????????????????????????? -Nietzsche

From my tumblr:

nemoi:

sntr:

gkojax:

uessai-text:

2009?8?25???????? ?????????

(via uessai-text3)

?????????????????????????

????

???????????????????????????????

"I am not a man. I am dynamite."

Nietzche

A bit more context:

"I know my fate. One day there will be associated with my name the recollection of something frightful, of a crisis like no other before on earth, of the profoundest collision of conscience, of a decision evoked against everything that until then had been believed in, demanded, sanctified. I am not a man. I am dynamite." -- FW Nietzsche, Ecce Homo.

Basically, I think he was saying: "History will make me out to be way worse than I really was, and in that sense, I'm not just a man, filled with positives and negatives, but as something with the power to challenge everything."

I feel like he is both recognizing his own limitations while accepting that society will take those limitations away, but in a way that isn't very controllable.  As a commenter says on the page I link to above, in Nietzsche's time, dynamite was a new, fearsome explosive that would have been the atom bomb of its time.  So, that's why I interpret the original quote including the idea that the power society gives him is uncontrollable.

I love seeing western quotes translated into Japanese because of the words the translator uses.  The original quote, taken literally, uses the word "man".  However, in the Japanese translation the word "ningen" is used, which means "human".  Interesting since the word "otoko" is the literal translation of the word "man."  What this does, for me, is focus in on the meaning Nietzsche was getting at--he wasn't just saying "I'm not a man," he was saying "I'm not a member of the human race, I'm a monster, a force of nature."

I'm a writer! Of course, I'm going to get off on little things like this :)

The suppression of uncomfortable ideas may be common in religion and politics, but it is not the path to knowledge; it has no place in the endeavor of science.

The suppression of uncomfortable ideas may be common in religion and politics, but it is not the path to knowledge; it has no place in the endeavor of science.

Carl Sagan (via ageofreason)

#Indeed.

It’s also common in the media, schools, social situations, and more!  In fact, humans don’t like uncomfortable ideas, period.  

Huh, I guess that’s why it’s called “UNcomfortable”.  

In law a man is guilty when he violates the rights of others. In ethics he is guilty if he only thinks of doing so.

In law a man is guilty when he violates the rights of others. In ethics he is guilty if he only thinks of doing so.

Immanuel Kant (via ageofreason)

Which is great, when true.  Alas, ethics tends to drift into law and suddenly, we have things like “hate crimes” which essentially put the deaths of some above the death of others. I understand, it’s to compensate, but it still feels wrong.  I mean, it’s what every racist and homophobe is afraid of: their rights being treated as less important than the minorities.  By codifying hate crime, you’re fulfilling the XYZiphobe’s biggest fears.  

It’s one thing to be protected, but another to have the loss of your life valued more than the loss of anyone else’s life.

Hate crime legislation may mean well, but really, it’s big brother telling us “wrongthinking is punishable.”  

Think of it this way, should a killer of a gay man get a lesser sentence because he can prove he’s not homophobic?  It’s like you get a “discount” for being a less-bad person.

“The creative adult is the child who survived.” #Indeed#Awesome

“The creative adult is the child who survived.”

#Indeed

#Awesome

Learners Vs. the Learned--which are you, boy?

btx91:

“The central task of education is to implant a will and a facility for learning; it should produce not learned but learning people. The truly human society is a learning society, where grandparents, parents, and children are students together. In a time of drastic change it is the learners who inherit the future. The learned usually find themselves equipped to live in a world that no longer exists.”

—

Eric Hoffer (via librarianista)

It’s painfully obvious which most of America’s leaders in government and business are—the learned.  They aren’t adapting—learning anything new.  Those of us on the ‘net, well, clearly, we’re still learning :)

"Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been..."

friendlyatheist:

“Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but…will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones”

—

Marcus Aurelius

Proof as to why arguing about whether there is a God or not changes nothing, in the end.  Live your life as you would have others remember you by.  If you want people to remember you by the people you hated, then go for it. Personally, I’d rather people remember me by the support I gave my friends, family and those causes I care for—and for the positive changes I wished to see happen to the world around me.

That’s the key to eternal life, by the way—live virtuously and you will live on forever—in the minds an memories of the people and, if your lucky, of the culture you leave behind.