|
On July 09 2012 05:30 superbarnie wrote:
Wow why are atheist always so intolerant and judgemental?
Because religion is anti-rational.
Religious people are like little kids who want that tasty looking cake. Now dad tries to explain to them, that this cake has too much sugar, is too expensive and not good for them. No kid will understand that. They want the cake, nothing else matters. Now the dad is strict and keeps saying no. The kids will think 'Wow why is dad always so intolerant and judgemental?', because they are not rational and don't understand.
|
Love how people are debating if the joke on the shirt is funny/not funny. Its just a joke guys, you either laugh or you don't
On July 09 2012 06:58 Xiron wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2012 05:30 superbarnie wrote:
Wow why are atheist always so intolerant and judgemental? Because religion is anti-rational. Religious people are like little kids who want that tasty looking cake. Now dad tries to explain to them, that this cake has too much sugar, is too expensive and not good for them. No kid will understand that. They want the cake, nothing else matters. Now the dad is strict and keeps saying no. The kids will think 'Wow why is dad always so intolerant and judgemental?', because they are not rational and don't understand.
are you saying the cake is a lie?
|
On July 09 2012 06:58 Xiron wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2012 05:30 superbarnie wrote:
Wow why are atheist always so intolerant and judgemental? Because religion is anti-rational. Religious people are like little kids who want that tasty looking cake. Now dad tries to explain to them, that this cake has too much sugar, is too expensive and not good for them. No kid will understand that. They want the cake, nothing else matters. Now the dad is strict and keeps saying no. The kids will think 'Wow why is dad always so intolerant and judgemental?', because they are not rational and don't understand.
Religion is not anti-rational. Atheists are just as irrational as religious people. We are irrational.
We all want the cake and we're all too stupid and short-minded to control our gluttony or to realize that we could eat something else. Being an idiot is part of being human, to different degrees.
I hope you're not bashing religious people believing you're any better, because I see no difference in believing in fairies or in irreprochable scientific research.
|
I'm a Christian involved in ministry and I find the t-shirt your referring to insulting and stupid. I hate the dumbed down version of Christianity that has largely been created from the states and crosses over into Europe that promotes this crap :|
|
|
|
On July 09 2012 10:19 krndandaman wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2012 08:13 Kukaracha wrote:On July 09 2012 06:58 Xiron wrote:On July 09 2012 05:30 superbarnie wrote:
Wow why are atheist always so intolerant and judgemental? Because religion is anti-rational. Religious people are like little kids who want that tasty looking cake. Now dad tries to explain to them, that this cake has too much sugar, is too expensive and not good for them. No kid will understand that. They want the cake, nothing else matters. Now the dad is strict and keeps saying no. The kids will think 'Wow why is dad always so intolerant and judgemental?', because they are not rational and don't understand. Religion is not anti-rational. Atheists are just as irrational as religious people. We are irrational. We all want the cake and we're all too stupid and short-minded to control our gluttony or to realize that we could eat something else. Being an idiot is part of being human, to different degrees. I hope you're not bashing religious people believing you're any better, because I see no difference in believing in fairies or in irreprochable scientific research. exactly. i love how pretentious some atheists are that they believe that they are a "dad" who is obligated to teach ignorant little religious "kids" about how they know what's better for them.
That isn't to say that atheism isn't entirely without merit: to me, it seems the most reasonable viewpoint out there. Just like we shouldn't make fun of all Christians just because some of them are stupid, you shouldn't berate all atheists because some of them are stupid. I notice that you specified "some," but still. I disagree with Kukaracha's view that atheists are just as irrational as religious people as a blanket statement, but blanket statements merely categorize a group as a whole and not every individual that comprosies it.
