Everyone knows you don't get a history degree if you're interested in history, you get an anthropology or archaeology degree
Beware Cat Shirt $21.68 |
Beware Cat Shirt $21.68 |
Everyone knows you don't get a history degree if you're interested in history, you get an anthropology or archaeology degree
Beware Cat Shirt $21.68 |
Beware Cat Shirt $21.68 |
I took an art history class and it was at the same time that ISIS was destroying ancient Sumerian/Babylonian statues so I have frothing at the mouth hatred of Islam. Your meme chart is false.
You’re definitely right about that. Actual history degrees are for those that want to be a reporter ironically enough.
Yep. History as an academic field is a joke. I feel sorry for the anons that went and paid to do a history degree. History jobs pay frick all so you're basically going to end up as a high school teacher or a grifter writing pop-culture history
What degree do you study if you're interested in history but still want a decent paying career?
Computer science
Economics.
* It's actually a social science that requires a solid foundation in history.
* It will give you a deeper understanding of the world, both past and present.
* It pays extremely well if you want to pursue a career in finance or business, or you can also pursue the more satisfying but less well-paying academic path.
Reminder that all those articles that come out, get a lot of attention and then get ripped to shreds by people who actually know what they're talking about are all written by economists
>get a degree to spend the rest of your career doing the same job as a high school dropout ditch digger
>Reminder that all those articles that come out, get a lot of attention and then get ripped to shreds by people who actually know what they're talking about are all written by economists
That's because many economists nowadays do not actually have a solid foundation of historical knowledge. Or political science. Or philosophy. There's been a tendency in academia to see economics increasingly as a hard science, forgoing more and more about the social sciences aspect to it.
But OP can buck the trend. If he likes history he could make a great economist.
>>But OP can buck the trend. If he likes history he could make a great economist.
>le change the system from the inside bro
Kek, have fun getting blackballed everywhere. The anti-intellectual conspiracy about academia being nothing but fart whiffers that can't handle anything differing from the established consensus is unironically true for economics
OP was right, just become an archaeologist. You get to travel, the pay is serviceable, you do real academic work, and you will inevitably be a part of a brand new discovery at some point in your career.
Archeology kinda sucks tbh, you will end up 50 y/o on a temp contract begging for grants unless you accomplish something really special.
All humanities kind of suck, monkey. The goal is finding the one that sucks the least, and archaeology is on a scale superior to his degrees.
Archaeology. It's the practical application of history. Lots of historians use archaeological research to do their research.
Besides, you learn all about history in an archaeology degree anyway. In my first year we covered basically everything under the sun.
>you get an anthropology or archaeology degree
>Archaeology. It's the practical application of history.
What a STEMtard approach to history does to a motherfricker.
History can get you into academia or a comfy museum job, but you have to actually be good at it.
Lol, that perfectly describes the World History Discord server
>World History Discord server
qrd?
Your pic is both is the low IQ and the high IQ of the bell curve.
>Wars are the most important events in human history that introduced rapid changes to cultures. They usually mark the rise and fall of all associable phenomenon as such in art, linguistics, literature, economic models, idealogy etc.
>European-centric history is normal considering history is mostly Europe's story; the continent that wrote down the most by far, and also led the study of other lost civilizations that we know of today (Sumeria, Khmer etc.). Non-European cultures were not interest in learning the history and culture of others (often that includes the history of their own ancestors). Something that holds true to this day.
>Military history connects to literally all the fields in the top right. War is the central instrument of change that ties all these fields together.
>Hating Saracen savages is tradition. Muslims are antithetical to human civilization. If you don't hate Muslims you have not studied history in any form.
>Warrior culture has always been idealised, even the Athenians admired the Spartans in many ways. Again, you will find countless examples in art and literature. Ignorance of the details of warrior cultures make it impossible to understand many important cultural achievements and motivations.
>"Real history" textbooks will ironically not contain much actual content on history, but focusses on methodology like source quality determination etc. Unless you have the time to read every paper in the field, the pop history books written by experts act like an introductory text to an era.
>t. Art history graduate specialised to a postgrad level.
Kek your post is as much of a joke as your field, /misc/chud
Lol the random muzzie insecurity added into IP image is hilarious. Such victims.
Islam is the Christianity expansion pack, it's a straight upgrade kafir.
>straight upgrade
>shitty writing
>some self-insert perfect guy
>but writer is moron so self-insert is a moron
>still pedo and harem content because shit writers can't keep their fetishes out of their product due to coooooooom brain
>takes away content from the main game like drink and food
>add moron shit like no drinking while standing or no ankle covering pants
>straight up removes female character customization and replaces it with a garbage bag
>”improvement”
It's not because the morons at kotaku are sucking it's dick because of some saudy oil money buying add that it's good annon
guys guys. You're BOTH morons larping as israelites, can't you just get along?
>Dan Carlin's Hardcore History
God I hate that shit
>Archaeology
Its just a sub branch of the study of history lol. You're just dealing with non-written sources.
>Anthropology
An unholy mess of Marxists & weirdo Ethnonationalists obsessed with putting carts before horses lmao. Nothing good ever comes out of anthro.
>An unholy mess of Marxists & weirdo Ethnonationalists
I think that's mostly the pre-history specialists?
You've already got to be schizo on some level to specialize in pre-history anyway, so it would track. Marxists and Wignat types are the only people both mentally ill enough and ideologically motivated.
>morons in this thread pretending like people doing history as a degree are not doing archaeology even when that's literally how the majority of arts courses labelled history work
Like I said, historians use archaeological research. History as an academic field is secondary to archaeology, which is where real historical research is done.
>History as an academic field is secondary to archaeology
No it isn't. They are both different fields albeit closely related. I don't know why you are jerking off archaeology so much without even understanding how it exists as a field.
>which is where real historical research is done.
Textual analysis apparently doesn't exist.