What all men ought to do

If someone wants my opinion it that abortions are absolutely immoral in the west because of decline in birth rate and the west is the best, on top of the fact that a child is the only thing that can tame a woman, on top of the fact that it is a horrendous procedure that might (or might) not be murder but is absolutely life-negating in its structural essence. But my opinion is not my wisdom. My wisdom tells me not to interfere with womans life giving and taking powers unless she has committed to me.Too messy to ever come to objective grips with, like trying to make the sun give off heat without being so hard to look into.

Well no see cause the contracts in place in the first world, the only place it actually exists (more crudely also in the second, wealthy commie nations), lead directly as they are to a senator getting tortured in my third world paradise.

These people need to chill the fuck out and think it through.

Btw, the third world also exists in the ghettos of the US (where Trump made his bones) and the first in the isolated bubbles of upper middle class of Venezuela.

They think they got it aaaaaaall figured out.

But bam. Fate. Your need to feel justified in your cantankerousness results in slow painful deaths of millions.

No changing that now. But fate keeps rolling. What will you do now?

Yes, hypocrisy always has a price that isn’t worth paying for it.
The social contract is a way to understand evolution otherwise than as the product of sexual selection.
It is what gives rise to Hegel.

Hypocracy is moralistic [the term], it poses an instead of. There is no such thing. Only what has been and what will be.

And what is, of course.

No I believe it is a technical term, denoting the act of making a demonstrably ungrounded claim to a moral position in order to get away with some advantage.

In this sense all foreign policy before Trump has been hypocrisy.

Mary and her books.

Well and after Constantine.

“to a moral position”

Exactly, to a moral position, an instead of. It is a lie before it is amoral.

Philosophers provide truth to the people. I give John fate, moral correctness would be a lie.

deleted a bad ironic comment.

a philosopher relieves from morality, and thereby dispels hypocrisies,
but a philosopher thereby risks being a moral man.

And this in turn is addictive, as Zarathustra found to his demise.

He tried to kick his habit, his students, but for what?
The power that he was the herald of did not yet exist.

All men ought to accept fate, not because it is morally correct, but because it is empowering. They may not, and weaken until they disappear. Ought is the imperative of success. Of honesty. Not forced. It just is.

All men ought to, but only rational men will assuredly do so.

Is that a moralization of power?

Negus. Because there is no instead of. Only live or die.

Maybe a stronger humanity empowers me. Couldn’t give a fuck about morality.

No but it leads to the concept that only the powerful can be moral.

At least that they can do what they ought to.

Zarathustra’s oughts were only because he thought people were listening. Shortly after these are not the ears for my words I stopped reading, the rest of the story was clear enough. He was in a cave man, he thought most human animals would be similar. Didn’t expect the degenerating power of history.