07-21-2006, 12:06 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-dhu+Jul 21 2006, 04:33 AM-->QUOTE(dhu @ Jul 21 2006, 04:33 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-ben_ami+Jul 20 2006, 01:59 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ben_ami @ Jul 20 2006, 01:59 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->someone taking deep interest in indian philosophy does not prove it. i want to know if all the germanic philosophers of the last 200 years "DERIVED" (or were influenced) their philosophy from hinduism and buddhism. osawld spengler didnt for sure.
[right][snapback]54168[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
spengler appears to be a nietzschean type in that he continuously refers to a "will to power" dynamic. the exaggerated, puerile"will to power" rhetoric is what develops when an inferior culture encounters a superior one and cannot graciously accept the fact, eg how the arabs felt about the persians at the eve of the islamic takeover.
we also need some work on how the new indian influence could not be digested by europe producing the fourth semitic heresy of Marxism, just as the ancient buddhist influence had mutated into christianity. and also just why this marxism emerged among the jewish intellectuals. yes i am sure that germanics like schopenhauer are plagiarizing off the jewish innovators.
spengler may also be another case of Shri RM's famous U-turn where the founding influences are erased or attributed to peripheral elements in the superior culture (eg zoroastrianism or buddhism). note this interesting "factoid":
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->wiki: He spent his final years in Munich, listening to Beethoven, reading Molière and Shakespeare, buying several thousand books, and collecting <b>ancient Turkish, Persian and Hindu weapons. </b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Of course, no hard conclusions can formed. it is all just very very "interesting".
[right][snapback]54218[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
the reason i had said that "spengler didnt" was that spengler was of the opinion that killing and carnage was the true primal nature of humans (just as the new dutch paedophile political party would have as believe with fornication). this funda by spengler was used for some time by the nazis to justify their tactics. if spengler came to the conclusion that killing is life and life killing, after reading books of buddhism, then i'd like to know how.
as for the 4th semetic heresey - i would call it the third. judaism, how so ever silly in its premise (god taking from behind burning bushes - the original bushim, adam eve concept - plagiarised from sumerians, 10 commandments - basicle tribal dribble, esp the first 5 commandments etc etc) was not very harmful or did not cause much bloodshed. probably because, tho just like christianity, islam and communism, it too seeks to control other people's lives by dictacting terms to them, judaism does not seek to control everyone - only jews. they feel no need to shove their rules and laws down the throats of others, the way christianity, islam and marxism does. so silly maybe, but not harmful.
with communism, it would be unfair to blame the jews entirely. tho inded the founding fathers were jews, there were many many other lesser comrades too.
same with christianity. only jesus and the apostles and some more were jews. is all. islam is all semetic in that all arabs are identically semetic.
btw, the other semetic heresay of feminism has done no less damage to people tho - its ruined the family in the west.
"just why this marxism emerged amongst jewish thinkers" - damned good question. almost all "isms" have emerged from their heads. my theory is that since judaism itself is a set of rules and do's and dont's to control society - happily enough only jewish society - the jews/semetics have an innate need and desire to keep emulating this dictatorial approach to try and control other people. almost invariably these ways of exercising control are contrary to human nature and the basic way the world/nature was made (another classic jewish/semetic trait - to try and somehow control/get the better of, their harsh desert enviornment). when i say contrary, i mean postulates like "all men are equal" (as marxism says), "all men have to live their lives in the same way" (as islam and christianity says) - thats simply not the way we are born. the control is exercised either from a religious reference frame as in christianity (you once said the romans are a quarter semetic by blood. if that be true, then thats further explaination) and islam or from a political reference frame like marzism and all its derivatives (communism, maoism, totalitarism etc). and even feminsm (very contrary to nature - women simply arnt born to make good husbands).
[right][snapback]54168[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
spengler appears to be a nietzschean type in that he continuously refers to a "will to power" dynamic. the exaggerated, puerile"will to power" rhetoric is what develops when an inferior culture encounters a superior one and cannot graciously accept the fact, eg how the arabs felt about the persians at the eve of the islamic takeover.
we also need some work on how the new indian influence could not be digested by europe producing the fourth semitic heresy of Marxism, just as the ancient buddhist influence had mutated into christianity. and also just why this marxism emerged among the jewish intellectuals. yes i am sure that germanics like schopenhauer are plagiarizing off the jewish innovators.
spengler may also be another case of Shri RM's famous U-turn where the founding influences are erased or attributed to peripheral elements in the superior culture (eg zoroastrianism or buddhism). note this interesting "factoid":
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->wiki: He spent his final years in Munich, listening to Beethoven, reading Molière and Shakespeare, buying several thousand books, and collecting <b>ancient Turkish, Persian and Hindu weapons. </b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Of course, no hard conclusions can formed. it is all just very very "interesting".
[right][snapback]54218[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
the reason i had said that "spengler didnt" was that spengler was of the opinion that killing and carnage was the true primal nature of humans (just as the new dutch paedophile political party would have as believe with fornication). this funda by spengler was used for some time by the nazis to justify their tactics. if spengler came to the conclusion that killing is life and life killing, after reading books of buddhism, then i'd like to know how.
as for the 4th semetic heresey - i would call it the third. judaism, how so ever silly in its premise (god taking from behind burning bushes - the original bushim, adam eve concept - plagiarised from sumerians, 10 commandments - basicle tribal dribble, esp the first 5 commandments etc etc) was not very harmful or did not cause much bloodshed. probably because, tho just like christianity, islam and communism, it too seeks to control other people's lives by dictacting terms to them, judaism does not seek to control everyone - only jews. they feel no need to shove their rules and laws down the throats of others, the way christianity, islam and marxism does. so silly maybe, but not harmful.
with communism, it would be unfair to blame the jews entirely. tho inded the founding fathers were jews, there were many many other lesser comrades too.
same with christianity. only jesus and the apostles and some more were jews. is all. islam is all semetic in that all arabs are identically semetic.
btw, the other semetic heresay of feminism has done no less damage to people tho - its ruined the family in the west.
"just why this marxism emerged amongst jewish thinkers" - damned good question. almost all "isms" have emerged from their heads. my theory is that since judaism itself is a set of rules and do's and dont's to control society - happily enough only jewish society - the jews/semetics have an innate need and desire to keep emulating this dictatorial approach to try and control other people. almost invariably these ways of exercising control are contrary to human nature and the basic way the world/nature was made (another classic jewish/semetic trait - to try and somehow control/get the better of, their harsh desert enviornment). when i say contrary, i mean postulates like "all men are equal" (as marxism says), "all men have to live their lives in the same way" (as islam and christianity says) - thats simply not the way we are born. the control is exercised either from a religious reference frame as in christianity (you once said the romans are a quarter semetic by blood. if that be true, then thats further explaination) and islam or from a political reference frame like marzism and all its derivatives (communism, maoism, totalitarism etc). and even feminsm (very contrary to nature - women simply arnt born to make good husbands).