09-10-2004, 07:16 PM
I though i made it clear that I wasnt refering to that the anti-christian.
IF you beleive badness/wrongness can exist as an element of character then Nitezsche was bad.(I suppose you could believe badness exist only as an element of action.)
Notice I said "bad" not evil, which would some sort of metaphysical judgment.
As to the concept of "dumb" your just playing a game of semantics. Its lame to attack my use of the word "dumb" but not address what I went on to say it represented.
Obviously he was intelligent. I was using dumb in the context of what some people call "common sense". He became so embroiled in the details of his subject that he let himself ignore the obvious foundation of the subject. I call that dumb - choose what evername for it you like.
Being that you tried to refute me without actually saying anything about the Nitezsche I suspect you really hvae no handle at all on the subject.
-you addressed my point of calling him bad by injecting extraneous religious concepts
-you addressed my other point by argueing the semantics of "dumb".
Your last sentence is basically saying nothing at all.
Sorry but I have little patience for anyone who refutes other peoples positions but only on the basis of "the subject is to complex to make judgments".
IF you beleive badness/wrongness can exist as an element of character then Nitezsche was bad.(I suppose you could believe badness exist only as an element of action.)
Notice I said "bad" not evil, which would some sort of metaphysical judgment.
As to the concept of "dumb" your just playing a game of semantics. Its lame to attack my use of the word "dumb" but not address what I went on to say it represented.
Obviously he was intelligent. I was using dumb in the context of what some people call "common sense". He became so embroiled in the details of his subject that he let himself ignore the obvious foundation of the subject. I call that dumb - choose what evername for it you like.
Being that you tried to refute me without actually saying anything about the Nitezsche I suspect you really hvae no handle at all on the subject.
-you addressed my point of calling him bad by injecting extraneous religious concepts
-you addressed my other point by argueing the semantics of "dumb".
Your last sentence is basically saying nothing at all.
Sorry but I have little patience for anyone who refutes other peoples positions but only on the basis of "the subject is to complex to make judgments".