One problem for Nietsche's thesis of different moral codes for different species: wolves and lambs would no doubt have different ethics, but human beings belong to a single species, so, by this argument, they ought to have the same morality.
Species is a construct, which is something that I learned from a paleoanthropologist at the Smithsonian in DC. It’s a meaningless term and part of a subjective taxonomic system. If the very concept of species is a construct, then the concept of a human species, universal or otherwise, is also a construct. I tried pushing back (at the museum) with species having the ability to produce viable offspring, but apparently, a tiny fraction of hybrids like mules/hinnies can in fact reproduce. Then, when you get into the “human” lineage, it gets even murkier. Science books that were considered antiquated at the end of the 20th century proclaimed that Neanderthals evolved into Cro-Magnon, i.e., humans. In the 1990s, mainstream science believed that modern humans were a distinct species from Neanderthals. Then this theory was debunked with DNA sequencing that demonstrated most Europeans are a hybrid species, carrying a tiny amount of Neanderthal DNA. The same is true about Asians, who have a little Denisovan DNA. So maybe instead of trying to prove that we’re all genetically the same, which we’re not…maybe we should be focusing on the fact that these differences do not matter because they don’t. Then we don’t have to play mental gymnastics trying to prove a falsehood, or even worse, rely on dogma to hedge our bets on the future.
Imho, I like the older Hicks more. He's gotten more refined over the years, and while I do appreciate the work the young Hicks did here, I think that the intellectual taste and the personality of Hicks has only gotten more sublime over the years. As my mother used to say: he has aged gracefully. This being said: Well done! This has been a very valuable and enjoyable piece of art!
No biggie, but I just noticed how young Stephen Hicks is in this video despite it being posted just a few weeks ago. I guess the video had been floating around for quite a while.
Nietzsche didn’t understand the sermon on the mount. He understood it extremely shallowly if that’s what he came away with. The apostles and disciples of the first century that heard the same teaching were absolutely bold, non-conformist revolutionary types.
Nietzsche, in fact, did not even understand Darwin. He could not distinguish between Darwin's natural selection and Lamarck's theory of use and disuse.
@@emissary_of_aldebaran I speak from within the pit of my soul It was He who made us as living beings Who took the thinker man's mind & soul to show him what he did not yet know🕊
He had syphilis which causes madness in the last stages. There was no cure in Nietzsche's time. There is controversy whether Nietzsche got it from a woman or a man.
Slave values became Jewish values....except that they didn’t. They invaded Canaan and conquered it, they fought the Philistines and many other peoples. The Maccabees threw off the hellenic successors of Alexander.
Id love to hear a good Christian or Jewish response to these arguments but I've never found one, if anyone has any suggestions I'd be very grateful thank you.
Check out Joseph Henrich's work on the influence of christianity on european culture, he is an atheist just like Nietzsche but his views on christianity are radically different
As an aside, did you know that the books that were being burnt in the 1930s were of transgender ideology, as well as other socially corrosive and subversive topics, (written by authors of a particular religious disposition which shall not be named).?
Oh yeah, Albert Einstein, known for his 'corrosive and subversive' topics. They burnt books that didn't conform to Nazi ideology and/or were written by Jews.
Christopher Isherwood was not Jewish. Isherwood's tales about Sally Bowles and her acquaintances became the basis for John Van Druten's play I Am a Camera (1951; film, 1955). Fred Ebb and John Kander turned this material into the much-acclaimed stage musical Cabaret (1966; film, 1972).
Magnus Hirschfeld (14 May 1868 - 14 May 1935) was a Jewish German physician and sexologist, whose citizenship was later revoked by the Nazi government. Hirschfeld was educated in philosophy, philology and medicine. An outspoken advocate for sexual minorities, Hirschfeld founded the Scientific-Humanitarian Committee and World League for Sexual Reform.
One problem for Nietsche's thesis of different moral codes for different species: wolves and lambs would no doubt have different ethics, but human beings belong to a single species, so, by this argument, they ought to have the same morality.
Species is a construct, which is something that I learned from a paleoanthropologist at the Smithsonian in DC. It’s a meaningless term and part of a subjective taxonomic system.
If the very concept of species is a construct, then the concept of a human species, universal or otherwise, is also a construct.
I tried pushing back (at the museum) with species having the ability to produce viable offspring, but apparently, a tiny fraction of hybrids like mules/hinnies can in fact reproduce.
