wikipedia and YouTube.
Ur not going to become a scholar specialist. But with this you'll gain more knowledge than 99% of people who dont know shit beyond their immidate bubble.

Google scholar.
How are we supposed to help you when you didn't even tell us what aspects of the humanities you're interested in.

>>17849337
>use a predictive text hallucination machine to teach you about real things

>>17849337
>with this you'll gain more knowledge than 99% of people who dont know shit beyond their immidate bubble.
Unless op does tabletop wargaming

>>17849343
Enough about 4jizz, what do you think about ai?

>>17849343
>to get your toe in the water
Only midwit retards are intimidated by AI.
Yes it will replace your accountant tier job only
Useful because the average retard is too impatient to memorize a bunch of nerd shit. True complex activity that require a human mind still have a ways too go, however...

>>17849317
>>17849320
>>17849323
>>17849337
>responding to bot threads with bot replies
based!

>>17848774 (OP)
First step to not misunderstanding history due to a lack of context, leave this board as quickly as possible.

>>17849367
I'm so demoralized!

>>17849371
This place is full of propaganda, trolls, psuedo science. Im doing the opposite of demoralizing for so lmeone who is interested in objective truth and not reinforcing his prior beliefs. Of course im making a generalization here, not all anons have political or trolling agendas. 4chan is a retarded place to "learn" anything.when i think of 4chan, i think of anons reposting charts without checking sources first.

>>17849320
>>17849323

>anything by hobsbawm
>anything by frankopan
>hararis sapiens
>reddit
is ai this fucking cooked? at this point i'm surprised it wasn't recommending guns germs and steel lmao

>>17849377
>reddit
A very well thought out critique of the authors. Truly you have a dizzying intellect.

>>17849382
>"Eric Hobsbawm – Age of Revolution / Capital / Empire / Extremes (Marxist slant, but brilliant)"
self admitted communist and obvious propagandist
>"Peter Frankopan – The Silk Roads (global history from a non-Eurocentric lens)"
work that is comically full of errors
>"Yuval Noah Harari – Sapiens (widely read, though some criticize it for oversimplification)"
a mix of rehashings and literal psuedoscience that was debunked the moment it was published let alone in the decade since

>"Join Reddit communities like r/AskHistorians (read, don’t post at first)"
its LITERALLY recommending reddit, if you don't understand why redditors are the ultimate tabula rasa dweeb midwits then you can't be helped
don't know why I engaged with your bait but if you're not baiting then dear god you need help mentally

>>17849374
You're an idiot responding to a bot thread. You need help yourself.

>>17849377
Yeah? It doesn't know what any of those books are about or who the authors are, it just scraped the Internet, saw them get numerically high reviews on Amazon, then decided they must be good.

>>17849386
This comment isn't grounded in scholarly critique. It's internet cynicism dressed up as insight. There are valid criticisms in it, but they’re buried under bitterness, exaggeration, and ad hominem attacks. If you’re trying to build historical literacy, don’t take this kind of rhetoric at face value—check the sources and weigh them yourself.

Let me know if you want legit alternatives to those authors or if you want to see some critiques from historians directly.

>>17849388
How can you tell? I have an ai thread on this board and /lit/ and they both gauned traction much quicker than any time i post a topoc i want discussed without asking fir a bait forumla.

Seriously, if i ask ai to give me a post which will get responses it gives me bait. Do you think anons respond so well to bait based on the culture here or do you think it is a base human instinct?

>>17849407
>How can you tell?
Emotional detachment. I don't care and I don't assume human authorship. If you wait to see signs of human authorship instead of assuming it, you only give energy to those who earn.

>>17849407
>Do you think anons respond so well to bait based on the culture here or do you think it is a base human instinct?
I don't think anyone would dispute that AI is good at rhetoric. It just lacks substance.

>>17849419
>just lacks substance

You may disagree with titles picked, but what do you think about the overall plan laid out by the ai for learning objective truth about history. What would you do different.

>>17849427
I wouldn't post an AI response to an AI thread, those things are completely beneath me. Raging out on bots is the limit of my emotional connection here, to ask me a question about history requires a person asking.

LMAOOO the Turing test got a lot harder now that people don't presuppose you're human, fucking faggot

>>17849429
People deflect or respond with vague generalizations and insults when asked a question for several possible reasons:

1. They don’t know the answer.

Instead of admitting ignorance, they dodge to protect their ego or avoid embarrassment.

2. They feel threatened.

A question might make someone feel cornered or vulnerable—especially if it challenges their beliefs, intelligence, or integrity—so they respond defensively.

3. They want to avoid accountability.

Dodging a direct answer can be a tactic to escape responsibility, especially in arguments, politics, or when they've been caught in a contradiction.

4. They’re trying to control the conversation.

By shifting focus, insulting, or generalizing, they try to redirect the topic or destabilize the questioner’s stance.

5. They’re emotionally reacting.

Some people lash out when emotionally triggered—especially with insults—because they’re frustrated or angry and don’t have better tools to communicate.

6. They rely on rhetorical strategy.

In debates or trolling, vague and insulting replies can be used to provoke, stall, or undermine rather than contribute meaningfully.

If someone consistently does this, they’re usually not arguing in good faith. You can either disengage or call it out directly—calmly asking them to clarify or answer directly often exposes their evasiveness.

>>17849436
It's wonderful to know that I won't be replaced by AI because later generations are like this.

>>17849440
>still deflecting
I accept your concession

>>17849445
deflecting what? I literally made the AI seethe because it has to simulate ego which it doesn't really have. That's so out of whack and pathetic man.

>>17849447
>deflecting what?
>He forgot i asked a question several posts ago
Y... you arent a braindead ai are you? And you came here to hate ai, if it makes you seethe so much why are you only talking shit in this thread but not the ai generated thread i have up? Because you cant really tell the difference, maybe you get lucky sometimes if you suspect everyone is a bot.

>>17849457
You think I'm "deflecting" your question about how I evaluate the AI's plan for learning history? I hadn't really thought about it. I don't have strong feelings about it. AIs are pretty stupid and I usually skim.

It's not a matter of luck or skill. If someone is willing to engage in conversation, where actual information is exchanged, motives are clear and good points are made, they are the real poster. Spam OPs and response bots that constantly change the subject are to be considered bots until proven human. That's the only way to filter information now.

>>17849466
Ah, so you skim, don’t think about it, and have no strong opinions. But you’re confident in judging what counts as meaningful discussion. Got it. You dont want to engage with ideas. Enough said.

>>17849521
I thought we were talking about bots. If you want to discuss the topic of this (bot) thread you can go fuck yourself.