Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: rbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Joy of this, Joy of that
Date: 12 Dec 2024 20:08:48 GMT
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <ls0u6gFembU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <vhigot$1uakf$1@dont-email.me> <AoycnTASZ6Hq0Mz6nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@earthlink.com> <ee978553-b4ea-0239-e93a-bbefa289c9d5@example.net> <virs73$1gno5$3@dont-email.me> <9cGcnY0c8c3LA8_6nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@earthlink.com> <6465d1f8-6fab-e3bd-0345-86011937364d@example.net> <lrh6e1FdnlbU4@mid.individual.net> <a97cff3a-7a2a-2797-f17f-4fa39a18a523@example.net> <vj1jdg$33eu5$7@dont-email.me> <lrjl8cFq671U3@mid.individual.net> <ed403392-950e-e1a7-f320-6da768eae20b@example.net> <lrkih3Fd5bU1@mid.individual.net> <77a225ca-c45c-dd19-fc45-e2de5f7963be@example.net> <lrml1gFaa38U4@mid.individual.net> <12bd40ae-a14e-7772-cb7a-5bf427664dec@example.net> <lrpc0kFnkplU3@mid.individual.net> <1a9e8e48-13eb-8276-cd59-1a31218d1dfb@example.net> <lrrj9aF4og5U1@mid.individual.net> <ceccead2-2c2f-1db7-4d71-e12576e6010b@example.net> <lrs93jF7n0tU1@mid.individual.net> <698b7064-5f49-d7b5-39e7-c18a513154ef@example.net> <lrurh7Fknh0U1@mid.individual.net> <73f2019d-9a05-68eb-c3f6-e88a32fd334f@example.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net BV9OBLI+JAOLJY2usuoJOQOrX88pmM/m2yce1fyGKnoYsbEFbu
Cancel-Lock: sha1:qtkyOSFY6VRRAWkZcMtc4gM3WeU= sha256:UtdFDd+5SCWJ6ksRZJxTTW/LCt5o52D/5LDEg7bS03I=
User-Agent: Pan/0.149 (Bellevue; 4c157ba)
Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.misc:62261

On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 10:21:18 +0100, D wrote:

> In some caes perhaps parody, but I think in others, he might have
> borrowed for dramatic effect? One thing is clear, I find him to be one
> of the best writers of many philosophers. Compare it with some modern
> analytic philosophy and it's not even the same universe. Modern
> philosophy texts can be bone dry.

While he ultimately disagreed with him, Nietzsche learned a lot from 
Schopenhauer. They both are readable. Kant's answer to Hume isn't and 
Hegel, well...


It's been a long time since I've read Russell, Moore, Wittgenstein, etc. I 
chewed on Principia in high school and tried to read some of the others 
later in life. 

Part of the problem is I realized my brain doesn't work that way. I've 
made a living employing logic all my life but it just 'happens'.