|
Post by Anittas on Sept 10, 2011 21:01:42 GMT -5
Hello, and by way of a quick introduction, I am Sandokan, the Tiger of Mompracem. There is a certain irony that we are talking about Nietzsche, nihilism and OverMan in a thread about the physics of the BigBang and possibility of multi-dimensional-multiple-universes. Nietzsche is a very misunderstood philosopher, I certainly won't lay claim to having understood him. One way to understand my partial reading of his many aphorisms is that he found a new "religion" in his "eternal recurrence" and his prophet was the "OverMan". en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_return#Friedrich_Nietzsche(My salutation) Love is the Law, Love under Will. Welcome to the forums (if you are new). Yes, his Eternal Return is a mess. In his later stage in life, he even claimed he was god, so maybe that's what Uz is thinking about. Lolz!
|
|
|
Post by uz on Sept 10, 2011 21:02:17 GMT -5
Anitas based on what we heard in the lectures, read in classes and watched in documentaries I will stand by my stance.
You do whatever it is you need to do, to prove me wrong. I don't mind being proven wrong, as long as the latter makes sense itself.
You don't even belong in a philosophy debate/discussion, you have too much arrogance to make any of this productive.
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Sept 10, 2011 21:05:14 GMT -5
Uz, please let me know if you agree to my challenge. I understand that you will stand by your stance, but do you accept my challenge?
As for my arrogance: you insulted me first. You always insult me first and now I'm calling you out. Just let me know if you accept my challenge.
|
|
|
Post by uz on Sept 10, 2011 21:08:05 GMT -5
I will certaintly not leave on anyone's terms except for my own.
Secondly, as I said.... I don't mind being proven wrong, my ego ain't that big, in fact I want you to prove me wrong so I have more insight on who he was.
....now run off and do what you have to do.
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Sept 10, 2011 21:08:45 GMT -5
Can you name me this supposed documentary that claims that Nietzsche believed in god when he wrote that "god is dead"? Can you refer me to the material that you read in classes that made this claim? If it's not too much trouble for you, of course.
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Sept 10, 2011 21:10:56 GMT -5
I will certaintly not leave on anyone's terms except for my own. Secondly, as I said.... I don't mind being proven wrong, my ego ain't that big, in fact I want you to prove me wrong so I have more insight on who he was. ....now run off and do what you have to do. But Uz, if you agree to my challenge, it would also be on your terms, since you would be in agreement with the challenge.
|
|
|
Post by uz on Sept 10, 2011 21:11:22 GMT -5
This was like 5 years ago, I have no idea where to begin to find all my papers on this subject.
This is not the point tho.
We are supposedly having a philophical discussion, so it's your turn to rebudle and show your sources. That is all, I am waiting.
|
|
|
Post by Emperor AAdmin on Sept 10, 2011 21:13:51 GMT -5
No need to agree with the bet since no need to see anyone gone. If someone wishes to exit the forums they can do it without such childish duels. BTW: It would be a bet with someone that has more forum lives then hundred cats combined ;D X 100
|
|
|
Post by fishcake on Sept 10, 2011 21:17:02 GMT -5
Can you name me this supposed documentary that claims that Nietzsche believed in god when he wrote that "god is dead"? Can you refer me to the material that you read in classes that made this claim? If it's not too much trouble for you, of course. No, but he believed in people not believing in God which is itself a belief and a risky one.
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Sept 10, 2011 21:19:59 GMT -5
I got no problems showing sources, Uz. In fact, I have some of them in front of me. Yet, it bothers me that you will jump in any subject, insult me on any ocassion, and when I call you out you refuse to walk the walk. I can show you the sources, but then tomorrow you can start the same crap again on something else.
What I'm saying is that if you're this cocky in your attitude (and to think that you called me arrogant) and continue to insult me without me insulting you--even on a subject that is dear to me--you should be able stand up to this challenge.
Again, I got no problem with giving you sources. They are in abundance and are easily found. But I've grown tired of doing things for free; and I'm tired of you insulting me and playing an expert on everything. And if weren't sure of this, then maybe you shouldn't have jumped in and insulted me.
