# Any Nietzsche fans out there?



## Ninja Glutton (Apr 24, 2010)

I read this quote today and it's so beautifully crafted that I couldn't pass up posting it. Granted, there are multiple translations, but this one sounds really nice. I almost want to learn German just to read his finely-crafted sentences.

"Once upon a time, in some out of the way corner of that universe which is dispersed into numberless twinkling solar systems, there was a star upon which clever beasts invented knowing. That was the most arrogant and mendacious minute of "world history," but nevertheless, it was only a minute. After nature had drawn a few breaths, the star cooled and congealed, and the clever beasts had to die. One might invent such a fable, and yet he still would not have adequately illustrated how miserable, how shadowy and transient, how aimless and arbitrary the human intellect looks within nature. There were eternities during which it did not exist. And when it is all over with the human intellect, nothing will have happened."

What are some of your favorite philosophers or philosophical quotes?
Are there any fat philosophers or philosophies on the nature of fat itself?

I'm in an intellectual mood


----------



## grubnboy (Apr 24, 2010)

Rod Serling said:


> There is nothing in the dark, that isn't there when the lights are on.



Rod Serling was great.


----------



## Amandy (Apr 24, 2010)

While visiting the Portrait Gallery in Edinburgh a couple of years ago I was happy to find this painting of David Hume... nothing like a chubby empiricist.

"Beauty in things exists merely in the mind which contemplates them."

Quite.


----------



## Ninja Glutton (Apr 25, 2010)

Amandy said:


> While visiting the Portrait Gallery in Edinburgh a couple of years ago I was happy to find this painting of David Hume... nothing like a chubby empiricist.
> 
> "Beauty in things exists merely in the mind which contemplates them."
> 
> Quite.



Yes :bow:

Although I'm probably more of the Eastern school of thought

I can respect any chubby thinker


----------



## veil (Apr 25, 2010)

Ninja Glutton said:


> I read this quote today and it's so beautifully crafted that I couldn't pass up posting it. Granted, there are multiple translations, but this one sounds really nice. I almost want to learn German just to read his finely-crafted sentences.
> 
> "Once upon a time, in some out of the way corner of that universe which is dispersed into numberless twinkling solar systems, there was a star upon which clever beasts invented knowing. That was the most arrogant and mendacious minute of "world history," but nevertheless, it was only a minute. After nature had drawn a few breaths, the star cooled and congealed, and the clever beasts had to die. One might invent such a fable, and yet he still would not have adequately illustrated how miserable, how shadowy and transient, how aimless and arbitrary the human intellect looks within nature. There were eternities during which it did not exist. And when it is all over with the human intellect, nothing will have happened."
> 
> ...



i don't have my books with me, but i've always enjoyed the elegance and earnestness of thought exhibited by the presocratics, especially empedocles. i really like his concept of love & strife as constantly dynamic and opposing forces, and the need for balance between them. if all were love, all would be drawn together and static. if all were strife, all would fly apart and nothing could ever be created. it's a bit more poetic than philosophic in some ways, but i find it to be very viscerally true.


----------



## KFD (Apr 25, 2010)

That's an interesting quote...


----------



## warwagon86 (Apr 25, 2010)

if i read anymore physcology or law or criminology this week you can find me at the bottom of the sea with a concrete block tied to my feet


----------



## Ninja Glutton (Apr 25, 2010)

veil said:


> i don't have my books with me, but i've always enjoyed the elegance and earnestness of thought exhibited by the presocratics, especially empedocles. i really like his concept of love & strife as constantly dynamic and opposing forces, and the need for balance between them. if all were love, all would be drawn together and static. if all were strife, all would fly apart and nothing could ever be created. it's a bit more poetic than philosophic in some ways, but i find it to be very viscerally true.



The Tao is neither good nor evil; it gives birth to both.


----------



## Ninja Glutton (Apr 25, 2010)

Also, it's awesome that that Tao Te Ching quote was my 1,000th post


----------



## veil (Apr 25, 2010)

Ninja Glutton said:


> The Tao is neither good nor evil; it gives birth to both.




