I found this paper to be extremely shallow and pedantic. It seems Dakota's vocabulary is limited to that of 3rd grader. With no real sentence structure and flow, I wonder who in their right mind would publish this work.
Thanks for the input judge, I find it interesting that anyone could be so ignorant and avoid making a logical or legitimate critique of a work and instead prefers to resort to childlike attacks in a dramatic fit of irony stemming from your critique of childlike writing. You clearly did not take any time to really read his article for if you did, you would see that it actually provides a valuable insight and close reading of Nietzsche's works. Feel free to continue carrying yourself in such a deplorable and embarrassing manner, never striving for intellectual debate and preferring to sink to a level of elementary attacks.
You truly made some excellent points. It turns out I actually had forgotten to read this paper! This work was so amazing, so thorough, so deep, that I am going to personally recommend that anyone interested in philosophy read Dakota's work, instead of reading Neitzsche. It's almost alarming that someone who's been reading Neitzsche for less than 5 years has such a grasp of complex material. 5/5 I would read again!
Judge William, any way you can specify what it is exactly you are criticizing? I agree there are certain problems with the paper, but what specifically are you condemning in this piece? Your comments are in no way constructive and make you appear to be quite childish yourself.