In just the same way that nihilists can only be motivated by bribes and threats, cattle can only be motivated by the stick or the carrot.
While it is understandable that non-human animals cannot be expected to understand and follow moral principles, there is an expectation that men who call themselves philosophers would have some idea of the nature and purpose of having moral principles and show some willingness to discuss and debate these ideas.
Which is worst and best?
1) To be cattle reared for slaughter who cannot be expected to know about principles
2) To be a nihilist masquerading as a liberal philosopher while refusing to state his liberal principles or discuss liberal morality
3) To be a nihilist who does not know that he is a nihilist wishing to remain in denial that he is a nihilist
Cattle at least have the purpose of being eaten. The fraudster even if malign serves his own purpose. But the man who does not know that he is suffering from the feminine vice of denial is the most unnatural and to be pitied.
Effeminate Western men are overwhelmingly nihilists and therefore Westerners, including Western women who understandably despise their nihilistic men, are to be pitied, along with their offspring (but most of them will have no offspring).
No comments:
Post a Comment