:happy:

the tao te ching is another favorite of mine, i love philosophy that doesn't just explain the universe, but people as well. practical yet mystical, two great tastes that taste great together.


----------



## ClockworkOrange (Apr 26, 2010)

"What, if some day or night a demon were to steal after you into your loneliest loneliness and say to you: "This life as you now live it and have lived it, you will have to live once more and innumerable times more; and there will be nothing new in it, but every pain and every joy and every thought and sigh and everything unutterably small or great in your life will have to return to you, all in the same succession and sequence - even this spider and this moonlight between the trees, and even this moment and I myself. The eternal hourglass of existence is turned upside down again and again, and you with it, speck of dust!" Would you not throw yourself down and gnash your teeth and curse the demon who spoke thus?... Or how well disposed would you have to become to yourself and to life to crave nothing more fervently than this ultimate eternal confirmation and seal?"

Nietzsche is the man


----------



## Ninja Glutton (Apr 26, 2010)

ClockworkOrange said:


> "What, if some day or night a demon were to steal after you into your loneliest loneliness and say to you: "This life as you now live it and have lived it, you will have to live once more and innumerable times more; and there will be nothing new in it, but every pain and every joy and every thought and sigh and everything unutterably small or great in your life will have to return to you, all in the same succession and sequence - even this spider and this moonlight between the trees, and even this moment and I myself. The eternal hourglass of existence is turned upside down again and again, and you with it, speck of dust!" Would you not throw yourself down and gnash your teeth and curse the demon who spoke thus?... Or how well disposed would you have to become to yourself and to life to crave nothing more fervently than this ultimate eternal confirmation and seal?"
> 
> Nietzsche is the man



Awesome quote. I like where this is going.

"We believe that we know something about the things themselves when we speak of trees, colors, snow, and flowers; and yet we possess nothing but metaphors for things  metaphors which correspond in no way to the original entities."

I love how he can be so contemporary. 

Interesting and poignant points about the shortcomings of representational language.

There's nothing very "cat-like" about the word "cat."


----------



## ClockworkOrange (Apr 26, 2010)

'What I have called "synchronicity", Nietzsche called "lucky occurrences filled with meaning". It becomes a poetic dialogue, a concerto for two violins, between the man-magician and Nature. The world presents you with a "lucky occurrence filled with meaning", it hands you a subtle, almost secret message, something which happens without apparent reason, a-causal, but which you feel is full of meaning. This being exactly what the world is looking for, that you should extract that meaning from it, which you alone are capable of seeing, because it "synchronises", it fully coincides with your immediate state of mind, with an event in your life, so that it is able to transform itself, with your assistance, into legend and destiny. A lucky occurrence which transformed itself into Destiny. And once you have achieved this, everything will appear to become the same as before, as if nothing had happened. Nevertheless, everything has changed fundamentally and for all time, although the only ones to know it will be you and the earth - which is now your earth, your world, since it has given itself up to you so that you can make it fruitful."

This is another good one by a cat named Miguel Serrano. Serrano says in one of his books that "only the poet will understand me". Very interesting stuff.


----------



## Slamaga (Apr 26, 2010)

I like this particular quote from Jean-Paul Sartre :

"The hell is the others"

You are always seen by the others who always judge you either consciously or inconsciously.


----------



## Amandy (Apr 26, 2010)

I get that western enlightenment thinkers are terribly unfashionable, but IMHO, no school of thought seeped so deeply to the masses with the concept of the self as an indivdual - a free, independent, self-directed member of society - quite like Locke, Hobbes, Hume, Rousseau, Voltaire et al. 

I enjoy a postmodern throw down as much as anyone, but I'd always go back to the age of reason for sheer 'fuck you your majesty' impact.


