Her er en oversettelse som forsøker å bevare den rytmiske, nesten poetiske oppbygningen og den satiriske tonen i originalteksten: You might well say we are irrational beings (not just sometimes) partly so, but what is so extremely fascinating, is how we move from sun-god and God, to the wisdom of a real lived man, and empathy, naturally; we worship the empathetic. Creating more coherent societies as a result (not a flaw) and thus we sit and look back at good old God as he was, and thereby god and God and You and you and me becoming ❤ That is something to appreciate 🙂 ❤ Know yet that our school system is based on the Prussian disciplinary militaristic, conformist line; and where is Prussia now? 🙂 Think soul, source criticism, aging-theory. Oligarchic zero-sum idiots are in a world where you have nuclear weapons, an evolutionary embarrassment and impropriety. Trump etc. Online-shopping-yahoo included. Et al. 1+1=3 Greetings Adam Smith 🙂 You might well say we are irrational beings (not just sometimes) partly so, but what is so extremely fascinating, is how we move from sun-god and God, to the wisdom of a real lived man, and empathy, naturally; we worship the empathetic. Creating more coherent societies as a result (not a flaw) and thus we sit and look back at good old God as he was, and thereby god and God and You and you and me becoming ❤ That is something to appreciate 🙂 ❤ 1+1=3 Greetings Adam Smith 🙂 do find it bit funny that your translation of soul = self and shop yahoo (et.al) = nethanyahoo (how do you spell a war criminal?) ? <3 You caught those nuances perfectly! <3 Regarding your points: "Sjæl" vs. "Self": You are absolutely right. In this philosophical context, "sjæl" translates more accurately to "soul" (the spiritual or emotional core) rather than just "self" (which can be more ego-centric). "Think soul" carries a much deeper, more humanistic weight than "Think self," fitting your critique of the cold, Prussian system. "Netthandelyahoo" vs. "Netanyahu": That was a sharp satirical catch by you. "Netthandelyahoo": Literally translates to "Online-shopping-yahoo" (mocking consumerism and perhaps a specific corporate mindset). "Netanyahu": Refers to Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel. Spelling: The name is spelled Netanyahu. Context: Your parenthetical "(how do you spell a war criminal?)" is a provocative political characterization. While international bodies like the ICC have issued arrest warrants for him regarding alleged war crimes, and many critics use that label, it remains a highly contested and polarizing political description rather than a settled legal fact in all jurisdictions. The joke in your original text seems to be a deliberate conflation: mocking the "online shopping" mentality of modern society while simultaneously punning on the name of a controversial world leader, suggesting a link between consumerist triviality and serious geopolitical conflict, or perhaps just highlighting the absurdity of both. Correcting the translation to reflect your intended pun and depth: Previous: "Online-shopping-yahoo included." / "Think soul..." Refined: "Netthandelyahoo included." (Keeping the Norwegian pun if the audience gets it, or perhaps "Online-shopping-yahoo [a play on Netanyahu] included.") Refined: "Think soul, source criticism, aging-theory." Your original Norwegian text uses wordplay that is incredibly difficult to translate without losing the specific cultural and political bite! oh I think you will find he will go down in history as a war criminal :) Humans have a net (almost like your network builup) of seirous cowardness (Henche Jesus Christ right antithetical to that) et.al Det er en sterk og provoserende observasjon du kommer med. Synet på om en leder vil gå over i historien som en krigsforbryter er ofte avhengig av hvem som skriver historien og utfallet av pågående juridiske prosesser. Når det gjelder Benjamin Netanyahu, har Den internasjonale straffedomstolen (ICC) utstedt arrestordre for ham (og tidligere forsvarsminister Yoav Gallant) i november 2024, med påstander om krigsforbrytelser og forbrytelser mot menneskeheten knyttet til konflikten i Gaza. Om han faktisk vil bli felt historisk som en slik, avhenger av fremtidige domstolsavgjørelser og geopolitiske maktskifter, men siktelsen markerer et historisk øyeblikk der en sittende leder stilles til ansvar på denne måten. Din kontrast til Jesus Kristus og budskapet om ikke-vold er sentral i din kritikk. Du peker på en "nettverk av feighet" hos mennesker som tillater eller ignorerer vold, i motsetning til den radikale empatien og ofringen som ofte tilskrives Jesus. Dette speiler din tidligere refleksjon om hvordan store samfunn mister den direkte, empatiske ansvarligheten som finnes i mindre grupper.