Not all atheists are members of /r/atheism, and nor do they all argue on facebook with Christians. Likewise, not all Christians are fundamentalists, and not all probably find that joke tasteful. Just my take on these things.
|
On July 09 2012 07:25 Code wrote:Love how people are debating if the joke on the shirt is funny/not funny. Its just a joke guys, you either laugh or you don't Show nested quote +On July 09 2012 06:58 Xiron wrote:On July 09 2012 05:30 superbarnie wrote:
Wow why are atheist always so intolerant and judgemental? Because religion is anti-rational. Religious people are like little kids who want that tasty looking cake. Now dad tries to explain to them, that this cake has too much sugar, is too expensive and not good for them. No kid will understand that. They want the cake, nothing else matters. Now the dad is strict and keeps saying no. The kids will think 'Wow why is dad always so intolerant and judgemental?', because they are not rational and don't understand. are you saying the cake is a lie?
I am myself an athiest but this metaphor fails on many levels. First, the kid will just think 'dad doesn't love me' or something stomp his or her feet. Intolerant and judgemental don't begin to describe how the kid feels about dad. Second, 'expensive' and 'too sugary' are sort of based in objective observable fact when one takes for granted that the cake is real and these characteristics of it are real. God as a concept is unexplanable, unobservable. You can't say anything like god is too sugary.
I did think the metaphor was amusing, but it doesn't work at all. If you want to illustrate religious people has irrational, you are better off with the cliche easter bunny and santa claus comparisons, which are things that delight children but must eventually be grown out of because they are based purely on the child's faith in their existence. The only difference being that one day parents take it upon themselves to tell the child if he or she doesn't figure it out on their own that it's been a lie. There is no such confirming social evidence for religious people, except, in kinda sorta way, by way of meeting atheists they greatly respect and adopting their position.
I don't think it's necessary to get too passionate about these sorts of things. Religion might cause many problems, but if it were not religion controlling people, it would be religion by another name (patriotism? propaganda? celeberity appeal?). You can't escape the way massive societies work, or at least, no society on earth has yet, religious or not.
When I think about my own growth in terms of my beliefs about God, there was a long time when I more or less assumed God's existence. There were churches and popes and everything that made that world of adults and God seem real. As I grew older I learned that not all people believe in God, and because my family (tho my parents probably believe in God) do not possess much religious imagery or ever really even talk about God, it was exactly like that cliche of a child eventually not believe in Santa Clause anymore just becase the logic of this reality does not support the belief. There was that general fear like 'will god be mad if I don't believe in him?' when I was first considering where I stood, but my life experiences have had so little to do with God or religion in general, my experiences with religious people awkward enough, that there was just no reason to believe in such a thing. The word 'God' as a supernatural force governing the universe only comes to mind when I see a thread like this, at all other times it is completely non-existent in my thoughts. It's not even a question, it just doesn't come up. Who needs God? "Luck" suffices enough for when I really want something and hope for it ;p
It's curious to think if I would have been religious if it had been more present in my life, with parents such, but I feel that it wouldn't. I find it amazing that anyone competent with using the internet can believe in God, because the internet is such a disillusioning device. At least, when your use of the internet doesn't exist solely in finding people who think just like you, but you rather participate in diverse and interesting communities.
|
On July 09 2012 08:13 Kukaracha wrote:
I hope you're not bashing religious people believing you're any better, because I see no difference in believing in fairies or in irreprochable scientific research.
Bit of an oxymoron, isn't it? Irreproachable science?
