/lit/ - Literature

I would argue he did it himself

Any suggestions on the right order to tackle his works? I'm hoping to get through all of them before I kill myself. Already read Zarathustra and parts of Beyond Good and Evil a while back.

Also, what's the best form to read the unpublished stuff from after he died? I want to avoid as much bias from the people that published stuff like Will to Power as possible.

>Nietzsche never married. Nietzsche proposed to Lou Salomé three times, but his proposal was rejected each time.

lol. you can literally be one of the greatest men to ever live and still be cucked

16: I read The Gulag Archipelago accidentally, as I was edgy and into that kind of stuff. Before that I had only read pulp fiction and I was pretty impressed, as I had never really expected anything more from a book before.
18: I was a neet for 3 years after high school and went on a hard fiction binge for the first part of it, Dostoevsky/Tolstoy were by far my favorites during that time.
20: I started to feel like all fiction was the same, and moved on into reading philosophy. I had no idea what I was doing so I just went for the names I had heard before which led me to Plato/Nietzsche/etc.
24: Eventually I got around to reading The Bible, as well as a few history books. Now for the past few years I have been getting my philosophy from the Bible, while I have more casually interesting reading material than I could ever read in my lifetime through my taste for history.

>>9392516
>tfw you realize that 99% of oppressed peoples who get published are still white men under false identities

>>8144548

>The bitterest pill line is about determinism IIRC and not about good and evil.

It's about both:

>Man's complete lack of responsibility, for his behaviour and his nature, is the bitterest drop which the man of knowledge must swallow, if he had been in the habit of seeing responsibility and duty as humanity's claim to nobility. All his judgements, distinctions, dislikes have thereby become worthless and wrong...between good and evil actions there is no difference in type; at most, a difference of degree. Good actions are subliminated evil actions; evil actions are good actions become coarse and stupid."

>"But this standard is continually in flux; many actions are called evil, and are only stupid, because the degree of intelligence which chose them was very low. Indeed, in a certain sense *all* actions are stupid even now, for the highest degree of human intelligence which can now be attained will surely be surpassed."

>>8115088

Nietzsche's spiel about the 'mixing of blood'/etc would probably bug him. Like >>8115134 said, I'm guessing he'd take issue with the Will to Power; on account of it being too presumptuous, for one.

If not Nietzsche, however, who is Schopenhauer's heir?

>>8089922

>2016
>Seeing anything wrong with this
>Not being beyond Good and Evil already

Nietzsche is giving me headaches at the moment.

It might just be a translation, but he seems to write like a madman; or at least, someone who is eccentric/deranged.

It should have been a surprise to no one that he actually went off the deep-end; yet what he writes is coherent, and is making me think about the uncomfortable things that only a few other philosophers have managed.