Christianity

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22265
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

Alexis Jacobi wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 12:03 am Nothing I have said about you has been 'prejudicial'.
Heh. :D

I had no idea you'd ever met me. I certainly can't remember meeting you. And yet you seem to have all sorts of firm opinions about me personally.

Are you a prophet, like Nietzsche?
It's how he was. He died in 1900, insane and most probably syphillitic. That last word might not be confirmable: the rest certainly is.
You are being dishonest.
Not a bit. Any biography of Nietzsche will tell you he died at the age of 55 in 1900, of either syphillis, brain cancer, congenital brain disease of some kind, or some other cerebral calamity like that...and definitely insane.

These are just the historical facts. You may not like them, but they are what they are.
Dubious
Posts: 4000
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 7:40 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Dubious »

Immanuel Can wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 2:40 am
Dubious wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 11:56 pm ...you consistently do the same to others!
The same what? I haven't done anything to anyone.
The same, for example as saying I don't know squat about the bible. When I asked you how you would know that, since the innards, the particulars in the bible were never discussed and therefore not subject to comment, your response was only a repeat of your assertion that you know I know nothing about the bible which you can't know since it was never discussed. But when anyone makes an assertion about you, you'll petulantly start whining, you don't know me, you don't know anything about me. This from someone who so often presumes to know without ever having taken the time or inclination to actually know since it may defeat some of your preconceptions. Perverse ignorance, meaning the intentional kind, creates its own walls to protect itself from any attack which may dismember it. Any idea what I'm referring to?

Of course those who affirm the existence of god as absolute, it's not hard to imagine they must also know so much else compared to those who admit retaining a question mark upon something so metaphysical as god's existence! :twisted:
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Christianity

Post by Dontaskme »

Immanuel Can wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 2:47 am

I had no idea you'd ever met me. I certainly can't remember meeting you. And yet you seem to have all sorts of firm opinions about me personally.

Are you a prophet, like Nietzsche

That's rich coming from someone like you.

Someone who appears to know so much about a guy called Nietzsche..hmm, and you even know a dead guy whom you call Jesus. You must have met him, must have done, since you incarnate here on earth so many times, taking the form of his body. Have you forgotton again that you told us that story about Jesus being the image of God the imageless?

I mean you do know that Jesus is within all of us don't you? every one of us is Jesus, because even you said so yourself don't you remember? he told you, then you told us, that he released you and us from our sinful ways when he died for you and us because he loved you and us just as he loved himself.

Have you forgotten who we all are now. Oh dear...I think it's time to dress your naked body again, and pop into your prophet suit.

IC Are you wearing your prophet suit yet, like IC does all the time, You've never really taken it off have you.

Oh do tell oh perfect prophet, tell us more about Nietzsche ...oh wise and well informed one.

IC Are you a prophet, like Jesus :lol: ..you seem to know so much about him...my god just listen to yourself, oh that's right, that's all you ever do anyway.

So lets keep on going....because if I don't keep going, I'm dead. Lets keep coming back from the dead...whoooo hooo!

Image








.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Christianity

Post by Dontaskme »

Immanuel Can wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 2:47 am Any biography of Nietzsche will tell you he died at the age of 55 in 1900, of either syphillis, brain cancer, congenital brain disease of some kind, or some other cerebral calamity like that...and definitely insane.

These are just the historical facts. You may not like them, but they are what they are.
Historical facts are todays fiction. The belief in live dead people will kind of make you go insane IC... NOW don't you be tripping IC

Image

Hey everyone I know everything there is to know about other people because it says so in their autobiographies. That's how we keep dead people alive, isn't that amazing, look how intelligent I am, being able to recite stories as if I'd actually met the person in living flesh. Whooo hooo, I'm so clever and intelligent to be able to remember myself so clear like that.
Last edited by Dontaskme on Tue May 17, 2022 7:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
Dubious
Posts: 4000
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 7:40 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Dubious »

Dontaskme wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 10:53 am
Dubious wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 10:15 am
IC never rationalized it that way. He's incapable of being rational when it comes to Nietzsche no matter the amount of data you throw at him as has been consistently proven. He still insists that N was anti-Semitic; nothing and nobody after all the corrections offered will change his mind on that.

As for the Will to Power motive, consciousness itself is a manifestation of it and cannot exist without it. Consciousness is that which strives. One cannot strive without a will to enforce it....and since consciousness includes everything humans do in whatever capacity, the Will to Power is inherent in everyone...as much in the Hitler and Stalin types as it is in St.Francis and Jesus!
I found this on reddit.
I think it compliments what you are saying...
I will say, personally, that I believe that the only way to create meaning in life is to follow one's (own) will unbendingly - the goal is not to achieve the object of the will, the object is afterall insignificant and vacuous like anything else, but to demonstrate willpower and faith in the will itself.

