There's a theory that Prof. Moriarty wasn't real, but a product of Holmes' cocaine addled mind. A highly intelligent individual with an inquiring mind connected the dots of seemingly random events and concluded that it was all part of a masterful plan. However, if science has taught us anything, sometimes it really is just mindless, purposeless random events.
Nietzsche and Runaway Audio Consumption
Came across this today. A lot of posts bring up the issue of "how much is enough?" or "when is audio consumption justified" etc.
Does this Nietzsche aphorism apply to audio buying? You be the judge!
Friedrich Nietzsche: “Danger in riches. — Only he who has spirit ought to have possessions: otherwise possessions are a public danger. For the possessor who does not know how to make use of the free time which his possessions could purchase him will always continue to strive after possessions: this striving will constitute his entertainment, his strategy in his war against boredom.
Thus in the end the moderate possessions that would suffice the man of spirit are transformed into actual riches – riches which are in fact the glittering product of spiritual dependence and poverty. They only appear quite different from what their wretched origin would lead one to expect because they are able to mask themselves with art and culture: for they are, of course, able to purchase masks. By this means they arouse envy in the poorer and the uncultivated – who at bottom are envying culture and fail to recognize the masks as masks – and gradually prepare a social revolution: for gilded vulgarity and histrionic self-inflation in a supposed ‘enjoyment of culture’ instil into the latter the idea ‘it is only a matter of money’ – whereas, while it is to some extent a matter of money, it is much more a matter of spirit.”
Nietzsche, Friedrich. 1996. Human, All Too Human: A Book for Free Spirits. Cambridge University Press. (p. 283-4, an aphorism no. 310)
I'm pretty sure @mahgister will want to read this one! (Because they speak so artfully about avoiding the diversion that consumption poses to the quest for true aesthetic and acoustic excellence.)
- ...
- 337 posts total
My posts was about history not about conspiracies FIRST AND FOREMOST... And if you mistake genious thinker like Mandeville to be anecdote with no importance in philosophy history and economic and psychology and politics history no more importance than an anecdote in Sherlock Holmes novels, i had bad news for you... Comic books are not the best way to learn to think and Sherlock Holmes so good it is dont replace studies.. And if you think that " if science has taught us anything, sometimes it really is just mindless, purposeless random events." you are late about science progress for at least a century... Comic book and detective novel has nothing to do with science....
Anyway if you are a mathematician and i am wrong about you , i had a question for you? Why is absolute randomness cannot be proven mathematically to exist and what is the relation between prime numbers distributions biases recently observed in prime number theory and the failure and LIMITATIONS of statistical method to study the primes distributions? Why these limit about statiscal method in prime number theory? If you are not a mathematician reading Sherlock Holmes and who dont give a damn about history but a child or an older newspaper reading guy, my only question is how old are you?
|
C’mon @mahgister I’ve read quite a bit here and on other threads alluding to conspiracy theories. Fess up! The history seems to be targeted to support the theories. Just read what has been written. Just saying. My theory is that people are best served consulting with their doctor regarding medical issues like viruses and pandemics, not philosophers, politicians ,’news” people or what some random guy on the internet says.
|
- 337 posts total