Kvasir is an autistic kook paGAYn Larper anonymous internet nobody whom nobody normal should pay any attention to unless they want to laugh or raise their pulse since he is both really obnoxious and really insane and actually believes he is a quasi genius and an artist, spiritual medium and ergo has big ego issues and guru tendencies, much like the cunt satire.
What is it with kooks and being stuck on words, not their meaning??? Do you know the word ‘phenomenology’ is multivariate??? Where in the Stanford article or anywhere on the web does it say Jaspers was a phenomenologist? Find me one source which says or shows Jaspers being a phenomenologist or stop talking shit. The quote you provided…in no way suggests from Jaspers that he held phenomenologist views, only a neo-Kantian and existential mishmash, which I already said it is.
Lets get more transparent…you provide a definition of phenomenology first, then we can take off.
like this:
Phenemology:
couple of sentences
conclusions
the end.
As I understand it Heidegger gave up fundamental ontology which was the project of Being and Time. As a matter of fact it was Jaspers who read what he had written for what was to be the second half of that book and talked him out of publishing it saying it was incoherent. Heidegger concluded that fundamental ontology is impossible. Whatever is manifest phenomenally conceals as much as it discloses. Compare Taoism’s yin/ yang, gestalt psychology’s figure/ ground, and Kant’s noumenon/phenomenon.
Heidegger’s existential phenomenology is acceptable on pragmatic grounds. The practitioners of the special sciences don’t live in a scientific world when they’re not practicing their whatever their area of study is. Kuhn made it clear that scientific practice is embedded in and contingent upon a world where hierarchical power and money prevail. Compare with Heidegger’s “The They”.
Pragmatic grounds are not an intellectual standard. Any problem can be solved, its just a question of finding somebody who will be willing to be satisfied with its solution. And white-washing Heidegger from the insanity of Nazism should really get you a slap across your face but we are on the internet and here all the filth and insanity gets a pass. Anybody who stayed a Nazi after 1934 knew what he was getting into.
If you want to pursue this I’ll start another thread and call it “existential phenomenology”.
Did I somewhere suggest the wholesale uncritical adoption of Heidegger’s philosophy? The relationship of Heidegger’s philosophy to Nazism versus the relationship of the man Heidegger to Nazism is a question embedded in the question of Heidegger’s relationship to his philosophy embedded in the relationship of any philosopher to his philosophy.
I was not talking to you but to Alf and commenting his ‘ecologism’ remarks which is a horseshit ideology in itself anyway and the only good it does is to provide a pretext for all power-hungry totalitarianism and bureaucracies to stick their nose into peoples affairs under a pretext of protecting animals. I mean, people who eat cheap meat or eat a lot of meat are filthy and selfish pigs(because mass farming is a disgusting and barbaric process) but I am definitely not going to surrender my freedoms so a glorious leader like Stalin or Hitler or Obama can step in and save all the chickens in the world because I am above a chicken and I and my wellbeing come before a chicken and I am not a naive autistic dullard zealot who does not understand how power and the world works. Humans are filthy and selfish pigs and a shitload of reservations about anything done on a mass scale is the only reasonable approach.
Catholics obey their Pope. What he says goes regardless of what the Bible says.
Catholicism is a disrespect for evidence, and a respect for authority. It is deductive, in that reasons follow from principle rather than evidence. It is deductive since is argues from the general to the particular.
Luther set the world on a path which overturned that. Religion was to be followed by examination of the Book of God and the Book of Life. These were the main sources of evidence by which the world was to understand god and how to behave. Protestantism is Inductive, it processes evidence and the particular to find general principles by which to live.
In this way the Reformation opened up the European mind for the growth of science and the enlightenment, which would eventually reject god in most instances.
Nietzsche thought Protestant’s more dangerous since they were slightly harder to argue against since they had understood part of the way to the enlightenment and so had some convincing sounding arguments in their weaponry.
