As long as a man knows very well the strength and weaknesses of his teaching, his art, his religion, its power is still slight. The pupil and apostle who, blinded by the authority of the master and by the piety he feels toward him, pays no attention to the weaknesses of a teaching, a religion, and soon usually has for that reason more power than the master.
Typical Nietzsche. A man's power is not derived from the ethicality of his teachings, nor from its strengths or weaknesses. Merely from the sheer power of his convinction and dedication to it.
It is true, there could be a metaphysical world; the absolute possibility of it is hardly to be disputed. We behold all things through the human head and cannot cut off this head
True. Each man is his own world, and that very world depends solely on individual perception. That's where the whole 'Beyong Good and Evil' concept was born.
hitherto we have been permitted to seek beauty only in the morally good - a fact which sufficiently accounts for our having found so little of it and having had to seek about for imaginary beauties without backbone!
Ah, my point exactly. The key point here is thet morals, when used in Nietzsche's texts, is a subjective term, and not the usually widely accepted moral and ethical eticquette. Morally good refers to each man as an individual and a special world of his own, no better or worse than enyone else, merely different. And each man's chase for his own chimera, his own moral pedestal, defines his actions.
Let's not base the foundation of the argument on wildy disputed ideas on where and when a personality is set. Or how it is developed. To put the choice before the person is to relieve the person of any responsibility. And therefore a shortcut to absolve guilt.
Not that extreme,friend, not that extreme... I merely pointed out that man has far less control over the shaping of his personality than he would desire. he is often found in front of situation in which his decisions and path making are inevitably pre set. The problem is that even he cannot see that and basks in his 'freedom of will' and 'majesty of free choice'. Which is a stretch, but still is far from the 'total independence' and 'karmic guarantee' extremes.
Also, the fact that you, a married adult lawyer expecting twins, would go as far as try to attack someone's computer in some way over an internet dispute from a forum you had supposedly been "retired" from seems incredibly absurd to me (and from the looks of it, I'm not the only one).
seems to me are the key words here. I would go to all lengths and extremes to protect my sovereignty, and I will not shy away from that. The fact that you associate a 'label' behavior to a 'family man expecting kids' in indeed a first sign of lawyer thinking.
And one last thing from my storybook of a post, I doubt anyone would take a seemingly "friendly" joke without offense when you use the smiley so much. It just looks like some cocky motherfucker with a British accent saying "Come get some, bitch". Well, I guess maybe that's my inner monologue, but I wanted to clear that up.
A 'wink and smile' smilie would be the perfect fit for me and my personality in this forum, instead of just teh wink one. British cocky mf saying "Come get some, bitch"? Yup, that's me all right...
Did you mail people asking them to put "Supports Dweaver" in their name/sig?
Nope.
Regardless, you did contact people to help you "hack" the NLSC.
I only investigated one person's availability and possible inclination to do so. So 'people' is misleading.
the thing I hate the most in life is being accused of something I did....whoever said I told Dweaver how to hack, is dead wrong....
leave X out of this, will you... His name does not deserve to get dragged into this in a negative manner. Thank you.
. That was the best post in the history of nlsc. That and the Michael(Jordan) one in the old forums 
.
