Quote:I didn't bring up anything about her economics views.

It clearly is your objection. There is no reason to get so upset against someone just for being not a great philosopher. The only really good thing about Rand is that it makes tedious socialists froth at the mouth

(January 5, 2014 at 9:37 pm)MarxRaptor Wrote:

(January 5, 2014 at 7:38 pm)houseofcantor Wrote: Yeah, I don't fit yer model. And nilihism is stupid.

Nihilism is merely the rejection of irrational or unproven assertions. Atheism is religious nihilism.

That's not the way I heard it.

And I wouldn't be a naive philosopher if I accepted established schools.

(January 6, 2014 at 6:49 am)là bạn điên Wrote:

Quote:I didn't bring up anything about her economics views.

It clearly is your objection. There is no reason to get so upset against someone just for being not a great philosopher. The only really good thing about Rand is that it makes tedious socialists froth at the mouth

It clearly is NOT my objection, hence why I made no mention of it. I was talking about her ridiculous philosophical positions and arguments, and her arrogance in, among other things, claiming that the only philosopher she owed a debt to in terms of ideas was Aristotle, despite ripping off (poorly) many of Nietzche's ideas. Nor did I really get upset, I just had a mini-rant.

(January 6, 2014 at 10:08 am)MindForgedManacle Wrote:

(January 6, 2014 at 6:49 am)là bạn điên Wrote: It clearly is your objection. There is no reason to get so upset against someone just for being not a great philosopher. The only really good thing about Rand is that it makes tedious socialists froth at the mouth

It clearly is NOT my objection, hence why I made no mention of it. I was talking about her ridiculous philosophical positions and arguments, and her arrogance in, among other things, claiming that the only philosopher she owed a debt to in terms of ideas was Aristotle, despite ripping off (poorly) many of Nietzche's ideas. Nor did I really get upset, I just had a mini-rant.

So who else in the world of philosophy do you have rants at?

(January 6, 2014 at 2:17 am)rasetsu Wrote:

(January 5, 2014 at 11:00 pm)MindForgedManacle Wrote: I'd say being an atheist nearly always results in being at least an existential nihilist. It just follows naturally. Though, I'd say you could argue essentially everyone is an existential nihilist, really. Unless they want to hold to a sort of hypocritical and atrocious view anyway.

Speak for yourself, Kemosabe. That you are ignorant of alternatives doesn't mean they don't exist.

Lol at the Kemosabe bit. I didn't say alternatives don't exist (hence why I said being an atheist NEARLY always results in being an existential nihilist), I just mean that to avoid it one seems to have to take on a position that upon reflection can be seen to be very, ah, malicious.

---

(January 6, 2014 at 10:10 am)là bạn điên Wrote: So who else in the world of philosophy do you have rants at?

Eh, I've done Nietzche before, and William Lane Craig is always so easy a rant-inducing apologist.

William Lane Craig is hardly a proper Philosopher, However ranting against him is perfectly acceptable. He is a complete and utter cunt. He actually stated that animals don't feel pain because god has 'graciously' taken away their ability to do so' fucking areshole.

(January 6, 2014 at 5:25 am)Zen Badger Wrote: My philosophy is that of the fourfold path of the B's

Bikes, boobs, beer, bacon.

This makes for a happy Badger.

I've seen much worse philosophies.

To be fair, what Craig really said was that animals don't possess awarenes of being aware of pain. Congizant of their cognition in other words. Still a huge prick though, to be sure.

I think I've gone off (a bit) on the Catholic philosopher Edward Feser too, or maybe I just said his work was shit or something.

Take what you can get and give nothing back.
I suppose it's more of guideline than an actual philosophy.

Craig still used it as justification for the ill treatment of animals. he is a cunt and should be butt raped by Rhinos