Skip navigation

Tag Archives: ERISTIK

My last post was accused of “trying to convince”, which i take to mean trying too hard to convince, and maybe being too argumentative. But i’ve been accused of this many times before.

That got me thinking about how we face ideas and how we fool ourselves.

And Derrida against Deleuze, obviously. Read More »


When the bastard John Snow was going to put the black, everyone told him it was noble, and brave, and the family thing to do, but the imp Tyrion Lannister told him it would suck. And then latter John Snow thought that only the Imp had told him the truth. When in fact the Imp had, as much as all the others, just given him a version of things. But his version was stronger than all the others. And if you want to understand how, if you want to have any chance of ever learning that trick, you must look much much deeper than truth.

Youre Tyrion Lannister the queens brother? My greatest accomplishment!

Snarky dialogue between Jon Snow and Tyrion Lannister

Read More »

Quando Jon Snow ia “adotar o pretinho básico” e entrar pra Night’s Watch, todo mundo disse pra ele que aquilo era muito nobre, e muito corajoso, e coisa de um verdadeiro homem de família, e tal e coisa, mas o Tyrion Lannister falou que ia ser uma merda. Daí muito depois o Jon Snow achou que só o anão tinha falado a verdade. Só que, claro, o anão deu uma versão da história, assim como todos os outros. Acontece que a versão do anão era mais forte. Mas se você quer entender como e porque, se você quer saber onde mora a trapaça, você tem que ir além da “verdade”.

Youre Tyrion Lannister the queens brother? My greatest accomplishment!

Read More »

When Nietzsche sez Plato was an ugly man, that is an adorable low blow. The idea being that just a very ugly man could have any interest into proving the material world to be an illusion, since then his ugliness would also be illusory. Turns out his name likely comes from a brutally big forehead, so, you see, the Moustache Guy was on to something (surprise, surprise). Even then explaining away someone’s world-views through such very paltry personal issues is a low blow.

Thinking about this, at first sight it looks like this is a vulnerability of serious thinkers, that by keeping high level arguments they unhappily open themselves up to coarser, blunter, stupid counter-arguments. That the personal stuff is just the basis for the arguments, and that those are, by their turn, more abstract and more important.

But there is a catch, there is cunning and deceit here. If the Moustache had said just that Plato is ugly and sad and dumb and he does not like him and, as we say in Portuguese, hates anyone who likes — well, that would have been like lowering our argument level. But what Nietzsche does is actually using the personal in order to raise the abstraction level. In pointing out ad hominem objections, he makes matters more complex and subtle. He uses a personal attack to make the argument more encompassing, not less.