----------



## Ninja Glutton (Apr 27, 2010)

Amandy said:


> I get that western enlightenment thinkers are terribly unfashionable, but IMHO, no school of thought seeped so deeply to the masses with the concept of the self as an indivdual - a free, independent, self-directed member of society - quite like Locke, Hobbes, Hume, Rousseau, Voltaire et al.
> 
> I enjoy a postmodern throw down as much as anyone, but I'd always go back to the age of reason for sheer 'fuck you your majesty' impact.



I think I just fundamentally disagree with free will.

We're just highly-refined energy-consuming DNA replicators. Every decision is a factor of physiological influences.

I also feel like individuality is kind of an illusion. There is no telling where the finger ends and the air begins, so, in that way, we are all connected.


----------



## FishCharming (Apr 27, 2010)

The World's Greatest Philosopher: Terry Pratchett

"Give a man a fire and he's warm for the day. But set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life."

"Seeing, contrary to popular wisdom, isn't believing. It's where belief stops, because it isn't needed any more."

"It is said that your life flashes before your eyes just before you die. That is true, it's called Life."

"God does not play dice with the universe; He plays an ineffable game of his own devising, which might be compared, from the perspective of any of the other players, to being involved in an obscure and complex version of poker in a pitch dark room, with blank cards, for infinite stakes, with a dealer who won't tell you the rules, and who smiles all the time."

Fantasy is an exercise bicycle for the mind. It might not take you anywhere, but it tones up the muscles that can. Of course, I could be wrong.


----------



## Webmaster (Apr 27, 2010)

Nietzsche, first and foremost, had utter contempt for almost anything and everything. Some of his language was masterful, some contrived, but it was always deeply cynical and full of (often jealous) mocking and contempt. Hence, translating Nietzsche always involved not just translating the words, but their intended contempt. To illustrate, someone who is not totally familiar with US English might not be able to meaningfully translate a statement such as "You're some piece of work" because the words alone do not convey the meaning This came to mind when I read the original German version of the paragraph.

So my translation would be:

In some remote corner of endless space spread in countless flickering solar systems there was once a star where some smart animals thought they'd discovered knowledge and awareness. It was no doubt the most arrogant and most deceitful moment in all of time, but just a fleeting moment nonetheless. Within no more than a few breaths of nature their orb grew cold and still, and the smart animals ceased to be. No conceivable fable could properly illustrate just how pitiful, how shadowy and fleeting, how meaningless and random is human intellect within nature. There were eternities where it did not exist, and once it's gone, nothing will have changed at all. 



Ninja Glutton said:


> I read this quote today and it's so beautifully crafted that I couldn't pass up posting it. Granted, there are multiple translations, but this one sounds really nice. I almost want to learn German just to read his finely-crafted sentences.
> 
> "Once upon a time, in some out of the way corner of that universe which is dispersed into numberless twinkling solar systems, there was a star upon which clever beasts invented knowing. That was the most arrogant and mendacious minute of "world history," but nevertheless, it was only a minute. After nature had drawn a few breaths, the star cooled and congealed, and the clever beasts had to die. One might invent such a fable, and yet he still would not have adequately illustrated how miserable, how shadowy and transient, how aimless and arbitrary the human intellect looks within nature. There were eternities during which it did not exist. And when it is all over with the human intellect, nothing will have happened."
> 
> ...


----------



## Ninja Glutton (Apr 27, 2010)

Webmaster said:


> Nietzsche, first and foremost, had utter contempt for almost anything and everything. Some of his language was masterful, some contrived, but it was always deeply cynical and full of (often jealous) mocking and contempt. Hence, translating Nietzsche always involved not just translating the words, but their intended contempt. To illustrate, someone who is not totally familiar with US English might not be able to meaningfully translate a statement such as "You're some piece of work" because the words alone do not convey the meaning This came to mind when I read the original German version of the paragraph.
> 
> So my translation would be:
> 
> In some remote corner of endless space spread in countless flickering solar systems there was once a star where some smart animals thought they'd discovered knowledge and awareness. It was no doubt the most arrogant and most deceitful moment in all of time, but just a fleeting moment nonetheless. Within no more than a few breaths of nature their orb grew cold and still, and the smart animals ceased to be. No conceivable fable could properly illustrate just how pitiful, how shadowy and fleeting, how meaningless and random is human intellect within nature. There were eternities where it did not exist, and once it's gone, nothing will have changed at all.



