Search Results
7/18/2025, 4:08:28 PM
>>24560225
Its an ok book, but nothing special. Its largely plotless and mostly revolves around people talking about satanism and church bells. The black mass at the end is interesting but that's about it.
Its an ok book, but nothing special. Its largely plotless and mostly revolves around people talking about satanism and church bells. The black mass at the end is interesting but that's about it.
7/17/2025, 8:25:49 PM
>>24557886
One of the best books on the subject is Becoming Evil: How Ordinary People Commit Genocide and Mass Killing. Also, I am just now reading The Nazi Mind: Twelve Warnings from History. Its good so far.
One of the best books on the subject is Becoming Evil: How Ordinary People Commit Genocide and Mass Killing. Also, I am just now reading The Nazi Mind: Twelve Warnings from History. Its good so far.
7/3/2025, 5:39:38 PM
>>24517419
And Neetzche
>There is a great deal in Nietzsche that must be dismissed as merely megalomaniac… It is obvious that in his day-dreams he is a warrior, not a professor; all the men he admires were military. His opinion of women, like every man’s, is an objectification of his own emotion towards them, which is obviously one of fear. “Forget not thy whip”–but nine women out of ten would get the whip away from him, and he knew it, so he kept away from women, and soothed his wounded vanity with unkind remarks.
>He condemns Christian love because he thinks it is an outcome of fear… It does not occur to Nietzsche as possible that a man should genuinely feel universal love, obviously because he himself feels almost universal hatred and fear, which he would fain disguise as lordly indifference. His “noble” man–who is himself in day-dreams–is a being wholly devoid of sympathy, ruthless, cunning, concerned only with his own power. King Lear, on the verge of madness, says: “I will do such things–what they are yet I know not–but they shall be the terror of the earth.” This is Nietzsche’s philosophy in a nutshell.
>For my part, I agree with Buddha as I have imagined him. But I do not know how to prove that he is right by any argument such as can be used in a mathematical or a scientific question. I dislike Nietzsche because he likes the contemplation of pain, because he erects conceit into a duty, because the men whom he most admires are conquerors, whose glory is cleverness in causing men to die. But I think the ultimate argument against his philosophy, as against any unpleasant but internally self-consistent ethic, lies not in an appeal to facts, but in an appeal to the emotions. Nietzsche despises universal love; I feel it the motive power to all that I desire as regards the world. His followers have had their innings, but we may hope that it is coming rapidly to an end.
And Neetzche
>There is a great deal in Nietzsche that must be dismissed as merely megalomaniac… It is obvious that in his day-dreams he is a warrior, not a professor; all the men he admires were military. His opinion of women, like every man’s, is an objectification of his own emotion towards them, which is obviously one of fear. “Forget not thy whip”–but nine women out of ten would get the whip away from him, and he knew it, so he kept away from women, and soothed his wounded vanity with unkind remarks.
>He condemns Christian love because he thinks it is an outcome of fear… It does not occur to Nietzsche as possible that a man should genuinely feel universal love, obviously because he himself feels almost universal hatred and fear, which he would fain disguise as lordly indifference. His “noble” man–who is himself in day-dreams–is a being wholly devoid of sympathy, ruthless, cunning, concerned only with his own power. King Lear, on the verge of madness, says: “I will do such things–what they are yet I know not–but they shall be the terror of the earth.” This is Nietzsche’s philosophy in a nutshell.
>For my part, I agree with Buddha as I have imagined him. But I do not know how to prove that he is right by any argument such as can be used in a mathematical or a scientific question. I dislike Nietzsche because he likes the contemplation of pain, because he erects conceit into a duty, because the men whom he most admires are conquerors, whose glory is cleverness in causing men to die. But I think the ultimate argument against his philosophy, as against any unpleasant but internally self-consistent ethic, lies not in an appeal to facts, but in an appeal to the emotions. Nietzsche despises universal love; I feel it the motive power to all that I desire as regards the world. His followers have had their innings, but we may hope that it is coming rapidly to an end.
6/29/2025, 8:49:45 AM
>>212137752
>I think the weak parts of it come back to the fact it's a remake of a 50s sci fi
The Thing is also a remake of a 1950's movie. So is Cronenberg's The Fly.
Main reason why The Blob isn't highly regarded as the other two is because its a comedy horror.
>I think the weak parts of it come back to the fact it's a remake of a 50s sci fi
The Thing is also a remake of a 1950's movie. So is Cronenberg's The Fly.
Main reason why The Blob isn't highly regarded as the other two is because its a comedy horror.
6/28/2025, 4:31:21 PM
>>212105228
Don't have one buddy, I just use the USB.
Don't have one buddy, I just use the USB.
Page 1