Political Crossfire Forums

cap'n queasy · Joined: 15 May 2004 Posts: 34968

I don't know why that thread got locked, but I just want to leave you with a final thought, Mr. U.

When you are sitting in the front yard in the middle of the pieces that used to be your car, don't say I didn't warn you.

A biology book has it's uses, but fixing stuff isn't one of them. :lol:

HomoUniversalis · Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:52 am Post subject:

I do not own a car. God did not see fit to equip me with one, or a driverslicense for that matter :p

Quote: A biology book has it's uses, but fixing stuff isn't one of them.

And the bible does? :lol:

Mr U

cap'n queasy · Joined: 15 May 2004 Posts: 34968

Yes, I would have to say that from my experience it does.

cap'n queasy · Joined: 15 May 2004 Posts: 34968

Here, try some.
http://www.searchgodsword.org/desk/?query=ec+1&t=nas&sr=0&l=en

HomoUniversalis · Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 6:08 am Post subject:

cap'n queasy wrote: Yes, I would have to say that from my experience it does.

Yet, this is not (just) about your experience. I can say `Also sprach Zarathustra´ helped me a great deal, and that will be that. However, the bible is a different book, insomuch that the view society has on it is different. It is not a book about a religion (which of course it (f)actually is), but it is a religious book.

What warrants this different view towards the bible? What warrants the unfounded trust in the stories of one´s forebears or those who share his environment, in their experiences with religious beliefs? Religious beliefs in a book, simply and purely, about religion?

Why, if it is about your experience, do you not simply use the bible to live by, but throw away the notions of deities, afterlife and such?

EDIT: Shall I cite Nietzsche?

Mr U

cap'n queasy · Joined: 15 May 2004 Posts: 34968

Quote: Why, if it is about your experience, do you not simply use the bible to live by, but throw away the notions of deities, afterlife and such?
:lol: My experience tells me that is not a good idea. The Bible would be just as worthless as the writings of Nietzsche are, if it was not an integrated message system from the Creator.

Quote: Shall I cite Nietzsche?

Don't be pretentious.
Nietzsche was a fool. He ended up in an insane asylum for his trouble.

cap'n queasy · Joined: 15 May 2004 Posts: 34968

The closest thing this planet has seen that fit the characteristics of the Ubermensch was Adolph Hitler, or possibly Joseph Stalin.

These were two men that were beyond the "fetters" of moral compunction.

Monsters, is all they were.

HomoUniversalis · Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 2:18 pm Post subject:

cap'n queasy wrote: Don't be pretentious.

As you are, to know the truth.

Quote: Nietzsche was a fool. He ended up in an insane asylum for his trouble.

Not for his trouble. Note that I have not resorted to calling the author of your book a fool.

Quote: The closest thing this planet has seen that fit the characteristics of the Ubermensch was Adolph Hitler, or possibly Joseph Stalin.

The characteristics of the Übermensch? As if Nietzsche turned it into something static. You know less of them, than you think, judging by your inaccurate remark.

Quote: These were two men that were beyond the "fetters" of moral compunction.

No, they were socialists. Nietzsche was an individualist, he hated the state. He would have never approved of their policies, or their puny machiavellian struggles.

Quote: Monsters, is all they were.

Much in you is worm. What kind of monster are you, to me?

Mr U

spearsy23 · Joined: 24 Oct 2005 Posts: 5633 Location: Fulton, Ks

cap'n queasy wrote:
Don't be pretentious.
Nietzsche was a fool. He ended up in an insane asylum for his trouble.
As opposed to Jesus who was nailed to a cross for his trouble :roll:

snow · Joined: 06 Jul 2005 Posts: 669

The Underground wrote:
As opposed to Jesus who was nailed to a cross for his trouble :roll:

That wasn't foolish, that was loving.

cap'n queasy · Joined: 15 May 2004 Posts: 34968

Quote: No, they were socialists. Nietzsche was an individualist, he hated the state. He would have never approved of their policies, or their puny machiavellian struggles.

