Nietzsche Is a fag

[Blackout.xl]

He’s a reddit tier soyboy fag from the 1800’s. He’s a homosexual.

It’s not surprising he came from a single mum home

 

[Deleted member 2597]

He’s a reddit tier soyboy fag from the 1800’s. He’s a homosexual.

It’s not surprising he came from a single mum home

Cope he was based, aquinas was the fag.

 

[Blackout.xl]

Cope he was based, aquinas was the fag.

Hardly based at all. He was a soyboy intellectual who was only redpilled on women. Don’t diss Aquinas ever again

 

[john2]

Hardly based at all. He was a soyboy intellectual who was only redpilled on women. Don’t diss Aquinas ever again

Indeed bro. Aquinas was a man of God and a great philosopher with strong arguments and explanation for faith and reason. As a non-catholic Christian, I agree with him. Nietzsche was a complainer who lost at life.

 

[honky]

Maybe you're an untermensch.

 

[Patient A]

FUCK OFF spamming that shit you piece of genetic shit

 

[Hopeful333]

He’s a reddit tier soyboy fag from the 1800’s. He’s a homosexual.

It’s not surprising he came from a single mum home

What makes Nietzsche soy?

Indeed bro. Aquinas was a man of God and a great philosopher with strong arguments and explanation for faith and reason. As a non-catholic Christian, I agree with him. Nietzsche was a complainer who lost at life.

I’m not disagreeing with you. Just could you elab?

 

[Blackout.xl]

What makes Nietzsche soy?

Anti - nationalism and him rushing to the defence of Jews

 

[Krezo]

"Read Nietzsche bro life is meaningless!!"

 

[Blackout.xl]

"Read Nietzsche bro life is meaningless!!"

Soyboys who think they’re intellectuals piss me off

 

[Deleted member 685]

Soyboys who think they’re intellectuals piss me off

KING

 

[Deleted member 4209]

nietzche is peak "i'm 14 and this is deep"

the guy was a literal homo whose brain was rotting away from syphilis which is why he had such bizarre theories.

 

[Deleted member 3556]

I said this on here a while back. He was raised by his single mom AND two aunts and a grandma iirc. And then ended up a total fag of course

 

[goodman78]

Indeed bro. Aquinas was a man of God and a great philosopher with strong arguments and explanation for faith and reason. As a non-catholic Christian, I agree with him. Nietzsche was a complainer who lost at life.

sry didnt know who Aquinas was so i just googled him and watched a recap video of his arguments
how is he anywhere close to a great philosopher, i wasted my time believing ill see some good arguments but it was 10yr old wack
basically his philosophy : i cant comprehend that something has no start, so it must have a start and that start is god
so lame

 

[Deleted member 4563]

Shit on that low T jew

 

[Blackout.xl]

sry didnt know who Aquinas was so i just googled him and watched a recap video of his arguments
how is he anywhere close to a great philosopher, i wasted my time believing ill see some good arguments but it was 10yr old wack
basically his philosophy : i cant comprehend that something has no start, so it must have a start and that start is god
so lame

He says events have a first cause, is this not true? There are no uncaused effects, if there were then our universe would be chaotic

 

[goodman78]

He says events have a first cause, is this not true? There are no uncaused effects, if there were then our universe would be chaotic

so why does this prove the existence of god?
an infinite ongoing process of cause and effect could happen forever that we cant comprehend
or something else
my point is that it doesnt prove god at all

the universe is chaotic
the order you see is manifestation of billions-trillions-xxilions of years of random luck
and it will return to that soon

 

[Blackout.xl]

so why does this prove the existence of god?
an infinite ongoing process of cause and effect could happen forever that we cant comprehend
or something else
my point is that it doesnt prove god at all

the universe is chaotic
the order you see is manifestation of billions-trillions-xxilions of years of random luck
and it will return to that soon

An ongoing infinite process of cause and effect (aka infinite regress) is impossible. There being no beginning means there’s no definite source of the chain, which means there is no chain.

The argument gives the logical basis For the existence of a god, it proves one of the core elements of god to be valid (Something where all things originate from is needed).

Our universe isn’t really chaotic, it’s orderly. Everything that happens follows the laws of physics and logical laws (such as cause and effect). What happens is clear enough and orderly enough for us to document, understand and predict. The laws are universal and set in stone, they mostly don’t change.