Thus, in post-Christian, post-nihilistic times, the Will itself becomes a spirit of free will, but only free and meaningful to the degree that you are willing to follow it, and not deny it. You must not believe that anything in this world can be achieved, that any goal can be reached, any end-state crystallized; however, as human beings, we are the vessel of a will, and such to demonstrate any significance and reality in this world, we have to follow our Will, because we simply only exist as our will. Thus, the will becomes a savior of past and future, as long as one remains loyal to the will, because the will connects the individual parts of life and thus creates the individual with its identity.

Nietzsche saw Christianity as having corrupted the will, but the true, new savior must be willing to follow his Will into any dark recess and any evil. Not - because the will itself is good or bad, or good or evil, but because the identity entirely lies in the will and thus to represents one's own identity, one must be willing to follow one's will to the end.

However, and this is where the Übermensch comes in, to transcend the ever-egoistical and base desires of the Will, one has to will for mankind as a whole and as such. To enforce the Will of mankind, hard, tyrannically and unswervingly, that represents the Übermensch.

Thus, anything that can ever be achieved by humans in this world is only the expression of our individual wills, and only when these wills combine into a greater will, a whole as the expression of its parts, does beauty arise.

How the will can (still) be free in a modern, scientific world is the fundamental question, but the answer rests on the fact that it is not the will itself (atoms, bodies, humans) that is free, but the desire and choice to follow the will. Thus, the only way to demonstrate free will in a modern world, is to ignore other wills and command yourself to obey your own will; this is, of course, hard in a social world, but he who manages to do it in the midst of the crowd, yet for the crowd as such, has transcended humanity and become truly superhuman. His achieved superhumanity lies in the fact that his will, as an expression of himself and his life, stands out among the others, as an individual capable of self-direction. Yet his goal is to speak for other wills as such, for mankind as a whole.
There are a few edits I'd make but all-in-all it's not unlike what I think Nietzsche had in mind.

I normally never keep my posts. They're all gone into oblivion but there is one or two I kept. One of them is this...in the power to will and overcome as rendered in the grim thought experiment of Eternal Recurrence:
The idea of "Eternal Recurrence" - as far as I understand it - is Nietzche's challenge to "Amor Fati" (love of fate) or in German "Liebe zum Schicksall"; the Passion Play of the endless repetition of fate, the fore-knowledge of which would be an infinity of mental crucifixions joyfully accepted in every detail of its glad gruesomeness. It's the surmounting of fate by "loving" it forever and in the process despising it because you have earned the right in your superhuman acceptance of it.

Who or what is the Übermensch? It is he who falls in love with the "howling infinite" as Melville put it even though as a Mortal nothing worse could be imagined. So the idea of "Ubermensch" and "Eternal Recurrence" are inseparable. The "loving" acceptance of the latter creates the dimensions of the former. HE is never someone who tortures but like Prometheus, someone who is tortured continuously. His contempt lies in his knowledge and in its "unmodified" acceptance. Even Gods cannot win against the odds of a mortal metabolizing fate in such a manner. Of course it's all a metaphor as are all our stories of "superhuman or redemptive" personalities. They are all challenges; there is no Jesus who will do the job for you.
I admit it's somewhat hyperbolized though I still think of the Will to Power or the revaluation of all values in those terms.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Christianity

Post by Dontaskme »

Dubious wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 7:30 am
Dontaskme wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 10:53 am
Dubious wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 10:15 am
IC never rationalized it that way. He's incapable of being rational when it comes to Nietzsche no matter the amount of data you throw at him as has been consistently proven. He still insists that N was anti-Semitic; nothing and nobody after all the corrections offered will change his mind on that.

As for the Will to Power motive, consciousness itself is a manifestation of it and cannot exist without it. Consciousness is that which strives. One cannot strive without a will to enforce it....and since consciousness includes everything humans do in whatever capacity, the Will to Power is inherent in everyone...as much in the Hitler and Stalin types as it is in St.Francis and Jesus!
I found this on reddit.
I think it compliments what you are saying...
I will say, personally, that I believe that the only way to create meaning in life is to follow one's (own) will unbendingly - the goal is not to achieve the object of the will, the object is afterall insignificant and vacuous like anything else, but to demonstrate willpower and faith in the will itself.

