30 definitions by Abraham's Adversary
A philosophical novel by Friedrich Nietzsche written in the 19th century. In German it is titled: Also sprach Zarathustra. In English, it is also called "Thus Spoke Zarathustra".
Or, simplified: Therefore, >> he (Zarathustra) spoke of >> thee. (subject)
It is a book widely regarded as Nietzsche's best work.
The title name Thus Spake Zarathustra, is meant to be ironic and cynical, like morbid sarcasm; and is suggestive of the apprehensive atmosphere the book displays. It explains why Zarathustra turned himself into a Prophet, during an era where God is dead (metaphor) in order to quell and stop disorder and confusion in the Middle East.
Despite Nietzsche being a good person; It is a very dangerous book, that should only be read by mature and responsible individuals. (this is why Germany and Russia have attempted to ban books written by Nietzsche.)
Basically, it tells the story of a real Avestan (Aryan) prophet named Zoroaster who lived about 2,500 years ago; and whom started a religion (see: Zoroastrianism) in order to overthrow a malignant, illegitimate and dystopian Empire; (see: Babylon) and to help uproot it, in order to create a new social order. Essentially, Zoroaster (or Zarathustra) attempts to become a Nobleman and wise prophet among the populace; or more specifically, an Übermensch.
Or, simplified: Therefore, >> he (Zarathustra) spoke of >> thee. (subject)
It is a book widely regarded as Nietzsche's best work.
The title name Thus Spake Zarathustra, is meant to be ironic and cynical, like morbid sarcasm; and is suggestive of the apprehensive atmosphere the book displays. It explains why Zarathustra turned himself into a Prophet, during an era where God is dead (metaphor) in order to quell and stop disorder and confusion in the Middle East.
Despite Nietzsche being a good person; It is a very dangerous book, that should only be read by mature and responsible individuals. (this is why Germany and Russia have attempted to ban books written by Nietzsche.)
Basically, it tells the story of a real Avestan (Aryan) prophet named Zoroaster who lived about 2,500 years ago; and whom started a religion (see: Zoroastrianism) in order to overthrow a malignant, illegitimate and dystopian Empire; (see: Babylon) and to help uproot it, in order to create a new social order. Essentially, Zoroaster (or Zarathustra) attempts to become a Nobleman and wise prophet among the populace; or more specifically, an Übermensch.
Thus Spake Zarathustra is a very good read. (whether you are Atheist or believer) Only the most intellectual of individuals are able to truly comprehend and understand it. Assholes and cowards despise and deride it; or are just too lazy or daft. The average individual may not understand the book. Many critics of Nietzsche disdainfully write it off as nonsense and drivel. The book is basically written in a fairy-tale storybook way, kind of like a poem or poetic prose. (similar to the gospel).
(Although asshole critics overlook and bash Nietzsche, he was actually doing perfectly fine in Mental health at the time, while he wrote the book. Nietzsche has a lot of controversy surrounding him; such as his subsequently deteriorating mental health. Which is what critics (without reading or understanding) overlook.)
Those who "get the book" therefore "understand". This is why Nietzsche proclaimed and entitled the book with the famous cautionary slogan: "A BOOK FOR EVERYONE AND FOR NO ONE."
(it could be said by some scholars, that mortal Zoroaster was the original Jesus.)
Ex. In Thus Spake Zarathustra; humble Zoroaster, minding the war, chaos and disorder that surrounds him; attempts to bring back order and self-responsibility to the people; and becomes an Übermensch, respite risking his own life.
(Although asshole critics overlook and bash Nietzsche, he was actually doing perfectly fine in Mental health at the time, while he wrote the book. Nietzsche has a lot of controversy surrounding him; such as his subsequently deteriorating mental health. Which is what critics (without reading or understanding) overlook.)
Those who "get the book" therefore "understand". This is why Nietzsche proclaimed and entitled the book with the famous cautionary slogan: "A BOOK FOR EVERYONE AND FOR NO ONE."
(it could be said by some scholars, that mortal Zoroaster was the original Jesus.)
