433
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 10:
Line 10: + +
no edit summary
How is that a cheap shot at Christianity? This joke makes us look stupid and insecure; Nietzsche would have loved it. It takes up a huge portion of the page on the philosopher, which is clearly written by someone who has never read anything he wrote. Nietzsche's "god is dead" quote is not a major point of his philosophy, only a part of a larger point he was making, and to write an encyclopedia article focused on it is to reveal a serious and embarrassing ignorance of his work. I think the popularity of this simple play on words does reveal a great deal about his thought, pointing to the insecurity of Christians when faced with philosophical challenges. Read Nietzsche and write a serious repudiation appropriate for an encyclopedia, or remove that joke.
How is that a cheap shot at Christianity? This joke makes us look stupid and insecure; Nietzsche would have loved it. It takes up a huge portion of the page on the philosopher, which is clearly written by someone who has never read anything he wrote. Nietzsche's "god is dead" quote is not a major point of his philosophy, only a part of a larger point he was making, and to write an encyclopedia article focused on it is to reveal a serious and embarrassing ignorance of his work. I think the popularity of this simple play on words does reveal a great deal about his thought, pointing to the insecurity of Christians when faced with philosophical challenges. Read Nietzsche and write a serious repudiation appropriate for an encyclopedia, or remove that joke.
I think you can have the joke stay - after all, it is probably the most universally-known reference to him. But you can still write a criticism of that joke, and the thinking behind it, provided it's not combative and opinion instead of fact. I think the edits you made to the first paragraph were great; I'd love to see what you could write about the joke.--[[User:Dave3172|Dave3172]] 16:43, 10 March 2007 (EST)