>>300318I see, so, AI has permeated deeply in programming now. I listened to some professor saying dat AI is just gonna make people do more work and it seem dat you agree with dat. I just dont use it though, but you dont have dat option now. I dunno, I think relying on job being interesting is futile because boss will make it not fun if sees you having fun. Its just dat they dont like when people have fun, it clashes with their beliefs about how hard guy should work. After all, in their mind, guy cant work hard and have fun. Any way, I dunno how it is with AI thing, but Im kinda glad not to know…
Sure, there is. Its just I think of psychology very different from philosophy. I dunno wat I want to say, but for example motivations and explanations of motivations not the same isnt it? When in a slasher movie we follow from first person the killer, we kinda judge the guy ourselves, we kinda live his role while watching, so we understand motivations by following his thinking. In the Camus book, I dunno if you can follow his thinking like dat. I dont remember the book though, but I guess in philosophical literature things get explained by some exterior thing, like speech of narrator or a character different from main point of view. Thats wat I meant by psychology, that you kinda live the role of the main character and dats how you come to understand the guy's thinking. But as for existence, I dunno. I only like authentic life concept, but for me, there is no inauthentic life so I dunno. I dont think there is definite answer for question of meaning of life, but its not like I can say that there is no meaning to life at all. I guess meaning of life is a multiplicity and not a totality, like meaning of nature, meaning of culture, both can be defined, and from this constellation we can say dat there is meaning to life. Its just too big of a category for us to give it a short definition or a quick mnemonic quip
Sure, he wasnt exactly ideologically homogeneous with the fascist party. He had his own motivations. But I dont think he was exactly anti religion though, at least, he agreed to be part of a cult(Mussolini cult) and of a would-be religion of fascism
He was a leftist, but at dat time many were. Risogimento was an liberal and dysfunctional regime, so, when it began to disintegrate people become more radicalized because of inability of the system to solve any problems. Many people seen socialism as the answer, but because conservatives and nationalists have more power, it was just easier to forge alliances with them for fascists. Thats how it is a revolution, it strives for a total change in society. Mussolini changed his perspective on things when it suited him(at least thats how it looks. I havent read about him personally yet, I know far more about Hitler than DVCE)
Fascism is not really an ideology, its kinda difficult to say wat it is. There is ideological part to it, but its more than dat. But yes, fascism of both types was anti conservative because conservatives resisted
Eh, Hitler was power addicted. So, it is difficult to say who cared more about power, Mussolini or Hitler. Probably for both it was the most important thing. Any way, Mussolini was indeed a macho, but I guess in Italy people like dat were always popular. Like Garibaldi. So, it is not by coincidence Mussolini was made a deity. Fascists at first thought dat they could control Mussolini but he was too smooth of an operator and just subverted the party for himself and made fascist party to equal fo his person, which wasnt how it supposed to be in original plan. Hitler is very similar, though, Hitler has built his own party by, (unironically), his own will