His moral psychology reminds me a lot of the kind of moral psychology that john hight re initiated in the early two thousands. The reason being a post hawk justification, in his view, for our emotions or our intuitions. And here for something even deeper, and may be less accessible to us. But, i mean, that's a running theme throughout, is that this reasoning is laughably and almost transparently after the fact. Its, it drives him cra that people aren't recognizing that, right?
Socrates was ugly and tired of life, so he made a tyrant of reason. Philosophers are mummies who hate the body and the senses. Reason is a tricky old woman. Morality is a misunderstanding. Kant is a sneaky Christian. And don't even get Nietzsche started on "free will" or the "self" - just excuse for priests to punish people, a hangman's metaphysics. David and Tamler dive into Friedrich Nietzsche's Twilight of the Idols, a fascinating set of aphorisms brimming with passion, provocation, questions without answers.
Plus, a professor is sanctioned for sex talk with his students - fair or coddling foul?
Sponsored By:
Support Very Bad Wizards
Links: