About
DEVOURING THE FEEBLE MINDED.
[This site wants to tell the truth, and nothing but the truth, or potential truth, so help me truth! Anybody finding what she or he considers to be a mistake, or an outrage, is vigorously encouraged to contact the author, and to bring her or his piece of perceived truth to the fore! I will be always thankful, even if i get an earful!]
I try to find out what is really happening, and what could happen, and what is not happening, or could not possibly happen, what is right and what is wrong, on many important questions, and in all sorts of ways. In other words, thinking is applied relentlessly, even ferociously. This why thinking evolved. Thinking evolved precisely because it was the ultimate instrument of domination of anything in sight (be it domination of one’s erroneous, or misadjusted self, or of one’s own ideas and emotions, or plain, old domination of the universe).
Thinking evolved to predict effectively and ambitiously, not to cower in a corner, modest and dazed.
Prometheus’ punishment was a regrettable misunderstanding the Greeks made. We did not steal fire from someone, and certainly not from inexistent gods, we created our mastery of fire, and fire made us what we are, as we wished. Mastering fire was not a sin, the Greco-Romans were wrong on that one. Mastering the unknown, and creating what was not before, is what we are. Fire was part of what we have evolved to be. Masters of the universe, for better or worse.
The philosophical jargon (for want of a better word), brandished, in the last two centuries, among some often viewed as philosophical, is avoided. This is not so much because most commoners do not know about it, but because more recent scientific research has often proven that pseudo philosophical jargon is inappropriate, or even hopelessly erroneous.
Thus science is not shunned, just the opposite. False language and semantics is shunned.
Speaking of science, as it is about truth, it is used as massively as possible. But not all science is adulated . I cut science down to digestible size, any time I can. As some science presented as science is not really science, but science base speculation, I do not refrained from that, either. Science needs imagination, based on speculation, to progress fundamentally. Yesterday’s established science is often today’s technology.
Economics, politics, religion and history are viewed as target rich environments for the enquiring philosopher. Engaging philosophy in economy, politics and sociology is the occasion for a reality check of said philosophy.
As the main goal of philosophy is to reveal better ways to get at the truth, in other words, reality, it’s important to engage in such down-to-earth checks. Psychoanalysis is central to the philosophical method.
Since we are the ones producing truth, by examining ourselves better, we make the source of truth higher quality. Any progress in psychoanalysis is bound to be painful, not to say scandalous, as it puts into question all knowledge laid down before, and those, individuals, institutions and structures, that rested on it while producing it.
A lot of hard core science derived from criticizing old preconceptions first, so it has been part, and fruit, of deeper psychoanalysis.
The hardest subjects are confronted with the greatest enthusiasm. Just as in mountain climbing, the harder, the better. No mountain is high enough for our universe devouring ambition.
So what is philosophy? It’s not about obscure notions, it’s not even a distantiated way of contemplating life. Instead, it’s at the very core of thinking, spindle neuron territory.
Philosophy is viewed as a METHOD. Philosophy is the set of all the methods of reasoning, and emoting that are best when, at first sight, little evidence seems at hand.
Thus philosophy is the cutting edge of human inquiry, whatever the inquiry is (be it of justice, grace, logic or science). And whatever the methods used (poetry is OK, and so are hard core facts, or the goriest considerations; if it happens, it’s under examination therein: censorship is not applied).
Hence philosophy is the most advanced neurological activity, probably the strongest driver of human evolution, being the most connected to the frontal lobes. In other words, it cannot be boring (if it is really what is taught, rather than the sort of fake, pretentious knowledge that one gets in exchange for a lot of money, and that Socrates was already, and very correctly, riling against).
The point of view of the present site is not just that of the highest, global civilization we have, from all continents, all histories, and all the hardest and deepest subjects. It is the point of view of the more advanced, more global and ambitious civilization we need, extending its imperium over all men, beasts and space known, from nanotechnology to Alpha Centauri and beyond. From fashion to hard core math.
All good ideas are asked to contribute, all bad ideas will be punished. And no superstition shall be in the way of truth.
A lot is incorporated, because a lot is rejected. Philosophy is an unending search for higher wisdom, always elusive, but still many conclusions have been reached, here and there, and everywhere. Per the nature of knowledge, many of these conclusions falsify certainties taken for granted before.
But not all is destruction. Some conclusions are positive, building new hypotheses, not just deconstructing old ones. For example: respecting individuals is a must, and a pleasure, but respecting stupid systems of thought is the highest form of immorality, and inhumanity, it is not an option for civilization. This philosophical cleansing starts here.
***
The post “To Those Caring Enough To Think Better!” will increasingly contain in succinct form some of my main themes, and will be periodically boosted.
[The Tyranosopher website (http://tyranosopher.com/) was run concurrently (at a more sedate pace). It contains older works that are not found here (shorter and more tentative posts are on Pan Terra (http://tyranosopher.blogspot.com/ ). Since I was not the person posting the Tyranosopher essays, it seems practically stopped.]
Tyranosopher.

