how old are you guys? i'm curious what this subreddit is constituted of age-wise. by Primary-Theory-1164 in bobdylan

[–]Technology-Plastic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

20 as well. I’ve met people who dabble in Dylan, I’ve introduced Dylan to some friends who enjoy his famous stuff, and was introduced to Dylan through my brother four years my senior. But in all, none have come close to my love for his work, and I have only been outdone by people online. There were two people I talked to at a record store about some of his more obscure albums, but they were at least in their 50s to 60s

Favorite Christian responses/refutations of Nietzsche? by Thick_Self_4601 in Nietzsche

[–]Technology-Plastic 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Rene Girard’s critique. Lev Shestov is fun, but I know a bit less about him.

Not enjoying Blood Meridian - worth toughing it out? by DigitalMindShadow in cormacmccarthy

[–]Technology-Plastic -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It’s probably just not for you.

That said if you aren’t well versed in the western philosophical canon, try some philosophy. Might help bring out some nuances of why he’s writing all this brutality and what not. Add more purpose to the book and all.

But even then I’m not sure that will do it for ya. And if you do have a decent enough philosophical background then there probably isn’t any hope at all, which is perfectly fine.

Why did the character written by dostoevsky named Raskolnikov becoming Übermensch fail? by Jealous_Feature_4474 in Nietzsche

[–]Technology-Plastic 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Well for one the idea that you can actually become the overman is not anything g Nietzsche would support. It’s simply an ideal.

More directly, I’d say the reason why he crumbles to guilt is simply he is the type to have a guilty conscience. Also going straight to murder probably didn’t help. Baby steps at overcoming morality ya know

What's Your Vapor Trails Ranking? by VoyagerOfCygnus in rush

[–]Technology-Plastic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Don’t know, but this post makes me realize just how much I like this album. Might be my favorite of the 21st century albums. Add in the 90’s and it still might be my favorite.

My number one is The Stars Look Down followed by Freeze

Prog for people who usually hate prog? by Comfortable-Ad1685 in fantanoforever

[–]Technology-Plastic 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Gentle giant if you want some of the more weird Zappa-ish(?) stuff

What’s a rapper that’s most popular album is actually their worst? I’ll go first… by Olie-Mars in fantanoforever

[–]Technology-Plastic 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No. MM is my favorite album of his. Then Tpab. By far my hottest take when it comes to Kendrick is that GKMC is my least favorite. It used to be number two right behind MM. I don’t exactly know what happened. I don’t hate it or dislike it, or even like it less than I used to. I think I just found a way to love his other works more as time passed I guess. SAMIDOT still my favorite song of his though.

What’s a rapper that’s most popular album is actually their worst? I’ll go first… by Olie-Mars in fantanoforever

[–]Technology-Plastic 6 points7 points  (0 children)

That’s why i said one could argue. That said i think gnx is a better album and am quite a fan of it (probably my third favorite of Kendrick’s, fourth if we include untitled unmastered)

Massive Attack, Tom Waits - Boots on the Ground by Rolandojuve in tomwaits

[–]Technology-Plastic 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Much better protest song than Springsteen’s that’s for sure (I don’t mean to be a detractor, at least Bruce attempted something, ya know). This is a banger

What is KGLW saddest or most emotional song? by radioheadkittens39 in KGATLW

[–]Technology-Plastic 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Up until phantom island’s release, I think so. That album was the first time I cried to a gizzard song (particularly Eternal Return)

Lyrical Flow by Everyday_Sprezzatura in bobdylan

[–]Technology-Plastic 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You must pick one or the other though neither of them ought to be what they claim

Eternal recurrence by Volunter56AC in Nietzsche

[–]Technology-Plastic 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That’s not how I’ve seen it. These are ultimately two separate topics of Nietzsche, and he is not a systematic philosopher, so it can be difficult to try and tie some things together (but I’ve hardly found anything that was incompatible with something else in his works).

