Customer Discussions > History forum

If you could invite any three historical figures to dinner, who would you invite?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 302 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Feb 23, 2011 8:22:32 AM PST
Hitler would have lost his temper under the withering criticisms of Churchill. He had a reputation for literally foaming at the mouth and rolling around on the ground in fits of anger. He was nicknamed the "carpet-eater" by some of the members of the German High Staff because if things weren't going his way at the war briefings he would literally fall to the ground and chew the carpet in rage. What a psycho!

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 23, 2011 8:18:42 AM PST
Yes! I believe it was Freud who said that Nietzsche knew himself better than any other person in history. He was also one of the first philosophers to discuss the unconcious. And I believe Marcus Aurelius would have been the epitome of the "noble" man in Nietzsche's schema.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 23, 2011 8:16:27 AM PST
I remember that episode of Star Trek. It was very interesting. I forget what the conversation was about, though. Have to watch it again.

One of things about Mozart was that he was apparently an excellent improviser. I'll bet Bird and Hendrix would have been impressed by his improvisational abilities. Same with Bach. There is a (?apocryphal) tale that there was going to be a musical battle between Bach and some other renowned organist but when Bach arrived the other musician was a no-show he was so terrified of being beaten by Bach.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 23, 2011 3:10:01 AM PST
[Deleted by Amazon on Jul 10, 2011 6:23:29 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 23, 2011 3:07:16 AM PST
[Deleted by Amazon on Jul 10, 2011 6:23:29 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 22, 2011 11:38:15 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 22, 2011 11:40:19 PM PST
sully says:
Rachel's:

<"but observing the patterns of history and how they repeat themselves, I a weary.">

Yes, I am Christian; God's peace is a reality and always available. We enter into peace that He brings, the peace that He is.
When we live in His peace, we become less apt to be manipulated by the world and the world isn't going to like that. Praise God!

And to man He said, 'Behold, the fear of the Lord, that is wisdom;
And to depart from evil is understanding.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 22, 2011 11:14:00 PM PST
What a wonderful thread!
My choice for one evening......
George Armstrong Custer,
Lieutenant William Cooke
Tom Custer
My question:Why did you not support Reno and what happened after that?
Regards,
Greg

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 22, 2011 10:29:02 PM PST
Rachel says:
Sully:

If you mention Aquinas I am assuming that you are Christian. Am I correct?

I, as a Jew, also have those hopes for the distant future,but observing the patterns of history and how they repeat themselves, I a weary. Humans do not grasp how they get into similar but no identical patterns and while we solve one problem others surface and so we go on and on.

NO, I still have hope, but in the millennium nope.

Rachel

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 22, 2011 9:01:21 PM PST
Pat Answer says:
arpard fazakas,
Greetings.

Wasn't there a card game in a Star Trek episode with Data, Newton, Einstein, and Hawking? But both your dinner parties sound cool. Especially the envelope-pushing musicians of their days.

I might go with
Marcus Antonius
Leon Trotsky
Jiang Jieshi (Kai-shek)

And what would you have done differently...?

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 22, 2011 9:00:01 PM PST
sully says:
Lorraine Paul says:

"Jesus and Moses would count as 'historical' figures."

I would ref. further examination.'

1. Moses is accepted as a historical figure, various aspects of the Biblical tale can be re-interpreted. Manetho's claim that Moses was an Egyptian is quite plausible.

2. The historical Jesus is a historical figure, to be understood in the context of his own lifetime in 1st-century Roman Judaea, not of Christian doctrine of later centuries.

sully
"today's mystery; tomorrow's history"

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 22, 2011 8:38:39 PM PST
[Deleted by Amazon on Jul 10, 2011 6:23:22 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 22, 2011 8:38:13 PM PST
[Deleted by Amazon on Jul 10, 2011 6:23:21 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 22, 2011 8:36:56 PM PST
sully says:
Rachel :
you said...

<Changes in Human Rights are so slow because human nature has not changed and they same violence and mistakes repeat themselves.>

I hear you, and feel the same at times, but I will not give up thinking someday there will be world wide compassion, and I will not give up hope for it. We were created by the Creator, and He is our advocate in all we do, we all belong to Him, and he belongs to us.

I remember what St. Augutine said:.......
"......we were made for God and we will be restless until we find rest in Him."

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 22, 2011 7:20:02 PM PST
Rachel says:
Aviva:

If I would be in that dinner:
I would argue that Human Rights are still a utopia.
I would say that civil disobedience without violence is not the way,because the other side is violent.
I would admire Mandela for his resistance in jail and stamina to survive.