It makes me jealous because his rhetoric is so finely-crafted. I wish I knew German.


----------



## Amandy (Apr 27, 2010)

Ninja Glutton said:


> I think I just fundamentally disagree with free will.
> 
> We're just highly-refined energy-consuming DNA replicators. Every decision is a factor of physiological influences.
> 
> I also feel like individuality is kind of an illusion. There is no telling where the finger ends and the air begins, so, in that way, we are all connected.



That free will may be motivated by physiology shouldn't take away it's existence. 

The beauty of free will is that I can choose to reject the tyranny of determinism, which gives me the total skeevies. If I'm going to be in bondage, it's going to be during a sex act, TYVM.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Apr 27, 2010)

I looove me some Nietzsche. His stuff on religion is awesome. Love the quote you posted.


----------



## WillSpark (Apr 28, 2010)

I do really love philosphy, but I haven't studied in depth enough to get to know certain philosphers. But I love all of the quotes posted here. I really need to take up a philosophy course in the next few years.


----------



## Wanderer (Apr 28, 2010)

I'm afraid I'm not fond of Nietzche on general principle. He's an interesting read, but I prefer Aristotle and Socrates. (The allegory of the cave in particular.)


----------



## Ninja Glutton (Apr 28, 2010)

Amandy said:


> That free will may be motivated by physiology shouldn't take away it's existence.
> 
> The beauty of free will is that I can choose to reject the tyranny of determinism, which gives me the total skeevies. If I'm going to be in bondage, it's going to be during a sex act, TYVM.



How can determinism not exist?

Every moment is tied completely to the moment immediately before it through a causal relationship.

I don't find it tyrannical, I find it freeing that everything that is going to be... is

I guess I see time as less of something linear and more as a multi-faceted crystal that is happening all at once but, through our limited human perception, we're seeing it one moment at a time.

I wasn't implying that our physiological factors for behavior are bondage but, rather, in the gene-centered evolutionary sense, a survival instinct.


----------



## Ninja Glutton (Apr 28, 2010)

Wanderer said:


> I'm afraid I'm not fond of Nietzche on general principle. He's an interesting read, but I prefer Aristotle and Socrates. (The allegory of the cave in particular.)



How can you prefer Socrates' readings? He never wrote anything down.

Aristotle is definitely good brain food, though.

Did you mean you preferred Plato? The cave allegory was Plato.


----------



## WillSpark (Apr 28, 2010)

Ninja Glutton said:


> How can determinism not exist?
> 
> Every moment is tied completely to the moment immediately before it through a causal relationship.
> 
> ...



Exactly !Every choice we make is in our "free will" but we are, or were, going to make those choices anyway based on everything that goes on with us and those around us. I sometimes don't see where or why some people don't understand that it just "is."


----------



## gobettiepurple (Apr 28, 2010)

*"Music without which life would be a mistake"

I may be paraphrasing or mistranslating, but that's my favorite Nietzsche quote. 

Okay, second runner up "God is dead and we have killed him" *


----------



## PolarKat (Apr 28, 2010)

Can't quite remember how it goes
"To be immortal isn't difficult to achieve, all you have to do is remember not to die"
That got stuck in my head for ages after reading it.


----------



## Amandy (Apr 28, 2010)

That an organism is not an agent of his or her own change is highly depressing to me. Determinism in its various flavors has been used and far to often misused over the centuries by princes, popes and media moguls as bread and circuses to keep the masses placated. It's like a shiny silvery poetic promise for tomorrow, but the end result is passivity. Fuck that, I'll take my chances with chaos. At a certain point I moved past the Phil 101 survey course and decided to go with my agnostic gut on this one. No need to convert me, thanks, I'm good.