Thus, in post-Christian, post-nihilistic times, the Will itself becomes a spirit of free will, but only free and meaningful to the degree that you are willing to follow it, and not deny it. You must not believe that anything in this world can be achieved, that any goal can be reached, any end-state crystallized; however, as human beings, we are the vessel of a will, and such to demonstrate any significance and reality in this world, we have to follow our Will, because we simply only exist as our will. Thus, the will becomes a savior of past and future, as long as one remains loyal to the will, because the will connects the individual parts of life and thus creates the individual with its identity.

Nietzsche saw Christianity as having corrupted the will, but the true, new savior must be willing to follow his Will into any dark recess and any evil. Not - because the will itself is good or bad, or good or evil, but because the identity entirely lies in the will and thus to represents one's own identity, one must be willing to follow one's will to the end.

However, and this is where the Übermensch comes in, to transcend the ever-egoistical and base desires of the Will, one has to will for mankind as a whole and as such. To enforce the Will of mankind, hard, tyrannically and unswervingly, that represents the Übermensch.

Thus, anything that can ever be achieved by humans in this world is only the expression of our individual wills, and only when these wills combine into a greater will, a whole as the expression of its parts, does beauty arise.

How the will can (still) be free in a modern, scientific world is the fundamental question, but the answer rests on the fact that it is not the will itself (atoms, bodies, humans) that is free, but the desire and choice to follow the will. Thus, the only way to demonstrate free will in a modern world, is to ignore other wills and command yourself to obey your own will; this is, of course, hard in a social world, but he who manages to do it in the midst of the crowd, yet for the crowd as such, has transcended humanity and become truly superhuman. His achieved superhumanity lies in the fact that his will, as an expression of himself and his life, stands out among the others, as an individual capable of self-direction. Yet his goal is to speak for other wills as such, for mankind as a whole.
There are a few edits I'd make but all-in-all it's not unlike what I think Nietzsche had in mind.

I normally never keep my posts. They're all gone into oblivion but there is one or two I kept. One of them is this...in the power to will and overcome as rendered in the grim thought experiment of Eternal Recurrence:
The idea of "Eternal Recurrence" - as far as I understand it - is Nietzche's challenge to "Amor Fati" (love of fate) or in German "Liebe zum Schicksall"; the Passion Play of the endless repetition of fate, the fore-knowledge of which would be an infinity of mental crucifixions joyfully accepted in every detail of its glad gruesomeness. It's the surmounting of fate by "loving" it forever and in the process despising it because you have earned the right in your superhuman acceptance of it.

Who or what is the Übermensch? It is he who falls in love with the "howling infinite" as Melville put it even though as a Mortal nothing worse could be imagined. So the idea of "Ubermensch" and "Eternal Recurrence" are inseparable. The "loving" acceptance of the latter creates the dimensions of the former. HE is never someone who tortures but like Prometheus, someone who is tortured continuously. His contempt lies in his knowledge and in its "unmodified" acceptance. Even Gods cannot win against the odds of a mortal metabolizing fate in such a manner. Of course it's all a metaphor as are all our stories of "superhuman or redemptive" personalities. They are all challenges; there is no Jesus who will do the job for you.
I admit it's somewhat hyperbolized though I still think of the Will to Power or the revaluation of all values in those terms.
Thanks Dubious, a very good find. With a super helping of (hyperbole)... IC's favourite word :D

Christians hate the God killers, aka themselves...Lol ... :lol: they are so blind, having kept their peepers too far up God's arse to even recognise they're own original face any more.

Just a bunch of narcissistic brainwashed idiots, who are nothing but their own human conditioned programming from cradle to grave.

That's why IC refuses to talk to me because he knows I am smarter than him, and that he knows I'm out to wack this mole that refuses to stay low.
Dubious
Posts: 4000
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 7:40 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Dubious »

Immanuel Can wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 2:47 am
Alexis Jacobi wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 12:03 am Nothing I have said about you has been 'prejudicial'.
Heh. :D

I had no idea you'd ever met me. I certainly can't remember meeting you. And yet you seem to have all sorts of firm opinions about me personally.

Are you a prophet, like Nietzsche?
It's how he was. He died in 1900, insane and most probably syphillitic. That last word might not be confirmable: the rest certainly is.
You are being dishonest.
Not a bit. Any biography of Nietzsche will tell you he died at the age of 55 in 1900, of either syphillis, brain cancer, congenital brain disease of some kind, or some other cerebral calamity like that...and definitely insane.