As for chance and luck, I severely doubt that imo.

 

[TsarTsar444]

Nietzsche is right, life has completely no meaning without God, only degeneracy and hedonism

 

[Deleted member 2597]

Nietzsche is right, life has completely no meaning without God, only degeneracy and hedonism

In life there is no meaning, only copes, and copes alone.

 

[Tony]

In life there is no meaning, only copes, and copes alone.

bro me fuky u

 

[Deleted member 2597]

bro me fuky u

Tf is wrong with u stop.

 

[Tony]

Tf is wrong with u stop.

ME FUCKY YOU WITH MY 9X6 AND YOU CRY

 

[Deleted member 6164]

He’s a reddit tier soyboy fag from the 1800’s. He’s a homosexual.

It’s not surprising he came from a single mum home

Based

 

[goodman78]

Nietzsche is right, life has completely no meaning without God, only degeneracy and hedonism

i like to view it metaphorically for fun let aside the afterlife part
god is the illusion that you have to believe to to live a happy life and denying him = eating the apple of knowledge casts you into reality which is evil, misery, etc etc

 

[Eduardo DOV]

he was probably an addicted masturbator

 

[TsarTsar444]

i like to view it metaphorically for fun let aside the afterlife part
god is the illusion that you have to believe to to live a happy life and denying him = eating the apple of knowledge casts you into reality which is evil, misery, etc etc

What do you mean reality?

 

[goodman78]

An ongoing infinite process of cause and effect (aka infinite regress) is impossible. There being no beginning means there’s no definite source of the chain, which means there is no chain.

The argument gives the logical basis For the existence of a god, it proves one of the core elements of god to be valid (Something where all things originate from is needed).

Our universe isn’t really chaotic, it’s orderly. Everything that happens follows the laws of physics and logical laws (such as cause and effect). What happens is clear enough and orderly enough for us to document, understand and predict. The laws are universal and set in stone, they mostly don’t change.

As for chance and luck, I severely doubt that imo.

well you see the problem is with you having as a starting point/general truth that "infinite regress" is impossible because you cant understand it neither can i
but jumping to the conclusion that there must be a god and let alone a sentient and good god is not very satisfying for me neither i can take that seriously tbh
dont get me wrong i wish god was real and i could believe in him cuz life sucks but the evidence is just so weak imho

What do you mean reality?

logical/scientific life, basically living reasonably

 

[Blackout.xl]

well you see the problem is with you having as a starting point/general truth that "infinite regress" is impossible because you cant understand it neither can i
but jumping to the conclusion that there must be a god and let alone a sentient and good god is not very satisfying for me neither i can take that seriously tbh
dont get me wrong i wish god was real and i could believe in him cuz life sucks but the evidence is just so weak imho

logical/scientific life, basically living reasonably

It’s not that we can’t understand it, it’s that it literally doesn’t make sense logically. We can claim anything can happen and say that “we just don’t understand it yet” as an argument in support of it. Which is why the argument doesn’t hold water.

As I said, it gives the logical basis for god. It doesn’t directly prove a god. It’s not meant for that. Extended arguments based on this and other arguments combined with this are what gets you to the conclusion of a god existing.

As for a sentient or good god, again, the argument isn’t meant for that. You’re saying the argument doesn’t address what you want it to but it’s literally not meant for that. It would be like me saying an argument for gravity is bad because it doesn’t address wind.

Imo I’ve seen sufficient reason for a god existing, I’ve not seen sufficient evidence for a god not existing

 

[Deleted member 2597]

A god existing is cope tbh, if there was something akin to a "god" it'd be an eldritch abomination higher being that woudn't be aware of tiny humans existence.

 

[Blackout.xl]

A god existing is cope tbh, if there was something akin to a "god" it'd be an eldritch abomination higher being that woudn't be aware of tiny humans existence.

Why would god not be aware of humans existence when he created the universe with the proper cosmological constants to support life?

 

[Deleted member 2597]

Why would god not be aware of humans existence when he created the universe with the proper cosmological constants to support life?

It was random chance, jfl at believing there is a structure to the universe.

 

[Blackout.xl]

It was random chance, jfl at believing there is a structure to the universe.

