Shop More Submit  Join Login
×




Details

Submitted on
March 1, 2012
Image Size
182 KB
Resolution
496×650
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
4,036 (2 today)
Favourites
55 (who?)
Comments
12
Downloads
182
×
Gawain Nerion by unoservix Gawain Nerion by unoservix
been a while since i drew a Knightmare Frame. anyways, tore myself away from drawing ponies to make this, the Gawain Nerion, an upcoming Knightmare design from :iconwingzeroalpha173:'s fanfic "Code Geass Megiddo"

now i'm off to go spend my weekend with Karl Marx, Rene Descartes, Thomas Aquinas, and Richard Rufus of Cornwall. they will all hurt me. now taking bets on who will hurt me the most!
Add a Comment:
 
:icondragonhero15:
DragonHero15 Featured By Owner Dec 2, 2013
Now Lelouch has no limits with the power of a super Gawain!
Reply
:iconmegasaurian4444:
megasaurian4444 Featured By Owner May 8, 2012
Is that an upgrade for lelouch's personal unit or that Mass production Gawain I heard from Lelouch's "Inner circle of old schoolmates"?
Reply
:iconrandomnumbers5902672:
That's pretty badass, serves well as Lelouch's mecha
Reply
:iconseraphiczero:
Seraphiczero Featured By Owner Mar 1, 2012
Umm...I'll bet 1 art request by me saying Rufus will hurt the most. (Never even heard of this guy...!)
Reply
:iconunoservix:
unoservix Featured By Owner Mar 1, 2012
very little is known about him. my medieval philosophy professor, evidently one of the very few people to have written anything on Rufus, thinks he's the earliest known commentator on Aristotle in the medieval period in Western Europe. he brings up at least one idea that is very important in the context of philosophy.
Reply
:iconseraphiczero:
Seraphiczero Featured By Owner Mar 2, 2012
Yeah, I could barely find anything on Rufus when I looked him up. What's that idea he had?

Anyway, let me know later on if I've won the bet or not. =3
Reply
:iconunoservix:
unoservix Featured By Owner Mar 2, 2012
the idea is that we have ideas.

=P

specifically, the word "idea," from the Greek "eidos," comes from Plato (who uses it to describe the Forms). in his Timaeus, he describes how the world is made, in which the Demiurge looks to the Forms/Ideas for an example of how to make the world, and then imposes that on the matter of the universe, the Receptacle (and while the Forms are perfect, the Receptacle isn't, so neither is the world). various interpretations have been advanced of that, and the early Christians tended to take it to mean that the Forms were either ideas in the mind of God or were the mind of God themselves. either way, for numerous ancient thinkers, ideas were not something in human minds; they existed either beyond mere sense apprehension or in the mind of God or were the mind of God. Rufus is apparently the first one to suggest that ideas are actually in human minds, which would be a major expansion of what the ancients and medievals believed was the human capacity for thought, if i'm understanding him correctly.

so far it is Aquinas who is hurting the most, because while Rufus was an Aristotle commentator, Aquinas was an Aristotle fanboy, and that is infinitely worse. =P
Reply
:iconseraphiczero:
Seraphiczero Featured By Owner Mar 2, 2012
*facepalm* Well, that was simple enough. Makes me wonder what those philosophers would do if they knew as much physics and biology as we do today. How much do you find this stuff helpful/interesting, 'cause it all just sounds like idealism and conjecture to me? I don't know how you philosophy majors do it. =p

Yeah, I can't imagine what would be worse than reading some dead guy's essays on how he would give Aristotle a handjob. I guess I lose the bet, then, if you want to throw an art (or perhaps beta reading) request my way.

Also, can I ask you a question? I came across some fellow on yt who thinks the Earth doesn't rotate. How would you personally prove that the planet does/doesn't rotate? Thanks. =o
Reply
:iconunoservix:
unoservix Featured By Owner Mar 2, 2012
my medieval philosophy class has been weird. UCLA divides its history of philosophy course into three classes, 100A, 100B, and 100C. 100A covers the Greek thinkers, from Thales to Aristotle. 100C covers the period from roughly 1650 to 1800, which would include the likes of Hobbes, Berkeley, Locke, Spinoza, Hume, and Kant, among others. 100B covers everything in between, which is only, oh, i dunno, about two thousand years. and this particular class includes Rene Descartes as a medieval philosopher--which is weird, because most people don't generally think of him as one. my professor made a case for why he could be included with them, but Descartes' thought seems to me more like it belongs in 100C than 100B. but the instructor for 100C didn't want to cover Descartes, so, well, there you go.

at any rate, 100B has to cover thinkers from Theophrastus all the way to the Renaissance, from everywhere from Ireland to Iran. and contrary to popular belief, the Middle Ages weren't intellectually dormant; there are lots of thinkers, like Richard Rufus of Cornwall, whose work has been lost for a long time and are just starting to be rediscovered. because there's two thousand years' worth of thought to cover, this class just covers selected medieval philosophers' thoughts on the subject of the human soul--a subject that has much to do with what we would today call psychology.

but one of the important questions relating to it is what it is that makes us human, and what makes us alive. that right there has important implications today, such as for artificial intelligence or cloning or stem cell research and so on. and it also has questions about how we are able to think--a question that's still a hot topic in philosophy and has kind of obvious implications for everything else.

personally, i'm inclined more towards ethics, moral psychology, and political/social philosophy than hardcore metaphysics or logic. i got into philosophy through Plato's early dialogues, where Socrates is certainly concerned with questions of definition and epistemology, but only as a means to the end of living the right way. so i'm only really passionate about this particular subject to the extent that it intersects with what i mentioned above. but i find it fascinating all the same, if for no other reason than it represents humans trying to understand themselves and the world around them through reason. even the most theological of medieval philosophers were unwilling to completely abandon reason.

i would imagine the easiest way to prove Earth's rotation to someone is a simple empirical demonstration. i guess the best one would be, like, a timelapsed video from a satellite showing the Earth rotating or whatever. or there's the Coriolis effect, which you'd have to explain some other way if the Earth wasn't rotating. but if someone doesn't believe that the Earth doesn't rotate and there's no other factors involved (like being someone without a basic education), well, they probably don't want to believe that the Earth rotates, for whatever reason. and if that's the case, then you can't convince them anyways, because people can only be convinced by superior argument and evidence if they're willing to accept them.
Reply
:iconseraphiczero:
Seraphiczero Featured By Owner Mar 2, 2012
Yeah, I think I can agree that I would find ethics and morals to be more interesting and applicable for this day and age. Thanks for the good reply, and sorry for robbing you of your Friday afternoon. =X
Reply
Add a Comment: