Random Politics & Religion #18

If we reported every time a Democrat or Republican lied it would be a 24/7 cycle of so and so lied today. Outrage in 3...2...1.

When the press lies and misleads to focus on a narrative they give them an award for journalism.

There are no facts just interpretations on to the next outrage !

"You have your own way. I have my way. As for the right way, correct way and the only way, it does not exist". What Nietzsche is trying to convey is the concept of 'individualism', that every man is free in how he looks at facts! When looking at a book, one might see the cover, another might see the side of the book... so their interpretations about the book will be different and one can not say that one of them is right and the other is wrong.

Trump didn't issue those "alternative facts", his minister of propaganda did.

All a fact is is a agreed upon thing. Something being a fact doesn't make it good or bad. Interpretations how we view the world reality etc matter.

The point of the quote on facts explained in detail:

An important thing to keep in mind when reading Nietzsche is that most of the time he is trying to reveal things through insights.

The point of this particular quotation is to reveal the assumption at the base of many philosophies (in this case, most specifically positivism): that objective facts exist.

Positivism holds, roughly, that the phenomena we observe through our senses are physical in nature and that they actually happen in a material world. Thus positivists take these phenomena as objective fact and use it for their world-explanation, for example by making physical laws. Nietzsche's statement is that fundamentally, positivists are interpreting observed phenomena as physical (instead of non-physical, e.g. Berkeley), and real, when in fact they have no definite justification to do so. Thus, facts are really the subjective result of information: there is nothing necessarily "true" about them, other than how they fit into a particular interpretation.

Just as the interpretation of a book is up to the reader, so too is Nietzsche pointing out that the interpretation of our world is up to the person observing. Now, here he does not make any claim as to whether, as with a book, there is an "author" who intended a particular meaning that we are supposed to pick up on, and that this meaning is the "correct" interpretation, but holistically that idea would probably be repugnant to Nietzsche: he effectively rejects all teleology, metaphysics, and meaningful notion of truth, which leaves no room for there to be a "correct" interpretation of the world.

Ultimately what this means is that, to Nietzsche, it is much less important whether we "understand" how the world "works" (if that is even a meaningful thing to say), and much more important that we develop an interpretation that works for us. One of Nietzsche's primary themes is the advance of humanity into a stronger (intellectually, culturally, and maybe physically) race, and the proper interpretation of the world could aid in achieving this. In Nietzsche's terms (and this is straying from this quotation against positivism to a generalized summary of Nietzsche), this would be the interpretation that best frees us from life-rejecting restraints such as Good vs Evil and lets us become stronger by exercising our will to power and working toward the overman.

Yes, I did.
But like my previous post clearly explained I'm talking about what he settled with in the end, not who the real Trump is. Because nobody knows that.

He's by no means at all a centrist. And no, it's not cause he's right of me like KN suggests(while knowing full well he's blocked), I guess it's convenient to forget I live in a country where more than 2 parties exist. I've talked multiple times about the fact that there's a moderate and there's an extreme right. Counterpoint: not everything on your side is moderate.

The only problem with this interpretation is that the ductile strength of steel, or the speed of light (photon) in a vacuum is rather important to the functioning of the universe. You can't "interpret" the speed of light to be anything other then what it is, because if it was open to interpretation the universe would of died instantly after creation. If the strength of a particular metal was open to interpretation then the bridge would fall apart the moment a negative person walked onto it. So physics itself is rather concrete, just our understanding of it is constantly evolving.

I agree with that my point was just because we agree with something doesn't prove anything.

In fact I'm skeptical when everyone agrees with something. I rather think for myself then to fall into one category or another. I support the individual not the group.

Every American not a Democrat is a conservative extremest in comparison to an European Socialist.

What you think or believe is irrelevant to American politics. You don't vote here, you don't participate in this political process and ultimately you don't matter.

So again I state, Trump is a centrist with opportunistic tendencies. He has no ideology, no loyalty to any political party. Someone with a political ideology is by definition a centrist.

False.

I really wish one day you'll stop pulling this crap and start engaging in debates in a honest way. It would benefit everyone, also cause you're eloquent enough to be able to make it work if you cared to do it. But enjoy your internet points until then I guess...

To the Europeans our Democrat party is conservative and the Republicans are extreme conservatives. A "proper" liberal party would be for full on nationalization of business's, free government pensions for life, free government healthcare, government home/fire/life insurance, government regulations on compensation, and abolishment of States entirely in favor of a single huge Federal bureaucratic Government that manages every detail via committee.

So everyone American who isn't a SJW is a conservative to Sehe's point of view. And the SJW's aren't doing enough cause they couldn't persuade get congress to suspend that silly Constitution and jail Trump for making them feel bad.

I watch what people do not what they say. You can say whatever you want but the demonstrated thought patterns behind your posts indicate something far different from what you state. You are ruled by your emotions and use those to determine what you do and don't believe in.

You state Trump is a conservative, while conveniently ignoring all his liberal actions in the past. Demonstrate, via actions, that he has not done any actions orientated with the liberal party and instead is a die hard conservative.

Actions are what matters not words, something progressives have a VERY hard time understanding, with all their safe spaces and cuddle puppies and hate speech.

Wait there is one thing, so vile, so evil, so capitalistic, so absolutely conservative that President Trump did that would brand him a die hard super conservative for the rest of his life. He beat Queen Clinton in a national election and stole away the crown she righteously deserved. This theft of position is so vile and repulsive that we can never forgive him. At best we can chose to look the other way, but only if he immediately steps down and offers the position to whomever the Democrats chose, since their always right anyway.