These are just the historical facts. You may not like them, but they are what they are.
The historical facts are that prior to the Turin event he wrote brilliant works now regarded as among the most influential in recent history. You may not like that but it is what it is.

Your woeful attempts to denigrate are a reflection of you, not Nietzsche. If a person suffers from Alzheimer's, not recognizing his surroundings or family does that negate his past accomplishments? There is something truly disgusting in the way your theism reveals itself.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Christianity

Post by Dontaskme »

Dubious wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 7:54 am
The historical facts are that prior to the Turin event he wrote brilliant works now regarded as among the most influential in recent history. You may not like that but it is what it is.

Your woeful attempts to denigrate are a reflection of you, not Nietzsche. If a person suffers from Alzheimer's, not recognizing his surroundings or family does that negate his past accomplishments? There is something truly disgusting in the way your theism reveals itself.
And the truth will set you free. But first it will mortally wound you. :shock: :lol:

🙌 Hail the truth...for it will indeed set you free, a one way ticket to nowhere, nowhere and never not here.
Dubious
Posts: 4000
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 7:40 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Dubious »

Dontaskme wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 10:55 am And then there's this ....
“ Man always A c t s R i g h t l y . ”— We do not complain of nature as immoral because it sends a thunderstorm and makes us wet,— why do we call those who injure us immoral ? Because in the latter case we take for granted a free will functioning voluntarily; in the former we see necessity. But this distinction is an error. Thus we do not call even intentional injury Immoral in all circumstances; for instance, we kill a fly unhesitatingly and intentionally, only because its buzzing annoys us ; we punish a criminal intentionally and hurt him in order to protect ourselves and society. In the first case it is the individual who, in order to preserve himself, or even to protect himself from worry, does intentional injury; in the second case it is the State. All morals allow intentional injury in the case of necessity, that is, when it is a matter of self-preservation! But these two points of view suffice to explain all evil actions committed by men against men, we are desirous of obtaining pleasure or avoiding pain; in any case it is always a question of self-preservation. Socrates and Plato are right: whatever man does he always does well, that is, he does that which seems to him good (useful) according to the degree of his intellect, the particular standard of his reasonableness.

We live in an age in which the desire for man and his future – a future beyond mere self-preservation, security and comfort – seems to be disappearing from the face of the earth. Modern atheists who have emancipated themselves from the affliction of past errors – the error of God, of the world conceived as a unity, of free will, and so on – have only freed themselves from something and not for something. They either believe in nothing at all or have a blind commitment to science and uphold the unconditional nature of the will to truth.

"There are no free and unfree wills, only weak and strong ones"
The first paragraph is from Nietzsche's own Human-All-Too-Human, one of his earliest works. It sounded familiar.

The second paragraph, I'm certain is not by Nietzsche; it certainly doesn't sound like him.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Christianity

Post by Dontaskme »

Dubious wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 8:11 am
Dontaskme wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 10:55 am And then there's this ....
“ Man always A c t s R i g h t l y . ”— We do not complain of nature as immoral because it sends a thunderstorm and makes us wet,— why do we call those who injure us immoral ? Because in the latter case we take for granted a free will functioning voluntarily; in the former we see necessity. But this distinction is an error. Thus we do not call even intentional injury Immoral in all circumstances; for instance, we kill a fly unhesitatingly and intentionally, only because its buzzing annoys us ; we punish a criminal intentionally and hurt him in order to protect ourselves and society. In the first case it is the individual who, in order to preserve himself, or even to protect himself from worry, does intentional injury; in the second case it is the State. All morals allow intentional injury in the case of necessity, that is, when it is a matter of self-preservation! But these two points of view suffice to explain all evil actions committed by men against men, we are desirous of obtaining pleasure or avoiding pain; in any case it is always a question of self-preservation. Socrates and Plato are right: whatever man does he always does well, that is, he does that which seems to him good (useful) according to the degree of his intellect, the particular standard of his reasonableness.

We live in an age in which the desire for man and his future – a future beyond mere self-preservation, security and comfort – seems to be disappearing from the face of the earth. Modern atheists who have emancipated themselves from the affliction of past errors – the error of God, of the world conceived as a unity, of free will, and so on – have only freed themselves from something and not for something. They either believe in nothing at all or have a blind commitment to science and uphold the unconditional nature of the will to truth.

"There are no free and unfree wills, only weak and strong ones"
The first paragraph is from Nietzsche's own Human-All-Too-Human, one of his earliest works. It sounded familiar.

