Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 13:41:14 -0700 (MST) From: LEO MEEKS <lmeeks-AT-du.edu> Subject: Re: Goetterdammerung Chris, i think your post articulates the the basic tenets of an either/or thinking. it seems as if neitzsche must be either a logical, rational writer in order to be a philosopher or he is a non-logical aphorist, a pagan, and so forth. What nietzsche criticised is the reduction of thought to the either/or position: fro nietzsche things seem to be much more complex and multiple than your discourse allows. -leo On Thu, 9 Feb 1995 CND7750-AT-utarlg.uta.edu wrote: > I agree almost totally. Nietzshce's atheism strikes me as being a kind > of belief. This kind of belief is at odds with christianity, and all > other forms of theism that i am aware of. I think we often attempt > to make Nietzsche more kind hearted than he was. The man obviously > despised not only the Christian faith but Christian vicivilization > as well, and was not averse to simply stating that he found the the > whole thing to be stupid. Of course he develops many more arguments, > but that is one of them. > > I would like to elaborate on making Nietzsche more presentable > to academic discourse, but have little tiem so will make just > a few comments and wait for them to be chewed up. Nietzsche is > a violent thinker. He is a pagan. I am not denying that he had > something of a scholar personality, but it seems to me that he > would have preferred not to. His argument appeal to base > emotions not logic, though, again, he is not averse to degradating > what he thinks is stupid. So what do we do? We tell Christians that > he was really not violent and not against everythign they believein > because we're afraid they might uturn on us or simply attempt to > band Nietzsche. Just because Nietzsche was violent does not mean > he was a Nazi. I don't think i need to explain this in great detail. > However, he was an antichrist and an antihumanist. > have at it. > > chris > ------------------
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005