Satyr's fatal flaw...

Just a brief reminder that, no matter what any of us thinks, it will never change what is.

“The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point, however, is to change it.” (Karl Marx, 1818 - 1883)

is is? :astonished:

And what IS is what it thinks.
Isn’t philosophy the pursuit of what IS?

How can you change what you cannot or do not understand or compeltely perceive?
How do you overcome or free yourself from chains you do not see or that you deny that they are wrapped around your legs?

But the trite, simplistic, regurgitated sophistries were welcomed.

…What percentage of all human ideologies are true, compared to the false?
What’s the history of human belief?
I’m going to ask 10 gods on this flat earth that the sun rotates around, to tell me where the water comes from which keeps on pouring off of the edges of the flat earth and falling down. I’m guessing maybe giant elephants drink it.

0 and 0. There is no true or false, only things that are true or false from more or less vantage points. Look down and tell me what shape the Earth is. There’s a reason people though the Earth was flat for so long. We had few vantage points then. Now we have more, and those new points of view overwhelmingly point to the Earth being round, so we say now that a round Earth is closer to truth. Not only do true and false not exist, but the values things hold in between are dynamic.

Aristotle called, he just located his wife’s clitorus and he wants his argument back.

Was it between your legs?

I haven’t read Aristotle.

Karl Marx was literally the high priest of Satan.

There is change, and then there is change for the better.

His philosophies brought $h!t to the world… and have been completely disproven.

Lol. One you believe in Satan. Two you patronize Marx to the point of priesthood.

You must DIE.

Apparently you have never heard of the religion called Satanism.

Surely I have.

And this correlates to Marx how?

He was their high priest… as I have said.

Why do you ask? Hungry, or just lonesome for Detrop again?

That explains quite a bit.

I’d just like to jump in for a second and agree that Marx is a tool. It’s like, there are some people in the world who can only understand things to a certain extent. Those people read shit like marxism and nietzsche. Then they go around acting like they know something about philosophy, by reciting the stories they’re read about marx and nietzsche. There is very little real philosophical content in the works of either of those fiction writers. It’s just meant to piss off your boss and parents.


I have a taste for finger-food.


Bravo!!! =D>

I thought this thread had died… Satyr you have such a strange apeal to folks :laughing: :laughing: The man people love to hate. When you were born,did the head nurse tell the other nurses to leave you alone, that you were bad to the bone? :laughing: :laughing:

Ironically, snookums, I am loved by people in my immediate environment.

You, see, babes, my insights help be play the game and my keen eye for details, my ability to imitate and to be funny as well as my empathic abilities which enable me top read people’s moods, and my easy-going temperament make me adaptable. This makes me well liked.
I know it’s hard for you to believe it, but it is a fact.

My perception of reality does not make me intolerant of another’s shortcomings or weaknesses, it only makes me aware of them all the more clearly and honestly.

If my honest opinions disturb the majority or if it makes them feel bad, this would explain their reactions to me.
People prefer to be told whatever they already want to believe is true, and they want their beliefs and hopes to be reinforced by others, no matter how absurd they are.
People do not like anyone challenging their core beliefs, the beliefs their well-being and psychological stability is structured upon.
Unfortunately the world doesn’t really care how we deal with its mechanisms.

Most are attracted to anyone that supports their own delusions or to anyone that promotes a perspective that benefits them directly.

I say directly because all awareness can be made to benefit you once you see, accept and adapt accordingly.
But most people don’t want to go through all that painful effort or have little ability to perceive or to think on their own. They want ready-made answers and quick fixes, mostly from others, so they prefer any perspective that is automatically beneficial to them or they deny anything that forces them to think or to conclude that they must suffer in order to achieve.

For instance an ugly, fat chick will avoid dieting or the painful effort of doing something about her appearance, if she wants to be sexually desirable or if she wants to find a mate, but will opt to simply deny the relevance of appearance and will be attracted to any delusion or romantic idealism that claims that beauty is skin deep, or some bullshit like that.
She will try the easier road of trying to convince others that their aesthetic interpretations are false or immoral when she lacks the will-power to do anything about it or cannot change her looks beyond a certain point.

If all fails she will become nice and understanding to compensate.

Unfortunately I am but a messenger.

Why do you go off of appearances and empirical findings, then? Really, if you want to take your reasoning all the way, you should be constantly exhibiting Cartesian doubt. You are such a tool.

You’re joking, right?

If you want to understand many of the political/military conflicts of the past hundred years, read Marx.
If you want to understand why contemporary existence cannot ground anything in a static foundation, read Nietzsche.

It would impossible to keep up with current debates in philosophy and politics without having read or heard of either of the two’s ideas.