June 24, 2008 at 8:54 pm |
You commented on Roger Cohen’s article on Turkey
Allah wants us to obey whoever detains power: “O YOU WHO BELIEVE! … OBEY THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE IN POWER.” (Quran’s fascist principle, S.4; v. 59). It is probable that this sura inspired Hitler directly, for his crucial “Fuehrerprinzip” (the Fuehrer had more than a passing acquaintanceship with Islam as he admired it loudly while spewing contempt on Christianism).
I love those who quote the Qur’an and proceed to give it their own interpretation without givng alternatives. The verse is to prevent anarchy among the community that had only tribal customary law and led by the elite.
The Arabic says to obey those who are in authority, “From Among you”.
The father of Tariq Ramadhan, Said Ramadhan has said that this means those who have been given the authority either by being freely chosen or accepted by affirmation or by not denying their authority(even if it was taken by force). It has been misused to justify toleration of kings and dictators who abused this authority by acting contrary to Islam or not implementing Islam completely. The divine right of kings was used in this manner. While rule by a majority is not always necessary, consultation is required.
To associate Hitler with Islam is part of the effort by Zionists and their Christian supporters to demonize Islam in order to support Israeli policies of oppression of the Palestinians done of course by the only democratic country in the Middle East!! Hitler exploited the Arabs and a sympathy for Islam for his own military objectives.
October 9, 2008 at 12:58 pm |
Hey
I read some of your stuff and find it quite interesting. Your reference to “racism without racists,” or aversive racism as they call it, was something I just wrote about in my own blog. I will be reading more of your stuff for sure. This web thing is kinda cool. I found your site through an comment section I was reading regarding a column by Roger Cohen about Kipling and Sarah Palin. This is the very phenomenon I want to study and research while in the doctorate program at East London University next feb; the social networking abilities, whether direct with something like FaceBook, or indirect, like how I found you through a series of hyperlinks. I feel, we are moving into a brave new world, best represented by the potential election of a person of color to the US presidency. I will be sending more comments in the future. Your site is quite inspirational
October 9, 2008 at 9:30 pm |
Thank you for the compliments. It is indeed a very brave new world, where the brave and the wise can be heard loud and clear for the first time ever. We have achieved, thanks to advanced technology, something the 80,000 Athenians were after: equal access to speech.
So now the planetary civilization is in an excellent position to tap all its mental ressources. This is good, all the more since much of the advice coming from below will not be incarnating vested interests, and, thus, will be much more correct. Anyway, i’m delighted and not a little proud to provide some inspiration…
December 4, 2008 at 7:04 pm |
I read you comment on Roger Cohen’s article today. What amazing history you unveiled! thanks so much. now that i’ve found your site i’ll read it as well. Thanks again — you’re brilliant!
March 5, 2009 at 7:59 pm |
Hello. Today I read your response to Roger Cohen’s ridiculous article on France. You said you might elaborate on that comment on your blog. Please do that if you can.
Living in the US South I have great difficulty keeping in touch with European thought. I once found that easy to do when news of European thought and happenings came to me through shortwave radio listening, but that relaxed medium is gone now. Here in the US our media tells us nothing about Europe except whether you are doing what our government tells you to do. I want to know more, as I believe that in “old Europe” you have actually created a civilized, decent society.
Will bookmark your blog and hope for more.
March 19, 2009 at 1:29 am |
You were very right about Tom Friedman’s next column on the bailout.
But I’m sure you will appreciate the most recommended reader’s comment as much as I did. Very satisfying indeed.
March 22, 2009 at 6:06 pm |
Great blog – I enjoy your writing.
What country are you from? What is your current nationality? What is your ethnicity? Religion? Job/class?
Just trying to get a sense of where you are coming from socially and intellectually.
April 14, 2009 at 12:18 am |
This is quite a hot information. I’ll share it on Twitter.
July 23, 2009 at 10:27 pm |
Wonderful (albeit sad) comment to today’s Krugman “What’s in a name.” We are becoming an extremely low brow, rude, uncultured, easily manipulated people.
September 11, 2009 at 2:25 pm |
I can’t find an RSS feed to your blog. The link at the bottom doesn’t work. Please advise. Thanks.
September 11, 2009 at 4:23 pm |
Paul: I am the one in need of advice here. I am rather blog primitive. OK, I will research the problem, and shall start by asking the friendly folks at wordpress… I detest uppity links which don’t work… In any case you can probably use the “preferred” setting in your browser: when I feel like it, I check the preferred I want to see, such as the Northern Ice Cap of the day (enjoy while it exists!)…. That is what I do, I do not really know what an RSS feed is…
I went to my site, and clicked at the very bottom on the left the letters in blue, “Entries RSS“. Then the link opened a new page with this on top:
“Some of Patrice Ayme’s Thoughts
You are viewing a feed that contains frequently updated content. When you subscribe to a feed, it is added to the Common Feed List. Updated information from the feed is automatically downloaded to your computer and can be viewed in Internet Explorer and other programs. Learn more about feeds.
Subscribe to this feed“
If one clicks, to “Subscribe to this feed“, one should be done.