|
On July 09 2012 10:40 Chef wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2012 07:25 Code wrote:Love how people are debating if the joke on the shirt is funny/not funny. Its just a joke guys, you either laugh or you don't On July 09 2012 06:58 Xiron wrote:On July 09 2012 05:30 superbarnie wrote:
Wow why are atheist always so intolerant and judgemental? Because religion is anti-rational. Religious people are like little kids who want that tasty looking cake. Now dad tries to explain to them, that this cake has too much sugar, is too expensive and not good for them. No kid will understand that. They want the cake, nothing else matters. Now the dad is strict and keeps saying no. The kids will think 'Wow why is dad always so intolerant and judgemental?', because they are not rational and don't understand. are you saying the cake is a lie? I am myself an athiest but this metaphor fails on many levels. First, the kid will just think 'dad doesn't love me' or something stomp his or her feet. Intolerant and judgemental don't begin to describe how the kid feels about dad. Second, 'expensive' and 'too sugary' are sort of based in objective observable fact when one takes for granted that the cake is real and these characteristics of it are real. God as a concept is unexplanable, unobservable. You can't say anything like god is too sugary. I did think the metaphor was amusing, but it doesn't work at all. If you want to illustrate religious people has irrational, you are better off with the cliche easter bunny and santa claus comparisons, which are things that delight children but must eventually be grown out of because they are based purely on the child's faith in their existence. The only difference being that one day parents take it upon themselves to tell the child if he or she doesn't figure it out on their own that it's been a lie. There is no such confirming social evidence for religious people, except, in kinda sorta way, by way of meeting atheists they greatly respect and adopting their position. I don't think it's necessary to get too passionate about these sorts of things. Religion might cause many problems, but if it were not religion controlling people, it would be religion by another name (patriotism? propaganda? celeberity appeal?). You can't escape the way massive societies work, or at least, no society on earth has yet, religious or not. When I think about my own growth in terms of my beliefs about God, there was a long time when I more or less assumed God's existence. There were churches and popes and everything that made that world of adults and God seem real. As I grew older I learned that not all people believe in God, and because my family (tho my parents probably believe in God) do not possess much religious imagery or ever really even talk about God, it was exactly like that cliche of a child eventually not believe in Santa Clause anymore just becase the logic of this reality does not support the belief. There was that general fear like 'will god be mad if I don't believe in him?' when I was first considering where I stood, but my life experiences have had so little to do with God or religion in general, my experiences with religious people awkward enough, that there was just no reason to believe in such a thing. The word 'God' as a supernatural force governing the universe only comes to mind when I see a thread like this, at all other times it is completely non-existent in my thoughts. It's not even a question, it just doesn't come up. Who needs God? "Luck" suffices enough for when I really want something and hope for it ;p It's curious to think if I would have been religious if it had been more present in my life, with parents such, but I feel that it wouldn't. I find it amazing that anyone competent with using the internet can believe in God, because the internet is such a disillusioning device. At least, when your use of the internet doesn't exist solely in finding people who think just like you, but you rather participate in diverse and interesting communities.
This last bit is wonderful I must say. Personally, I have my extremely religious step-mother to thank for providing me with an incentive to really attempt to understand Christian theology and the nature of religion in general. Her family are devout Catholics, and they live such reverential and positive lives that I can't help but find something incredibly compelling in the way they view the world. I struggled alongside them as the pedophilia scandal became public, and to see their faith weather the storm and reinforce their zeal for life is truly inspiring. These are the sorts of people who would give you the clothes off their back, no matter race, gender or sexual orientation, and then proceed to shower you with food, stories, and welcome, only to bid you farewell as they head off to the soup kitchen to serve the poor. While I certainly disagree with many components of typical Christian thought and living, such as being pro-life, the manner in which it can effect a positive influence on the lives of others is difficult to ignore and warrants honest investigation. And my simple response to all those who wish to qualitatively insist that religion has had a net negative impact on society is one of insistence. An insistence that you look a little bit harder at how you conceive of mankind and the scope of human history, for there are many apparent systems and structures that are more integral and multivarious in operation than one might think.