----------



## Ninja Glutton (Apr 28, 2010)

Amandy said:


> That an organism is not an agent of his or her own change is highly depressing to me. Determinism in its various flavors has been used and far to often misused over the centuries by princes, popes and media moguls as bread and circuses to keep the masses placated. It's like a shiny silvery poetic promise for tomorrow, but the end result is passivity. Fuck that, I'll take my chances with chaos. At a certain point I moved past the Phil 101 survey course and decided to go with my agnostic gut on this one. No need to convert me, thanks, I'm good.



Whoa, and I thought we were being civil here 

I didn't realize having an opinion that differs from yours meant I was trapped in a gen ed philosophy course. That is quite arrogant, presumptuous, and close-minded.

Just because it depresses you doesn't make it false.

The end result doesn't have to be passivity, it can be peaceful. There's a certain comfort in knowing that things will run their course. It has nothing to do with gods and predestination or instruments of control. It's not about sitting back and being a passenger of your own life. There are still visceral experiences. There is still a life to lead. There is still the entire spectrum of human sensory and emotional experience. I'm just taking the broad world view as opposed to relating everything to my own personal experience.

I wasn't trying to convert anyone, and this was simply a thread for philosophical meanderings of all shapes and forms. You're getting quite defensive in what should be a friendly context.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Apr 28, 2010)

Amandy said:


> That an organism is not an agent of his or her own change is highly depressing to me. Determinism in its various flavors has been used and far to often misused over the centuries by princes, popes and media moguls as bread and circuses to keep the masses placated. It's like a shiny silvery poetic promise for tomorrow, but the end result is passivity. Fuck that, I'll take my chances with chaos. At a certain point I moved past the Phil 101 survey course and decided to go with my agnostic gut on this one. No need to convert me, thanks, I'm good.



This is a discussion forum so if you aren't up for discussion you probably shouldn't bother posting.


----------



## Ninja Glutton (Apr 28, 2010)

Also, they don't have to be mutually exclusive. Compatibilism asserts that both free will and determinism are equally valid.


----------



## adolan55 (Apr 29, 2010)

Ninja Glutton said:


> I think I just fundamentally disagree with free will.
> 
> We're just highly-refined energy-consuming DNA replicators. Every decision is a factor of physiological influences.
> 
> I also feel like individuality is kind of an illusion. There is no telling where the finger ends and the air begins, so, in that way, we are all connected.



I agree that every decision is a factor of physiological influences but I think saying this, while absolutely correct, can also be misleading to say I agree with it. While I love philosophy because it helps to explore the questions of our existence (which in philosophy tell much more so than the answers), I look to one of my favorite natural sciences for answers in respect to this particular question asked by philosophy, physics.

Consider the thought experiment of Schroedinger's cat. This experiment, for those not familiar, is a popular thought experiment that seeks to explain the nature of quantum superpositions (or very basically all the possible states any object can potentially have). It uses an absurd notion to help in visualizing the problems associated with the Copenhagen interpretation which in its basic form asserts that at the exact moment of quantum measurement that this observed quantum superposition collapses and forms the definite state that is observed. The Schroedinger's cat thought experiment allows for this thinking at a quantum level to be applied to something that is much larger which also happens to be an organism and he chose a cat. Its a very interesting idea so I would suggest to any that is not familiar with it go forth and google as I think you will find it very intriguing. Anyways, ultimately the experiment puts the cat in a quantum superposition where it is both alive and dead at the same time. This being because his life and death hangs in the balance by a single subatomic particle.

Now I realize that this experiment that critiques the Copenhagen interpretation works in favor towards deterministic views, but the level in which it criticizes that aspect of quantum mechanics also parallels to our universe with the idea that we are in a "sealed box" and that we are not acting as observers in this sealed box universe. However, I maintain that the very questions that we as humans ask in the philosophy of existence acts as a quantum measurement allowing for all possible states as us as an object to exist at once (and making us observers in this experiment we call the universe). So in essence our ability to recognize our own existence is what allows us to exist in a perpetual chain of quantum superpositions which lends towards the possibility of free will. Without the human ability to be self-aware and question our own existence I believe we would be completely governed by casual laws that result in only one possible state (and thus determinism), but since we do have self-awareness of our existence we have at the very least an unpredictable existence which can start new casual chains at any given point. At a quantum superposition potentially any state is possible for a given object and while not the glorified idea of free will we are use to I think it is what free will really is, which is that random statistically probability that ultimately collapses into its final definite state.