If we go by random chance then we shouldn’t be here, there shouldn’t be any life in the universe. The laws of our universe are tuned perfectly to support life, changes in the region of less than 1% would lead to 0 life existing or the universe ending too early.

There is a structure to the universe. It’s called the laws of physics

 

[goodman78]

It’s not that we can’t understand it, it’s that it literally doesn’t make sense logically. We can claim anything can happen and say that “we just don’t understand it yet” as an argument in support of it. Which is why the argument doesn’t hold water.

As I said, it gives the logical basis for god. It doesn’t directly prove a god. It’s not meant for that. Extended arguments based on this and other arguments combined with this are what gets you to the conclusion of a god existing.

As for a sentient or good god, again, the argument isn’t meant for that. You’re saying the argument doesn’t address what you want it to but it’s literally not meant for that. It would be like me saying an argument for gravity is bad because it doesn’t address wind.

Imo I’ve seen sufficient reason for a god existing, I’ve not seen sufficient evidence for a god not existing

in the context that i was writing i meant the same for "we cant understand it" and "it doesnt make sense logically"
and if so, if it doesnt make sense logically, it doesnt make sense aswell to point out to a god aswell

the same way you can find "reason" / "evidence" / "triggers" that point out to a god existing
i can do the same to you and give you examples of why an evil god / evil origin of life exists

tbh its hard for me to understand how can a reasonable unbiased man can observe his environment and come closer toa conlcusion that god exists and not near a conclusion that everything is random and if anything, evil/miserable/objectively bad

If we go by random chance then we shouldn’t be here, there shouldn’t be any life in the universe. The laws of our universe are tuned perfectly to support life, changes in the region of less than 1% would lead to 0 life existing or the universe ending too early.

There is a structure to the universe. It’s called the laws of physics

but we werent here for so many years
you could not experience the years that we were absent/not alive because you did not have a brain to experience them
you are here merely by luck, but that doesnt mean that if you are not here you will experience your absense
you would experience anyway, how can u experience a non experience?

 

[Deleted member 2597]

If we go by random chance then we shouldn’t be here, there shouldn’t be any life in the universe. The laws of our universe are tuned perfectly to support life, changes in the region of less than 1% would lead to 0 life existing or the universe ending too early.

There is a structure to the universe. It’s called the laws of physics

It's a game of chance dude.

 

[Blackout.xl]

in the context that i was writing i meant the same for "we cant understand it" and "it doesnt make sense logically"
and if so, if it doesnt make sense logically, it doesnt make sense aswell to point out to a god aswell

the same way you can find "reason" / "evidence" / "triggers" that point out to a god existing
i can do the same to you and give you examples of why an evil god / evil origin of life exists

tbh its hard for me to understand how can a reasonable unbiased man can observe his environment and come closer toa conlcusion that god exists and not near a conclusion that everything is random and if anything, evil/miserable/objectively bad

?

It makes perfect sense to point to a god after analyzing all the arguments. The argument we talk about is not the only thing that delivers you to the conclusion, it’s not meant to be.

Evil god = still god

Believing in chance isn’t superior to believing in a god tbh. You’re quite literally just putting your hands up and saying nothing has a purpose and that it was all a happy accident, it’s a fair opinion but after all it’s an opinion. Not fact

 

[goodman78]

?

It makes perfect sense to point to a god after analyzing all the arguments. The argument we talk about is not the only thing that delivers you to the conclusion, it’s not meant to be.

Evil god = still god

Believing in chance isn’t superior to believing in a god tbh. You’re quite literally just putting your hands up and saying nothing has a purpose and that it was all a happy accident, it’s a fair opinion but after all it’s an opinion. Not fact

alright let me clear this out
im not entitled to my opinion neither i believe that its superior or sth to not believing in a god (in fact i told u that i wish the evidence was strong enough for me to believe in a god, and i say this in a completely non hypocritic way trust me)
ive came to this conclusion not because its a trend or someone told me but because it makes the most sense to me

having said the above, remind me once again what is the main nargument that points to the existence of god

you said before that theres more evidence that god exists than evidence that god doesnt exist
well
that "god" doesnt exist is the primary condition
maybe an indoctrinated infant grows up to be unbiased 100% from religion and still develops an implicit belief towards a superior power and i understand that

but most people arent like that and still, it doesnt hold the same weight
like, i could say the same for everything
theres also not much evidence that lochness monster exists or doesnt, actually there are anecdotal reports sights, so do i believe in it and every mythical creature?

except if you describe "god" as very different to the monotheistic god, not even a sentient one, to that i will still say i dont have any idea if true or not

 

[Deleted member 2597]

God is just a human idea, a symbol, nothing more. You can believe in the idea that god represents, its give us meaning, keeps us from roping and being degenerate but in the end of the day nothing matters. Everything is cope.