Nice and easy…Protestantism = science and progress. Catholicism = fanaticism and backwardness. Almost as nice and simple as shitTHYSELF kooks tirades but, for better or worse, the reality is not simple. You are at least being honest and are not scheming against Catholics like the autistic zealots who would find exceptions to the rule and focus all their attention on it whilst ignoring the whole picture. If there was some Pope or bishop who hated women and if females were slaves in the whole of Ancient Greece, it is pretty obvious that Christians degraded feminity and females whilst the Ancients were noble and a strong, independent female with no instinct to procreate would fare far better in Antiquity.
Like the idiot Satyr…on a ‘war’ against ‘nihilism’ and ‘ungrounded’ ‘language’ yet certain as fuck he knows how the universe started…give me a fucking break…like swimming through rubbish.
Having grown up within protestantism, Nietzsche would have known it experientially from the inside, whereas he would have known Catholicism from the outside as an outside observer. Of course, ways of being that are lived pre philosophically are proximally hidden to us.
Protestantism was a World in the factical anamnesis out of which Friedrich Nietzsche became Friedrich Nietzsche by means of philosophical self-reflection. Not so Catholicism.
To what degree was Friedrich Nietzsche a self-hating Protestant?
Nietzsche’s opinions on Christianity are irrelevant and are an intellectual dildo for pseudo-intelligent half-wits to beat themselves on their foreheads. His whole philosophy is completely missed and naively romantic…wait until you get malignant cancer of intestines that spreads onto your reproductive organs and try your will to power and your eternal reaffirmations then…wake the fuck up people, wake the fuck up…life is not a dream, it is not a rainbow journey and you are neither a hero nor a main actor…stop your autistic megalomaniac delusions or continue to rot in your basements, making up excuses about why your life is not what you deserve. lets try 3 bullets into an overmans skulls fired by a hoodlem negros hand covered in dry and peeling skin and gripping with long and dirty nails and we can talk about ‘overcoming’ Christianity when we all get to see how much greatness comes out of that.
Nietzsche is much like Peterson…an intelligent kook living in his own world. A virgin and a spastic cripple who went mad seeing a horse being beaten down with fantasies of power and grandeur who appeals to people just like him…lunatics, autistic boys with no friends, virgins who cant get laid…bums past 40 with nothing to show…autistic ladies, teenager emos…and so forth. It was a completely different thing to be his enthusiast in the first half of the 20th century and a century later, two wholly separate things.
Tell us how you really feel!
If you believe in what you are saying and not simply fondling your penis and telling yourself you are smarter than you are then you become invested in what you say and believe and you try to fight off that which you think is bad and harmful.
Agreed. But your prose are also intentionally humorous are they not?
Yes, its one thing to be against something or even actively fight against it and yet another to be hateful and wanting revenge and wishing ill on somebody else and yet another to by lying and making shit up to get an upper hand whilst shitting in your own basket too like so many ‘Europeans’ do. Christianity is not about being a victim but about being a Hector instead of Achilles. My humour is because I take my cursing and ridiculing of my enemies half-heartedly and half-seriously BUT MAKE NO MISTAKE…NEO-NAZI AND TOTALITARIAN TENDENCIES AND RACISM AND ANTI-SEMITIMS IS TO BE TAKEN EXTREMELY SERIOUSLY, EVEN IF THE PEOPLE BEHIND IT ARE SOMETIMES DIFFICULT TO TAKE SERIOUSLY.
youtube.com/watch?v=6So_cgF … ovaraMedia
Here you have a far-left Indian woman spouting the same nonsense about America being one-party state that the neo-nazi SHITthyself kooks spout…because Communism and Nazism are like a hand in a mirror, left is right, right is left. Its conspiratorial terrorism stemming from the fact that their fantastical delusions as to what is possible and what should be do not find their reflection in the reality they find themselves in so this reality must be conspired against and undermined and to provide a pretext for revolutionary activities meant to instill their utopias. Hitlers’ delusions about what Germany is and what the Germans could do were even more delusional and insane than the Communists.
You are suffering from a very traumatic father complex.