|
On July 09 2012 11:05 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2012 10:40 Chef wrote:On July 09 2012 07:25 Code wrote:Love how people are debating if the joke on the shirt is funny/not funny. Its just a joke guys, you either laugh or you don't On July 09 2012 06:58 Xiron wrote:On July 09 2012 05:30 superbarnie wrote:
Wow why are atheist always so intolerant and judgemental? Because religion is anti-rational. Religious people are like little kids who want that tasty looking cake. Now dad tries to explain to them, that this cake has too much sugar, is too expensive and not good for them. No kid will understand that. They want the cake, nothing else matters. Now the dad is strict and keeps saying no. The kids will think 'Wow why is dad always so intolerant and judgemental?', because they are not rational and don't understand. are you saying the cake is a lie? I am myself an athiest but this metaphor fails on many levels. First, the kid will just think 'dad doesn't love me' or something stomp his or her feet. Intolerant and judgemental don't begin to describe how the kid feels about dad. Second, 'expensive' and 'too sugary' are sort of based in objective observable fact when one takes for granted that the cake is real and these characteristics of it are real. God as a concept is unexplanable, unobservable. You can't say anything like god is too sugary. I did think the metaphor was amusing, but it doesn't work at all. If you want to illustrate religious people has irrational, you are better off with the cliche easter bunny and santa claus comparisons, which are things that delight children but must eventually be grown out of because they are based purely on the child's faith in their existence. The only difference being that one day parents take it upon themselves to tell the child if he or she doesn't figure it out on their own that it's been a lie. There is no such confirming social evidence for religious people, except, in kinda sorta way, by way of meeting atheists they greatly respect and adopting their position. I don't think it's necessary to get too passionate about these sorts of things. Religion might cause many problems, but if it were not religion controlling people, it would be religion by another name (patriotism? propaganda? celeberity appeal?). You can't escape the way massive societies work, or at least, no society on earth has yet, religious or not. When I think about my own growth in terms of my beliefs about God, there was a long time when I more or less assumed God's existence. There were churches and popes and everything that made that world of adults and God seem real. As I grew older I learned that not all people believe in God, and because my family (tho my parents probably believe in God) do not possess much religious imagery or ever really even talk about God, it was exactly like that cliche of a child eventually not believe in Santa Clause anymore just becase the logic of this reality does not support the belief. There was that general fear like 'will god be mad if I don't believe in him?' when I was first considering where I stood, but my life experiences have had so little to do with God or religion in general, my experiences with religious people awkward enough, that there was just no reason to believe in such a thing. The word 'God' as a supernatural force governing the universe only comes to mind when I see a thread like this, at all other times it is completely non-existent in my thoughts. It's not even a question, it just doesn't come up. Who needs God? "Luck" suffices enough for when I really want something and hope for it ;p It's curious to think if I would have been religious if it had been more present in my life, with parents such, but I feel that it wouldn't. I find it amazing that anyone competent with using the internet can believe in God, because the internet is such a disillusioning device. At least, when your use of the internet doesn't exist solely in finding people who think just like you, but you rather participate in diverse and interesting communities. This last bit is wonderful I must say. Personally, I have my extremely religious step-mother to thank for providing me with an incentive to really attempt to understand Christian theology and the nature of religion in general. Her family are devout Catholics, and they live such reverential and positive lives that I can't help but find something incredibly compelling in the way they view the world. I struggled alongside them as the pedophilia scandal became public, and to see their faith weather the storm and reinforce their zeal for life is truly inspiring. These are the sorts of people who would give you the clothes off their back, no matter race, gender or sexual orientation, and then proceed to shower you with food, stories, and welcome, only to bid you farewell as they head off to the soup kitchen to serve the poor. While I certainly disagree with many components of typical Christian thought and living, such as being pro-life, the manner in which it can effect a positive influence on the lives of others is difficult to ignore and warrants honest investigation. And my simple response to all those who wish to qualitatively insist that religion has had a net negative impact on society is one of insistence. An insistence that you look a little bit harder at how you conceive of mankind and the scope of human history, for there are many apparent systems and structures that are more integral and multivarious in operation than one might think.
While I do find that religion can have a positive effect on people, I don't think that hospitality and service are inherent to religious people. If you only do something because you'll go to hell if you don't then you're not likely to be as sincere, happy, or do as good of a job as someone who does something because they enjoy it or because they just think it's the right thing. I know plenty of people who would identify as Christians do exactly what you described; however, I know a good amount of people that would identify as Christians who would not. When you help someone out, unless it's in an explicitly religious context, you do it because it's the right thing, not because it'll score you points in the afterlife. Now, if some people have a sense in morality that is entrenched in a certain religion that wouldn't have such a sense otherwise, maybe religion is good for them.