Ex. In Thus Spake Zarathustra; humble Zoroaster, minding the war, chaos and disorder that surrounds him; attempts to bring back order and self-responsibility to the people; and becomes an Übermensch, respite risking his own life.
by Abraham's Adversary July 9, 2016
There's just no substance in Lil Xan's music; Xanax made him braindead. Total Xanarchy is listening to a young boy rapping with brain damage. true story
by Abraham's Adversary October 21, 2018
A field of study of numbers and logic that is illogical. Mathematics contradicts itself. Yes, it does. Ain't it weird? It is seen as a study that is practical; but is actually impractical, considering it is a paradox.
Pythagoras was wrong when he said that Mathematics is an absolute. Mathematics is not an absolute - because only human beings use and recognize Mathematics. Mathematics is an abstract concept or explanation for a HAPPENING in the universe. It is not a universal law; either. It is only just a clever illusion. A language and pattern of logic invented by human beings. (that only seems to make sense - because WE invented it; to make sense of the external universe.)
German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche was good in discrediting the Greeks; and making them look pretty stupid. Mathematics is only an illusion. It is not an absolute; but more of an accusation or of something that is apparent. It explains how objects work or go together. (Kind of like in languages where Indo-European grammar syntax is Nominative-Accusative; while the Basque language grammar syntax is Ergative-Absolutive.)
(When you think about it; Mathematics is just as logical as Music is. Monkeys/Apes can be taught to play instruments, but they do not understand music. They are only doing what they are told by humans, so they get rewarded with a treat.)
Pythagoras was wrong when he said that Mathematics is an absolute. Mathematics is not an absolute - because only human beings use and recognize Mathematics. Mathematics is an abstract concept or explanation for a HAPPENING in the universe. It is not a universal law; either. It is only just a clever illusion. A language and pattern of logic invented by human beings. (that only seems to make sense - because WE invented it; to make sense of the external universe.)
German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche was good in discrediting the Greeks; and making them look pretty stupid. Mathematics is only an illusion. It is not an absolute; but more of an accusation or of something that is apparent. It explains how objects work or go together. (Kind of like in languages where Indo-European grammar syntax is Nominative-Accusative; while the Basque language grammar syntax is Ergative-Absolutive.)
(When you think about it; Mathematics is just as logical as Music is. Monkeys/Apes can be taught to play instruments, but they do not understand music. They are only doing what they are told by humans, so they get rewarded with a treat.)
There are plenty of easy logical explanations for Mathematics contradicting itself. Observe in nature:
While Mathematics may apply to the Universe; it does not apply to Biology, organisms or life-forms. Only inanimate objects or abstract concepts. Strange huh? This is the logical problem of Mathematics. (at least; the Western version of it.)
For example: 1+1=1 most the time; when two humans have children. Sometimes it will equal triplets (3 children) and so on. And one can easily see the examples in Cats and Dogs or even Chicken/Ducks and other animals; who usually have a litter of descendants.
(And, why can't other animals do Math? They can only be taught it by humans; or learn from experience/instinct. Just like music instrument.)
So, I ask you, reader - if Mathematics is logical; does that mean that Life/Biology is illogical? Or is it the other way around? (That is the question. Just like "What came first - the chicken or the egg?") If Mathematics is only illusion and not absolute; this means that Pythagoras was wrong. ) In contrast; this would possibly explain that Zeno of Elea was actually right.)
Mathematics is always 99.9% There is no such thing as 100%. (this is why like in DNA paternity tests; the father will always come out as 99.9999999999% etc. in relation to a baby, and never 100%)
While Mathematics may apply to the Universe; it does not apply to Biology, organisms or life-forms. Only inanimate objects or abstract concepts. Strange huh? This is the logical problem of Mathematics. (at least; the Western version of it.)
For example: 1+1=1 most the time; when two humans have children. Sometimes it will equal triplets (3 children) and so on. And one can easily see the examples in Cats and Dogs or even Chicken/Ducks and other animals; who usually have a litter of descendants.
(And, why can't other animals do Math? They can only be taught it by humans; or learn from experience/instinct. Just like music instrument.)
So, I ask you, reader - if Mathematics is logical; does that mean that Life/Biology is illogical? Or is it the other way around? (That is the question. Just like "What came first - the chicken or the egg?") If Mathematics is only illusion and not absolute; this means that Pythagoras was wrong. ) In contrast; this would possibly explain that Zeno of Elea was actually right.)
