| Blogs > zulu_nation8 |
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On June 19 2008 02:54 zulu_nation8 wrote: I'm afraid i have no idea what we are discussing here zulu..this discussion has potential perhaps if we talked about social trends and their implications on 18th century we could have a nice chat? | ||
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
| ||
|
XCetron
5226 Posts
| ||
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
| ||
|
G5
United States2921 Posts
| ||
|
nA.Inky
United States794 Posts
I'm slowly beginning to read some stuff, starting with Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil, which is fantastic so far, and speaks to a lot of the thoughts I've had for some time, particularly in being critical of the subject and critical of our ability to know the world. So, I think that if you are interested in a more meaningful discussion, you ought to erase the barriers to entry (the need to have read particular philosophers) and put the problems you want to discuss in language that is more accessible to this audience. I'd definitely be interested in this discussion if I knew in particular what you are comparing or interested in discussing. | ||
|
RavenWrath
Germany174 Posts
On June 19 2008 02:53 {88}iNcontroL wrote: what? He just denounced philosophy and generalized it into a single sentence. That guy has fucking amazing potential. He even got "word[ed]" for it. Which makes the statement even greater.. someone is dumb enough to agree. people like you were/are the greatest philosophers of all times. No idea of anything but addicted to attention. So what to do?! Being bumptious enough to gather a small group of other people too dump to make something up themselve but lazy enough to prefer follwing your words to doing something of worth. Oh I forgot. To be a potent philosopher you have to be naiv enough to think that your bullshit changes anything/solves any problems/is of any worth at all. Imagine the hardcore philosphers even thought they reached anything in life right before the reaper gets them. Well I guess the right term is stubborn, not hardcore. | ||
|
crabapple
United States397 Posts
On June 19 2008 03:18 nA.Inky wrote: I'd love to talk philosophy, but I am one of those folks who hasn't read a lot of philosophy. I also know, however, that one can have very deep philosophical conversations without having read particular authors. I'm slowly beginning to read some stuff, starting with Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil, which is fantastic so far, and speaks to a lot of the thoughts I've had for some time, particularly in being critical of the subject and critical of our ability to know the world. So, I think that if you are interested in a more meaningful discussion, you ought to erase the barriers to entry (the need to have read particular philosophers) and put the problems you want to discuss in language that is more accessible to this audience. I'd definitely be interested in this discussion if I knew in particular what you are comparing or interested in discussing. THIS is a comment that deserves a "word". word and yes, please explain existentialism at the very least, in a couple of sentences. it's not like catholicism is it? where only special people are allowed to explain it? | ||
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
Now I need to pack up the tent before dusk. They only come out at night. Mostly. | ||
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
On June 19 2008 03:18 nA.Inky wrote: I'd love to talk philosophy, but I am one of those folks who hasn't read a lot of philosophy. I also know, however, that one can have very deep philosophical conversations without having read particular authors. I'm slowly beginning to read some stuff, starting with Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil, which is fantastic so far, and speaks to a lot of the thoughts I've had for some time, particularly in being critical of the subject and critical of our ability to know the world. So, I think that if you are interested in a more meaningful discussion, you ought to erase the barriers to entry (the need to have read particular philosophers) and put the problems you want to discuss in language that is more accessible to this audience. I'd definitely be interested in this discussion if I knew in particular what you are comparing or interested in discussing. Well continental philosophy is not accessible to people who don't have basic knowledge of the discipline because it's a very rich tradition like most other humanities. I didn't mean to make an exclusive discussion but the topic does demand people to have a reasonable philosophical background. | ||
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
| ||
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
On June 19 2008 03:22 crabapple wrote: THIS is a comment that deserves a "word". word and yes, please explain existentialism at the very least, in a couple of sentences. it's not like catholicism is it? where only special people are allowed to explain it? The thing is I can't explain it in a few words. I can explain it in Heideggerian terms but then I'd need to explain who Heidegger is and what his definitions mean and to do that I have to explain his philosophy. | ||
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
