It's a condescending angle because you were condescending at first, even more when attempting to use 1800s philosophy to argument for ambition based on very fos

It's a condescending angle because you were condescending at first, even more when attempting to use 1800s philosophy to argument for ambition based on very fossilised philosophy. I like Nietzsche, I wouldn't use Nietzsche as the sole basis of morality argumentation since there are much more updated thinkers considering our moral standards in the contemporary world. Receding from the discussion doesn't take that away, you were being reductionist in your argumentation, I just pointed out you were stuck in the 1800s. Since then I read your profile and saw you are actually a consequentialist, I don't want anything to do with Effective Altruism true believers so thanks for not engaging further.