Message from @Alex Fahey
Discord ID: 691821407042273281
So now you're trying to paint this as something it isn't, again? Because you can't hold a debate without trying to discredit your opposition? I literally don't care about genetics, not one bit. That's all it is.
@Jym Get a biologist in here to debate him, I love seeing huge egos getting rekt
In all honesty, any confusion about the Nietzsche quote is your fault to begin with @phadreus. You forget to put quotations around it and not till the very end is there anything to indicate that it is, in fact, a Nietzsche quote instead of just a random man who struggles with simplifying their own mental diarrhea into something easy to read and digest. On a side note, that mental diarrhea is a problem I see with most philosophers which irritates me to no end. I'm far too fond of the simple and straightforward to deal with that verbose, paper-colored slime.
@ETBrooD
Why bother? I mean I'm not a biologist at best I can read graduate texts *slowly* but it's not like it is worth arguing with someone who cannot recognize the difference between physics and biology.
There's a difference? Maybe that's the problem <:Veemote:501103628883591188>
> So now you're trying to paint this as something it isn't, again? Because you can't hold a debate without trying to discredit your opposition? I literally don't care about genetics, not one bit. That's all it is.
@ETBrooD That's literally what happened though??? <:WaitWhatArmy:590858815189024778>
Yeah it is almost like the essential elements of matter, energy, and the cosmos have no real relationship to the behavior of a hyper-social species of erect primates. Or some dumb redneck shit like that....
> @ETBrooD
>
> Why bother? I mean I'm not a biologist at best I can read graduate texts *slowly* but it's not like it is worth arguing with someone who cannot recognize the difference between physics and biology.
@Jym Your inability to understand that animals are open systems that shed heat isn't a fault against my argument, regardless of how hard to try to pretend it is.
@phadreus I had no interest in genealogy or whatever in my entire life. Not once. This is not about me dodging a debate.
> In all honesty, any confusion about the Nietzsche quote is your fault to begin with @phadreus. You forget to put quotations around it and not till the very end is there anything to indicate that it is, in fact, a Nietzsche quote instead of just a random man who struggles with simplifying their own mental diarrhea into something easy to read and digest. On a side note, that mental diarrhea is a problem I see with most philosophers which irritates me to no end. I'm far too fond of the simple and straightforward to deal with that verbose, paper-colored slime.
@Alex Fahey Okay, first off, why tf did it take you like 20 minutes to write this? I thought you were working on your own damn post, NOPE, just more nonsensical attacks for no apparent reason.
> On a side note, that mental diarrhea is a problem I see with most philosophers which irritates me to no end.
Just because you have a hard time understanding what such people say doesn't make it "diarrhea". In reality this take is an example of why these people are renowned and why you're nothing.
Eh, over 24 hours ago we covered this. *Everything in the goddamned Universe* sheds energy. Including humans, rocks, assorted marsupials, Hymenoptera, dying stars, the hopes and dreams of teenage girls, and the eventual heat death of the universe.
> In reality this take is an example of why these people are renowned and why you're nothing.
<:hypersmugon:544638648721604608>
@phadreus I only responded to your Nietzsche quote and I explained why Nietzsche is not the best of philosophers in my opinion. And then I got dragged into some mudslinging. So w/e
@phadreus I was. I decided it wasn't worth my time and effort about halfway through, and I thought "Fuck it; might as well join the shit-show."
> @phadreus I was. I decided it wasn't worth my time and effort about halfway through, and I thought "Fuck it; might as well join the shit-show."
@Alex Fahey You should do that instead
Or better yet, respond to my initial OP 🙂
> Eh, over 24 hours ago we covered this. *Everything in the goddamned Universe* sheds energy. Including humans, rocks, assorted marsupials, Hymenoptera, dying stars, the hopes and dreams of teenage girls, and the eventual heat death of the universe.
@Jym Yep, and that means everything is subject to entropy. See, it's not that hard of a concept... Glad I could help you understand.
In the same way that everything is made of atoms. That does not mean that applying Boyel's Law to the behavior of naked mole rats is somehow legitimate.
By the way, I think my take is the same one you'll find in a lot of physical science focused people. The ability to explain something simply is a great indicator of understanding and the Philosopher's inability to do so with their works is a mark against their galaxy brains. I think it was Einstein who said "if you can't explain it to a child of 6, then you don't understand it." or something of that manner.
> @ETBrooD
>
> Why bother? I mean I'm not a biologist at best I can read graduate texts *slowly* but it's not like it is worth arguing with someone who cannot recognize the difference between physics and biology.
> Eh, over 24 hours ago we covered this. *Everything in the goddamned Universe* sheds energy. Including humans, rocks, assorted marsupials, Hymenoptera, dying stars, the hopes and dreams of teenage girls, and the eventual heat death of the universe.
<:pepelaugh:544857300179877898>
Fucking boomers LMAO
I have no clue what's going on
@ETBrooD He doesn't understand how entropy applies to humans and societies and thinks it only applies to stars or some dumb crap.
I don't experience any entropy, that's just my glow
OH I can understand *not at fucking all* rather easilly.
> By the way, I think my take is the same one you'll find in a lot of physical science focused people. The ability to explain something simply is a great indicator of understanding and the Philosopher's inability to do so with their works is a mark against their galaxy brains. I think it was Einstein who said "if you can't explain it to a child of 6, then you don't understand it." or something of that manner.
@Alex Fahey Philosophers, the good philosophers, nietzsche actually being a great example, typically try to ***pack in additional information*** by writing in a very complicated but concise way. I suggest you try slowing down amd really absorbing the information. Maybe try starting with a science based philosopher like freud or etc.
> I think it was Einstein who said "if you can't explain it to a child of 6, then you don't understand it." or something of that manner.
See this is exactly what I mean, Einstein had an IQ of roughly 160 where Nietzsche is thought to have been between 180-200. Despite what you think of nietzsche's mastery of language and ability to explain extremely complex topics in very concise and ways; millions of people have read his books and he has influenced society to extreme measures from the grave.
What people don't understand about philosophers is that they write in concepts where most people write in sentences. It is necessary to the job to convey as much information in as full a scope as possible and as concisely as they possibly can. That's how it works. If you don't like it or cannot understand it then perhaps it simply isn't for you rather than being "verbal diarrhea".
I watched a video series deconstructing Nietzsche's and thusly spaketh zarathrustra-chan
My take is his eloquence hides the holes in his ideas.
One of the problems with intelligent people in general, really
It may not even, necessarily, have been intentional.
I see no reason to give philosophers any more credit for being honest about their views than any other person tbh
And it wouldn't surprise me if Nietzsche was just trolling all along
Kant is a perfect example 😂
It is most certainly not for me. That's why I often consider their works verbal diarrhea, lol. Regardless of how intelligent I may or may not be, questions of an existential nature draw very little of my attention.
> And it wouldn't surprise me if Nietzsche was just trolling all along
@ETBrooD this tbh, I get a feeling that he liked to fuck with people
I'd like to say that I base my opinion of nietzsche on 2 main factors rather than specific details of his work. These two things being:
1. The insane amount of influence his work has had since his death. If we are judging who the "greatest" is on influence upon modern society then he's up there
2. The fact that his thoughts were extremely novel and that he was basically an enigma of time. If you look into it this will be the main praise of Nietzsche, as well as being the major factor for why people attribute to him 180-200 IQ. He was, essentially, as original and groundbreaking as a person can possibly be.