Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Daycare Nation
And you are free to think that those who commit acts of philosophy do so from a standpoint which is "outside one's temporal confines," but mental constructs are actually the same as cultural constructs. One merely exchanges the cultural construct for one's own philosophical context within which to masturbate mentally...both constructs are finite, both are inherently false.
|
See, I was all about to agree entirely, but saying all are inherently false is such a nihilistic statement I can't help but disagree. Show me something that couldn't, by some feat, be shown to be false. This doesn't make it false - but to work on the assumption that anything that could be construed as false
is false only commits yourself to barbaristic nihilism.
!"£$% - You're a top poster, and I'm not wanting to start an argument (not that I am with anyone else on this thread, you understand), but saying Nietzsche 'smashes' philosophy and then conveniently disliking the books which don't fit your appreciation of Nietzsche (who was, for the most part, fairly consistent) strikes me as ignoring the general thrust of philosophy - no one 'smashes' anything, rarely does an idea not return on the whim of the zeitgeist. I've read papers saying Nietzsche has more in common with ancient Sufism and Buddhism than Western philosophy - and although I disagree with most of them, the philosophy student in me has to assert that all philosophy exists in a continuum, never exempt of context which is often the mis-apprehension of science rather than philosophy.
Anyway, to cut a long story short, you're all wrong apart from the bits where you say I'm a prick, and I'm going to bed.
*Edit - any criticisms of my articulation at the moment are spot on as well.