The second paragraph, I'm certain is not by Nietzsche; it certainly doesn't sound like him.
Thanks chief inspector Dubious. :D The second part could be anyones BUT...they're all holy :mrgreen:

Human-All-Too-Human sounds about bang on the button...I mean if we are going to play our role well, we might as well be true to ourselves and not act on behalf of some thing we are not.

Image

Image


Image
Belinda
Posts: 8035
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Belinda »

Alexis Jacobi wrote:
Nietzsche himself was acutely aware of the psychic and psychological danger involved with *wiping away the horizon*. He would actually say, and did say, that in fact we do need the concept. Many people cannot survive without it and they go nuts.

But the issue, IC, is that we are having a very very difficult time, down here on the planet Earth, recovering the 'concept'.
The Sea of Faith Network is based on the matter of the poem by Matthew Arnold "Dover Beach" in which the tide of faith is felt to be withdrawing from society. As you and Nietzsche note, loss of faith is scary. We have largely recovered from loss of faith in miracles but still have difficulty with loss of the fixed horizon towards which we naturally steer. The existentialists especially perhaps Sartre have led many to trust that a lone yachtsman can with courage find his own meaning. All that is required for faith is what we can all have, courage and reason,as we are inevitably future- oriented. The 'leap of faith' springs from courage and reason and saves us from complete disorientation.
Dubious
Posts: 4000
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 7:40 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Dubious »

Dontaskme wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 9:29 am
Dubious wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 8:11 am
Dontaskme wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 10:55 am And then there's this ....

The first paragraph is from Nietzsche's own Human-All-Too-Human, one of his earliest works. It sounded familiar.

The second paragraph, I'm certain is not by Nietzsche; it certainly doesn't sound like him.
Thanks chief inspector Dubious. :D The second part could be anyones BUT...they're all holy :mrgreen:

Human-All-Too-Human sounds about bang on the button...I mean if we are going to play our role well, we might as well be true to ourselves and not act on behalf of some thing we are not.
That's the theory, but sometimes we don't know ourselves well enough as experienced when something alien comes to life we weren't aware existed. It's usually trauma of some kind which forces a part of us into view which so far remained submerged.

Whatever! Knowing oneself is overrated...

to know yourself may not be the best advice
when showing less of virtue and more of vice.


I found the writer of the second paragraph. It continues from what you quoted. Sounds interesting; I plan to read some more.

You can, if you wish, peruse for yourself...

https://books.google.ca/books?id=8hs598 ... h.&f=false
Dubious
Posts: 4000
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 7:40 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Dubious »

"Wiping away the horizon" was inevitable since the horizon presented the same view from the place we viewed it from. Can there be a horizon when the difference between here & there is virtually nil. When perspectives conflate they subtract into a near timeless immediacy. It's distance is wiped.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Christianity

Post by Dontaskme »

Dubious wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 10:16 am
Dontaskme wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 9:29 am
Dubious wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 8:11 am

The first paragraph is from Nietzsche's own Human-All-Too-Human, one of his earliest works. It sounded familiar.

The second paragraph, I'm certain is not by Nietzsche; it certainly doesn't sound like him.
Thanks chief inspector Dubious. :D The second part could be anyones BUT...they're all holy :mrgreen:

Human-All-Too-Human sounds about bang on the button...I mean if we are going to play our role well, we might as well be true to ourselves and not act on behalf of some thing we are not.
That's the theory, but sometimes we don't know ourselves well enough as experienced when something alien comes to life we weren't aware existed. It's usually trauma of some kind which forces a part of us into view which so far remained submerged.

Whatever! Knowing oneself is overrated...

to know yourself may not be the best advice
when showing less of virtue and more of vice.


I found the writer of the second paragraph. It continues from what you quoted. Sounds interesting; I plan to read some more.

You can, if you wish, peruse for yourself...

https://books.google.ca/books?id=8hs598 ... h.&f=false
Thanks Dubious. 👍

I guess some of us suffer from a little more constipation than others. All that's needed is a dam good flushing, thank god for toilets, huh! :D

Keep up the good jobby business .. :wink:

Scottish slang dictates that a 'jobby' is actually another word for faeces. . for anyone who wants to know what is none of your business.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Christianity

Post by Dontaskme »

Dubious wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 10:26 am "Wiping away the horizon" was inevitable since the horizon presented the same view from the place we viewed it from. Can there be a horizon when the difference between here & there is virtually nil. When perspectives conflate they subtract into a near timeless immediacy. It's distance is wiped.
Thats nice! well said. :D

I've personally never been able to cross the horizon ..have you? :D I tried it once, but I could not for the life of me manage to catch up with it.
Post Reply