I watched this slick operator reinvent everything except Romania .On that I more than absorbed Richard Wurmbrand 's books .
I found Darry Cooper a subsumptive .
I also think the fact that he works as a defense contractor in EU ( undisclosed details) is cogent .
I admire his tells .
If I were to use any of them I would say he (DC) is a plant .
Please convince me otherwise ,although I think's Mo's idea of sending -Gabriels- a fifth of strong alcohol ,BEFORE (G) labyrinthically waylays meta details is a start .
I saw his (DC's ) take on serbia as so truncated ,as to be insulting ,for anyone who lives there,and loves serbs .
I relish CF 's laying bare of sources ,but I want his blood type .
In that it is all so easy to be 99% contextural ,with a 1% of spin that truly re paragimates .
Ie discombobulates .
My aim is to see how much of that 1% is 'the yeast of the pharisees' .
From the little I have listened to, I am sceptical of these takes. Five hours is too short for such grandiose, ambitious, speculations. Remember, in any life, whether your own or that of others, you can always dig deeper. If you want. Some people never know when to stop. One assumption here, which is only revealed in a limited way, would be the widespread, indeed universal, ideal of marriage, and monogamous marriage at that. An absurdity imposed by others, not always, perhaps seldom, chosen. The core principle of marriage is exclusion, i.e. rejection, and not love. This sets people up as rivals. See http://www.thinking-for-clarity.de/family.html and http://www.thinking-for-clarity.de/love.html.
To read and understand Nietzsche you need many years, it cannot be done by twenty, especially if you wish to learn German in order to appreciate his full brilliance. Dostievsky may need longer, Russian certainly does.
The speaker is engaging in psychoanalysis of people long dead. Then jumps to contemporary figures and anecdotes. There is an air of superiority, of arrogance, in the fluent talk. The talk is indeed fluent, which in itself is quite an achievement. Obvious a clever man, but has he done the due diligence? Given each their due? I doubt it.
hi, i suspect it is meant for informed dialogue rather than learning the script, but for those of us less studied, it gives us a new experience. i see there are different levels to any subject and each of us moves at his own pace, for instance, i'm a slow learner and this works alright by me.
you on the other hand seem to have a wider grasp and would bring more to the table here as i see you have
Now that is an example of what I would call beautiful manners, freelearner. "In case it matters to your schedule..." I have had a trauma tumble, (something happened) and I thought it was saturday yesterday. Truth be told, I often "lose days" but in this instance, I can blame the "trauma tumble." I'll change the headline. I'm a little embarrassed. I need to write down what day it is, each day. 😣
What I've learned about Martyr Made is that he reads/researches an almost-unimaginable amount of primary and other sources before he speaks on a topic via podcast. He has said that he dives into all accounts he can find (and after listening to many hours, I find no reason to doubt this!) and it seems an organic narrative arises from his research. Martyr Made goes past the walls that professional snobby historians build around themselves, the latter asserting that only they have rights to tell the history, and they'll keep much of it to themselves and their university societies. I'm close to done with the "Fear and Loathing in the New Jerusalem", which was 6 episodes long, and the perspective he provides is invaluable to me. Thank you Celia for sharing #20, I'll get to it with all haste!
In so many words this speaker asserts that Nietzsche was in love with Cosima Wagner and that this lay behind his later dispute with her husband Richard Wagner, who he had originally admired. Is there any evidence for this? It is new to me.
My concern is also a broader one. There seem to be many speakers and writers re-writing history. Certainly, the history we have been handed down needs to be questioned. But my observation is of a tendency for would-be historians (as would-be journalists) to write a good story at the expense of truth.
“If you’re not reading Nietzsche at 20, you have no heart. But if you haven’t transitioned to Dostoevsky by 30…” In this episode... the lives and work of the two 19th century existentialist authors.
I watched this slick operator reinvent everything except Romania .On that I more than absorbed Richard Wurmbrand 's books .
I found Darry Cooper a subsumptive .