I guess my point here is that this isn't necessarily driven by religion but more by morals. There are religious people that will do what you describe and there are atheists as well, there are religious people that won't and there are atheists that won't. This seems to be rooted more in morality to me than religion.
|
On July 09 2012 11:29 Chocolate wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2012 11:05 farvacola wrote:On July 09 2012 10:40 Chef wrote:On July 09 2012 07:25 Code wrote:Love how people are debating if the joke on the shirt is funny/not funny. Its just a joke guys, you either laugh or you don't On July 09 2012 06:58 Xiron wrote:On July 09 2012 05:30 superbarnie wrote:
Wow why are atheist always so intolerant and judgemental? Because religion is anti-rational. Religious people are like little kids who want that tasty looking cake. Now dad tries to explain to them, that this cake has too much sugar, is too expensive and not good for them. No kid will understand that. They want the cake, nothing else matters. Now the dad is strict and keeps saying no. The kids will think 'Wow why is dad always so intolerant and judgemental?', because they are not rational and don't understand. are you saying the cake is a lie? I am myself an athiest but this metaphor fails on many levels. First, the kid will just think 'dad doesn't love me' or something stomp his or her feet. Intolerant and judgemental don't begin to describe how the kid feels about dad. Second, 'expensive' and 'too sugary' are sort of based in objective observable fact when one takes for granted that the cake is real and these characteristics of it are real. God as a concept is unexplanable, unobservable. You can't say anything like god is too sugary. I did think the metaphor was amusing, but it doesn't work at all. If you want to illustrate religious people has irrational, you are better off with the cliche easter bunny and santa claus comparisons, which are things that delight children but must eventually be grown out of because they are based purely on the child's faith in their existence. The only difference being that one day parents take it upon themselves to tell the child if he or she doesn't figure it out on their own that it's been a lie. There is no such confirming social evidence for religious people, except, in kinda sorta way, by way of meeting atheists they greatly respect and adopting their position. I don't think it's necessary to get too passionate about these sorts of things. Religion might cause many problems, but if it were not religion controlling people, it would be religion by another name (patriotism? propaganda? celeberity appeal?). You can't escape the way massive societies work, or at least, no society on earth has yet, religious or not. When I think about my own growth in terms of my beliefs about God, there was a long time when I more or less assumed God's existence. There were churches and popes and everything that made that world of adults and God seem real. As I grew older I learned that not all people believe in God, and because my family (tho my parents probably believe in God) do not possess much religious imagery or ever really even talk about God, it was exactly like that cliche of a child eventually not believe in Santa Clause anymore just becase the logic of this reality does not support the belief. There was that general fear like 'will god be mad if I don't believe in him?' when I was first considering where I stood, but my life experiences have had so little to do with God or religion in general, my experiences with religious people awkward enough, that there was just no reason to believe in such a thing. The word 'God' as a supernatural force governing the universe only comes to mind when I see a thread like this, at all other times it is completely non-existent in my thoughts. It's not even a question, it just doesn't come up. Who needs God? "Luck" suffices enough for when I really want something and hope for it ;p It's curious to think if I would have been religious if it had been more present in my life, with parents such, but I feel that it wouldn't. I find it amazing that anyone competent with using the internet can believe in God, because the internet is such a disillusioning device. At least, when your use of the internet doesn't exist solely in finding people who think just like you, but you rather participate in diverse and interesting communities. This last bit is wonderful I must say. Personally, I have my extremely religious step-mother to thank for providing me with an incentive to really attempt to understand Christian theology and the nature of religion in general. Her family are devout Catholics, and they live such reverential and positive lives that I can't help but find something incredibly compelling in the way they view the world. I struggled alongside them as the pedophilia scandal became public, and to see their faith weather the storm and reinforce their zeal for life is truly inspiring. These are the sorts of people who would give you the clothes off their back, no matter race, gender or sexual orientation, and then proceed to shower you with food, stories, and welcome, only to bid you farewell as they head off to the soup kitchen to serve the poor. While I certainly disagree with many components of typical Christian thought and living, such as being pro-life, the