God Is Dead

dMole said:

On the slow typing, I'm helping tutor my nephew in college algebra- he's a Marine, not a scientist!
d

Click to expand...

Way to suck the fun out of my joke, maaaan.

Upon rereading your original post, I beg to argue the point that you were speaking more form the heart. "Laughable" and "rubbish" are not ways YOU would choose to argue a point. They speak of your emotions on the subject. Did you think you had gotten away with the sorry ass follow up? I woulda called you on it the second I saw it,

Click to expand...

LOL! I was wondering when I saw you post a reply why you didn't berate me. I still stand by my post. Though I used a politicians tactics by first belittling the argument, I did address the points at hand.

werther said:

LOL! I was wondering when I saw you post a reply why you didn't berate me. I still stand by my post. Though I used a politicians tactics by first belittling the argument, I did address the points at hand.

Click to expand...

Really? You stand by it? Sounded to me like you denounced it in your very next post! Then you are officially athiest? There is nothing wrong with that. I think it doesn't matter as long as you live life as a good person.

at what point did I say I was an athiest? I am just against arguing for or against something using faulty logic.

My post addressed the article and pointed out some of its inherit contradictions. For me to put in 'laughable' and whatever else was in bad taste; that I admit.

werther said:

at what point did I say I was an athiest? I am just against arguing for or against something using faulty logic.

My post addressed the article and pointed out some of its inherit contradictions. For me to put in 'laughable' and whatever else was in bad taste; that I admit.

Click to expand...

Well then so what are you? Sheesh, talk about avoidance! Like pullin teeth.

http://www.freewebs.com/thinkingstraight/Fallacies.htm


I got this from you. I really like it as a method of taking apart an argument.

Well then so what are you? Sheesh, talk about avoidance! Like pullin teeth.

Click to expand...

I am an asshole.





ah but seriously, I suppose I am agnostic. I do not believe in a god in the typicall religious sense. There may be something 'bigger' than us, but I don't count on it.

I got this from you. I really like it as a method of taking apart an argument.

Click to expand...

Hahaaa! I actually used that to take apart the post. It is typically easy to spot a fallacy, but to be able to name which one makes a rebuttal that much more potent. I used to know them all in latin but my days of reading philosophy are pretty much over.

I'm pretty against all the elite occultists like Nietzche and the others behind the scenes that brought us Hitler, Himmler, von Braun and his Paperclip cronies, (and the Brown Brothers Harriman ones at Yale that were guilty of "Trading With The Enemy" Act by financing IG Farben and the Nazi war machine).

Click to expand...

Nietzsche brought about Hitler!? Nietzsche wrote about the Ubermensch (elite humans) in his stories namely 'Thus Spoke Zarathustra'. And Hitler did quote Nietzsche, however out of context. When Nietzsche talked about the ubermensch he meant a coming of the new intellectual in reference to Plato's philosopher kings. No longer would the philosophers sit idle in their ivory towers but come down from the mountains and lead by rational. The book 'Thus Spoke Zarathustra' has a compainion book which is three times as big explaining what was meant be each 'passage'. It is apparent that Hitler did not understand what Nietzsche meant by ubermensch, or he simply bastardized what his writings.

Nietzsche is the philosopher who took an account of God dying. He said "God is dead". He did not mean God 'the living breathing being', but rather God 'the living breathing concept'.
"Yeah I'm a devout Christian, ...I mean I swing by the church once or twice a year". -This is an instance of God is dead.

@rachel

1. the atheist's favorite: prove God exists. My favorite counter: prove He doesn't. ... I can't prove either of these arguments - doesn't that tell us something about God's existence?

Click to expand...

that made my brain hurt.



syllogism of your argument:
1. athiest cannot prove god doesn't exist
2. thiest cannot prove god does exist
3. -therefore god exists.
-huh?

Reminds me of a quote about Cheney

AuGmENTor said:

Way to suck the fun out of my joke, maaaan.

Click to expand...

I can't remember the source, but I remember hearing that someone in DC once said of Big Dick, "That guy can suck the truth right OUT of a room..."

I know- off-topic, but I still find it funny (and applicable to Watergate and 9/11 and...) Plus, Cheney is a pretty good argument towards the existence of anti-Christ(s)...

Dig a little deeper...

werther said:

Nietzsche brought about Hitler!

Click to expand...

Hi Werther,

Have you ever researched about Helena Blavatsky & her Theosophists, the Vril Society, Thule Society, or Order of the Golden Dawn? How about Guido von List, Karl Hausehofer, Jorg Lanz Von Liebenfels, Rudolf von Sebottendorf, Master Karl Maria Wilgut, or finally Dietrich Eckert, who said in 1923, " Follow Hitler! He will dance but it is I who have called the tune! I have initiated him into the Secret Doctrine, opened his centers in vision and given him the means to communicate with the powers. Do not mourn for me, I shall have influenced history more than any other German."

My source books are not currently in my physical possession (I've got a pretty big library that isn't where my internet connection lives). Do an Amazon search for Nazis and "occult" and you'll find quite a bit.

----------BEGIN QUOTED on F. Nietzche
Nietzsche: A Precursor to Hitler?

- by Phillip D. Collins ©, July 12th, 2005
I recently took a college course in the history of philosophy. The instructor, who happens to be an extremely intelligent woman, was going to examine Foucault. I was eager to study Foucault and seized the opportunity. His Marxist proclivities aside, Foucault's views concerning the carceral system were certainly of merit and valuable to my research. Yet, there was another philosopher on the menu. In the halls of orthodox academia, his reputation precedes him. His name is Friedrich Nietzsche. I prepared myself for what was guaranteed to be yet another exercise in anti-Christian rhetoric.