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Sept 10, 2011 21:21:43 GMT -5
No need to agree with the bet since no need to see anyone gone. If someone wishes to exit the forums they can do it without such childish duels. BTW: It would be a bet with someone that has more forum lives then hundred cats combined ;D X 100 Not at all, Aadmin. I have one life, only. Yes, I've left before and rejoined several times: but all of this was on my own accord. I never had to consider a bet of this nature.
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Sept 10, 2011 21:23:55 GMT -5
Can you name me this supposed documentary that claims that Nietzsche believed in god when he wrote that "god is dead"? Can you refer me to the material that you read in classes that made this claim? If it's not too much trouble for you, of course. No, but he believed in people not believing in God which is itself a belief and a risky one. What the hell are you talking about? He believed in people not believing in god? As in believed that such people existed; or he believed that they were on to something? Whatever the alternative, it is incorrect.
|
|
|
Post by uz on Sept 10, 2011 21:24:04 GMT -5
I got no problems showing sources, Uz. In fact, I have some of them in front of me. Yet, it bothers me that you will jump in any subject, insult me on any ocassion, and when I call you out you refuse to walk the walk. I can show you the sources, but then tomorrow you can start the same crap again on something else. What I'm saying is that if you're this c**ky in your attitude (and to think that you called me arrogant) and continue to insult me without me insulting you--even on a subject that is dear to me--you should be able stand up to this challenge. Again, I got no problem with giving you sources. They are in abundance and are easily found. But I've grown tired of doing things for free; and I'm tired of you insulting me and playing an expert on everything. And if weren't sure of this, then maybe you shouldn't have jumped in and insulted me. Your deluded kid, read back on the previous posts. I told you to "pipe-down", if that's an insult then you're one sensitive individual.
|
|
|
Post by fishcake on Sept 10, 2011 21:27:23 GMT -5
No, but he believed in people not believing in God which is itself a belief and a risky one. What the hell are you talking about? He believed in people not believing in god? As in believed that such people existed; or he believed that they were on to something? Whatever the alternative, it is incorrect. You know that's the problem just when I think I understand Nieztche I don't. Maybe that's why I don't like him but I still thinks he contradicts himself a lot. I'm still right about nihilism though, maybe not about what Nieztche(I hate spelling his name I never get it right) thought of it but definately that it's flawed as a concept. If nothing matters neither does nihilism and if nihilism doesn't matter then everything matters.
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Sept 10, 2011 21:28:12 GMT -5
Uz, I would only like to hear from you if you accept my challenge. If you don't want to accept it, you can just say no. You can also choose not to say anything. Free choice is such a privilege, don't you think?
|
|
|
Post by uz on Sept 10, 2011 21:30:02 GMT -5
You obviously haven't read thorugh my posts, you just seem to go off.
^ this is a quote from my previous post you intentionally missed.
ps; You and Pyros are so alike.
----
I agree with the above.
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Sept 10, 2011 21:34:50 GMT -5
Yes, Fish, I agree that nihilism makes itself sound contradictory. As for Nietzsche, it's not for everyone. He understood that much of his writing was ambiguous and he also realized that he contradicted himself on certain subjects. Many people don't care for his playful writing, yet not all of his works are like that. You can try to look into On the Genealogy of Morals, considered by some as his Magnum Opus. He goes straight to the point. Maybe you will enjoy it and change your attitude towards him. I hope you agree that it is unfair to judge a philosopher, or any writer, without having first read any of his works.
|
|
|
Post by fishcake on Sept 10, 2011 21:34:53 GMT -5
uz accept the duel
|
|
|
Post by uz on Sept 10, 2011 21:37:39 GMT -5
I'm still waiting for him to prove the contrary. After all his rambling it seems he forgot about his own point.
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Sept 10, 2011 21:40:59 GMT -5
Uz, you keep insulting me. You call me a kid (yes, it is considered an insult) and you compare me to Pyrros (yes, I consider that an insult, also). I was ready to take it to the bank and allow an expert to make the call.
You, on the other hand joined in a discussion that you are not knowledgeable about and started insulting, much like Pyrros would do.
To make it clear: it is okay to join a discussion without having much knowledge. It is okay to be in the error. However, I don't think it's okay to join a discussion when you don't have much knowledge, insult the other participant and speak with a tone of authority.
|
|