Maybe your browser does not support all this technology (I cannot access everything with my most primitive browsers). Latest Microsoft Explorer, Firefox, etc. work on anything….
Thanks for your interest, in any case…
PA
January 27, 2010 at 1:39 am |
Hello,
I ran into your site from the Federal debt black hole article on the coming collapse site.
I’d like to exchange links with you if you have a link exchange.
My site is http://thecomingdepression.net
Let me know if you want to exchange.
January 27, 2010 at 7:07 pm |
Hello Jack!
Absolutely! I did not know your site, but it looks excellent. I do believe we are already in a Much Greater Depression. The basic reason being that, whereas the Great Depression of the 1930s was caused by too loose a monetary policy, plus overproduction, plus huge mistakes (enormous 50% augmentation of tariffs!), in other words, causes that could have been easily avoided, the present situation confronts us with much deeper problems, actually the very problems that led to… decolonization and plutocracy (among other things)….
I do not have a link exchange set, but I am game…
PA
May 3, 2010 at 4:15 pm |
Patrice, your essay, ‘SOPHIA: WHEN POLITICS GOES NUTS’ is very plausible and articulates some of my own vague intuitions.
I have worked in workplaces where people are oppressed and dominated by cruel bosses, and in workplaces with relatively level hierarchies and mutual respect – the latter type BY FAR are more creative and efficient, and bootstrap the capabilities and motivation of both the individuals and the organization as a whole. And needless to say, happier places to be.
I have read a few of your articles and although I sometimes disagree with what I perceive to be a ‘systems engineer’ approach to life, I think that there’s so much thought of worth here that I will definitely be adding your site to my blogroll and recommending it to others.
You seem to be extremely well-read!
July 4, 2010 at 7:11 pm |
Recent revelations regarding the close and cordial co-operation between Croatia’s late president, Franjo Tudjman and Yugoslavia’s late strongman, Slobodan Milosevic – ostensibly, bitter enemies – expose the role that warfare and instability played in increasing the flow of aid (both civil and military) to belligerent countries. The more unstable the region, the more ominous its rhetoric, the more fractured its geopolitics – the more money flowed in. It was the right kind of money: multilateral – not multinational, public – not private, deliberately ignorant – not judiciously cognizant. It was the “quantum fund” – capable of “tunnelling” (as the Czechs called it) – vanishing in one place (the public purse) and appearing in another (the private wallet) simultaneously. Even the exception – the never-enforced sanctions against Yugoslavia – served to enrich its cankerous ruling class by way of smuggling and monopolies.
изучение английский язык носитель языка
http://s58.radikal.ru/i162/1006/6f/55636f63e8dc.jpg
http://s41.radikal.ru/i093/1006/26/bdc0a6cd3eb0.jpg
выучить английский язык за две недели
September 23, 2010 at 4:46 am |
Hi, nice to meet you, thinker !
September 23, 2010 at 7:58 pm |
Hi Patrice.
I found your site through a comment on this Krugman blog post. I am a recent college graduate in physics, but feel there are bigger problems than the unification of gravity and quantum mechanics, so I have decided to be a journalist. I have been reading as much as I am able to further this goal.
I am very much in agreement with your writing and have enjoyed reading the articles I have read. I am new to the whole blogging world and I’d really appreciate it if you would take a look at some of my work and criticize the crap out of it.
Or maybe just swap links?
Spottiswoode
http://graduate-opinion.blogspot.com/
September 23, 2010 at 10:11 pm |
Dear Spottiswoode:
True, if civilization crashes, so will science. After Athens’ democracy went down, under Macedonian fascist occupation, and internal plutocratic undermining, the rate of scientific, mathematical and technological progress slowed to a crawl, when it did not outright reverse… Informing people, the demos, is the best way to help science.
PA
January 13, 2011 at 4:11 am |
I just stumbled onto your writings tonight.
Awesome work !!! Very cool how you incorporate the knowledge and experiences of history.
I have a thought for you: I just read the About on the http://patriceayme.wordpress.com/ site and you talked a lot of psychoanalysis.
In what I understand of Plutocracy, Oligarchy, Fundamentalism, Conservatism, and their brethren, I can’t not think that the basis for these behaviors is Sociopathy/Narcissism.
I believe that this is what the great sages of history were trying to warn us about.
What do you think?
Thanks.
ANt.
January 13, 2011 at 4:14 am |
Thank you very much, Ankely. Sorry I did not answer before, but I am very busy. In any case I appreciate a lot, and your comments are welcome. I prefer to answer through general comments, because of the time, which is sorely short. It is true, as I make clear, including in the very latest essay I am presently working on, that a lot of human tragedies arise from much more than a question of evil, psychoanalysis, and, even, man. There are other important factors, such as the exponential function.
Patrice
June 12, 2011 at 4:56 am |
Hi Patrice, I would be grateful if you would have a look at the book Disappearance of the Universe by Gary Renard and let know your take on it.
Sincerely,
Nathan
June 12, 2011 at 5:16 am |
Dear Nathan:
I will put that on my list of things to do… Let me guess in the meantime, what it could be about.
Because of the (deeply mysterious, but maybe not so in my way of looking at Quantum Physics, TOW) “Dark Energy“, the universe’s space-time fabric is supposed to stretch ever faster, and in a 100 billion years or so, only the (by then all red) Milky Way should be visible, the rest of the universe being recessing away faster than the speed of light… All this would make Hans Solo (of star Wars fame) smirk: it’s a bit all too speculative: if one does not know why something is going on, to assume it will go on for 100 billion years, is somewhat naive…
PA
June 12, 2011 at 3:28 pm |
Dear Patrice,
I was just going to add a rider about my comment because if you read the premise of the book I asked you to check out – it comes across as decidedly new agey. And it’s for that reason that I came back just now to add something about this very issue. Despite that being the case – I would encourage you to read beyond appearances on the surface/back cover. I think the book has some merit. He covers quantum physics and also a very interesting psychotherapist by the name of Groddeck.
As I see it science is a tool for us to flesh out the mysteries of the percieved universe. But Quantum physics points out that the tool and the observer using the tool impacts the research findings. So that tool will always give us relative/skewered results.
Why I think Gary Renard’s book is interesting is that it broaches metaphysical questions that possibly pave a path for Christian metaphysics (I am not a Christian) to actually make sense in the large scheme of things (it’s not Renard’s invention – his book is a revisioning of another source – which makes sense if you read the book).
There is a sort of cartoon version of what is said in the book – called: The Universe is a Dream by Alexander Marchand. Both books are worth a read and I have a feeling you would find them very interesting.
If you share your email address I can send you a pdf of one of these.
Sincerely
Nathan
June 13, 2011 at 6:37 pm |
PS my email is nathan@bluelotuesolutions.com if you prefer to keep your mail ID private
June 13, 2011 at 7:21 pm |
Dear Nathan: It is not just that (as I have long rampaged throughout received wisdom, I have been the object of lethal violence), but I also have very little time (baby, job, etc.) So I prefer that people wanting to exchange ideas use the public forum. After all, it’s all about ideas, and making them public, no? Facebook is a half baked public forum, I can be found there.
PA
June 14, 2011 at 7:16 pm |
Dear Patrice, I sent you a link (with an explanation why I need to keep the link itself private as -it is not my intellectual property to share) via facebook. Thank you. Sincerely, Nathan
July 22, 2011 at 7:01 am |
Michelle Ciccati Hopefully the moral law isn’t as fluid as the ever changing starry sky though
Monday at 4:40pm · Like
Bohrnagin Ferthheluvitt I love quotes.
Monday at 4:42pm · Like
Patrice Ayme Kant said to obey the commander in chief always. Such was his moral law within. dozens of millions of Germans goose stepped behind that revelation, thereafter. Eichman pointed that out at Jerusalem, thus exhibiting his scrupulous morality, sending a few million Jews to death…
Monday at 5:26pm · Like
Mark Hopkins ”we were only following orders’ from Hitler to Nixon thru Reagan and Cheney….my moral compass is pretty rigidly entrenched in the Judeo Christian ethic. Old school
Monday at 5:30pm · Like
Daniel Brezenoff patrice: to what in kant’s writings are you referring?
Monday at 5:38pm · Like
Daniel Brezenoff http://eastanglia.academia.edu/KennethRWestphal/Papers/91685/Kants_Qualified_Principle_of_Obedience_to_Authority_in_the_Metaphysical_Elements_of_Justice
Monday at 5:38pm · Like
Patrice Ayme Let me quote Kant’s prefered moral principle: Fiat justitia, pereat mundus, (“Let justice be done, though the world perish”). Ironically found in his 1795 Perpetual Peace (Zum ewigen Frieden. Ein philosophischer Entwurf.)
Monday at 6:15pm · Like · 1 person
Patrice Ayme Here is another apostle of “peace” of the same sort. A guy with a moustache, who talked about peace all the time, just the same. Adolf Hitler. German philo brought that, and Nietzsche (PBUH) was one of the first and loudest to point that out.
Monday at 6:17pm · Like
Daniel Brezenoff I reject utterly the line you posit from kant to hitler. Diametrically opposed.
Monday at 7:11pm · Like
Patrice Ayme Go explain that to Eichman, or Hannah Arendt, who was there. I posit nothing. You do. Countless Nazis hid behind Kant. I quote Kant: “Justice Done, Perish World”. What is it in that 4 word sentence that is not IDENTICAL to Hitler? Maybe you are not familiar with Hitler’s “philosophy”? Hint; it’s: “Justice Done, Perish World”!
Monday at 8:24pm · Like
Cheshire Funkmeyer I agree http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/image/astro/hst_eskimo_ngc2392_0007.jpg
Monday at 9:43pm · Like
Cheshire Funkmeyer oh but moral law sounds kinda like ego BS…
Monday at 9:43pm · Like
Daniel Brezenoff nazis quoted jesus, too, does that make a line from jesus to nazis? if so, who is not a nazi? noam chomsky and you?
Monday at 9:47pm · Like
Daniel Brezenoff dev, can you elaborate on “moral law” is “ego bs”?
Monday at 9:48pm · Like
Patrice Ayme BTW, this is not new, as my reference to Arendt already revealed. The Frankfurt school (Habermas, etc.) and Foucault, later, spoke about that, generations ago. And the 4 words sentence stands, clear enough. I will mention this, at a much higher level, in connection with what thinking means, in my next essay…
Monday at 9:49pm · Like
Cheshire Funkmeyer Moral and Law are not words I would put together. Law implies that something has a state of testable fixation. Moral has to do with the ego’s opinion and judgement which (in my humble opinion) come from it’s upbringing education, language structure and experiences. To imply that one could discover a moral idea and connect it with a testable state of fixation in order to call it a law sounds like thinking one person can make calls for another about behavior and it’s value. Which I just don’t feel is the case.
Monday at 10:16pm · Like
Daniel Brezenoff replace moral law with karma…or replace moral with ethical and law with principle embedded in the universe with which your soul is going ro reckon.
IF not, why have ethics?
Monday at 10:27pm · Like
Daniel Brezenoff patrice, that it isnt new or that fouclat said it or that you have a certain interpretation of the phrase doesnt mean all that much to me. I take kant’s body of work and I’m certainly not going to use the nazis as a standard for judging something’s meaning. YOu didnt reply to the jesus analogy
Monday at 10:28pm · Like
Patrice Ayme I did not reply to the Jesus analogy because I was off the Internet. About the Frankfurt school my point is that they tired to see where the nazi madness came from. And they found some ot it, and that included Kant. Now Jesus is an even bigger can of worms, and maybe you should peruse my site before words are said the context of whose would be misinterpreted. Just an hint; it’s not the Nazis, it’s not even Luther or saint Louis who invented mass murdering anti-semitism…
Monday at 10:34pm · Like
Patrice Ayme The sentence of Kant you quoted is excellent. It is, in my opinion, his entire body of work which is lamentable. Same for Hegel, Herder, etc… Nazism did not happen in Germany by surprise…
Monday at 10:36pm · Like
Cheshire Funkmeyer I see where you are going. For me, ethics and whatever I will have to reckon with as a soul are the part of my journey that I feel is deeply personal, I also feel that those things are personal for others. I support fostering an environment where we can all grow to understand each other and I support communication, but which behavior is good karma is as much a matter of opinion as which flavor of ice cream is best. There is no ethical law that I know of imbedded in the universe unless you are speaking of the law of cause and effect.
Monday at 10:38pm · Like
Daniel Brezenoff what’s wrong with the law of cause and effect? That works for me. But let’s be clear: it’s not the law of cause and effect as understood in the west; that would only apply to purely physical matters, and morality/ethics arent normally understood to be physical. So if they are involved in cause and effect, that’s a huge paradigm shift. Which is great.
if ethics are involved in inevitable cause and effect relationships, that seems to me the same thing as a “moral law”, though it’s not, I think, precisely what kant meant (not too concerned, ultimately, with what kant meant). The question then becomes – how does it work? What ethical causes will lead to which effects? How’s that gonna show up?
If it’s true, it’s hard to see how it’s personal, beyond the details.
Monday at 10:43pm · Like
Cheshire Funkmeyer well now we are getting somewhere, I will ponder more and get back to you
Monday at 10:46pm · Unlike · 1 person
Patrice Ayme Amusingly, I have been working hard on an essay, for weeks, where all becomes physical… all thoughts, and emotions, thus including ethics. Thanks to Quantum Physics, cause & efffects have become very nebulous though… Nighty night…
Monday at 11:19pm · Unlike · 1 person
Daniel Brezenoff oh no, you threw hegel under the bus, too.
Tuesday at 12:13am · Like
Mark Hopkins Hegel the actress, or Hegel the philosopher…lol
Tuesday at 7:01am · Like
Patrice Ayme The Nazi bus.
Tuesday at 2:43pm · Like
Brian Addison You know me, Daniel: I am a chatty fuckin’ Cathy but I am left utterly speechless at someone claiming Kant instigated the Holocaust (which is the equivalent of the very ill-informed idea that Nietzsche instigated the Third Reich). Philosop…
See More
Tuesday at 8:31pm · Like
Daniel Brezenoff this could be a very long thread
Tuesday at 9:57pm · Like
Patrice Ayme Nobody has said that Kant instigated a holocaust, let alone “THE” holocaust. What is true is that those who obeyed orders that they should not have followed under Nazism, justified it with Kant’s philosophy that they had been pmprinted to view as an a priori absolute.
Yesterday at 8:55am · Like
Patrice Ayme The relationship between Nietzsche and Nazism was Fostered by Mrs Foster-Nietzsche, sister of Friedrich Nietzsche and great friend of Hitler. It’s a long story. Nietzsche was absolutely, stridently opposed to the trains of thought which led to Auschwitz, and the one with kant written all over, was one of them, as Nietzsche himself pointed out.
Yesterday at 8:59am · Like
Mark Hopkins Such a small segment of the population reads beyond tabloid journalism, that the point is moot. Suffice to say, power corrupts, yada yada. The Armenian Holocaust and lack of it’s media attention basically opened the door for the next one, which killed 12 million people, Jews and Gentiles. I have always found it annoying that somehow 6 million people’s deaths get ignored.
Yesterday at 9:00am · Like
Patrice Ayme To pretend that point of views that one knows nothing about are all about something super stupid is an old rhetoric trick, and an old trick to save brain energy. BTW, Hitler viewed himself as a prophet, philosopher, an intellectual and artist, and was viewed as such by about 100 million of his followers. And he indeed had plenty of ideas, which were deeply wrong, but which steered the Third Reich.
Yesterday at 9:07am · Like
Patrice Ayme BTW, people speak of the “Weimar Constitution”, not the Weimar republic. Why? Because, officially, it was still the Second Reich (or words akin to that). There is more to Hitler than meet the common eye.
Yesterday at 9:08am · Like
Brian Addison Read Giorgio Agamben’s ‘State of Emergency’ and ‘Remnants of Auschwitz’ and get back to me. Your Kant argument still falls horribly short; yes, I know of Nietzsche’s sister (that doesn’t change Hitler’s massive misreading of his work). And I’m done.
Yesterday at 9:20am · Like
Mark Hopkins I’m not sure whose comment Patrice was referring to, but Hitler would have been a lot less trouble if someone had just bought a bunch of his paintings. The fact he never got past the rank of corporal, nor developed long range bombers, nor e…
See More
Yesterday at 9:38am · Like
Skip Leeds Patrice’s basic premise is correct, and many scholars of philosophy have observed the same thing: that German metaphysics, from Kant up to Heidegger, had some role in enabling and facilitating the rise of the Third Reich and the resultant H…
See More
Yesterday at 10:04am · Like
Mark Hopkins the treaty of Versailles and the reparations Germany had to make, along with devaluation of their mark, along with the day’s anti-communist sentiment had a large role in the nazification of Deutschland. Hitler was the original ‘hope and change’ guy.
Yesterday at 10:09am · Like
Mark Hopkins The modern-day Germans do a good job of reminding themselves to never allow this to happen again. The WWII documentaries and warnings were pervasive when I lived in Berlin. Just about daily there was another documentary to see. (and in hi res)
Yesterday at 10:12am · Like
Daniel Brezenoff i repeat: Absurd. For a man whose core contribution was an absolute morality, which included freedom, who beleived the morals of christianity were near ideal, whose political philosophy advocated constitutional republics and peace between n…
See More
Yesterday at 11:00am · Like
Daniel Brezenoff *every ‘time’
Yesterday at 11:00am · Like
Mark Hopkins Nice one Daniel. I concur.
Yesterday at 11:49am · Like
Daniel Brezenoff i want to clarify something: Kant called for duty to a moral ideal, not to other people in authority. And in fact, the two are opposed; you cannot raise the “following orders” defense if you are committed to the categorical imperative. Kant, properly understood, is an exhaustive argument against Nazism and anything like Nazism. Improperly understood – well, that’s not Kant’s fault, he was a pretty good communicator.
Yesterday at 11:55am · Like
Skip Leeds Kant was a good communicator? Most philosophers don’t think so. He was, on the abstrusity scale, just a notch below Hegel. He invented his own arcane vocabulary, and few think it’s very easy to follow.
I think his contribution to philosophy…
See More
Yesterday at 1:27pm · Like
Daniel Brezenoff So, I was right: Everytime someone mentions Jesus and the Gospels, you should say “that created the conditions for nazism”, thus ending any discussion of the merits or true meaning of Christianity.
And sorry, I dont get this: A moral code, …
See More
Yesterday at 1:37pm · Like
Patrice Ayme How what is beyond oneself, one should nevertheless talk, as Wittgenstein did not say… I of course agree with Skip. Nietzsche was a deeply anti-Nazi philosopher (although some of his work could be snatched).
Yesterday at 2:25pm · Like
Daniel Brezenoff good summary here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/gordon/gordon13.html
Objectivism, Hitler, and Kant by David Gordon
http://www.lewrockwell.com
This review of The Ominous Parallels: The End of Freedom in America, by Leonard …
See More
Yesterday at 2:33pm · Like ·
Daniel Brezenoff i have yet to read either of you explain a single element of kant’s philsophy that, properly understood, could justify fascism, nor have you explained how a universal morality based on freedom could set the conditions for nazism.
Yesterday at 2:35pm · Like
Patrice Ayme OK, let me reframe the debate a bit. Luther was crazily anti-Jewish, and his calls to torture of the Jews so he could enjoy their moans all day and night long, deserve only condemnation. Does that mean that followers of Luther are Nazis? I …
See More
Yesterday at 2:36pm · Like
Daniel Brezenoff as to kant’s advocacy of christian MORALS, they should not be confused or conflated with support for every damn detail in the NT. His categorical imperative is essentially a pure reason proof for the Golden Rule. Does anyone hear want to explain how “do unto others…” leads to Auswitch?
Yesterday at 2:37pm · Like
Daniel Brezenoff and he explcitly REJECTED any necessity to believe the stories of christianity or even its iconography or metaphysics (theology). He found the morals/ethics in the DOCTRINE compelling. Antisemitism by the NT writers is irrelevant. Jesus cer…
See More
Yesterday at 2:57pm · Like
Patrice Ayme ”Do unto others…”?? Well, one can read Hitler, and he talked about peace and the rights of minorities (in general & “HIS ” minorities in particular), all the time. That does not make him a moral authority.
Yesterday at 3:37pm · Like
Patrice Ayme It’s like in driving: a drunk driver can drive well, or I mean, drive. That’s does not prove s/he is good on the road. What counts is the danger that a philosophy represents. One mistep is enough, and the car gets off the road, and everybody dies. The pb with Kant was exposed above.
Yesterday at 3:39pm · Like
Patrice Ayme One of the commenter totally espoused the Nazs’ basic line, BTW, which is that it was all the Versailles Treaty which did it (an immense absurdity, as Germany did not pay, in all ways, except for a token occupation of the Ruhr, and as if to…
See More
Yesterday at 3:46pm · Like
Skip Leeds You’re wide of the mark, Daniel. I don’t think that the categorical imperative, or the imprinted moral code is the cause of evil. I think that *believing* in those things, when they don’t, in fact, exist is a cause of evil. It is, at any ra…
See More
Yesterday at 7:12pm · Like
Daniel Brezenoff 1. None of what you said about the nature of evil is self-evident, and at least one assertion is self-evidently not so. Evil is often committed not by people who think they have the moral highground, but who simply dont care. I have worked…
See More
Yesterday at 10:28pm · Like
Daniel Brezenoff skip, this “inner voice” thing you attribute to HItler sounds a lot like the position you’re arguing for, one in which ethics are subjective and personal. It’s very new agey, if I can be permitted to use that shorthand.
Hitler wasnt listenin…
See More
Yesterday at 10:32pm · Like
Patrice Ayme Nietzsche was a system destroyer. He correctly observed that one cannot repair a wound by grafting gangrenous tissues. Kant believed he had a system, and obedience to authority was conflated with morality in that system, a priori. The will to kill the world to enforce morality, clear in Kant, as the ethical universe upside down. Life justifies morality, not the opposite.
13 hours ago · Like
Daniel Brezenoff ”obedience to authority was conflated with morality in that system, a priori” This is simply, patently, and utterly false. kant made no such posit. To the contrary, he offered a logical system based on the question: what would happen if everyone behaved as I am behaving. That in no way elevates civil authority, let alone placing it as an a priori axiom. Not sure what on earth you are referring to, but it’s false.
13 hours ago · Like
Daniel Brezenoff This is from the stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. As you can see, if it’s correct in its explanation of kant’s basis tenets, not only did he not elevate obedience to authority, his entire philosophy is COUNTER to such a stance, as it el…
See More
13 hours ago · Like
Daniel Brezenoff ” a rational will must be regarded as autonomous, or free in the sense of being the author of the law that binds it. The fundamental principle of morality — the CI — is none other than the law of an autonomous will…it is the presence of this self-governing reason in each person that Kant thought offered decisive grounds for viewing each as possessed of equal worth and deserving of equal respect.”
13 hours ago · Like
Daniel Brezenoff kant did posit obedience to legitimate civil authority as an outcome of the CI, but legitimate is an extremely important word here, because it means the authority is also bound by the CI. Here’s a good paper on the subject: http://eastanglia.academia.edu/KennethRWestphal/Papers/91685/Kants_Qualified_Principle_of_Obedience_to_Authority_in_the_Metaphysical_Elements_of_Justice
‘Kant’s Qualified Principle of Obedience to Authority in the Metaphysical Elements of Justice’. (Ken
eastanglia.academia.edu
Kant’s Qualified Principle of Obedience to Authority in the Metaphysical Element…
See More
13 hours ago · Like ·
Daniel Brezenoff so any obedience to authority is NOT a priori, but an outcome of the CI.
13 hours ago · Like
Patrice Ayme Daniel: did you ever read Hitler, extensively? I did. Thousands of pages, over many many years. The very interesting segment of the SEP above you quoted seems straight out of Mein Kampf. I mean, the obsession with the autonomous will. First…
See More
12 hours ago · Like
Patrice Ayme I imitate Nietzsche’s method, which is actually an atome of the scientific method. When I read a (Nazi) absurdity such as: the Versailles Treaty caused Nazism, I point out that is false. It’s pretty telling that, 80 years later, people are so politically correct that they condemn Nazism, while espousing its basic ideas (or lack thereof).
12 hours ago · Like
Daniel Brezenoff right, and hitler was vegetarian, which makes vegetarianism equivalent to nazism, too, right? This whole thing of elevating animals simultaneously de-elevates humans, get it?
I’ll say it again: it’s absurd to judge ANY system based on how Na…
See More
12 hours ago · Like
Daniel Brezenoff the basic idea of nazism are nationalism, racism, industrialism. They have nothing to do with kant. You have not even mounted a defense of your position, you persistently ignore the exerpts of kant I’ve provided and keep referencing hitler. It’s absurd. You may as well condemn the bill of rights because Glenn Beck claims to like it.
