Submitted by HisWillness on March 23, 2008 - 10:50am.
iwbiek wrote:
i appreciate your candor, though i've never heard hawking called a "shit disturber" before.
It might be a local idiomatic expression. It means a prankster or someone who always has that twinkle in their eye like they're messing with you.
iwbiek wrote:
did you mean "distributor"? do you think hawking has a religious agenda or what?
Haha - "distributor". That would be funny, but certainly not. I think he was just writing something inflammatory in a book with a popular audience. I honestly wouldn't know if he had a religious agenda, since I'm not familiar with his views on religion.
iwbiek wrote:
nietzsche in "the birth of tragedy" lauds wagner because wagner represents a return to classical religion, or what he calls "dionysian" religion. [...]
Oh, I know what you're talking about now. I'm more of a hobby reader of Nietzsche anyway. I find him a fun read, and he may have influenced the way I put my statement about classical and modern gods. It's possible Nietzsche and I disagree on many more things.
iwbiek wrote:
... indeed saw that a return to ancient greek religious modes (in a modern context) would be beneficial for mankind's survival and "evolution"
I tend to argue (in a tongue-in-cheek way I think Nietzsche enjoyed himself) that having more than one god at least eliminates the tiresome arguments about omnipotence, and makes for better stories. The modern christian seems forced to make a god out of the devil in order to accomplish this goal. But at least that way, there's a battle.
iwbiek wrote:i appreciate
It might be a local idiomatic expression. It means a prankster or someone who always has that twinkle in their eye like they're messing with you.
Haha - "distributor". That would be funny, but certainly not. I think he was just writing something inflammatory in a book with a popular audience. I honestly wouldn't know if he had a religious agenda, since I'm not familiar with his views on religion.
Oh, I know what you're talking about now. I'm more of a hobby reader of Nietzsche anyway. I find him a fun read, and he may have influenced the way I put my statement about classical and modern gods. It's possible Nietzsche and I disagree on many more things.
I tend to argue (in a tongue-in-cheek way I think Nietzsche enjoyed himself) that having more than one god at least eliminates the tiresome arguments about omnipotence, and makes for better stories. The modern christian seems forced to make a god out of the devil in order to accomplish this goal. But at least that way, there's a battle.
Will: no gyration without funkstification.