Freedom is something you loose and gain everyday. It is a continuous fight for the survival of freedom, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Changes in Human Rights are so slow because human nature has not changed and they same violence and mistakes repeat themselves.

Are we better than before? Yes, some parts of the world are better than before, yet it is NOT universal.

Rachel

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 22, 2011 1:48:32 PM PST
Aviva Lynne says:
John Adams
Nelson Mandela
Ghandi

define human rights
what is the best way to celebrate freedom

Posted on Feb 22, 2011 1:44:42 PM PST
Another interesting dinner party would be Archimedes, Newton, and Richard Feynman.

Posted on Feb 22, 2011 1:43:00 PM PST
I think it would be cool to invite Mozart, Charlie Parker, and Jimi Hendrix to dinner and play samples of each one's music. I would love to see Mozart's reaction to Bird and Bird's reaction to Hendrix.

Posted on Feb 22, 2011 12:41:37 PM PST
getalife says:
Loch Ness monster, Bigfoot and Chupacabra.

If they couldn't make it....

Larry, Curly and Moe.

Posted on Feb 21, 2011 12:48:30 PM PST
Joe Anthony says:
Jesus Christ
Mohandas Gandhi
Sigmund Freud

The Menu:

First Appetizer: Warm Viennese bread with "powidl", a Central Euopean spread made form plums (remember, Mr. Freud comes from Vienna, a place so steeped in a variety of flavors that it is the ONLY city to have it's own category of cuisine); also hummus with Syrian bread (remember that Jesus is from the Middle East)

Second Appetizers: a Hungarian goulash made with beef for Jesus and Freud; sans beef for Mr. Gandhi (remember that Gandhi is a vegitarian)

Third Appetizer: Kosambari (a spicy Indian vegetarian salad)

Entre: Wiener Schnitzel for Mr. Freud; one grilled fish with Middle-Eastern spices for Jesus; "Huli" (a main dish made with coconut, rice, curry and assorted vegetables and spices) for Mr. Gandhi

Side dishes: steamed vegetables, especially sweet potatoes (my favorite)

Beverages: Wine for Freud and Jesus; tea with lemon for Mr. Gandhi who did not drink alcohol

Dessert: choice of assorted Viennese pastries for Mr. Freud; Indian pastries for Mr. Gandhi; also fruits and nuts for Jesus (which I guess is what Jesus and the apostles ate for dessert at the time of the "Last Supper"); but guests would also be invited to try some of one and some of the other...

Posted on Feb 21, 2011 9:12:47 AM PST
Kyle Galaise says:
Nietzsche
Sigmund Freud
Marcus Aurelius

That would be one interesting conversation.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 20, 2011 9:36:55 PM PST
sully says:
"1. Robert Johnson
"2. Stevie Ray Vaughn
"3. Martin Luther King Jr.

Sully: "Whats for dinner?"

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 9, 2010 3:21:50 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 9, 2010 3:36:41 AM PST
You ask your chosen trio (Burghley, Raleigh, Marlowe), "Who wrote the works attributed to William Shakespeare?"

Even pretending that "William Shakespeare" is not the blindingly obvious answer to that question, why would you think that Raleigh, Burghley and Marlowe could offer any enlightenment on the matter? You have assembled some very interesting people and asked them some rather narrow and banal questions.

Posted on Jan 8, 2010 10:10:34 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 8, 2010 10:11:39 AM PST
Gryphon X says:
Voltaire
The Marquis de Sade
Ayn Rand

I don't think any "starters" will be necessary.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 8, 2010 8:20:12 AM PST
I would invite Madison, Hamilton and Patrick Henry.
My conversation starters: How does Art. V give the people the "right to alter" the Constitution? What do you think of our current notion that the Constitution is a "living" document? and Do you think the Nixon pardon was constitutional?After Patrick Henry: A Second American Revolution

Posted on Jan 7, 2010 11:32:03 PM PST
Christopher Marlowe, Lord Burghley (or his son Robert Cecil), and Sir Walter Raleigh. Questions: 1) Who wrote the works attributed to William Shakespeare? 2) Was Marlowe a homosexual in the modern use of the term? 3) What really happened to Marlowe? Was he murdered, or was his death faked? 4) Was the group around Raleigh atheistic or free thinkers?
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 13 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  History forum
Participants:  178
Total posts:  302
Initial post:  Feb 24, 2008
Latest post:  Feb 23, 2011

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 16 customers

Search Customer Discussions