Tell me what use is it to be a single individual who is not restrained by notions of morality?

This seems to me to only a useful characteristic for a leader who needs to perform certain "difficult" actions for the "good" of humanity, and this is a large part of Nietzsche's concept as well. Whether you would like to admit it or not.

Quote: What kind of monster are you, to me?

Well, I'm certainly going to declare you an enemy of the "common welfare" and recommend your destruction.

HomoUniversalis · Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 6:51 pm Post subject:

cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: No, they were socialists. Nietzsche was an individualist, he hated the state. He would have never approved of their policies, or their puny machiavellian struggles.

Tell me what use is it to be a single individual who is not restrained by notions of morality?

Like D.A.F. de Sade? Your arrogance blinds you. One can not be without morality. One can be without Christian morality, yes, Rousseau reminds us all too well of that.

Quote: This seems to me to only a useful characteristic for a leader who needs to perform certain "difficult" actions for the "good" of humanity, and this is a large part of Nietzsche's concept as well. Whether you would like to admit it or not.

Like to admit it? An Übermensch is someone who, from the primary stage of having realised that God is dead, needs a new 'source' from which to draw on morals. Who has then walked over the abyss of nihilism, and has arrived at a place where he forms his own morals in dedication towards a target, towards beauty. An Übermensch is no leader. An Übermensch detestes the masses and their blind adherence to false moral prophets.

Quote: Well, I'm certainly going to declare you an enemy of the "common welfare" and recommend your destruction.

Common welfare? There is nothing wellfaring about the commons. They are weak and unruly, and have little to live or die for. Do not confuse reality with your twisted Christian view where the drive for your morality is the slave. Perhaps you should read Nietzsche before you resort to petty name-calling.

Mr U

adrenalinejunkie · Joined: 28 Sep 2004 Posts: 398 Location: Plains, Kansas

HomoUniversalis wrote: An Übermensch is someone who, from the primary stage of having realised that God is dead, needs a new 'source' from which to draw on morals. Who has then walked over the abyss of nihilism, and has arrived at a place where he forms his own morals in dedication towards a target, towards beauty. An Übermensch is no leader. An Übermensch detestes the masses and their blind adherence to false moral prophets.
An Übermensch is therefore a blind man leading himself. Rejecting an outside "source" called God for his morals, the Übermensch draws a new "source" by forming "his own morals" toward his own idea of "beauty" (for who can decide for him what is beautiful?) and therefore in the end, has no checks, no balances, no one to pick him up lest he fall, and no other opinion to keep his own from twisting or recognizing his has been corrupted. No wonder Nietzsche went mad. Most people do when isolated to such a degree.

HomoUniversalis wrote: There is nothing wellfaring about the commons. They are weak and unruly, and have little to live or die for.
Thus has said every dictator...
HomoUniversalis wrote:
Do not confuse reality with your twisted Christian view where the drive for your morality is the slave.
The drive of Christianity is to realize the impossibility of reaching moral perfection and the need of forgiveness for all. One cannot truly be a Christian without deep humility.

cap'n queasy · Joined: 15 May 2004 Posts: 34968

Quote: They are weak and unruly, and have little to live or die for

It is this type of comment that reveals what is in your heart.

spearsy23 · Joined: 24 Oct 2005 Posts: 5633 Location: Fulton, Ks

snow wrote: The Underground wrote:
As opposed to Jesus who was nailed to a cross for his trouble :roll:

That wasn't foolish, that was loving.

Both were thought to be out of their minds. The difference? one has a book whose origins cannot be determined saying he died for the human race.

