#41
Post rating: +
more like NEETzsche
#42
Post rating: +++++

bumpthread posted:

I down voted this


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!" i bet you'd fucking regret downvoting me then, huh?

#43
"Jpg." - Hank Hill
Post rating: ~
DAE hope lungfish is dead irl
#44
[account deactivated]
#45
Post rating: +
ladies and gentlemen miss grace jones........ slave to the rhythm
#46
Post rating: ~
woah this is 6 years old
#47
Post rating: +

bumpthread posted:

woah this is 6 years old


yeh... some would call it a bump... thread

#48
Post rating: ~

bumpthread posted:

woah this is 6 years old


*puts on glasses* actually master-slave morality dates back to about 1887, making it approx 130 years old

#49
Post rating: ~
Master-slave morality is not correct, because the fundamental assumption that the masters "created" some original morality and that the slaves just "reacted" to it does not hold up to scrutiny. It is pure speculation that is generally without scientific basis. Similarly, we see throughout history that values which are allegedly associated solely with the "slaves" are also held by the masters, and vice versa.

The true, correct morality is of course Christianity, wherein we are called to be slaves to Christ and servants to all men, and that the first shall be last and the last shall be first. Here we see an inversion of "worldly", or sinful values, which aren't quite the same as master morality, as the Christian appreciates beauty. Nor are Christian values the same as slave morality, because Christians reject pessimism and cynicism. And we respect free will, such that we hope for people to become slaves to Christ voluntarily, due to a desire for God's love. But the Christian does reject the "master morality" values of consequentialism, pride, and excessive wealth.
#50
Post rating: +
but is master-slave morality correct?
#51
[account deactivated]
#52
Post rating: -

Agnus_Dei posted:

Master-slave morality is not correct, because the fundamental assumption that the masters "created" some original morality and that the slaves just "reacted" to it does not hold up to scrutiny. It is pure speculation that is generally without scientific basis. Similarly, we see throughout history that values which are allegedly associated solely with the "slaves" are also held by the masters, and vice versa.

The true, correct morality is of course Christianity, wherein we are called to be slaves to Christ and servants to all men, and that the first shall be last and the last shall be first. Here we see an inversion of "worldly", or sinful values, which aren't quite the same as master morality, as the Christian appreciates beauty. Nor are Christian values the same as slave morality, because Christians reject pessimism and cynicism. And we respect free will, such that we hope for people to become slaves to Christ voluntarily, due to a desire for God's love. But the Christian does reject the "master morality" values of consequentialism, pride, and excessive wealth.



nice

#53
Kurdt
Post rating: +
The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas, i.e. the class which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time its ruling intellectual force. The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, has control at the same time over the means of mental production, so that thereby, generally speaking, the ideas of those who lack the means of mental production are subject to it. The ruling ideas are nothing more than the ideal expression of the dominant material relationships, the dominant material relationships grasped as ideas; hence of the relationships which make the one class the ruling one, therefore, the ideas of its dominance. The individuals composing the ruling class possess among other things consciousness, and therefore think. Insofar, therefore, as they rule as a class and determine the extent and compass of an epoch, it is self-evident that they do this in its whole range, hence among other things rule also as thinkers, as producers of ideas, and regulate the production and distribution of the ideas of their age: thus their ideas are the ruling ideas of the epoch.
#54
UNUSUALY COOL
Post rating: ~
slaster-mave molarity
#55
Post rating: ~
reverse the master-slave polarity
#56
Post rating: +
sometimes i think i should finish that zizek effortpost and then i think the time and effort would be better spent creating a bot that automatically downvotes every boourns post then hides it from me before i ever see it
#57
Post rating: ~
please do the zizek effortpost! I don't know how to make a bot but to make up for it I will work on scaring boourns off
#58
Dont Mess With Sucess
Post rating: +

Belphegor posted:

please do the zizek effortpost! I don't know how to make a bot but to make up for it I will work on scaring boourns off


Hey now, don't make things difficult. Their heart is in the right place, a little left of center but well below the shoulder

#59
Post rating: ~
Hulk Hogan: Remember, Commie Flanders: train, say your pryaers, eat your fiber, take your meds.
#60
Post rating: ~
hiding boourns posts is easy with just a css stylesheet but ill look into automating downvotes with js never ereally fucked with that but should be easy enough
#61
[account deactivated]
#62
Post rating: +
hey, everyone's gotta have a gimmick. i'm scared if i actually finish the zizek thing my posts will be like twin peaks after they tell you who killed laura palmer
#63
Post rating: -

shapes posted:

The_Boourns_Identity posted:

Nietzsche viewed Christianity as a form of slave morality, and by his own definition sure it takes those characteristics, but I believe that the true Christian ethical action allows one to 'win' even in a moment of submissive self-sacrifice, like we see with Christ or the protest model of Dr King.

I think this is the best morality



Dr. King is a terrible example to use for slave morality. Nietzsche thought slave-morality was ultimately a morality of self pity, ie, "blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth."

if Dr. King's position had been, "yes, it's true that black people are a slow-witted race of layabouts and pickaninnies, but our simple ways have a noble goodness to them" then THAT would be slave morality

i'm sure that Nietzsche would find the praxis of Dr. King ingratiating due to its Christian background and imagery (conversely, Dr. King probably was familiar with Nietzsche, he taught a college class on ethics and the reading list was quite in-depth and featured a lot of German philosophy), and technically Nietzsche emphasized that ANY morality is ultimately a historical, social construct. but Nietzsche definitely had his favored qualities, and Dr. King had more of them than some doofus like Richard Spencer could ever hope to

drcat posted:

is anyone going to care about Nietzsche in 100 or 200 years? this is a real question.

i feel like if he were alive today he would be very easy to confuse with the timecube guy.



i mean, as much as any philosopher will be read in 100-200 years. he's got huge advantages over a lot of his peers in that he's much more readable. compare him to Hegel or Heidegger, and it's night and day. he's pithy, sarcastic, endlessly quotable. reading Hegel is a chore even for his fans. reading Nietzsche is actually enjoyable, or at least as enjoyable as anything in philosophy.

le_nelson_mandela_face posted:

lol nietzche was even goonier than i thought



if it helps, there's a good chance his physical and mental decline was due to syphilis, so at least he lost the ol' V-Card, amirite?