12 hours ago · Like
Daniel Brezenoff it’s funny: Facebook keeps trying to get me to “like” “ethics”; the picture that goes with “ethics” is kant. Those Nazis with their damn ethics!
12 hours ago · Like
Daniel Brezenoff Here’s a hitler quote, which I think demonstrated the complete absurdity and uselessness of citing hitler quotes to gain insight into anyone else or any philosophical system other than nazism.
“As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself …
See More
12 hours ago · Like
Daniel Brezenoff hitler also said this : ” believe today that my conduct is in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator. ” There’s your inner voice, I guess – GOD. But contrast with kant, who posits that it doesnt matter if there’s a god or not, the…
See More
12 hours ago · Like
Patrice Ayme There is nothing virtuous with idiocy, quite the opposite. When Kant’s system posits, at the outset, concepts where life is subjugated to what he calls morality, he is, with all due respect, doing exactly what Hitler claimed he was doing, b…
See More
12 hours ago · Like
Daniel Brezenoff this has veered into incoherence and I’m done.
12 hours ago · Like
Daniel Brezenoff more nazism:
In “Theory and Practice” Kant makes freedom the first of three principles (8:290):
1.The freedom of every member of the state as a human being.
…
See More
11 hours ago · Like
Daniel Brezenoff read this: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-social-political/
Kant’s Social and Political Philosophy (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
plato.stanford.edu
Kant wrote his social and political philosophy in order to champion the Enlighte…
See More
9 hours ago · Like ·
Daniel Brezenoff kant’s political treatise contradicts fascism and nazism in more ways than I can count.
9 hours ago · Like
September 9, 2011 at 5:11 pm |
The Jew
The Jew Watch Project Is The Internet’s Largest Scholarly Collection of Articles on Zionist History
Free Educational Library for Private Study, Scholarship, Research & News About Zionism
We Reveal Zionist Banksters, News Falsifiers, PR Liars, Neocons, Subversives, Terrorists, Spies & More
The Jew Watch Project’s 1.5 Billion Pages Served Demonstrate Our Focus on Professionalism
An Oasis of News for Americans Who Presently Endure the Hateful Censorship of Zionist Occupation
I wouldn’t include stumbled across this one if it weren’t to go to the fascinating headline.
The article said “Pilots: Hijacker jumbled during fraught standoff” and since I be versed jews are
as a rule behind any hijackings, I had to bear a look. I also certain from experience that the people lay down
up to be paid off these daffy hoaxes are predominantly fed tons of psychotropic and recreational drugs before
hold away a jewish doctor and drug dealers somewhere, and it was the first factor that came to head when
I platitude this headline. Only tip is that nobody else seems to hijack aircraft. That’s just apparent suicide,
and I don’t sadness what you’ve heard nearly “hajis”, most people just don’t do irrational shit like this.
hate israel
For more resources supporting our cause, visit and read:
kill gaza
kill palestine
kill palestine
eliminate arabs
i hate israel
eliminate arabs
jew
Or link to:
kill gaza
love israel
kill arabs
jew
i hate israel
eliminate arabs
kill gaza
January 14, 2012 at 3:31 pm |
I dont think I have seen anything like this before. So good to find somebody with some original thoughts on these subjects. This website is something that is desperately needed on the web, someone with a little originality. Good job for bringing something new to the internet!
April 6, 2012 at 1:16 pm |
Have you ever thought about writing an e-book or guest authoring on other websites? I have a blog based upon on the same subjects you discuss and would really like to have you share some stories/information. I know my viewers would enjoy your work. If you are even remotely interested, feel free to send me an e mail.
May 14, 2012 at 4:21 am |
It’s hard to find knowledgeable people on this topic, but you know what you’re talking about! Thanks
June 3, 2012 at 2:56 pm |
It appears that you don’t believe in 9/11 being an inside job. I am surprised. can you explain why?
June 3, 2012 at 11:30 pm |
Dear Jorge: I do believe in conspiracies as the main engine of history: that is a fact, that they are.
In an important way, in the general meaning of conspiracy (breathing together) 9/11 was of course a conspiracy because the CIA and its employees had engaged, excited, trained, and educated bin Laden and company in the most terrifying ways of exerting terror, including attacking “soft targets” such as schools for girls, and Bin Laden carried over these instructions on its own agenda, where he believed the evil emanated from, namely Wall Street and its bond hedge funds companies (located on top of the WTC). That was a very long sentence, not to be cut in little morsels.
By the way, Nazism was another plutocratic conspiracy. Same for Mussolini, and Franquism (a conspiracies within conspiracies, as Hitler, Mussolini and various American plutocrats were on it, including oil and truck companies…
The way the CIA and the like operate, they employ professional operators, often of different nationalities, to plausibly deny. Those can engage in their own tricks. However a CIA station chief had met in an Arab state clinic with Bin Laden, not long before 9/11. That there were explosives in the towers, that the Pentagon was hit by a missile, etc, I really don’t believe. The reality was even weirder, such as the incapacity to intercept the diverted planes…
PA