/lit/ - Literature

>>8426100
Don't worry, the N-God believes you have a soul.

you're just shallow and pragmatic by instinct

>>8311886
>It's a philosopher with severe mommy issues sits down to write about how women are stupid doody heads but we're actually all stupid doody heads so it's really not a big deal episode
>oh except for his sister and mother who were such poopfaces that he claimed they were the last two things preventing him from embracing ER with all of his heart
>and as revenge they kept him alive for what I assume was an absolutely torturous decade of insanity rather than letting him quickly die eating his own shit, like a proud free spirit ought to.

>>8219999
Yes we do, you R-word.

>>7790128
Some roastie is getting toasty. Nothing Nietzsche said about women was what he considered to be an absolute truth. It was just his opinion. This argument boils down to WAAHHHHH NIETZSCHE SAID MEAN THINGS ABOUT GIRLS HOW DARE HE HAVE A DIFFERENT OPINION INFORMED BY LIVED EXPERIENCE THAN ME! HE IS A LOSER VIRGIN KEK THEREFORE HIS OPINIONS ARE INVALID, WHILE MY OPINIONS ARE MERITORIOUS BECAUSE I AM SOCIALLY SUCCESSFUL!

Russell, for all his merits, was a bit of a useless cunt when it came to criticism. His other criticisms of Nietzsche follow the same general pattern. HE LIKED STRONG MANLY TOUGH GUYS BUT HE WAS A WEAK LITTLE GIRL, HAHAH LAUGH AT THE PATHETIC LITTLE WEAKLING! His critique is based on misinterpretation, intentional misrepresentation and generally churlish ad hominem.

Rarely, only rarely does anyone actually delve into criticizing his core positions, Russell does the same things Benedict does with slapping away at peripheral and generally unimportant points. Nietzsche leaves himself open to these kinds of attacks because he has opinions on everything and includes them in his works despite many of them being fundamentally unimportant to his greater project.