Then, when you get into the “human” lineage, it gets even murkier. Science books that were considered antiquated at the end of the 20th century proclaimed that Neanderthals evolved into Cro-Magnon, i.e., humans. In the 1990s, mainstream science believed that modern humans were a distinct species from Neanderthals. Then this theory was debunked with DNA sequencing that demonstrated most Europeans are a hybrid species, carrying a tiny amount of Neanderthal DNA. The same is true about Asians, who have a little Denisovan DNA.
So maybe instead of trying to prove that we’re all genetically the same, which we’re not…maybe we should be focusing on the fact that these differences do not matter because they don’t.
Then we don’t have to play mental gymnastics trying to prove a falsehood, or even worse, rely on dogma to hedge our bets on the future.
Imho, I like the older Hicks more. He's gotten more refined over the years, and while I do appreciate the work the young Hicks did here, I think that the intellectual taste and the personality of Hicks has only gotten more sublime over the years. As my mother used to say: he has aged gracefully.
This being said: Well done! This has been a very valuable and enjoyable piece of art!
Really, very good stuff. Hard to take at times but well thought out and presented. Well done, indeed. Thanks,
No biggie, but I just noticed how young Stephen Hicks is in this video despite it being posted just a few weeks ago. I guess the video had been floating around for quite a while.
Read his book well over 10yrs ago. Happy to see an accessible video that lets me revisit these ideas so easily. Thanks for posting!
Nietzsche didn’t understand the sermon on the mount. He understood it extremely shallowly if that’s what he came away with. The apostles and disciples of the first century that heard the same teaching were absolutely bold, non-conformist revolutionary types.
Nietzsche, in fact, did not even understand Darwin. He could not distinguish between Darwin's natural selection and Lamarck's theory of use and disuse.
Love is man's greatest fulfilment and involves the greatest sacrifice.
Very insightful commentary. I wish my university professors had been this compelling. Thank you.
Human beings are social animals. This suggests that they will flourish best if they collaborate. That will involve some compromise and sacrifice.
Was it a coincidence or destiny that
the thinker man lost his mind in the abyss
@@emissary_of_aldebaran
I speak from within the pit of my soul
It was He who made us as living beings
Who took the thinker man's mind & soul
to show him what he did not yet know🕊
He had syphilis which causes madness in the last stages. There was no cure in Nietzsche's time. There is controversy whether Nietzsche got it from a woman or a man.
@@willchristie2650
Losing his mind long after losing his soul
Slave values became Jewish values....except that they didn’t. They invaded Canaan and conquered it, they fought the Philistines and many other peoples. The Maccabees threw off the hellenic successors of Alexander.
Id love to hear a good Christian or Jewish response to these arguments but I've never found one, if anyone has any suggestions I'd be very grateful thank you.
Check out Joseph Henrich's work on the influence of christianity on european culture, he is an atheist just like Nietzsche but his views on christianity are radically different
@@olegsergienko7444 hey thanks a bunch!
@@emissary_of_aldebaran thank you I'll look it up..... I'd love to find a steel man argument.... That usually it's just a straw man very frustrating
As an aside, did you know that the books that were being burnt in the 1930s were of transgender ideology, as well as other socially corrosive and subversive topics, (written by authors of a particular religious disposition which shall not be named).?
Oh yeah, Albert Einstein, known for his 'corrosive and subversive' topics. They burnt books that didn't conform to Nazi ideology and/or were written by Jews.
Christopher Isherwood was not Jewish. Isherwood's tales about Sally Bowles and her acquaintances became the basis for John Van Druten's play I Am a Camera (1951; film, 1955). Fred Ebb and John Kander turned this material into the much-acclaimed stage musical Cabaret (1966; film, 1972).
Havelock Ellis was not Jewish
Magnus Hirschfeld (14 May 1868 - 14 May 1935) was a Jewish German physician and sexologist, whose citizenship was later revoked by the Nazi government. Hirschfeld was educated in philosophy, philology and medicine. An outspoken advocate for sexual minorities, Hirschfeld founded the Scientific-Humanitarian Committee and World League for Sexual Reform.
My favourite thing about the anti-semite tribe is their refusal to actually study history.
I’m fine with his criticism of priests, but his Bible criticism is weak as all get-out.