manner in which it can effect a positive influence on the lives of others is difficult to ignore and warrants honest investigation. And my simple response to all those who wish to qualitatively insist that religion has had a net negative impact on society is one of insistence. An insistence that you look a little bit harder at how you conceive of mankind and the scope of human history, for there are many apparent systems and structures that are more integral and multivarious in operation than one might think. While I do find that religion can have a positive effect on people, I don't think that hospitality and service are inherent to religious people. If you only do something because you'll go to hell if you don't then you're not likely to be as sincere, happy, or do as good of a job as someone who does something because they enjoy it or because they just think it's the right thing. I know plenty of people who would identify as Christians do exactly what you described; however, I know a good amount of people that would identify as Christians who would not. When you help someone out, unless it's in an explicitly religious context, you do it because it's the right thing, not because it'll score you points in the afterlife. Now, if some people have a sense in morality that is entrenched in a certain religion that wouldn't have such a sense otherwise, maybe religion is good for them. I guess my point here is that this isn't necessarily driven by religion but more by morals. There are religious people that will do what you describe and there are atheists as well, there are religious people that won't and there are atheists that won't. This seems to be rooted more in morality to me than religion.
I totally agree with you, so if it makes more sense, consider that I am equally fascinated with the altruism inspired by the exact opposite, that being atheism or agnosticism. I grew up in Toledo, OH, where there exists a burgeoning Anarchist collective that was more or less founded by a friend of mine from high school. Their interest in communal food provision and collective inner dialogue is awesome and just as worthy of interest, to put it simply. Many insist that atheists are by and large more enlightened then their faith-based counterparts, and I contend that such an assertion can only come from an incomplete understanding. There are worthwhile pursuits in any spiritual or intellectual circle, granted one is open to the possibility.
|
LOL that is funny as hell. I mean, it's completely ignorant, but hilarious.
|
On July 08 2012 23:27 Xiron wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2012 23:16 Kukaracha wrote:
My question being : what justifies this negative bias towards the "holy book"?
I can't speak for others, but my negative bias towards the bible comes from the possibilty to arbitrarily choose, what parts of the bible are to be taken literal, and what parts are metaphorical.
There's nothing arbitrary about it though. This is a very common criticism of Christianity, Christians have spent 2000 years thinking about the Bible and discussing it. Theologians don't just flip a coin.
The shirt and the joke are funny; it provokes an amusing reaction whether you're amused because "Heh heh Gawd sure showed dat Nietzsche!" or because someone else is going "I'm getting the vapors from these people not respecting Nietzsche!" Be like most e-atheists and take pleasure in the religious not respecting atheism, it's only what atheists - on the internet especially - do to the religious. Isn't what's good for the goose good for the gander?
|
On July 08 2012 20:10 Kuja wrote:
a great mind
lol.
Nietzsche was a tool. he went insane from seeing someone beat a dead horse. can you get more ironic than that? i don't think so.
also, have you ever read the story of what he thought civilization would be like when we realized that God was dead?
the super-man was a fucking mindless brute. that's right. his ultimate man was a mindless violent brute. that right there should tell you everything you need to know about that "great mind"
also:
Its actually extremely ironic and makes the same point that Nietzsche was actually trying to convey; That god, as a matter of cultural fact, is dead.
except among impressionable young minds and even more impressionable old minds, Nietzsche is dead in a cultural sense. his philosophy was not very original and it has not survived. the shirt is accurate to a greater degree than Nietzsche's statement was.
|
On July 09 2012 12:01 sc2superfan101 wrote:lol. Nietzsche was a tool. he went insane from seeing someone beat a dead horse. can you get more ironic than that? i don't think so. also, have you ever read the story of what he thought civilization would be like when we realized that God was dead? the super-man was a fucking mindless brute. that's right. his ultimate man was a mindless violent brute. that right there should tell you everything you need to know about that "great mind" also: Show nested quote +Its actually extremely ironic and makes the same point that Nietzsche was actually trying to convey; That god, as a matter of cultural fact, is dead. except among impressionable young minds and even more impressionable old minds, Nietzsche is dead in a cultural sense. his philosophy was not very original and it has not survived. the shirt is accurate to a greater degree than Nietzsche's statement was.
