Quote:
Originally posted by mika
What I find ridiculous in Nietzsche is his egotist approach. Maybe it was sarcasm, I can't tell for sure. But given the poor poor life he had, he devoted all his life to writing books expressing his anger towards Christianity, morality, humanity etc
He was nothing else than a bitter man with a few fine ideas.
What I mean by being 'egotist' in his case, was his thinking that he somehow considered himself to be able to separate all the bullshit from his own 'idealistic knowledge of the world'.
Quiet, you told me yesterday I should'nt talk about Nietzsche if I haven't read him. Isn't this against Nietzsche's ideology itself, which you have sooo much respect for?
Isn't Nietzsche expecting us to explore everything and anything without being blinded by books or morality or church or laws etc etc. You made an anti-Nietzsche statement by saying i shouldn't discuss Nietzsche if I haven't read him
|
there is an intrinsic difference between exploration/interpretation of your world - and arguing over someone's specific philosophy.
for example: if your objective is to explore spirituality, it can be argued that you need to learn/explore that on your own.
if your objective is to argue the pros and cons of the Christian bible (for example), you should (again, obviously) be well versed in the bible in order to build any sort of argument.
i'm going to bed
