lolz, mebbe they dont know of anything beyond it wfs? or mebber they find it harder to 'study', cuz the more you go back, the worse the information gets mebbe
or mebbe it s just zeh interest in stuff closest to you (greek/roman stuff -> western civ)

blablabalaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

ahemz

> Wild Flower Soul wrote:

> Why everyone's so interested in the Greek and Romans is beyond me, but I hated them

And Taft, your courses seem quite random

I'm a history major, specializing in European history and especially classical antiquity/military history. So, as four of my courses were history courses, they are in fact related and relevant. At my college in the history department you take the majority of your classes within your concentration, but must also take a certain amount outside of it (hence me taking the History of Disease class). The psychology class was just a random one I threw in, because I needed another class. I passed all my exams, and I am graduating from college. Now onto the real world (and potentially grad school).

thats a very strange combination of modules.

and nemeara its not at all true that the more you go back the harder it is to study. the greeks and romans were the forerunners of western literature and civilisation. their legacy is everywhere and there is definitely no lck of evidence. the period after the fall of the roman empire was called the dark ages for gods sake:P which do you think sounds better chronicled, two of the greatest and most civilised empires ever to have existed (roman and alexandrian) and the world's first democracy(classical greece), or the dark ages?

got mines end june

got molecular cel biology and technology judgement in practice

I have electrodynamics tomorrow morning . Let's just say I'm F'd in the a

> [TI]  The_Unknown wrote:

> Sometimes i wonder, are you mentally challenged Nemeara?

zomg, would great minds think alike after all ? (i ve wondered the same about you)

hmmm, but wise man say "ARF, he never right"

> Wild Flower Soul wrote:

> Well, I must say, I'm glad you decided on European history. But why on earth military history? That's quite a neglectable field imo

Whenever I look at history, and here I mean the entire spectrum of the written historical record, I see it continually and irreversibly shaped by military conflict. For me, connecting the dots between civilizations and specific time periods using a scope of military history allows one to see how conflict and military innovation not only shaped how/why our species kills each other, but also how different forms of government, economic institutions, philosophy and technology were shaped and/or created in response to these conflicts. Also, I am quite partial to the biographers of military commanders and of the specifics of military campaigns and battles on the strategic, operational, and tactical levels. Alas, I am quite the eclectic student, and though I focused on history in my undergraduate education, I feel pulled towards philosophy and literature just as strongly. A bit mixed up, I guess.

Mine end of June.

"Whenever I look at history, and here I mean the entire spectrum of the written historical record, I see it continually and irreversibly shaped by military conflict. For me, connecting the dots between civilizations and specific time periods using a scope of military history allows one to see how conflict and military innovation not only shaped how/why our species kills each other, but also how different forms of government, economic institutions, philosophy and technology were shaped and/or created in response to these conflicts. Also, I am quite partial to the biographers of military commanders and of the specifics of military campaigns and battles on the strategic, operational, and tactical levels. Alas, I am quite the eclectic student, and though I focused on history in my undergraduate education, I feel pulled towards philosophy and literature just as strongly. A bit mixed up, I guess."

True that, military conflicts shaped history, but usually is was merely the weapon wielded by a body of the state (economy, politics etc). When that body wasn't strong enough, military victories were usually redundant. The only time where I can see long term significance for military history is in ancient times though..
Oh, and I feel rathe pulled to art these last years

"military history is the only field of history that I really see people can 'learn from'... in the saying "those who dont learn it repeat it" or something like that. Hell, I can't remember much about Stalin, but I'm hardly going to cause a contraversial industrial revolution anytime soon."

Not true. People have learned from economical history at least as well... If they hadn't, we would now be in a new '30s economical depression..

Passed all my yr1 examz..guess my course X(:

Fluid Mechanics
Solid Mechanics
Structural Mechanics
Thermodynamics
Structural Materials
Digital Electronics
Engineering Mathematics
Electromechanics
General Aerospace
General Management
Engineering Design
Electric Circuits

Ah, I writing my last exam tommorrow: Biochemistry

I had 4 in total in one week: Algebra, Physical Chemistry (Kinetics), Organic Chemistry and Biochem.

........