Mathematics is always 99.9% There is no such thing as 100%. (this is why like in DNA paternity tests; the father will always come out as 99.9999999999% etc. in relation to a baby, and never 100%)
by Abraham's Adversary December 11, 2017
What happened when Barack Obama was elected twice in America from 2008 to 2012. Between Obama's era, the Cajun population of Louisiana state in the USA experienced a horrific, massive (accidental) demographic collapse.
(People of Cajun decent lost their homes due to Obama's policies and also experienced high infant mortality rates (even higher than the Amish) - both due to poverty, and many Cajun people (mostly young men without a future) committed suicide. An event that occurred between 2008-2018 that almost went completely unnoticed to most Americans and the rest of the world.)
Unfortunately, these people were mostly of French and Basque ancestry. (ancestry that is actually very rare in the USA)
There are often more Cajun women today than there are Cajun men, because many of their men killed themselves because of economic devastation.
(People of Cajun decent lost their homes due to Obama's policies and also experienced high infant mortality rates (even higher than the Amish) - both due to poverty, and many Cajun people (mostly young men without a future) committed suicide. An event that occurred between 2008-2018 that almost went completely unnoticed to most Americans and the rest of the world.)
Unfortunately, these people were mostly of French and Basque ancestry. (ancestry that is actually very rare in the USA)
There are often more Cajun women today than there are Cajun men, because many of their men killed themselves because of economic devastation.
It is very sad that the Cajun population in the USA is dying and may never even see another generation. Barack Obama is responsible for the Second Cajun genocide. Most Cajun people are so poor that they can't even afford to have children, either. Or even think about raising big families like the past. (It's sad, but the Cajun ethnicity will soon become extinct.)
by Abraham's Adversary January 14, 2019
An absolute brilliant German philosopher that is often overlooked, overshadowed, underappreciated and/or completely misunderstood. He could deconstruct logical aspects of human concepts that would blow your mind. Even people like Albert Einstein or Rene Descartes would never win; in an argument against Nietzsche. At least, according to Nietzsche's train of thought and his natural strict logic composition; in regards to metaphysics.
Rene Descartes always focuses on "essence" and "truth"; while Nietzsche argues that essence and truth are not real and are only ideas or figments of illusions in our conscious minds. Nietzsche focuses on the subconscious; while Descartes focuses on the conscious mind. "I think, therefore I am."
Nietzsche: You do not "think"!!. You only "believe" that "you think". Your brain is an organ struggling for life, just like your heart, liver, kidneys and everything else!
Descartes: I do not understand what you are saying, Nietzsche!
Nietzsche: You have missed the big picture entirely and focused on the irrelevant, simple matters.
Descartes: I still don't think I hear you!
Nietzsche: Likewise.
Rene Descartes always focuses on "essence" and "truth"; while Nietzsche argues that essence and truth are not real and are only ideas or figments of illusions in our conscious minds. Nietzsche focuses on the subconscious; while Descartes focuses on the conscious mind. "I think, therefore I am."
Nietzsche: You do not "think"!!. You only "believe" that "you think". Your brain is an organ struggling for life, just like your heart, liver, kidneys and everything else!
Descartes: I do not understand what you are saying, Nietzsche!
Nietzsche: You have missed the big picture entirely and focused on the irrelevant, simple matters.
Descartes: I still don't think I hear you!
Nietzsche: Likewise.
Albert Einstein: Doing something over and over again and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity.
Friedrich Nietzsche: No it isn't, Einstein! Doing something over and over again is NOT insanity. The very fact that you use the aspect/essence of "insanity" contradicts the whole concept of: A HAPPENING. A happening is just exactly that: A HAPPENING. An indifferent, recurrent happening. And it will always function in our indifferent universe as: a happening. It is only human judgement and interpretation that: a happening; will be thought of as "insanity". Therefore, doing something over and over again and expecting a different result is NOT insanity. Only human minds can determine what doing something over and over again is. Conclusion: IT IS NEITHER "INSANITY" NOR "SANITY"! IT IS A HAPPENING!
