<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>human_superhuman at Yahoo! Groups</title>
    <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/</link>
    <description>The Nonteleological Man.</description>

    <item>
      <title>Re: Nietzsche on Feminine and Masculine Love.</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Jul 2012 19:25:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>sauwelios</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/535</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/535</guid>
      <description>When, at the very end of my second post in this thread, I spoke of &quot;adoring [woman] for her sincere passion for passion, and blessing her for the silliness of</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Nietzsche on Feminine and Masculine Love.</title>
      <pubDate>Sun, 01 Jul 2012 23:48:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>sauwelios</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/534</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/534</guid>
      <description>There is a fear that pervades woman&#39;s life: the fear of being raped, murdered, and/or tortured by man. And the context in which Nietzsche coins the phrase &quot;the</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Nietzsche on Feminine and Masculine Love.</title>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2012 03:30:47 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>sauwelios</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/533</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/533</guid>
      <description>Before I continue, first a note on the translation. The translation is from Project Gutenberg, and I&#39;ve made a few corrections to it already because it isn&#39;t</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Nietzsche on Feminine and Masculine Love.</title>
      <pubDate>Sun, 24 Jun 2012 20:25:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>sauwelios</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/532</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/532</guid>
      <description>As a Lampertian Nietzschean, and at some level perhaps even rather a Straussian Nietzschean, I know something of Nietzsche&#39;s esotericism. Still, I&#39;m impressed</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: The Nietzschean Übermensch: new group on Facebook.</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2012 18:45:05 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>sauwelios</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/531</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/531</guid>
      <description>I will try to explain my insight by the hand of the high point, the thirty-fifth paragraph, of  one of Leo Strauss&#39;s last writings, his &quot;Note on the Plan of</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Nietzschean Übermensch: new group on Facebook.</title>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2011 02:35:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>sauwelios</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/529</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/529</guid>
      <description>Dear Members, I&#39;ve created a new group about Nietzsche&#39;s Übermensch: https://www.facebook.com/groups/336960912985736/ </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Sauwelios as ruler</title>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Oct 2011 20:02:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>osvit000</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/528</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/528</guid>
      <description>Sauwelios complained about his failed rule as the master of the nietzsche-pyramid. He probably thought that a belief in hierarchy is sufficient to attract</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Eternal Universe With New Cosmological Model</title>
      <pubDate>Sat, 27 Aug 2011 01:30:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>sauwelios</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/527</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/527</guid>
      <description>Dear Ian, I think I can counter your objection to syllogism 6 very easily. You say: &quot;Nothing about being enclosed by something unthinkable implies that the</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Eternal Universe With New Cosmological Model</title>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Aug 2011 22:55:51 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Ian</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/526</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/526</guid>
      <description>Um, hi.  It&#39;s been quite a while since the last post of this discussion.  I have no excuse; I just completely forgot about it. That, of course, isn&#39;t</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Eternal Universe With New Cosmological Model</title>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Oct 2010 11:32:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>sauwelios</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/525</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/525</guid>
      <description>... And by saying that a concept is a thing, I did not mean to imply that it had &#39;substance&#39;. So it&#39;s not a metaphysical, but a definitional argument. I define</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Eternal Universe With New Cosmological Model</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2010 22:26:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Ian</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/524</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/524</guid>
      <description>&quot;Well, for one thing, I&#39;d say a concept *is* a thing. I don&#39;t mean that all things can be formed or had in the mind.&quot; Well, we can dispute that.  Ultimately,</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Eternal Universe With New Cosmological Model</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2010 07:42:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>sauwelios</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/523</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/523</guid>
      <description>... Well, for one thing, I&#39;d say a concept *is* a thing. I don&#39;t mean that all things can be formed or had in the mind. ... Thank you. I would indeed not mind</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Eternal Universe With New Cosmological Model</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2010 05:19:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Ian</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/522</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/522</guid>
      <description>Thank you for taking the time to write those syllogisms.  Some problems with it are: 1 (a): &quot;To think is to form or have in the mind&quot; I agree with this</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Eternal Universe With New Cosmological Model</title>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2010 01:46:14 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>sauwelios</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/521</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/521</guid>
      <description>... I did some reading on it. That didn&#39;t help to ground your assertions. ... Of course. ... Below are syllogisms. In each case, &quot;a&quot; is the first premise, &quot;b&quot;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Eternal Universe With New Cosmological Model</title>
      <pubDate>Sun, 03 Oct 2010 23:30:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <dc:creator>Ian</dc:creator>
      <link>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/520</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/human_superhuman/message/520</guid>
      <description>&quot;Well, as you have not grounded any of your assertions, there is nothing for me to go into.&quot; Do the words &quot;Riemannian geometry&quot; ring a bell here? &quot;I don&#39;t know</description>
    </item>

  </channel>
</rss>
<!-- rss2.grp.bf1.yahoo.com uncompressed Tue May 21 10:57:47 PDT 2013 -->
