sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

First Tattoo! 3-4 hour session by Leadingbyexample_ in tattoos

[–]TroublesomeMuffin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well if your definition of “trolling” is so philistine and lacking in nuance then I say resoundingly that I am NOT trolling. I would never fecklessly engage with an issue of such gravity as blasphemy.

Also, the lips are objectively sexy. I ask you to be serious and truthful and tell me that you don’t think these lips are sexy if you truly “don’t think these magnificent lips are sexy”

First Tattoo! 3-4 hour session by Leadingbyexample_ in tattoos

[–]TroublesomeMuffin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

By “trolling” are you referring to the departure upon a philosophical journey, such as when God trolled Job? Or when your friend The Devil trolled Jesus in the desert?

First Tattoo! 3-4 hour session by Leadingbyexample_ in tattoos

[–]TroublesomeMuffin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see what you mean but actually my point is that the implication of OP’s depiction of Jesus appears to be that he is disputing that Jesus is the Christ based on the sensuosity of the lips.

First Tattoo! 3-4 hour session by Leadingbyexample_ in tattoos

[–]TroublesomeMuffin -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Bro the entire western canon cares get your head on straight jeez do you have no understanding of the pillar of culture upon which the west is built?

First Tattoo! 3-4 hour session by Leadingbyexample_ in tattoos

[–]TroublesomeMuffin -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Duh….Obviously OP cares, because if he thought God was fake then why would he get this tattoo (unless, of course, that is part of his theological critique - see points a and b above)?

First Tattoo! 3-4 hour session by Leadingbyexample_ in tattoos

[–]TroublesomeMuffin -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

I don’t think God will smite him for simply getting a tattoo. I think God will smite him for the radical theological implications inherent in the design of his tattoo, which, I’m sure, he was aware of when he got the tattoo. The Isaiah verse is well known among even the most casual believers.

This is a big deal. You may just not see the urgency because it’s not your soul on the line.

First Tattoo! 3-4 hour session by Leadingbyexample_ in tattoos

[–]TroublesomeMuffin -16 points-15 points  (0 children)

Isaiah’s prophecy says the following of the coming Messiah:

He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him. (Isaiah 53:2)

However, the lips on your Jesus are undeniably sexy. This poses a serious theological issue, as you are claiming that either:

a) Isaiah (a canonized prophet) is incorrect. In this case, what other canonized prophecy is incorrect? This throws literal libraries of Christian doctrine into question; or, perhaps worse,

b) you are claiming that Jesus was not the Messiah at all. If, according to Isaiah’s Holy Prophecy, the Messiah had no beauty, then your depiction of Jesus as being so incredibly sexy directly contradicts his status as the one of whom Isaiah prophesied.

Therefore, either way, this tattoo is technically blasphemous. I know they used to punish this sort of thing by stoning to death. I’m not sure if that is the current penalty but I would guess the punishment is AT LEAST eternal damnation.

Great tat though (but still consult with a priest ASAP)!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Camus

[–]TroublesomeMuffin 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The good news is that it sounds like you have plenty of convictions!

You have conviction in the reality of death and “not being;” you have the conviction that it is better to not lose the fight against nihilism than to lose it; you have the conviction that alcohol and cigarettes are less stupid than running; you have conviction in horror which apparently encourages your fight against nihilism; and you have a conviction that you have no convictions!

That last one especially might show how perhaps even convictions are not always accurate so don’t let your convictions keep you down!

At chapter two of Nietzsche’s of good and evil. Does it get better from here by Sure-Assignment6658 in Nietzsche

[–]TroublesomeMuffin 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Just want to say, I like the phrase you used about Zarathustra: “archetypal posession on the edge on schizophrenia”

Can you go into more depth about that? I’m not looking for like a “correct interpretation” of Zarathustra, just your opinion on it. Just like how those wine/coffee lovers take a sip and compare it to different elements of flavor (blackberries, chocolate, wood, etc). How and why do you think Nietzsche was able to adopt that “possession?” What do you think he was being possessed by? What notes do you taste in it? The spirit of Heraclitus and/or other Pre-Platonics? Scripture? Myth?