Einstein, Descartes and Everbody else: WOW! MIND = BLOWN
Friedrich Nietzsche: No it isn't, Einstein! Doing something over and over again is NOT insanity. The very fact that you use the aspect/essence of "insanity" contradicts the whole concept of: A HAPPENING. A happening is just exactly that: A HAPPENING. An indifferent, recurrent happening. And it will always function in our indifferent universe as: a happening. It is only human judgement and interpretation that: a happening; will be thought of as "insanity". Therefore, doing something over and over again and expecting a different result is NOT insanity. Only human minds can determine what doing something over and over again is. Conclusion: IT IS NEITHER "INSANITY" NOR "SANITY"! IT IS A HAPPENING!
Einstein, Descartes and Everbody else: WOW! MIND = BLOWN
by Abraham's Adversary October 9, 2018
When a collective group, organization or industry of people began to tire of each other and resort to savage and violent acts; and are pushed over the edge; and begin to protest and break-up the very foundations that once kept them together.
Losing the glue is basically when pure human nature begins to take it's course: Pushed over the edge. When the strings are loosened, etc. (Anarchy, Hate and Disorder usually occurs; when this happens. Dog-eat-dog, cut-throat competition.)
Losing the glue is basically when pure human nature begins to take it's course: Pushed over the edge. When the strings are loosened, etc. (Anarchy, Hate and Disorder usually occurs; when this happens. Dog-eat-dog, cut-throat competition.)
The Balkan wars and the break-up of Yugoslavia were a good example of a nation that lost the glue.
All of the murders committed in the 1980's USA were by bitter, disillusioned middle class workers who lost the glue.
The Bloods and Crips formed Black street gangs, because in the 1960s; they were repressed and lost the glue.
In the Donald Trump vs Hillary Clinton 2016 election; America almost Lost the glue.
America and Russian relations have become close to losing the glue.
All of the murders committed in the 1980's USA were by bitter, disillusioned middle class workers who lost the glue.
The Bloods and Crips formed Black street gangs, because in the 1960s; they were repressed and lost the glue.
In the Donald Trump vs Hillary Clinton 2016 election; America almost Lost the glue.
America and Russian relations have become close to losing the glue.
by Abraham's Adversary November 2, 2018
A band in the 1980's that was a lot better than The Cure, by a long shot.
Music is meant to be subjective; but anyone realistic would see that The Smiths are a lot more relevant to the modern culture at that time. Especially in the UK.
Robert Smith(The Cure)'s music is fun, but it has no endearing qualities; and after a while; Robert starts to sound like a little boy that needs to grow up and is "overdoing it". Just like a manchild. (to the point where it starts to get weird.)
Music is meant to be subjective; but anyone realistic would see that The Smiths are a lot more relevant to the modern culture at that time. Especially in the UK.
Robert Smith(The Cure)'s music is fun, but it has no endearing qualities; and after a while; Robert starts to sound like a little boy that needs to grow up and is "overdoing it". Just like a manchild. (to the point where it starts to get weird.)
The Smiths were original and cool in the sense that their music was really cutting edge and also sappy. (edgy and melancholic at the same time - ironic) Their lyrics were funny but also depressing at the same time. They were consistent. Even the band name - The Smiths - was a mockery of modern society. (because there are loads of people out there surnamed "Smith". The band were mocking the unoriginality of the Post-Industrial UK society. So they took the band name "The Smiths" - to be ironic. Almost like mocking The Beatles and everyone with the last name Smith. That was the whole point of The Smiths' music - to mock the unoriginality and banality of modern society.) In this aspect, Morrissey was a genius and an originator. Plus in the 1980s, they did not wear makeup or style their hair, and just looked like normal gents. (not trying to stand out)
It is here, this is where The Smiths make Robert Smith and The Cure look like a bunch of juvenile attention whores. The Smiths have an inner depth and seem like philosophers doing music; while The Cure just seem like a superficial band and only devoted to pleasure. Robert Smith has no sense of humor. While Morrissey was an ironic razor blade.
It is here, this is where The Smiths make Robert Smith and The Cure look like a bunch of juvenile attention whores. The Smiths have an inner depth and seem like philosophers doing music; while The Cure just seem like a superficial band and only devoted to pleasure. Robert Smith has no sense of humor. While Morrissey was an ironic razor blade.
by Abraham's Adversary February 24, 2018