Enraptured by his vitriolic hatred for Christianity and enshrinement of moral anarchism, academia has consistently defended Friedrich Nietzsche as one of history's "misunderstood" philosophers. Cribbing from the standard litany of apologetics, many argue that Hitler somehow "misrepresented" or "distorted" Nietzsche's ideas. Is this genuinely the case? Of course, during their migration from abstraction to tangible enactment, ideas can become contaminated by any number of factors. To be sure, internal contention amongst adherents, the personal idiosyncrasies of individual analysts, and the manifestly unpredictable nature of reality itself makes an idea's journey towards tangible enactment very problematic.

Yet, was Nietzscheism's journey toward tangible enactment so bastardized by Hitler that it was virtually unrecognizable? Was Nazism nothing like what Nietzsche had in the mind? Again, only an examination of the delicate segues between abstraction and tangible enactment can answer this question. In The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, William Shirer recounts Hitler's frequent sojourns to the Nietzsche museum in Weimar (100). Commenting on Hitler's veneration for Nietzsche, Shirer writes: Indeed, the commonalities are numerous. Perhaps the most damning of these was Nietzsche's adoration for "the magnificent blonde brute, avidly rampant for spoil and victory" (Shirer 100). While Nietzsche also referred to the "masters" (i.e., noble men, rulers, etc.) as "blond beasts," this "blond brute" was something different. He was Nietzsche's superman, the Übermensch (Shirer 100).

Of course, many apologists for Nietzsche argue that the criterion for defining the Übermensch was neither racial nor hereditary. However, Nietzsche frequently espoused eugenical concepts, suggesting that he did invest significant value in race and hereditary. For instance, consider the following social mandate set forth by Nietzsche: Automatically, the astute reader will recognize the traditional themes of eugenics: Malthusian demands for the prohibition of procreation amongst certain populations and mandates for compulsory sterilization. Nietzsche's tirade is also replete with contradictions. He asserts that eugenical regimentation should be implemented with no regard for "rank, descent, or intellect." Simultaneously, he insists that there is an "unhealthy" population that "must at all costs be eliminated." Why must this population be eugenically expunged? Does Nietzsche fear that such "dysgenics" would interbreed with those of healthier stock? Remember, Nietzsche's remarks are made in conjunction with procreation, inferring that he believes in some connection between hereditary and the "unhealthy."

Moreover, Nietzsche's bestowal of primacy upon the social "whole" betrays his collectivist proclivities. Hitler shared such propensities, as is evidenced by his virtual deification of the collective in Mein Kampf: "The sacrifice of personal existence is necessary to secure the preservation of the species" (no pagination). Sans the racialist emphasis of this statement, these words sound distinctly reminiscent of Marx's characteristic collectivism. This is no coincidence. In 1933, the Fuehrer candidly admitted to Hermann Rauschning: "the whole of National Socialism is based on Marx" (Martin 239).------------END QUOTED, from:

http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/Commentary/Nietzsche.htm

Here's a strange French secret society offshoot of Nietzche's work, too:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ac%C3%A9phale#The_Secret_Society

The deeper you dig, the stranger it gets...

There was some ground for this appropriation of Nietzsche as one of the originators of the Nazi Weltanschauung. Had not the philosopher thundered against democracy and parliaments, preached the will to power, praised war and proclaimed the coming of the master race and the superman--and in the most telling aphorisms? (100)

Click to expand...

weltanschauung for those who are wondering means 'world view'. I am pretty sure my first post in regards to Nietzsche covered this. Again this is in reference to 'Thus Spoke Zarathustra' and as well 'The Geneology of Morals'. When Nietzsche would write that man should be in a constant state of war, he was again speaking of Plato's philosopher kings and meant that man should always be at intellectual war. The master race part is of course from Ubermensch, which is a horrible translation given the context. Master Race is somewhat of an emotive portmanteau with such time strung conotations. 'Overman' is more commonly used and is more fitting. The Nazis took Nietzsche's writings and twisted them to fit their propaganda model. Nietzsche did not see the Germans as a master race and wrote of them being the antithesis.

You guys lost me a few posts ago. I am just sitting here drooling on myself and saying, "Da?"

There was some ground for this appropriation of Nietzsche as one of the originators of the Nazi Weltanschauung

Click to expand...

.

I hate to paraphrase without the origins of the quote but "...if someone uses a chair as weapon, should blame and fault lie with the inventor of the chair?"

Indeed, the commonalities are numerous. Perhaps the most damning of these was Nietzsche's adoration for "the magnificent blonde brute, avidly rampant for spoil and victory"

Click to expand...

-out of context. Nietzsche was in fact referring to a lion, the king of the jungle.

other quotes by Nietzsche:

"I feel kinship only with the most cultivated French and Russian people, but not at all with the so called distinguished elite among my own countrymen, who judge everything from the principle: 'Germany above everything...'"

Click to expand...

"Let him come to Zarathustra who has unlearned the love of his people because he has learned to love many peoples."

Click to expand...

"I have recently been overwhelmed with anti-Semitic letteers and pamphlets; my repunance for this party (who would be only too pleased to avail itself of my name) is as pronounced as it possible could be."

Click to expand...

I used to love reading/studying philosophy. I started reading when I was about twelve after finding out 'killing an arab' by The Cure was based on a book by Albert Camus called 'The Stranger'. Pretty lame start in philosophy I know, but a start none the less. Before I stopped reading essays 'religiously'
my favorite philosopher was and still is Arthur Schopenhauer.

Anyway, what I am getting at is I love to discuss this stuff. .....Let me have it!