Nietzschean Threads No Longer Hosted On Paizo.com! (not sticky)


Off-Topic Discussions

51 to 100 of 147 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Sigmund Freud wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
its not like philosophy matters... :)
And how does that make you feel about your mother?

Yo mama's so Freudian, when she sits around the house, it's a Rorschach.


Yo mama's so Freudian, once a month she has a latency period.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

tracks through the fresh ink and leaves pawprints all over the carpet


2 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
its not like philosophy matters... :)

The only philosopher still worth half a crap is Nihilist Arby's.

(Edit: Now I'm tempted to start a Nietzche Wachee mermaid account on Twitter.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Darth Grumpicus wrote:
(Edit: Now I'm tempted to start a Nietzche Wachee mermaid account on Twitter.)

What does not kill you, makes you flounder.


What doesn't kill me, makes me danglier.


readies to pounce


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Darth Grumpicus wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
its not like philosophy matters... :)

The only philosopher still worth half a crap is Nihilist Arby's.

The strange lights that appear over their location have yet to be explained, yet already provide ample evidence in the minds of onlookers, soothsayers, doomsayers, conspiracy theorists, UFOlogists, and photophobes across the county.

Arbys. We have the meats, but that does not necessarily imply we are completely certain of their origins. This has been traffic.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Friedrich Nietzsche wrote:
Darth Grumpicus wrote:
(Edit: Now I'm tempted to start a Nietzche Wachee mermaid account on Twitter.)
What does not kill you, makes you flounder.

WHAT DOESNT KILL ME MAKES MR LOUDER!!!


Was that our cue? No? Oh. Sorry, my bad.


Dirty Old Victorian Longears wrote:
What doesn't kill me, makes me danglier.

♬Highway to the Danglier Zone...♬


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Alan Watts was fond of saying that philosophers were men at universities who would walk around in long white coats, if they thought they could get away with it.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Right. No Nietzsche. Let's do Voltaire.

"To find out who rules, just find out who you're not allowed to criticize."


Nobody for Voltaire? Really?

Guys, throw me a bone here. If this keeps up, we are going to have to go de Beauvoir.

Scarab Sages

Sissyl wrote:

"To find out who rules, just find out who you're not allowed to criticize."

Wonderful quote, isn't it? Here's the REALLY CRUMMY problem with it.


Thank you. Good stuff to know. Even so, the quote is true.

Scarab Sages

Sissyl wrote:
Even so, the quote is true.

I was, in fact, just thinking that the fact that it gets attributed to Voltaire DESPITE coming from nearly as anti-Voltaire as source as can be imagined, if anything, strengthens its profundity as an idea independent of a personality. That's some philosophic dynamite.


So... de Beauvoir...?

Scarab Sages

Why not Plato?

Anything Goes With Plato(TM)!


Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. Voltaire (pretty sure anyways.)

Dark Archive

The heck is this thread .-. Is this new form of art?


I drank what?!


CorvusMask wrote:
The heck is this thread .-. Is this new form of art?

One vote for Warhol.

*sighs*


Sissyl wrote:
Thank you. Good stuff to know. Even so, the quote is true.

Given that the quote was in the context of critising a whole bunch of people, it seems a bit disingenuous.


Also as a further note no one is allowed to criticize DOOM!


I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:

Why not Plato?

Anything Goes With Plato(TM)!

If I remember correctly, one of Plato's ideas on Atlantis has snuck into fantasy as a whole. I believe it's the first mention of (then an alloy) Oricalcum/Orichalcon/Horacalcum/however-you-spell-it.


Not to mention the solids that feature so prominently in our hobby...


3 people marked this as a favorite.
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
Sissyl wrote:
Even so, the quote is true.
I was, in fact, just thinking that the fact that it gets attributed to Voltaire DESPITE coming from nearly as anti-Voltaire as source as can be imagined, if anything, strengthens its profundity as an idea independent of a personality. That's some philosophic dynamite.