Why even bother with an election, the progressives are always right so just let them pick the leadership positions among themselves and choose which laws they should create.

Not true.

I've said a bunch of times this isn't about past Trump, only the stances he settled with in the end. I'm tired of repeating it...

I'm a very analytical person actually, even when it comes to personal matters. You say you know what I post but you've always conveniently ignored when I criticized stupid things like neo-feminism for example, deciding to just lump me into that group cause it was more convenient for your scoreboard. You need to start accepting that not every person falls into the perfect archetype you imagine.

Case in point, I always said Clinton was a ***candidate.

Demonstrate with actions


Doesn't matter, you use your emotions to decide things. If you feel good about something then you'll look for reasons to like it, if you feel bad then you'll look for reasons to dislike it. This is demonstrated with your focus on words over actions. You dislike President Trump for his words because he made you feel bad, you've completely ignored his actions.

Again the Republican candidates railed against him because he wasn't really a conservative, the Republican party threw everything they could legally throw at him to remove him and prevent him from being their candidate because he wasn't conservative enough. They failed because the Republican voters didn't want a conservative candidate, they wanted a moderate.

Trumps actions demonstrate he's a moderate centrist.

And no you can't just chose to ignore what doesn't support your argument. That's an extremely progressive thing to do and fueled entirely by emotions. Things that don't support your preconceived beliefs make you feel bad so you reject their legitimacy and hand waive them as non-existent.

"The future is certain, it's the past that keeps changing"

Everyone said she was a ***candidate, but that didn't prevent them (or you) from supporting her. You defended her one very one of her scandals and problems. You ridiculed those pressing that people shouldn't ignore her scandals and you trivialized those scandals.


She was given support because to not support her is tantamount to supporting the enemy and that makes you feel bad.

This is a forum, I don't know what you're expecting but talking is all we can do here...

No, they demonstrate he'd do anything for his goals and at times that he's also not very intelligent.

That's not it, maybe you just misunderstood me. What he said in the past is irrelevant to his current platform, which is what I'm addressing.
Also being all over the place doesn't make you a centrist, it makes you a lunatic.

I supported Sanders.

I have no fracking clue what you're talking about. What scandal? The emails? I never even commented on those because I don't know american law and don't weigh in on things I know nothing about.

Don't you get it, he doesn't have a platform. There is no political agenda, he's not a career politician following a party approved agenda. He will do and support whatever he believes works best for a particular situation, regardless of which ideology the solution falls under.


This is what I'm talking about. You just called a man with an IQ higher then yours, who just ran an outstanding non-standard election campaign that not only beat every other Republican candidate, including doctors, but also beat the queen of the Democrat party, ... not intelligent.

Hate the man if you want, all you do it show your ignorance by failing to recognize talent and accomplishments. President Trump has accomplished more in a single day then you will do for your entire life. And that was before he decided to run for President which only raised the bar even higher.

Healthy respect for ones enemies is critical to being able to defeat them.

What is my IQ? What is Trump's?

If you can't answer you should apologize.

You have a pretty unhealthy concept of accomplishment and intelligence.

This point seems to be lost on many people.

I'm not interested in defeating anyone, only in being critical. Even that is something that is lost on many.

His is north of 130, yours is around 110 maybe 120 if we push it.


A common indication of high IQ (as in real intelligence) is emotional detachment. The person has emotional reactions, they just don't dominate the decision making process at a subconscious level like they do normal people and the person is able to ignore them and make rational decisions even if they feel strong negativity towards those decisions. These people are usually perceived as distanced which carries negative social consequence. The smarter genius's learn to fake emotional attachment and interactivity which gives them a Machiavellian attitude. Able to appear to be like others and gain social benefits but still making cold calculating decisions.

And as I said before, Trump accomplished more in a day then you have your entire life. Even if you don't like him you should still respect his accomplishments. Your failure to not only respect him but to refuse any accomplishments at all, is a testimony to how emotional you are.

Hillary Clinton has many accomplishments herself, chief of which is the sheer amount of fear and respect other politicians hold for her. She is an extremely capable person and I hold most of Bill's success to backroom influence from her. She is cunning, fearsome, capable, experienced, knowledgeable and has many connections born from a lifetime of successful politics. I honestly believe she should of had the nomination back in 2008 and would of done a much better job of being President. Becoming the Secretary of State was the worst decision she made for her political career.

There goes the asspull.

You're wrong by a long shot too. I understand you just wanted to belittle me, like you always do. I think I've been patient enough for the night.

Another reason to not watch SNL

http://www.mediaite.com/online/snl-writer-deletes-tweet-saying-barron-trump-will-be-americas-first-homeschool-shooter/

A writer for Saturday Night Live broke the usual rule about not targeting the children of politicians we disagree with.

For approximately three hours today, SNL “Weekend Update” writer Katie Rich had a tweet up saying that President Trump‘s 10 year old son, Barron, was going to grow up to become America’s “first homeschool shooter.”

You're talking about a guy who tweets about people who don't like him at 3 AM. There's nothing rational and restrained about Trump, he's pure id.

Also you're comparing the accomplishments and intelligence of an uneducated 70something man born into wealth with a 20something woman with a college education who you know basically nothing about.

Nothing rational about posting on a video game forum but here we are...