...or maybe i'm just really high on caffeine and sugar right now...idk...lol


----------



## Ninja Glutton (Apr 29, 2010)

adolan55 said:


> I agree that every decision is a factor of physiological influences but I think saying this, while absolutely correct, can also be misleading to say I agree with it. While I love philosophy because it helps to explore the questions of our existence (which in philosophy tell much more so than the answers), I look to one of my favorite natural sciences for answers in respect to this particular question asked by philosophy, physics.
> 
> Consider the thought experiment of Schroedinger's cat. This experiment, for those not familiar, is a popular thought experiment that seeks to explain the nature of quantum superpositions (or very basically all the possible states any object can potentially have). It uses an absurd notion to help in visualizing the problems associated with the Copenhagen interpretation which in its basic form asserts that at the exact moment of quantum measurement that this observed quantum superposition collapses and forms the definite state that is observed. The Schroedinger's cat thought experiment allows for this thinking at a quantum level to be applied to something that is much larger which also happens to be an organism and he chose a cat. Its a very interesting idea so I would suggest to any that is not familiar with it go forth and google as I think you will find it very intriguing. Anyways, ultimately the experiment puts the cat in a quantum superposition where it is both alive and dead at the same time. This being because his life and death hangs in the balance by a single subatomic particle.
> 
> ...



But is self-awareness just a mechanism, like dreaming, that is there to protect us from our own body's operations?

Is there a reason that we dream? Is it just because of the REM that our brain paints visions for us?

I'm sorry if I'm being spacey, but I often ponder the nature of consciousness itself. Perhaps our perception is more like a prison than a 1:1 experience of life because it confines us to one set of definitions. We're not even seeing/hearing/smelling/touching the world at a 1:1 because there is always going to be a delay, however miniscule. Our perception is still only one slice of the massive, infinite pie of perspectives.

Honestly, though, that was a really intelligent and well-defended argument. Kudos to you, sir.


----------



## adolan55 (Apr 29, 2010)

Ninja Glutton said:


> But is self-awareness just a mechanism, like dreaming, that is there to protect us from our own body's operations?
> 
> Is there a reason that we dream? Is it just because of the REM that our brain paints visions for us?
> 
> ...



Thank you for saying so, maybe too much caffeine and not enough sleep can amount to something coherent after all.

I can tell you like philosophy because you have posed great questions here, and ones that I have spent considerable time pondering myself. I have followed some of the more recent studies that interpret dreaming being much like the "garbage-collecting" process of computer programs in that it cleans up the memory to make room for more memories or even create a more logical relational structure. I got to thinking about it and thought it could be possible that the brain stores things like a computer database using a relational structure except in an abstract way that needs to be refined from time to time. For instance we store a correlation of the word "Bandana" with "Banana" because they have similar phonetic properties but has to make a exclusion whenever retrieving information that pertains to only one or the other. So maybe the brain at night cleans up the relations that do not allow for the efficient retrieval of information and places them in better kinds of categories like putting Banana with Yellow and Fruit, and then Bandana with Hats and Out of Style.

Of course as Nietzsche would say:
"All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth."


----------



## Amandy (Apr 29, 2010)

when it comes to free will I get a little passionate - I regret you took me the wrong way... I'll remember to show less emotion next time.


----------



## Guinness (Apr 29, 2010)

Amandy said:


> when it comes to free will I get a little passionate - I regret you took me the wrong way... I'll remember to show less emotion next time.



Could you be anymore condescending?