Not really. Quotes tend to get associated with well known figures, whether deliberately to lend them more weight or just because people couldn't remember where they came from and grabbed someone known for making great quotes.

It's a great quote though. Let's you weaponize reaction to your own offenses: Get called ant-Semitic for your rant about how the Jew controls everything? That's just proof Jews really do rule you.

It's b*&~#@!$, but it's a great tool for reinforcing your existing prejudices.

Thinking a little more about the Voltaire attribution: It wouldn't even have vaguely made sense to him. Voltaire lived in a monarchy with strong censorship laws. His books were often banned and he was forced on occasion to flee to exile. Sure, those he wasn't allowed to criticise ruled him, but there was no need to "find out" - they were the king and the nobility and they passed laws against being criticized.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Well said.

Here's a quote from me, unattributed to anyone famous:

Marginalization of terrible ideas is not oppression. It's just good sense.

Scarab Sages

When I first heard it (well before learning its true source), my first thought was "the military," so in that context it made a great deal of sense - and frankly, still does.

@thejeff: You're only interpreting it now based on its true unfortunate source, and kind of demonstrating my point how having a "celebrity endorsement" of an idea can bias one's judgment of it + or -. The question is 'can ideas exist independently of people?,' and I think this make a strong case that they can.

@quibblemuch: That's beside the point, though. Nobody here and now is arguing otherwise.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Vidmaster7 wrote:

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. Voltaire (pretty sure anyways.)

Works better if ronald mcdonald said it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. Voltaire (pretty sure anyways.)

Works better if ronald mcdonald said it.

This is scientifically true of every quote. SCIENCE!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:

When I first heard it (well before learning its true source), my first thought was "the military," so in that context it made a great deal of sense - and frankly, still does.

@thejeff: You're only interpreting it now based on its true unfortunate source, and kind of demonstrating my point how having a "celebrity endorsement" of an idea can bias one's judgment of it + or -. The question is 'can ideas exist independently of people?,' and I think this make a strong case that they can.

Perhaps, though I've only heard it (or similar sentiments) in such contexts.

Ideas can certainly exist independent of people. They can also exist independently of truth. It's a crappy idea. It exists to demonstrate some hidden power that prevents you from criticizing some group, generally while criticizing that group.

In a relatively open society, you can generally find multiple, often opposed, groups that you'll be bashed for attacking. In a society where you really can't safely criticize the ruling group, it's rarely secret.


Having lived in several such societies, I can confirm this to be true.

EDIT - But I'm not here to get into a thing. Let's not get into a thing. Let's remember the purpose of the thread... to make fun of Friedrich Nietszche for reasons no one really understands.


Oy! Nem zich a vaneh!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
quibblemuch wrote:


EDIT - But I'm not here to get into a thing. Let's not get into a thing. Let's remember the purpose of the thread... to make fun of Friedrich Nietszche for reasons no one really understands.

He knows what he did.


thejeff wrote:
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:

When I first heard it (well before learning its true source), my first thought was "the military," so in that context it made a great deal of sense - and frankly, still does.

@thejeff: You're only interpreting it now based on its true unfortunate source, and kind of demonstrating my point how having a "celebrity endorsement" of an idea can bias one's judgment of it + or -. The question is 'can ideas exist independently of people?,' and I think this make a strong case that they can.

Perhaps, though I've only heard it (or similar sentiments) in such contexts.

Ideas can certainly exist independent of people. They can also exist independently of truth. It's a crappy idea. It exists to demonstrate some hidden power that prevents you from criticizing some group, generally while criticizing that group.

In a relatively open society, you can generally find multiple, often opposed, groups that you'll be bashed for attacking. In a society where you really can't safely criticize the ruling group, it's rarely secret.

I will admit that I study the words of humanity's monsters and see what they had to say on philosophy.