I wasn't saying that Dr. King was an example of slave morality, I was saying that from a Nietzchean perspective it would be considered such. King's praxis was rooted in his Christian ethics, which Nietzsche specifically deemed to be a slave morality.

I disagree with that perspective, & I think Dr. King's praxis would be very beneficial for today's revolutionary movements, as it seems to be absent.

I think the movement associated with Dr. King disproves the Nietzchean assertion that Christianity is a slave morality which is similar to Marxist-Leninist positions on religion which asserted that religion was counter revolutionary because the bourgeoisie uses it as a means to impose their ideology on the working class. Of course they do this & of course religion can be counter revolutionary, but I don't think this is necessarily true.

#64
Post rating: ~

Petrol posted:

sometimes i think i should finish that zizek effortpost and then i think the time and effort would be better spent creating a bot that automatically downvotes every boourns post then hides it from me before i ever see it



Is this a critical view of Zizek? Please do, I read so much of his work back when I first started turning away from liberalism & getting interested in Marxism. I enjoyed several of his books but most of all I appreciated how attention getting style grabbed hold of my young froward mind & got me interested in reading other, better writers. Basically Zizek was like a gateway drug onto better thinkers

#65
Post rating: -

Belphegor posted:

please do the zizek effortpost! I don't know how to make a bot but to make up for it I will work on scaring boourns off



If anyone wants a real growing revolutionary movement, shouldn't you work on educating people rather than pushing them away?

Idk tho I'm just an idiot

#66
[account deactivated]
#67
Post rating: -

roseweird posted:

The_Boourns_Identity posted:

Belphegor posted:

please do the zizek effortpost! I don't know how to make a bot but to make up for it I will work on scaring boourns off

If anyone wants a real growing revolutionary movement, shouldn't you work on educating people rather than pushing them away?

Idk tho I'm just an idiot

are you saying if the rhizzone is nicer to you and dignifies all your thoughts replies in quote-response form that revolutionary science will be advanced



No im saying it's probably good to have an ethical stance grounded in winning over support for revolutionary movements & perhaps not actively pushing people away is part of that.

Never asked for anyone to be nice or whatever, I'm just saying teaching people may be more effective than casting them away.

#68
[account deactivated]
#69
Post rating: +
i, however, sincerely dislike you, insofar as everything you post is incredibly annoying and bad.
#70
Post rating: ~

Petrol posted:

i, however, sincerely dislike you, insofar as everything you post is incredibly annoying and bad.



That's fine I don't really have an opinion about you so whatever

#71
Post rating: +
#72
Dont Mess With Sucess
Post rating: +

The_Boourns_Identity posted:

Never asked for anyone to be nice or whatever, I'm just saying teaching people may be more effective than casting them away.


I think the issue is that proselytizing on one's own is not actually very effective, whereas working with an org that tries to meet the needs of the people is highly effective

#73
Post rating: +

Petrol posted:

hey, everyone's gotta have a gimmick. i'm scared if i actually finish the zizek thing my posts will be like twin peaks after they tell you who killed laura palmer



release the zizpunk wedding post

#74
Post rating: ~

swampman posted:

The_Boourns_Identity posted:

Never asked for anyone to be nice or whatever, I'm just saying teaching people may be more effective than casting them away.

I think the issue is that proselytizing on one's own is not actually very effective, whereas working with an org that tries to meet the needs of the people is highly effective





i agree with the second part of course, but why is the first part less effective?

also here's this

#75
Dont Mess With Sucess
Post rating: +

The_Boourns_Identity posted:

i agree with the second part of course, but why is the first part less effective?

because one's beliefs do not significantly affect one's behavior, but material conditions do. it's called marxism

#76
[account deactivated]
#77
Post rating: ~
If anyone is interested

#78
Post rating: ~

roseweird posted:

The_Boourns_Identity posted:

swampman posted:

The_Boourns_Identity posted:

Never asked for anyone to be nice or whatever, I'm just saying teaching people may be more effective than casting them away.

I think the issue is that proselytizing on one's own is not actually very effective, whereas working with an org that tries to meet the needs of the people is highly effective

i agree with the second part of course, but why is the first part less effective?

for one thing you arent jesus



oh word?
the difference between Jesus & myself is the gap that drives my ethics

#79
Post rating: +

The_Boourns_Identity posted:

swampman posted:

The_Boourns_Identity posted:

Never asked for anyone to be nice or whatever, I'm just saying teaching people may be more effective than casting them away.

I think the issue is that proselytizing on one's own is not actually very effective, whereas working with an org that tries to meet the needs of the people is highly effective

i agree with the second part of course, but why is the first part less effective?

also here's this



because the idea that people respond to good arguments and effective rhetoric is an idiot liberalism practiced by people who dont have to listen to anyone and will stay in power no matter what anyone thinks or says anyway

beliebers who engage in this sort of rational discourse and say things like "the marketplace of ideas" wihtout a gun in their mouth need only hear the word "regime" uttered allowed before their programming activates and they vanish faster than you can say DSA

#80
Post rating: ~
the first rule of church planting is getting a handful of people together who can push each other, give honest feedback, and provide emotional + material support. communism works the same way