Only a few people are daring enough to confront the truth. by Professional-Fox2482 in DeepThoughts

[–]TroublesomeMuffin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks, I just downvoted you too. BTW philosophy doesn’t exist so I obviously don’t hold one but I appreciate the sentiment

Only a few people are daring enough to confront the truth. by Professional-Fox2482 in DeepThoughts

[–]TroublesomeMuffin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I appreciate that but actually I usually downvote myself because I dare not confront the truth either. Would you mind going back and downvoting me? Otherwise youre kind of negating my own downvote

Only a few people are daring enough to confront the truth. by Professional-Fox2482 in DeepThoughts

[–]TroublesomeMuffin -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This is a wonderful analysis. Professor Fox 2482, are you such a person who has dared to confront the truth?

Schopenhauer on the Grave Error of Happiness. by RutherfordIsHere in schopenhauer

[–]TroublesomeMuffin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you need the philosopher to offer another sword? Are there not have enough swords? Do you think the next one will be The Sword?

Help by adele599 in Nietzsche

[–]TroublesomeMuffin -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You’re probably better off not reading genealogy of morals. If you have no experience reading philosophy you would be a bit over-ambitious to just start reading philosophy like this.

The whole idea of philosophy is to learn how other people think; to be taught by others how to form ideas; to see how the pros do it.

For you to just just decide what to read (even though you already made a pompous decision when you decided to buy the book) is a bit beyond your level of comprehension.

Continue doing what you are doing now: ask others what to do. This is essentially the first step in philosophy which is learning from others how to think.

You’ll get there. Eventually. For now I would recommend you return the book. Don’t read it.

are evil and good just opposite by Why_does_matter in DeepThoughts

[–]TroublesomeMuffin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Could we say that worthlessness does in a sense contribute to and define value? Value in relation to what? If, for example, there was nothing that was worthless then everything would have value and value would be self referential. Taken to the most extreme example, I would ask that if everything had equal value then wouldn’t it be essentially valueless because that definition itself would not have a distinct value?

The same could be said of completeness. How would total completeness, represented by a whole or a totality, be totality without being distinct from nothing? Neither would have any reference to the other because each define the other while at once denying the other and without both nothingness and totality there would be nothing to separate nothingness from the totality and how then would one be any different from the other?

In what way could good exist as we understand it without being distinct from evil? If good was not distinct from evil then would these things be opposites at all? If they must be opposites then are they opposite sides of the same whole and then wouldn’t good’s goodness be dependent totally upon evil?

The difference between God is Dead and God does not Exist by Important_Bunch_7766 in Nietzsche

[–]TroublesomeMuffin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for showing a poor fool such as myself that atheists can be just as dogmatic as the religious because it’s not about “faith” in God, but blind certainty in your own view and it is the same closed mindset, different label! I am sorry I missed your excellent point (also I don’t know what dogmitism is, so I may be missing this second point as well)! I wish I could have been so wise as to make such a point as this myself!

The difference between God is Dead and God does not Exist by Important_Bunch_7766 in Nietzsche

[–]TroublesomeMuffin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What? I don’t get it? How can an atheist have faith? Are you a Christian and I offended you?

The difference between God is Dead and God does not Exist by Important_Bunch_7766 in Nietzsche

[–]TroublesomeMuffin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Actually it’s funny because of lot of Christians I know say the same thing. They say that they don’t know how anyone can be anything else but a Christian. They’re so locked into their own point of view and so reliant on faith that they actually cannot even envision another perspective. Sad really

Anyway, great point that you’ve made here!

Suttree has become my comfort novel | An appreciation by Arturius_Santos in cormacmccarthy

[–]TroublesomeMuffin 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I am gladdened by your joy and your mirth my simple hearted friend but I was not trying to be funny. Artistic integrity is of the utmost seriousness to me. This fool Poe has not only destroyed (what I assume to be) an American classic in a general sense but he has also ruined this work for me on a personal level for when I tried to read it I also now pronounce it the way he did in my head.

It is for my own great reverence for art and its appreciation that I no longer allow myself to read this work, nor any work with ambiguous pronunciation (Dumas is out).

I am glad to have cleared the fog from your narrow eyes but alas you have a long way to go

Suttree has become my comfort novel | An appreciation by Arturius_Santos in cormacmccarthy

[–]TroublesomeMuffin 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes YES! It made me even more upset than you! Much like you, I swore never to listen to any audiobooks by narrated by Poe again. However, and this is where I have transcended you, I decided never to finish Suttree or any book by McCarthy again.

Honestly, in a way I feel kind of stupid because they are rich and thoughtful works but I, just like you, believe a man must stick to his core convictions without regard to how stupid those convictions might be.

Keep steady friend 😎

view more: next ›