A more interesting question for this forum, has anybody read anything beyond Nietzsche?
A show of hands please.
Nietzsche is like the band “phish”. He’s not bad really, and he’s got some talent. But his fans are unbearable.
This is one of my favorite analogies of Nietzsche so far! 
K: I’ve read Kant, Hegel, Kierkegaard, Schopenhauer, Plato, Aristotle,
Seneca, Aquinas and Augustine for starters, does that qualify?
Kropotkin
Believing in science and its “gods” or believing in philosophy and its “gods” is very similar to believing in religion and its “gods” and believing in theology and its “gods”. The gods do not disappear - because humans want to be gods. (Note: These last two sentences are not referring to the question whether gods exist or not, because there is no answer in the sense of knowing it, there is only an answer in the sense of believing it.)
You first! (Well, after pseudo-Kropotkin, I suppose.) Have you read anything, including Nietzsche?
There are three hidden assumptions in that question.
- what you discuss is no more than what you read
- there are philosophers other than Nietzsche who are worth reading
- we are discussing philosophers, not reality
Joker is an attention whore who will use any means whatsoever to draw attention towards himself.
You are the one who is arrogant here.
There is no such a thing as debate between me and Gib. Debates apply only to people who are trying to convince their audience they are right. This is not what I am doing. What I am doing here is I am correcting Gib. There is neither competition nor equality between the two of us. There is me who is right and there is Gib who is wrong. Nothing that I can possibly lose.
You need to do what you normally, but not fully, do, and that is to stay away from philosophy. Go back to your non-philosophical chat where you talk about your insignificant everyday life events. This is the only thing you can do well.
My problem with Gib, which is not merely a personal problem as Gib likes to think, is that he is evasive.
You don’t see this because you are no better than him.
Countless posts have been written about what an utter retard you are. Don’t force me to repeat them.
You cannot carry on a civilized discussion. You already demonstrated your incapacity to do so. What you can do is be meek and timid. You can be an egalitarian, a relativist, who respects other people’s right to be evasive. And this is what you normally are, until someone comes along and puts you in your place, and your defensive mechanism that you call “trolling” is triggered.
lol
You already have an opportunity to do so, you imbecile. By admitting that what you did was wrong we can return to the topic.
But you don’t want to do this. Instead, you want me to forget about it, nay, you want to convince me that you did nothing wrong.
You cannot talk to someone unless you know that someone is responsible. You proved to be irresponsible, therefore, if you want this discussion to move forward, you need to become responsible.
But that’s not what you’re doing. Instead, what you are doing is trying to make me irresponsible myself.
You do not want me to think, to process all of my knowledge and experience, in order to predict whether talking to you is worth my time. No, you want me forget everything I know, and simply hope that you are worth my time.
This is what you are doing in the above quote.
You are telling me that I should think that you will be paying attention merely because you say you will be paying attention.
You think that if you have a serious intent to pay attention from now on that I should forget everything you did in the past and simply lay hope in you.
I believe this gives you some sense of superiority, though false of course, because you do not really understand how thinking works.
Intellectually speaking, you are a woman.
Is there any way I can renew topical discussion of Nietzsche’s significance?
Anderson, don’t be such a butt hurt baby towards everyone who doesn’t agree with or understand you.
If I want to drive my car around the town, but the car is making strange sounds, is it me turning the car into the subject or is it my car turning themselves into the subject?
What do you think?
Do I want to open my car and fix them just for fun or do I want to do so in order to drive them around the town?
In a sense, I am the one turning them into the subject. Without my decision to turn them into the subject they can never become the subject. Indeed, there is nothing stopping me from driving them around the town except for my concerns.
But does that mean I am the one turning them into the subject?
I certainly never wanted them to be broken.
The point is that I am turning them into the subject not because I want them to be the subject but because it is necessary to do so if I want to make sure I can drive them safely.
My main goal is to drive the car, not to examine them in order to fix them.
Do you understand this, imbecile?
Is this enough for you?
That’s not being butt hurt, that’s being disciplined.
You are a retard.
The definition of the word elite was irrelevant. What was relevant is what I meant. And what I meant by the word elite is “the ruling ones” or “the ones considered to be the best”. I meant nothing other than what is normally meant. Hardly obscure.
My point was that modern elites (= the ruling ones, or the ones considered to be the best) are not powerful.
You never really understood what I meant when I said that, but you nonethless proceeded to conclude not only that you know what I mean but also that I am wrong.
Thus betraying your very low level of standard of communication.
Your argument was that elites are by definition powerful.
My argument was that modern social groups that are identified by the word elite are not powerful.
Noone ever spoke of definitions. Except for you, because you are a retard with an extremely short attention span.
Your obsession with definitions is a mere distraction from the topic.
Don’t mind Mr. Anderson, he’s our resident challenged Romanian gypsy that lives in his mother’s basement.
He does a lot of this in his spare time…
What’s Romanian for, “Can you spare some change?”
Sure, I can go along with that.
What is it with a majority of people on this forum?
Do you read any post- modern philosophers at all? The classics are great and all but there is a lot of post -modern philosophers of the nineteenth or current century as well.
This coming from the biggest Nietzschephile on the internet with a smoothe love affair. If Nietzsche was still alive I can imagine you groping on him in a dark alley holding a copy of one of his books. Shutters the thought