/lit/ - Literature

>Haha, I bet you didn't think of that one!
t. every 18-y/o undergrad idiot

>>17282980
yes and you just BTFO'd Nietzsch with one simple question. this is basically russell's paradox

this reminds me of people that say
>you can't prove a negative
which would be true if you could prove it, meaning you can prove a negative.

>>17283024
What if the only negatives you can prove are of this type, much like the only unquestionable thing is the doubt in itself?

>>17282992
Says a lot about Nietzsche that absolute plebs are able to shred his arguments with ease.

"We don't know if anything is true including this statement" - Kahnus

>>17283040
>What if the only negatives you can prove are of this type, much like the only unquestionable thing is the doubt in itself?
well then you could prove a negative and that statement would still be wrong. moreover, you'd still have to prove that, although formal logic does not treat negatives as any sort of special case and (hint) many negatives have been proven before i.e. Fermat's Last Theorem is a negative that has been proven. or even the statement "there is no lion in my anus" is necessarily true

>>17283081
So Knee-cha is a hack?

>>17283138
i dont think so since even if his statement can be shut down by appealing to formal logic it not only doesn't mean there are absolute truths also this paradox blindsighted maths in the early 20th century when people were trying to formalize it. moreover, he's the nietzsch. wasn't he the youngest person to ever get a tenured position at his university? the man knew his shit

>>17283041
This. Anon tried to discredit the 18 year old when it’s the other way around.

>>17282980
>Is this an absolute truth?
No, it's a relative one, and one that holds up in tests better than previously proposed ones (like a scientific theory that we currently regard as "true").

>>17282980
No, read Heidegger's grand livre (the Nietzsche lectures) if you want to understand why this objection is moronic in this context.