 

[goodman78]

to conclude
lets say between "i dont believe in god" and "i believe in god" there is "i dont know" and that is the primary belief and the starting point even tho i have a feeling that he doesnt exist lets be more logically "correct"

well then, this guy you mentioned fails to get me from "i dont knwo" to "god exists" with his arguments because i believe theyre weak to do that

 

[Blackout.xl]

It's a game of chance dude.

A game of chance that is overwhelmingly against the odds of a universe like ours existing. The ratios changing by less than 1% = no life. For every set of constants that even allow a universe regardless of life, there’s a set of constants that don’t even allow a universe. And so on, the chances and odds are so infinitely small, writing it off to chance isn’t sufficient enough imo

in the context that i was writing i meant the same for "we cant understand it" and "it doesnt make sense logically"
and if so, if it doesnt make sense logically, it doesnt make sense aswell to point out to a god aswell

the same way you can find "reason" / "evidence" / "triggers" that point out to a god existing
i can do the same to you and give you examples of why an evil god / evil origin of life exists

tbh its hard for me to understand how can a reasonable unbiased man can observe his environment and come closer toa conlcusion that god exists and not near a conclusion that everything is random and if anything, evil/miserable/objectively bad

but we werent here for so many years
you could not experience the years that we were absent/not alive because you did not have a brain to experience them
you are here merely by luck, but that doesnt mean that if you are not here you will experience your absense
you would experience anyway, how can u experience a non experience?

We weren’t here but the structure of the universe allowed us to evolve and eventually take our final form. The ratios were still the same even when we weren’t here, they didn’t change.

experience isn’t related to this conversation tbh

alright let me clear this out
im not entitled to my opinion neither i believe that its superior or sth to not believing in a god (in fact i told u that i wish the evidence was strong enough for me to believe in a god, and i say this in a completely non hypocritic way trust me)
ive came to this conclusion not because its a trend or someone told me but because it makes the most sense to me

having said the above, remind me once again what is the main nargument that points to the existence of god

you said before that theres more evidence that god exists than evidence that god doesnt exist
well
that "god" doesnt exist is the primary condition
maybe an indoctrinated infant grows up to be unbiased 100% from religion and still develops an implicit belief towards a superior power and i understand that

but most people arent like that and still, it doesnt hold the same weight
like, i could say the same for everything
theres also not much evidence that lochness monster exists or doesnt, actually there are anecdotal reports sights, so do i believe in it and every mythical creature?

except if you describe "god" as very different to the monotheistic god, not even a sentient one, to that i will still say i dont have any idea if true or not

There’s many arguments that can point you towards a god existing, going into all of them would take pages upon pages. A few examples though are first cause and argument from fine tuning.

The lochness monster isn’t even comparable, not even in the same realm. For anecdotal reports of a lochness monster, most if not all can be chalked up to people mis identifying other creatures the lochness monster after we review the evidence. The same cannot he said for god, if we could, the argument would be done and dusted.

God not existing is not the primary condition, I’m tired of that argument. When you’re a baby you don’t know what god is, you can’t make a sufficient choice on if he exists or not. If you go up to a baby and ask if god exists they won’t be able to answer the question, they won’t say no. Therefore it’s not the primary condition. Agnosticism at best is the primary condition and even that can be argued against. I hope you also know most athiests on this planet are only atheists because they took after their parents. It’s the minority that came into that belief through searching by themselves.

 

[Deleted member 25534]

I said this on here a while back. He was raised by his single mom AND two aunts and a grandma iirc. And then ended up a total fag of course

XDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

 

[Deleted member 25534]

he was probably an addicted masturbator

XD