HomoUniversalis · Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 7:54 pm Post subject:

adrenalinejunkie wrote: HomoUniversalis wrote: An Übermensch is someone who, from the primary stage of having realised that God is dead, needs a new 'source' from which to draw on morals. Who has then walked over the abyss of nihilism, and has arrived at a place where he forms his own morals in dedication towards a target, towards beauty. An Übermensch is no leader. An Übermensch detestes the masses and their blind adherence to false moral prophets.
An Übermensch is therefore a blind man leading himself. Rejecting an outside "source" called God for his morals, the Übermensch draws a new "source" by forming "his own morals" toward his own idea of "beauty" (for who can decide for him what is beautiful?) and therefore in the end, has no checks, no balances, no one to pick him up lest he fall, and no other opinion to keep his own from twisting or recognizing his has been corrupted. No wonder Nietzsche went mad. Most people do when isolated to such a degree.

Please. Had you done any research on Nietzsche's ailment, or psychological disorders and neuro-pathologies you would know that what you claim here is absurd.

Quote: HomoUniversalis wrote: There is nothing wellfaring about the commons. They are weak and unruly, and have little to live or die for.
Thus has said every dictator...

Only those who believed the commons are to be ruled. An Übermensch dedicates himself to beauty. How can leading a group of apes be beautiful?

Quote: HomoUniversalis wrote:
Do not confuse reality with your twisted Christian view where the drive for your morality is the slave.
The drive of Christianity is to realize the impossibility of reaching moral perfection and the need of forgiveness for all. One cannot truly be a Christian without deep humility.

Yes, the need to adhere to unnatural principles that go against being a man, all in service of a deity described only in books and the deluded dreams of religious maniacs.

Quote: It is this type of comment that reveals what is in your heart.

You have no idea what is in my heart, or what the ultimate beliefs of my ideology are. Personally, I don't think you care, because demonising your opponent and degrading him to lunacy seems to fit your agenda all too well. Human, all too human.

Mr U

cap'n queasy · Joined: 15 May 2004 Posts: 34968

Quote: You have no idea what is in my heart, or what the ultimate beliefs of my ideology are.

All I can do is go by what you say. I'm just calling them as I see them.

Perhaps this is why you implied I was a monster. I am a threat to your paradigm and it's dogma.

HomoUniversalis · Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:24 pm Post subject:

cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: You have no idea what is in my heart, or what the ultimate beliefs of my ideology are.

All I can do is go by what you say. I'm just calling them as I see them.

Perhaps this is why you implied I was a monster. I am a threat to your paradigm and it's dogma.

No, I implied the lack of nature in you was monstrous. I do not take offense of you. Only shame.

Quote: All I can do is go by what you say. I'm just calling them as I see them.

Ah yes. Your acumen is astounding. You remind me of a phenomenon in biology class where I had to disect the eye of a fish with kitchen tools.

Mr U

cap'n queasy · Joined: 15 May 2004 Posts: 34968

Quote: An Übermensch dedicates himself to beauty.

What is beautiful about the idea that the masses are detestable?

They too, are individuals. This is not an individualistic dogma, but an extremely faulty elitist dogma that is designed to appeal to a certain psychological profile. A person who wishes they were superior and ignores evidence that points to a different conclusion.

This is probably the source of Neitzsche's madness.
Cognitive dissonance.

HomoUniversalis · Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:35 pm Post subject:

cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: An Übermensch dedicates himself to beauty.

What is beautiful about the idea that the masses are detestable?

You would not know, as you have not read his books.

Quote: They too, are individuals. This is not an individualistic dogma, but an extremely faulty elitist dogma that is designed to appeal to a certain psychological profile.

Quote: A person who wishes they were superior and ignores evidence that points to a different conclusion.

I am eighteen years old, and am one of the smartest people I know. I am facing a succesful carreer, and engage in an active social life, where I aid my community. I do not need to feel superior. Ignores evidence? What evidence? The bible? Please, if you have anything to discredit post-modernism, I anxiously await you to present it.

Quote: This is probably the source of Neitzsche's madness.
Cognitive dissonance.

No, it probably isn't, had you a clue about Nietzsche's ailment. And cognitive dissonance? Nonsense. All the researches (including the boring task research) done in that field can have alternative explanations.

Mr U