I also think the fact that he works as a defense contractor in EU ( undisclosed details) is cogent .
I admire his tells .
If I were to use any of them I would say he (DC) is a plant .
Please convince me otherwise ,although I think's Mo's idea of sending -Gabriels- a fifth of strong alcohol ,BEFORE (G) labyrinthically waylays meta details is a start .
I saw his (DC's ) take on serbia as so truncated ,as to be insulting ,for anyone who lives there,and loves serbs .
I relish CF 's laying bare of sources ,but I want his blood type .
In that it is all so easy to be 99% contextural ,with a 1% of spin that truly re paragimates .
Ie discombobulates .
My aim is to see how much of that 1% is 'the yeast of the pharisees' .
So help me out ,please .
From the little I have listened to, I am sceptical of these takes. Five hours is too short for such grandiose, ambitious, speculations. Remember, in any life, whether your own or that of others, you can always dig deeper. If you want. Some people never know when to stop. One assumption here, which is only revealed in a limited way, would be the widespread, indeed universal, ideal of marriage, and monogamous marriage at that. An absurdity imposed by others, not always, perhaps seldom, chosen. The core principle of marriage is exclusion, i.e. rejection, and not love. This sets people up as rivals. See http://www.thinking-for-clarity.de/family.html and http://www.thinking-for-clarity.de/love.html.
To read and understand Nietzsche you need many years, it cannot be done by twenty, especially if you wish to learn German in order to appreciate his full brilliance. Dostievsky may need longer, Russian certainly does.
The speaker is engaging in psychoanalysis of people long dead. Then jumps to contemporary figures and anecdotes. There is an air of superiority, of arrogance, in the fluent talk. The talk is indeed fluent, which in itself is quite an achievement. Obvious a clever man, but has he done the due diligence? Given each their due? I doubt it.
hi, i suspect it is meant for informed dialogue rather than learning the script, but for those of us less studied, it gives us a new experience. i see there are different levels to any subject and each of us moves at his own pace, for instance, i'm a slow learner and this works alright by me.
you on the other hand seem to have a wider grasp and would bring more to the table here as i see you have
i'll check out your links as well
thanks!
In case it matters to your schedule Celia, I'm receiving this on Sunday evening. Thank you as always for all your posts.
Now that is an example of what I would call beautiful manners, freelearner. "In case it matters to your schedule..." I have had a trauma tumble, (something happened) and I thought it was saturday yesterday. Truth be told, I often "lose days" but in this instance, I can blame the "trauma tumble." I'll change the headline. I'm a little embarrassed. I need to write down what day it is, each day. 😣
Me too.
What I've learned about Martyr Made is that he reads/researches an almost-unimaginable amount of primary and other sources before he speaks on a topic via podcast. He has said that he dives into all accounts he can find (and after listening to many hours, I find no reason to doubt this!) and it seems an organic narrative arises from his research. Martyr Made goes past the walls that professional snobby historians build around themselves, the latter asserting that only they have rights to tell the history, and they'll keep much of it to themselves and their university societies. I'm close to done with the "Fear and Loathing in the New Jerusalem", which was 6 episodes long, and the perspective he provides is invaluable to me. Thank you Celia for sharing #20, I'll get to it with all haste!
In so many words this speaker asserts that Nietzsche was in love with Cosima Wagner and that this lay behind his later dispute with her husband Richard Wagner, who he had originally admired. Is there any evidence for this? It is new to me.
My concern is also a broader one. There seem to be many speakers and writers re-writing history. Certainly, the history we have been handed down needs to be questioned. But my observation is of a tendency for would-be historians (as would-be journalists) to write a good story at the expense of truth.
deep dive phylosophicles
much food for thought...
; )
“If you’re not reading Nietzsche at 20, you have no heart. But if you haven’t transitioned to Dostoevsky by 30…” In this episode... the lives and work of the two 19th century existentialist authors.
Wow, 5 hour listen.
Need a rainy day to listen to it all!