The scary thing is, many of the greatest insights into the most terrible aspects of modern human society are things I have learned from the philosophies of humanity's worst examples. Some of them aptly demonstrated the truth of their philosophy, and learned weaknesses of the tactics they used they had not considered. Weaknesses since adapted to.

Just because they are a terrible person and use their words for bad reasons does not mean those words do not hold wisdom. For example, while that neo-nazi quote is false in the circumstances in which it was used, consider the number of places around the world where it is not only true, but a lesson that can mean the difference between life and death.

But that still doesn't mean the wisdom of the statement isn't b&$%%^&!t reasoning for being a terrible person. If half of these people could learn from their own wisdom, the world would be a massively better place.


Terrinam , consider the Survivors bias in your statement. Not the actual survived part, but the made history in a big enough splash that there's books on the stuff they said sense.

It takes a LITTLE bit of the horror out of how bad humans are. A bit.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Terrinam wrote:


The scary thing is, many of the greatest insights into the most terrible aspects of modern human society are things I have learned from the philosophies of humanity's worst examples. Some of them aptly demonstrated the truth of their philosophy, and learned weaknesses of the tactics they used they had not considered. Weaknesses since adapted to.

Those of you who intend to play a Cleric/Druid/Monk/Shaman/Warpriest/Spiritualist PC in "Way of the Wicked" or something like that, take note!

@BigNorseWolf: I don't think Terrinam was trying to reduce the horror of anything - the effect of what he's saying is the opposite, if anything.


BigNorseWolf wrote:

Terrinam , consider the Survivors bias in your statement. Not the actual survived part, but the made history in a big enough splash that there's books on the stuff they said sense.

It takes a LITTLE bit of the horror out of how bad humans are. A bit.

I wasn't trying to reduce horror.

I can't fully counter the impact of survivor's bias without getting into a topic that would get this thread locked. Politics would come up. We're at an impasse at discussing this.

I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
Terrinam wrote:


The scary thing is, many of the greatest insights into the most terrible aspects of modern human society are things I have learned from the philosophies of humanity's worst examples. Some of them aptly demonstrated the truth of their philosophy, and learned weaknesses of the tactics they used they had not considered. Weaknesses since adapted to.

Those of you who intend to play a Cleric/Druid/Monk/Shaman/Warpriest/Spiritualist PC in "Way of the Wicked" or something like that, take note!

Yes, take note! And take note studying those gives you ideas of how to write a horrid but convincing philosophy for your own evil character!


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Camus Can DO......
But Sartre is smartre.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I never said most of the things I said. {steals pic-a-nic basket, exits stage left}


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Terrinam wrote:


Just because they are a terrible person and use their words for bad reasons does not mean those words do not hold wisdom. For example, while that neo-nazi quote is false in the circumstances in which it was used, consider the number of places around the world where it is not only true, but a lesson that can mean the difference between life and death.

What places? That's my point.

In the places where not criticizing certain groups is a matter of life and death, it's usually pretty damn obvious who rules: The people running the "secret police". Or, like in Voltaire's day, the not secret police. "It's illegal to criticise the king. You'll be arrested and your books banned." Not exactly a great insight.

In other places you can get killed for not properly praising any one of several armed groups who are generally at odds with each other. Mostly they're not rulers though, as you can see when they're chased out of town by the next group of guys with guns.

Where's the great insight here?


Thejeff, you don't think like a monster, so you don't realize the veiled threat of the guy's statement. Think on that and what it reveals about where the lesson is really needed.

I had a longer post here, but it was getting too heavily into derail territory. Wrong place for it. And wrong time for it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Terrinam wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Terrinam wrote:


Just because they are a terrible person and use their words for bad reasons does not mean those words do not hold wisdom. For example, while that neo-nazi quote is false in the circumstances in which it was used, consider the number of places around the world where it is not only true, but a lesson that can mean the difference between life and death.

What places? That's my point.