On June 19 2008 03:19 RavenWrath wrote: people like you were/are the greatest philosophers of all times. No idea of anything but addicted to attention. So what to do?! Being bumptious enough to gather a small group of other people too dump to make something up themselve but lazy enough to prefer follwing your words to doing something of worth. Oh I forgot. To be a potent philosopher you have to be naiv enough to think that your bullshit changes anything/solves any problems/is of any worth at all. Imagine the hardcore philosphers even thought they reached anything in life right before the reaper gets them. Well I guess the right term is stubborn, not hardcore. This should be the wiki definition for philosophy imo | ||
|
nA.Inky
United States794 Posts
| ||
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
On June 19 2008 03:42 nA.Inky wrote: If the goal is to get people to express their complete lack of knowledge and confusion, possibly so you can feel knowledgeable and well read, then congrats, you seem to have succeeded! If the goal is to get people's thoughts on some issue, you might try changing your approach. On June 19 2008 03:42 nA.Inky wrote:I intend for this to be a purely constructive post and mean no offense. Like I said, I'd love to talk philosophy. I feel as knowledgeable talking to you as I do when a person who hasn't played starcraft tries to argue strategy with me. It's not some elitest attitude but rather an expectation that people who come into my blog would at least have some idea of what I'm talking about before barging in here expecting me to explain to you a whole fucking school of thought. If you want a quicky just so you can come in and tell me about your brilliant interpretations go read the wiki article on existentialism. | ||
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
| ||
|
Newbistic
China2912 Posts
Talking about unsubstantiated philosophical theories is just too fucking easy. Yes, i guess the world could be interpreted as "something" and "nothing" as heidegger believes it, but there is no practical purpose whatsoever in doing so. He basically holds the view that science isn't as important as the exploration of "dasein" which is somehow underneath all reality, despite the fact that science has lead to technology, which has in turn infinitely benefited mankind while his philosophy doesn't have any practical potential at all. Having said that, my ultimate point is probably that heidegger's idea of transcendence, which is to embrace the existence of "nothing" and "dasein" is just too limited because there is no practical purpose. There are too fucking many philosophers who believe their views are worth half a piece of turd (and unfortunately, a lot of other people also see it that way -_-), but ultimately they're simply highly personal and highly personalized interpretations of the world developed for their own personal usage. | ||
|
MiniRoman
Canada3953 Posts
| ||
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
On June 19 2008 05:08 Newbistic wrote: I haven't read any of Kierkergaard's stuff, but at least I think heidegger's ideas are full of shit. Talking about unsubstantiated philosophical theories is just too fucking easy. Yes, i guess the world could be interpreted as "something" and "nothing" as heidegger believes it, but there is no practical purpose whatsoever in doing so. He basically holds the view that science isn't as important as the exploration of "dasein" which is somehow underneath all reality, despite the fact that science has lead to technology, which has in turn infinitely benefited mankind while his philosophy doesn't have any practical potential at all. Having said that, my ultimate point is probably that heidegger's idea of transcendence, which is to embrace the existence of "nothing" and "dasein" is just too limited because there is no practical purpose. There are too fucking many philosophers who believe their views are worth half a piece of turd (and unfortunately, a lot of other people also see it that way -_-), but ultimately they're simply highly personal and highly personalized interpretations of the world developed for their own personal usage. nono he thinks science will not truly be positive and good science without having better understanding of dasein. The purpose of being and time is not to construct a personal philosophy at all but rather to re-examine every kind of human thought ever. For example without realizing that the organization of life in biology is high dependent on the prevalent thought and discourse of society and culture, biology will just go in circles and did for centuries without realizing what it's actually doing which is just reflecting the changes in the self interpreting human way of being aka existential. It serves a very practical purpose because it pretty much made everyone realize that every idea ever has a highly complicated and implicit background and it's important to examine every idea in those contexts aka hermaneutics in order to make actual progress. | ||
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
On June 19 2008 05:09 MiniRoman wrote: I personally think existentialism is the ideal belief set for today's world. Live by what is right for you, own up to things you've chosen to do. Everything in your life is a product of yourself choosing to accept what is.Far too often people bitch about not having a choice when they are truly the only one who has the power to live their lives. so did it actually have an effect on how you live, like did you actually try to own up and accept certain stuff you were confused about or ignored before. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
RSL Revival
herO vs MaxPax
Rogue vs TriGGeR
BSL
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
Afreeca Starleague
Sharp vs Scan
Rain vs Mong
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Afreeca Starleague
Soulkey vs Ample
JyJ vs sSak
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
