Who here likes Nietzsche?

no, existentialism is self-refuting and comes from false premise.
the best we have is aristotelianism. And christianity also mogs that existential shit
Existentialism doesn't offer an objective truth or meaning and doesn't claim to do so, it's a practical response to crisis.

Science mogs both aristotelianism and Christianity.
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: Nebelix28 and theRetard
Existentialism doesn't offer an objective truth or meaning and doesn't claim to do so, it's a practical response to crisis.
so if it doesn't offer an objective truth, then no reason to be an existentialist because it is not the truth
Science mogs both aristotelianism and Christianity.
scientism is retarded and self-refuting
 
  • +1
Reactions: Nebelix28
cuz an unexamined life is not worth living.
you can keep living in your delusions though
How can you arrive at the conclusion that life is meaningless and you'll have to provide it with your meaning, if you don't examine it ?
Elaborate. I'd argue science is self transcending rather than self refuting
 
How can you arrive at the conclusion that life is meaningless and you'll have to provide it with your meaning, if you don't examine it ?
if you did examine it then you wouldn't think that it is meaningless because if life is meaningless then the statement is also meaningless
Elaborate. I'd argue science is self transcending rather than self refuting
so can you scientifically prove that science is above aristotelianism and christianity?
 
Last edited:
if you did examine it then you wouldn't think that it is meaningless because if life is meaningless then the statement is also meaningless
This is a linguistic problem not a philosophical one, Wittgenstein talks about it. It's like saying "You can’t coherently deny meaning without using meaning"
so can you scientifically prove that science is above aristotelianism and christianity?
Science doesn't do that but it can prove christianity is a false worldview because it is anti-scientific
 
  • +1
Reactions: Nebelix28
This is a linguistic problem not a philosophical one, Wittgenstein talks about it. It's like saying "You can’t coherently deny meaning without using meaning"
alright if it is just a linguistic problem rather than philosophical then i can claim that this statement is just a linguistic shit as well
Science doesn't do that but it can prove christianity is a false worldview because it is anti-scientific
basically: christianity is wrong because it is anti-scientific, it is antiscientific because it is false, it is false because science can't disprove it.
just fucking LOL.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Nebelix28
basically: christianity is wrong because it is anti-scientific, it is antiscientific because it is false, it is false because science can't disprove it.
just fucking LOL
It sounds self contradictory because you're using science to disapprove metaphysical claims (it can't do that) rather than testable, emperical claims within Christianity like Earth's creationism.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Nebelix28 and theRetard
Sub5 neurotic
 
  • +1
Reactions: Nebelix28
It sounds self contradictory because you're using science to disapprove metaphysical claims (it can't do that) rather than testable, emperical claims within Christianity like Earth's creationism.
so if it cannot disapprove metaphysical claims then how does scientism mog aristotelianism and christianity?
 
  • Hmm...
  • +1
Reactions: zeref74 and Nebelix28
He was an incel
Im not taking advice from somebody who would have a red name on here if he was born in modern times
 
  • +1
Reactions: Nebelix28
Me! (i have never read a single word of his writing)
 
  • JFL
Reactions: Nebelix28

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top