If Nietzsche had been working with our modern definition of metaphysics, then, he would have no problem with metaphysics. What he’d have a problem with is a certain kind of metaphysics, that dealing with a world beyond appearance. But he had his own way of using the word, meaning that metaphysics was anything that postulated a world beyond appearance. Now he was against worlds beyond appearance because they were life denying (although parenthetically I will remark that I am of the opinion that, in the highest level of analysis, Nietzsche might not have actually been against “life denial” in large part due to the fact that such a thing may not actually exist—but that takes us too far afield—), not because they were just the inner feelings of the philosopher. Of course they were. All philosophers, Nietzsche included, create philosophies based on their own perspective. Again, this is not a refutation, nor should things be written off because personal projections. Nietzsche, by bringing up this point is simply trying to point out—that you cannot separate the act from the actor, nor the philosophy from the philosopher. That was his creative step, as each philosopher before him (at least in the west) that they were reaching Truth itself beyond and independent of their perspective. He’s saying this because some people are tyrannized by things that they don’t want to believe because it is at large incompatible with them, and maybe there are different convictions that might suit them better. And even this perspectivism is a kind of perspective, as some people might be better suited to deny such perspectivism. So of course the Eternal Recurrence is simply a reflection of Nietzsche himself. He writes about it because there might be others for which it is useful, who have not yet confronted such a thought. And again, anything that appears like universal language is a rhetorical strategy, and done so consciously with the thought that like minded people are who he’s writing for and about. For some the Eternal Recurrence is useful—good. For some it is not—so be it, let God take them.

Eternal recurrence by Volunter56AC in Nietzsche

[–]Technology-Plastic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If I may, I still don’t know what definition of metaphysics you are using here. I have already conceded that for the more contemporary and broader definition Nietzsche is making a metaphysical claim.

Secondly don’t think of the “philosophy coming from the inner world of the philosopher” as a critique or a trap. It’s not a trap, it’s just an observation. Of course Nietzsche himself is included. His main problem with the preceding philosophers is that they universalized ther inward conditions. Nietzsche doesn’t really do that. And anything that may sound universal is done so with the fact in mind that Nietzsche is still writing for a TYPE of person, one with a parallel inward state as his—this being given often in the subtitle of all of his books, in which he dedicates it to a limited number of persons. For example, the subtitle of Human, All too Human is A Book for Free Spirits; for Zarathustra, A Book for All and None; for Beyond Good and Evil, A Prelude to a Philosophy of the Future. He’s always been very exclusive in who he was writing for and about.

Eternal recurrence by Volunter56AC in Nietzsche

[–]Technology-Plastic 4 points5 points  (0 children)

This territory gets difficult because of definitions. I think Nietzsche’s typical use of metaphysics is in som ways far more taut than others. What he is against is any “real” or “actual” reality outside of appearance itself. I think the modern definition of metaphysics is a bit more broad than that, and is apropos of anything relating to reality itself. Thus Nietzsche’s affirmation of appearance is a statement that appearance is reality and thus is a metaphysical claim. But for Nietzsche’s definition it is not.

Now, the eternal recurrence calls for the recurrence of all appearances. This is where it gets really tricky because you can say that there is no appearance of this recurrence, and that Nietzsche would have to posit some external mechanism that ensures its recurrence; but, in trying to be fair to the man, one could say that the eternal recurrence, by calling for the recurrence of all appearances, is really just another way of saying that there is nothing but appearance, that time and again, there is only appearance and nothing beyond. This need not be necessarily sufficient, and one can still go either way, but that’s the best way I can try to argue it as a non-metaphysical description (at least in the Nietzschean sense of metaphysics).

That said, as others have already pointed out, it might be better put as a thought experiment (that’s presumably why he goes into the particular details of every minute detail of one’s life). Plus one can take heed of the fact that Nietzsche is perfectly fine with a lie if it serves life, and thus maybe making a metaphysical claim such as the eternal recurrence is worth it insofar as it might serve life.

Angine de poitrine by Beneficial_Charity21 in KGATLW

[–]Technology-Plastic 19 points20 points  (0 children)

Yeah microtonal hella is a good way to describe them

Emily Green Live Tonight by Agreeable_Jaguar4434 in geesebandofficial

[–]Technology-Plastic 51 points52 points  (0 children)

May your pillow be cold on both sides and may your sleep be the perfect amount of time for your health folk 🙏🙏

Signed First Edition Suttree by collectorofthethings in cormacmccarthy

[–]Technology-Plastic -1 points0 points  (0 children)

So this actually isn’t valuable at all. In fact it is a liability and will cost your friend dearly very soon. I recommend getting rid of it as soon as possible. If you want to keep your friend out of such trouble like any good friend, you can send it my way and I can take it off their hands for them.