No.2354
>>2353Yes, I made that thread.
Also, good catch, though I wasn't expecting already the first post to point it out :^)
No.2433
>Be where your feet are.
Applies to pretty much everything in life but comes up frequently in sports. If your mind is on anything other than the 300 lb lineman in front of you, you'll quickly find yourself lying on the turf.
No.2483
I like this one:
>moral outrage usually consists of 2% morals, 48% uptightness and 50% envy.François de La Rochefoucauld
>>2433Good one, it speaks about taking the challenges ahead at you, and not to bother about distant things, both figuratively and literally.
>>2354>Yes, I made that thread.Wow, I thought I did. But it's been a while, I might be wrong.
No.2484
>>2483>Wow, I thought I didThat's because you are not you. You are me.
>Foolish love makes beasts of menFrancois Villon
No.2494
I'm convinced that aphorisms are not only unethical but also reactionary in their nature. Aphorisms are short, witty, and often clever sayings that are meant to convey a general truth or observation. While they may seem harmless on the surface, aphorisms are actually dangerous because they promote a simplistic and reductionist understanding of complex social issues.
Aphorisms are often used to justify oppressive power structures by reducing them to simple slogans. For example, the saying "money can't buy happiness" is used to justify the capitalist system by suggesting that the pursuit of wealth is futile. This overlooks the fact that capitalism is a system of exploitation that perpetuates inequality and suffering. Similarly, the saying "all lives matter" is used to dismiss the Black Lives Matter movement and uphold the status quo of systemic racism.
Moreover, aphorisms promote a culture of individualism and self-help rather than collective action and solidarity. By reducing complex social issues to pithy slogans, aphorisms imply that individuals can solve these issues through their own efforts, without the need for collective action. This ignores the fact that many social issues are systemic in nature and require collective action to bring about meaningful change.
In conclusion, I believe that aphorisms are unethical and reactionary because they promote simplistic and reductionist understandings of complex social issues, justify oppressive power structures, and promote a culture of individualism and self-help. Instead of relying on aphorisms, we should engage in critical thinking and collective action to challenge oppressive power structures and bring about meaningful social change.
No.2509
>The purpose of life is to enjoy its purposelessnessFriedrich Nietzsche
...
...
...
Yeah yeah, OK, I wrote it myself and it sucks, I know.
>>2494I'd engage in discussion, but I'm afraid that this would only promote further understandings, with which I'd cement the existing power structure.
No.2791
If everyone agrees with your proposal, it might not be worth doing it.
No.2802
>>2797Because really good and groundbreaking ideas usually involve breaking up existing systems, which also means pissing off those who were comfortable in or who profit from it.
No.2833 KONTRA
>>2802Nothing of this is implied in that statement though, so either you're missing part of the quote, or came up with it yourself.
No.4327
You should treat other people worse than your parents. Sounds bad? But this is what people demand when they say to honor your parents.
No.4329 KONTRA
>>4327Confucias BTFO’d with facts and logic
No.4722
>If you wish to be out front, then act as if you were behind.
Lao-Tzu
It must be good, because a chinese man said it long ago.
>Reading aphorisms and expecting to achieve wisdom is like reading Beethoven's sheet music and expecting to become a musician.
It must be bad, because there is no reference to an ancient chinese man. Not even Oscar Wilde, can you believe it? What is this crap?
No.4726
>>4722Shitty Ernst aphorisms are easily identifiable by being too roundabout and crude to come from someone of renown.
No.4732
>>4726>by being too roundabout and crude to come from someone of renown.I have read "aphorisms" by Oscar Wilde which were so poor that they made my toenails roll up. Maybe that's not his fault, more likely the fault of whoever pulled any arbitrary brainfart of his out of context and coined it an aphorism. Some of those may be quotes from a character in a novel, and might fit well there, but out of context I refuse to believe they contain any relevant meaning. Examples?
>Questions are never indiscreet; answers sometimes are.Of course questions can be indiscreet. Why wouldn't they? The question is what starts up the whole topic which might be indiscreet. You think it's wrong? Ask your coworkers about their sex life. Do it polite, so that no one can confuse indiscreet with rude. Even if they don't answer, you will face the consequences of the act of posing the question alone.
>The only thing that one really knows about human nature is that it changes.Yes, nothing else was ever and will ever be known about human nature. Even if this was true and there is temporary knowledge, it's still knowledge, so this is just crap.
>It is better to be beautiful than to be good, but it is better to be good than to be ugly.The first half: Okay. But "It's better to be good than to be ugly"? Wow, great words of wisdom. Just imagine I posted this and said I wrote it. It's so bad it wouldn't even get critizised.
No.4750
>>4732Most "aphorisms" by Wilde are indeed taken out of context from his writings, so it's hardly his fault.
I don't even know if he ever published any "actual" aphorisms that were meant as such.
That said, your reviews of your examples are as retarded as you claim them to be.
>Being Ernst means understanding everything and getting nothingKarl Ludwig Lauer von Lauersleben
No.5298
Man shrivels without a struggle to overcome. With civilization granting us spare time, we become increasingly unhappy. We are poorly equipped for the future we create.
No.5299
>>5298If I was a firstie, I would easily find struggle to overcome.
No.5301
>>5300Speedrunning is just an autistically in-depth hobby, like building scale models of one single thing while having a library of references and going to museums specifically to get the details right.
No.5945 KONTRA
>>5944I have an aphorism:
"Looking for humour in soijak memes is like looking for the sun at night: It makes you a fool"
kontra goes in all fields
No.5947
>>5945Deny that ability for yourself, if you lack confidence. The true assburger master can ernstify everything, and has no need for self-inflicted limitations.
Brb, submitting banner...
No.5949 KONTRA
>>5947You are not "ernstifying" anything, you are 4channifying EC, which should be a bannable offence.
Keep that shit out, keep EC clean.
No.5953 KONTRA
>>5951"OC" does not necessarily mean "good".
The n-th retarded, unfunny, shitty soijak macro may be technically OC, but it doesn't make it any less shitty. Soijak is a (forced) shit meme by shit people for shit people and anyone claiming otherwise does not belong anywhere else but one of the containment boards on 4chan.
I could write another paragraph about why soijak is such a shitty (forced) meme, but I would only get angrier.
>Strange that it was completely fine when Brick did it, everyone (including me) liked itWe have no balls anymore, your argument is invalid - how do I know you're not Brick taking the piss?
And NOT everyone liked it, btw (because it was another variant of the unfunny, shitty, retarded soijak meme). And now you're shitting up a completely unrelated thread with it.
I have said it on xyz and I will say it now: Being tolerant of this kind of shit will just attract more shit and lead to the inevitable downfall.
Back then nobody listened, maybe now someone will.
No.5954
>>5952>Brick is EC's enfant terrible, he can draw soyjacks and post battle picturesWell, fair enough. But what even are "battle picures"?
No.5958 KONTRA
>>5956>>5957Ah, I see. I know this kind of picture, but I never heard that name before. Thanks for the information.
No.5959 KONTRA
>>5945Tried deleting your post with kontra and KONTRA.
You lied!
No.5960 KONTRA
>>5958>but I never heard that name before. Because it's also some shitty non-EC bullshit that doesn't belong on here.
Okay, I vote for getting balls back, if this is the kind of audience that gets attracted.
No.5961 KONTRA
>>5960I don't know about a "non-EC bullshit"-topic, and that's also a bad thing now?
No.5962 KONTRA
>>5961>and that's also a bad thing now?Yes, if it comes from 4chan.
Also, are we really so creatively bancrupt here that we have to copy every shit from over there? All the monotonous idpol and seethe, seethe, seethe, yes, we should do away with that.
I say: Let new things develop organically. It's okay to heed established traditions, but just adopting the worst memes from the americans just because they're constantly spammed by absolute subhumans should be something for us to be above.
No.5963 KONTRA
>>5962>Yes, if it comes from 4chan.But I really meant it: I don't even know these. What do you mean by "copying" those? As far as I can see that didn't happen, and the ones in this thread were just posted by another Ernst for clarification. Or am I misunderstanding you?
No.5965 KONTRA
>>5963It's just a quixotic endeavour of an old man yelling at clouds, but before I head to bed, let me say this:
Soijaks are not made for humor, they are made to irritate and degrade. Nobody posting a soijak has anything of value to say and is normally the most obnoxious piece of shit in that respective thread so far, right until the more of that vermin shows up.
Nothing good will come out of this if you continue down this path, mark my words.
No.5966 KONTRA
You remind me of .xyz admin who based his identity on "not being kohlchanner".
No.5969 KONTRA
>>5965I understand your point, even if I don't fully agree with it. Anyway, have a good night.
>>5966My take on this was always that there are not really bad images, like Pepe, Spurdo, Anime or whatever sometimes is associated with low effort posting. Same goes with the compulsive distancing from other imageboards, or in case of 4chan from their boogeyman Reddit. There are just low effort posts, which might be correlated with a certain type of pictures. But banning the pictures won't make the problem go away. Removing bad posts will. On a board with decent posters you can talk about anything and use any pictures you like, it won't be a problem. Though I suppose it's true that there are topics and maybe even images that are prone to attracting bad posters. Still it feels wrong to not allow the images, because it feels like we're restricting ourselves because other people do bad things elsewhere, this should not be a concern of ours. And it's not sustainable, because what are we gonna do if Spede or Ernstwurf becomes the next big thing for shitposters? This approach basically gives people a handle to arbitrary spoil pictures or topics for us. But well, just my 2 cents, it's honestly not that important to me, so I won't be butthurt, no matter how things are handled.
No.5977
>>5969> because what are we gonna do if Spede or Ernstwurf becomes the next big thing for shitposters?That is a thing that can happen, and if it happens, well, shit happens, but it was not intended.
But soijak is like the nazi flag - a perversion of something else with the sole purpose of being destructive, and consequently it's burned for "normal" use.
I personally can not remember ever seeing a soijak post that was not disruptive or dumb and where the poster was interested in any kind of discussion.
It's simply smearing shit all over a discussion and using a soijak you are identifying yourself as someone who likes to smear shit on everything.
As I said, I feel like I am fighting windmills here, and I am angry at myself for getting into such a heated meta rant in this thread.
To bring it back on topic:
>When angry count four; when very angry, swear.Mark Twain
No.6075
"Better fewer, but better" - Lenin
"The best is the enemy of good" - Voltaire
No.6086
>If you understood everything I said, you’d be me
- Miles Davis
No.6248
If you need to ask, you don't know
- Franklin D. Roosevelt
No.6257
>>6248What did he mean by it?
No.6278
>>6248If you don't know, you betta ask somebody
-50 Cent
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2UD-zjFwsM No.6302
>>6248What if it is a rhetoric question only meant to annoy someone?
No.6303
>>6302Well, if you need to ask....
No.6338
>>2791>Let's end all diseases>Let's nuke IsraelNow everything makes sense, mein Fuehrer
No.6690
>>5300In 3-rd world life itself is an any % speedrun.
No.7642
Career success isn't based on doing a good job. It's based on others believing that you're doing a good job.
No.7647
>>7642I swear I've seen this post before
No.16408
When life gets in your face, lean back.
No.18470
>Tam miser est quisque quam credidit
Seneca the Younger