By default it is passive. Unless you got ADHD. Sit the fuck down and listen or read.
Yeah, also worked on a few of the presocratics, heavily on Aristotle and Theophrastus, who divided all the previous philosopher they know into Dualist and Non-Dualist camps, and most of the philosophers since then touching upon various arguments, to this day, remains a hot academic topic. In India, philosophy is still divided by these divides (I actually use their terminology, given how Liebniz fucked up the terminology in the west) and China and Japan divides it on that basis too.
I’m going to have to stick with all the major philosophers and reject you. You gotta be careful, cause Nietzsche was active on both sides of the argument as well. Half this forum discusses it with AMbigious on and off with his Dasein discussions… That us exactly what he us fighting in.
And YOU, not me, brought up Anslem’s Ontological Argument, you simply failed to grasp the context they were discussing it in. Faith as the basis of knowkedge isnt different from stating the anwser preceeds the question. We wouldn’t be able to have fields like Pure Mathematics if it wasnt for this cignitive insight of St. Anslem. Alot of ideas you thing are purely secural and athiestic, come directly from this.
It is because you never took this seriously (philosophy as a whole, not just Anslem here) that ut is comming as a bewikdering shock. Your used to just shrugging stuff off, saying “Christians bad, athiests good” because you’ve never been challenged on your own ignorance, your used to preaching to a choir of liked minded individuals. Never occured to you to actually apply yourself to difficult problems, great ideas of the past.
At least Nietzsche as a philologist tried to do this at times, snd came back with a admiration of catholic philosophers. He was largely opposed to the insular, ignorant and uncultured Germans who never tried to think or study, or look into the past or abroad for ideas.
People like you. One of the great paradoxes of Nietzsche is why as a wide thinking, well read yet conservative author who detested sloth of mind and insular thinking, he only attracts liberal idiots who general don’t get the sources he is referring to because they don’t read, are more or less the reincarnation of the thick headed Prussian youths he tried to drill new ideas into.
I find it absolutely fascinating and disturbing at the same time. Only conservative (in the Nietzschean sense) I’ve met so far, anywhere, whatsoever was Cezar… But he suffered from the same intellectual languidity. None of you fuckers ever read. I’m sure if he was resurrected, he would earnestly try to kill all of you. If I had followers like you centuries after my death, I would hope for them too all die too.
It is better to have a handful of intellectuals who grasp your system than a sea of misfits misrepresenting it, ruining it. He had a shitty system to begin with, but it is no where near as bad as the collective idiocy on this forum takes it. I think it is unfair to blame Nietzsche for this, why I general attack Nietzscheans instead of Nietzsche here. If we ever get real Nietzscheans here, I will more actively denounce Nietzsche, but that requires a certain level of intellectual activity not found on these forums. Wasn’t on Nietzscheforum.com either.