The only tool in this conversation is you , Nietzsche was a great mind and his philosophy has survived and is a very important. You haven't even leveled any criticism against the man you've just talked bollocks about his character , literally nothing you've said criticizes anything bar the man as a person.
If you're gonna try to criticize a great mind at least bring some fucking points to the table, instead of spewing your mindless half-witted bullshit.
|
On July 09 2012 07:25 Code wrote:Love how people are debating if the joke on the shirt is funny/not funny. Its just a joke guys, you either laugh or you don't Show nested quote +On July 09 2012 06:58 Xiron wrote:On July 09 2012 05:30 superbarnie wrote:
Wow why are atheist always so intolerant and judgemental? Because religion is anti-rational. Religious people are like little kids who want that tasty looking cake. Now dad tries to explain to them, that this cake has too much sugar, is too expensive and not good for them. No kid will understand that. They want the cake, nothing else matters. Now the dad is strict and keeps saying no. The kids will think 'Wow why is dad always so intolerant and judgemental?', because they are not rational and don't understand. are you saying the cake is a lie?
I don't care much for the preceding analogy but tis is genius LOL
|
On July 09 2012 12:12 Elsid wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2012 12:01 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 08 2012 20:10 Kuja wrote:
a great mind
lol. Nietzsche was a tool. he went insane from seeing someone beat a dead horse. can you get more ironic than that? i don't think so. also, have you ever read the story of what he thought civilization would be like when we realized that God was dead? the super-man was a fucking mindless brute. that's right. his ultimate man was a mindless violent brute. that right there should tell you everything you need to know about that "great mind" also: Its actually extremely ironic and makes the same point that Nietzsche was actually trying to convey; That god, as a matter of cultural fact, is dead. except among impressionable young minds and even more impressionable old minds, Nietzsche is dead in a cultural sense. his philosophy was not very original and it has not survived. the shirt is accurate to a greater degree than Nietzsche's statement was. The only tool in this conversation is you , Nietzsche was a great mind and his philosophy has survived and is a very important. You haven't even leveled any criticism against the man you've just talked bollocks about his character , literally nothing you've said criticizes anything bar the man as a person. If you're gonna try to criticize a great mind at least bring some fucking points to the table, instead of spewing your mindless half-witted bullshit.
his philosophy was not original in any sense of the word. not only did many German philosophers before him say basically the same things, but long before the German's ever wrote their philosophy, the idea of God as a cultural idea being dead existed. furthermore, his works are mindless drivel for the most part. Thus Spake Zarathustra especially was god-awful (pun intended). take this quote for example:
"But man does not live by bread alone, but also by the flesh of good lambs..."
now i am taking this out of context to some degree... but are you kidding me? and further, the rest of the quote, and conversation from which it comes from is little more than self-aggrandizing rambling.
can you tell me which society has ever embraced Nietzsche's philosophies? the Nazi's did to some degree. any others? where in modern popular society do we see Nietzsche? it was a fringe and it will always be a fringe. even the Nazi's couldn't find much practical use for his writings, and instead twisted them to mean something more than pure nihilism leading to even worse nihilism. where is this death of God? where is the catastrophe? what group has ever committed themselves to the creation of the Übermensch? in what way has Nietzsche survived even past his own century? it is not correct to claim that Nietzsche is dead in a cultural sense. He never lived. in a cultural sense he was aborted in the womb, never even born.