In the places where not criticizing certain groups is a matter of life and death, it's usually pretty damn obvious who rules: The people running the "secret police". Or, like in Voltaire's day, the not secret police. "It's illegal to criticise the king. You'll be arrested and your books banned." Not exactly a great insight.

In other places you can get killed for not properly praising any one of several armed groups who are generally at odds with each other. Mostly they're not rulers though, as you can see when they're chased out of town by the next group of guys with guns.

Where's the great insight here?

Try asking what places on the LGBT topic. They can give you some examples. Ask African Americans, and they can give you more.

Ask the family of that neo-nazi, and if he has any children that don't agree you can get another answer.

If we want to get into naming examples, we could be here all day rooting out the hidden horrible elements of every civilized nation on Earth and all of the ways power is abused. Ways most people are aware of, but which many don't understand until they become the victims. Even when that power is just a small town group over someone who is different or the power of parent over child.

Thinking it must always be big, some government or group with temporary societal dominance, ignores the fact that many of the darker philosophies spread through the people with little power and are exercised in small ways. You don't need the lesson to know if your government is corrupt. You need the lesson to know if your parent or your town is going to...

Maybe I'm not understanding you.

The oppressed know they're oppressed. They don't need any special insight to be taught that. The quote is either b$+$!%&+ or obvious. Kids don't need to learn they can't criticize their parents to know their parents are in charge.

The whole point of the quote is that you have to look beneath the surface story to see the truth of who's really in charge. I suppose that could apply to someone from outside seeing that kid is afraid to say anything against his parents or some such?


thejeff wrote:

Maybe I'm not understanding you.

The oppressed know they're oppressed. They don't need any special insight to be taught that. The quote is either b!@~~*+* or obvious. Kids don't need to learn they can't criticize their parents to know their parents are in charge.

The whole point of the quote is that you have to look beneath the surface story to see the truth of who's really in charge. I suppose that could apply to someone from outside seeing that kid is afraid to say anything against his parents or some such?

You're not understanding me. But there is good reason. There's limits on what I can say before it becomes too dark a subject to speak on. I have been trying to speak around it, but it is time to address it directly and hope I don't touch it too much.

First, examine the guy's words in line with his philosophy. The point of him using them isn't to say that you have to look beneath the surface to see who's in charge. It's about not knowing who around you is an enemy until they reveal themselves. Consider who neo-nazis believe actually rule the world and then the importance of the word "rulers" in his statement; he's identifying enemies, not societal leaders.

Secondly, do you think he and his buddies would allow you to criticize him if he had political power? He knows he wouldn't. In that manner, it's also a veiled threat, in which he implies he will silence his enemies if he ever gains power.

While you can divorce philosophical sayings from the people to a degree, you cannot divorce them from the people's understandings of what words mean. For example, if a person says "a well-armed militia is the most important military resource" but understands "militia" to mean "farmers with pitchforks," his statement is going to be seriously misinterpreted by someone who understands "militia" to mean "well-trained, organized soldiers."

That is what I hinted at when, after I edited my last post, I spoke on a veiled threat.

As for my bringing up the LGBT group and others: I admit I named them because I would rather they have a voice than him.


I will not argue about this, because politics. I will simply restate that free speech is vital, including criticism of any sacred cows, to every open society.

And it always makes me happy when thejeff doesn't agree with me. It makes me far more certain I am right.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Sissyl wrote:

I will not argue about this, because politics. I will simply restate that free speech is vital, including criticism of any sacred cows, to every open society.

And it always makes me happy when thejeff doesn't agree with me. It makes me far more certain I am right.

Aww, how sweet. Likewise, I'm sure.


PHILOSOPHIZE TO THE DEATH! GO!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

That would be Descartes. He was invited to Sweden as an honoured guest of our queen. Winter meant cold, pneumonia, and he died.

51 to 100 of 147 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / Nietzschean Threads No Longer Hosted On Paizo.com! (not sticky) All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.