----------



## Ninja Glutton (Apr 29, 2010)

adolan55 said:


> Thank you for saying so, maybe too much caffeine and not enough sleep can amount to something coherent after all.
> 
> I can tell you like philosophy because you have posed great questions here, and ones that I have spent considerable time pondering myself. I have followed some of the more recent studies that interpret dreaming being much like the "garbage-collecting" process of computer programs in that it cleans up the memory to make room for more memories or even create a more logical relational structure. I got to thinking about it and thought it could be possible that the brain stores things like a computer database using a relational structure except in an abstract way that needs to be refined from time to time. For instance we store a correlation of the word "Bandana" with "Banana" because they have similar phonetic properties but has to make a exclusion whenever retrieving information that pertains to only one or the other. So maybe the brain at night cleans up the relations that do not allow for the efficient retrieval of information and places them in better kinds of categories like putting Banana with Yellow and Fruit, and then Bandana with Hats and Out of Style.
> 
> ...



I agree with that Nietzsche quote because, at any given time, common and generally-accepted ideas are based on a power structure rather than truth.

That brings up the whole "what is truth?" argument, though. To me, there is no absolute truth, but, rather, a giant tower card catalogue of individual stories, individual truths. It's just like when you read a story and it affects you in some profound way, but it's still just a story. As long as you accept it as truth, it is truth.


----------



## Ninja Glutton (Apr 29, 2010)

Amandy said:


> when it comes to free will I get a little passionate - I regret you took me the wrong way... I'll remember to show less emotion next time.



How did I take you the wrong way?

You were implying that at some point you moved beyond elementary philosophy and that whoever didn't agree with you was still stuck there.

You expressly stated the evils that determinism has been associated with and, while I don't disagree with you, that doesn't mean that all deterministic modes of thinking are evil or ulterior in motive. That's a very limited stance to take.

I didn't say you shouldn't be passionate or fiery with your opinions and arguments, but you could do it in a more civil way. I tend to treat others as intellectual equals instead of talking to them like they are children.

I'm liking the discourse in this thread and I'd hate to have it ruined by unnecessary rudeness.


----------



## Amandy (Apr 29, 2010)

okay... so my mea culpa even got slapped... Kinda makes me sad. Like actually sad I swear I'm not being sarcastic or condescending here, or whatever else seems to sit between the lines of unintended meaning. So to be clear, if I IMPLIED something insulting to you, I'm sorry. I can't be any clearer than that.

Not sure what else I can say, I guess I'll go back to repping pics of hot guys and reading steamy stories because I'd much rather feel horny than feel sad. Its much safer.

:::backs slowly away:::


----------



## adolan55 (Apr 29, 2010)

Amandy said:


> okay... so my mea culpa even got slapped... Kinda makes me sad. Like actually sad I swear I'm not being sarcastic or condescending here, or whatever else seems to sit between the lines of unintended meaning. So to be clear, if I IMPLIED something insulting to you, I'm sorry. I can't be any clearer than that.
> 
> Not sure what else I can say, I guess I'll go back to repping pics of hot guys and reading steamy stories because I'd much rather feel horny than feel sad. Its much safer.
> 
> :::backs slowly away:::



Please stay and be a "philosophizer" with us  Although I still think you should also rep pics of hot guys as well since that is important too.



Ninja Glutton said:


> I agree with that Nietzsche quote because, at any given time, common and generally-accepted ideas are based on a power structure rather than truth.
> 
> That brings up the whole "what is truth?" argument, though. To me, there is no absolute truth, but, rather, a giant tower card catalogue of individual stories, individual truths. It's just like when you read a story and it affects you in some profound way, but it's still just a story. As long as you accept it as truth, it is truth.



I see truth as infinity in a Calculus equation where the limit is being found for a variable or function. The more and more we approach truth the closer and closer we get to it but never quite reaching what can be absolute truth. So we get close enough that certain things we take as being in general "the truth", but all the way accepting that someone could tomorrow disprove that truth however unlikely (like say tomorrow someone disproves gravity and the existence of cake). Those are some truths that I'm pretty sure about but I think to immediately dismiss the possibility that truths like that could be wrong would be a horrible mistake for a society that is continually on a journey towards truth and knowledge.