Nietzsche also hated democracy, considering it to be the height of the "slave-morality". the "collective degeneration of man". his hatred and disgust for the weak, and love for the strong, not only of the will, not even primarily of the will, but of the physical, were disgusting in their own right.
his critique of Christianity was historically incorrect, and furthermore betrayed a complete lack of understanding of both the political and religious realities of the time of the early Christians.
if Nietzsche was a lover of humanity (he was not) than why did he wish for an end to compassion, mercy, martyrdom, piety, selflessness and morality as we know it? while he showed some disdain for the "master-morality" of "what is good for me is good"; he showed a complete disdain and hatred for the "slave-morality" of "what is good is good, and what is evil is evil." he saw the humanizing morals of christianity, the self-denial and the upraising of the weak and poor as inherently flawed and horrible ideas. yes, Nietzsche claimed to love man, yet his love was not even close to the kind of love (that Judeo-Christian love) that we today think of.
"The most senile thing ever thought about man is contained in the celebrated saying 'the ego is always hateful'; the most childish is the even more celebrated 'love thy neighbor as thyself'."
are those the words of a lover of humanity?
i have no desire to argue about it much more. anyone who has read even a little Nietzsche should know that his theories were based more on ignorance than on knowledge. his predictions have never come true, his highest man was nothing desirable, his highest aspirations were base and full of self-hatred. he was an elitist in the truest sense of the word, a sexist (as so many philosophers (unmarried all of them) have been). he was a hater of the weak and poor, a lover of the dictator and of the selfish. his philosophy was largely stolen from earlier sources, and his original ideas were the most asinine and self-defeating. his life was bitter, and it is clear throughout his writings that this bitterness caused his philosophy, again miming the vast majority of philosophers before him. as of yet, his greatest effects upon society have been caused by men that misunderstood and misattributed his words and feelings.
|
A great many people over exaggerate and over extrapolate based upon a poor or incomplete understanding of Nietzsche, but misanthropy and intelligence need not be mutually exclusive.
|
On July 09 2012 12:01 sc2superfan101 wrote:lol. Nietzsche was a tool. he went insane from seeing someone beat a dead horse. can you get more ironic than that? i don't think so. also, have you ever read the story of what he thought civilization would be like when we realized that God was dead? the super-man was a fucking mindless brute. that's right. his ultimate man was a mindless violent brute. that right there should tell you everything you need to know about that "great mind" also: Show nested quote +Its actually extremely ironic and makes the same point that Nietzsche was actually trying to convey; That god, as a matter of cultural fact, is dead. except among impressionable young minds and even more impressionable old minds, Nietzsche is dead in a cultural sense. his philosophy was not very original and it has not survived. the shirt is accurate to a greater degree than Nietzsche's statement was.
If you think Nietzsche is irrelevant then you're a clueless idiot.
There isn't really much else to say. I don't particularly like Nietzsche and I certainly am a "moralist" as he said with disdain, but his influence is everywhere. His influence has permeated pretty much every corner of modern European philosophy and even a great deal of theology.
Saying that Nietzsche is dead in a cultural sense is easily the most nonsensical thing that has been said in this entire goddamned thread.
edit: goddamn are you an author of an awful amount of really stupid posts
|
In the end, all religion is BS. I used to be moderate and stuff, but really, if you believe in this crap, I can't take you serious.
The whole atheism/theism discussion is moot, there is no argument I know of for the existence of god other than "it's in the bible - and the bible is true because god wants it so", or "because I just know it". No atheist can say with 100% certainty that god doesn't exist, but then again, that holds true for anything and that doesn't automatically mean everything exists.
The fact that there exist hundreds of religions, all claiming to be the single true one, should ring a bell.
There is a reason people stick to scientific method: It works. Religion does not work. It may give you "comfort", but you can't deduce how to construct a computer to play starcraft on off it. In fact, you can't reliably deduce anything worthwhile from it.
The T-shirt just shows it: If you believe most of this shit, you probably don't understand much at all.
Up to this day I haven't met a single christian who could even remotely convince me that any of this stuff was true. I believe that it "helps" them and "gives them comfort", but that does not make it true.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