Nietzsche had many things to say about truth and they all were focused towards that same line of thought which questions what truth really is and what it means to have "truth".

"Why does man not see things? He is himself standing in the way: he conceals things."

I took what he was saying here that we must look at our own ideas with appropriate criticism and accept the fact that we can be wrong (and be ok with that). I have generally stated to people many times (and they didn't believe me when I said it though) that the greatest thing I have ever learned is the possibility that I am wrong.


----------



## Ninja Glutton (Apr 29, 2010)

Amandy said:


> okay... so my mea culpa even got slapped... Kinda makes me sad. Like actually sad I swear I'm not being sarcastic or condescending here, or whatever else seems to sit between the lines of unintended meaning. So to be clear, if I IMPLIED something insulting to you, I'm sorry. I can't be any clearer than that.
> 
> Not sure what else I can say, I guess I'll go back to repping pics of hot guys and reading steamy stories because I'd much rather feel horny than feel sad. Its much safer.
> 
> :::backs slowly away:::



I was never trying to attack you, and I apologize if I misinterpreted. I'm just trying to keep this friendly.

No hard feelings and your contributions are appreciated.

Please don't fade back into lurkerdom


----------



## Saoirse (Apr 29, 2010)

I really hope Im not the only person to read this thread and instantly feel stupid.


And crave drugs.


----------



## Ninja Glutton (Apr 29, 2010)

adolan55 said:


> the greatest thing I have ever learned is the possibility that I am wrong.



Haha I always assume I'm wrong because that's kind of part of the whole collective human experience.


----------



## Paquito (Apr 29, 2010)

Saoirse said:


> I really hope Im not the only person to read this thread and instantly feel stupid.
> 
> 
> And crave drugs.



Care to do the fetal position with me? I have candy...


----------



## Saoirse (Apr 29, 2010)

free2beme04 said:


> Care to do the fetal position with me? I have candy...



Oh Candy Man, you read my mind. Hold on, let me get my lighter.


----------



## adolan55 (Apr 29, 2010)

free2beme04 said:


> Care to do the fetal position with me? I have candy...



OMG lol


----------



## Bearsy (Apr 30, 2010)

grubnboy said:


> Rod Serling was great.



Hahah that's what I have as my Religious info on my Facebook. I love that quote.


----------



## LovesBigMen (Apr 30, 2010)

"After coming into contact with a religious man I always feel I must wash my hands."
Well I found this on a site that had a buch of his quotes.
Heh, I probably have heard some of his quotes before and loved them with out knowing.
And I don't know why, but I found this one funny hehe.
Very well then there is one that I like even though there are ALOT more just not enough space here I would be overwhelming this box I am typing in.


----------



## Saoirse (Apr 30, 2010)

I love this one:

If you take the game of life seriously, if you take your nervous system seriously, if you take your sense organs seriously, if you take the energy process seriously, you must turn on, tune in, and drop out




...oh wait, that was someone else.


----------



## LovesBigMen (Apr 30, 2010)

Saoirse said:


> I love this one:
> 
> If you take the game of life seriously, if you take your nervous system seriously, if you take your sense organs seriously, if you take the energy process seriously, you must turn on, tune in, and drop out
> 
> ...




Haha still that one is cool.


----------



## Zowie (Apr 30, 2010)

Saoirse said:


> I love this one:
> 
> If you take the game of life seriously, if you take your nervous system seriously, if you take your sense organs seriously, if you take the energy process seriously, you must turn on, tune in, and drop out



Switch on, switch off, and explode.


----------



## Buffetbelly (May 10, 2010)

Neitzche was an early modernist and helped shake the cobwebs off of philosophy. But his ethics were terrible. His notion of the Superman is downright disturbing, and may have influenced Hitler.

For ethics, I much prefer the Utilitarianism espoused by John Stuart Mill. The greatest good for the greatest number, I always say.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilitarianism


----------

