/lit/ - Literature

>Long live Physics!...what? You admire the categorical imperative within you? This "firmness" of your so called moral judgement? This "unconditional" feeling that "here everyone here must judge as I do"?

>Rather admire your selfishness at this point. And the blindness, frugality, pettiness of your selfishness.

>For it is selfish to experience ones own judgement as a universal law; and this selfishness is blind, petty and frugal because it betrays that you have not discovered yourself, nor yet created an ideal for yourself, your very own - for that could never be somebody else's; much less that of all, all!

Is it just me or does Nietzsche not seem to understand Kant's categorical imperative here? Nor does he refute it but merely makes a few superfluous remarks that don't address the subject matter, and then continues on as if he has dealt it a fatal blow.

WAGE WAR LIKE NO TOMORROW BECAUSE NO HELL, THERE WON'T BE ONE

>>9811602
>I feel sorry for you.

I started reading this book since everyone keeps bringing up Nietzsche.

I'm having trouble understanding this metaphor about the camel, lion, and the child.

Nietzsche says that we should be like a camel in always wanting more of a burden. I guess to continue the trend of constantly working hard improving oneself, and transcending man's nature.

Then he talks about being a lion. Is he continuing the trend that having too many virtues is putting oneself in a knot? So being a lion is having the freedom to say fuck it, and not blindly follow duty?

And one needs to be like a child to have a "short-term memory". To not let the past beat you down. To approach new experiences like they are new with no negative predisposition?
>All these heaviest things the load-bearing spirit taketh upon itself: and like the camel, which, when laden, hasteneth into the wilderness, so hasteneth the spirit into its wilderness.
But in the loneliest wilderness happeneth the second metamorphosis: here the spirit becometh a lion; freedom will it capture, and lordship in its own wilderness.
Its last Lord it here seeketh: hostile will it be to him, and to its last God; for victory will it struggle with the great dragon.
What is the great dragon which the spirit is no longer inclined to call Lord and God? ‘Thou-shalt,’ is the great dragon called. But the spirit of the lion saith, “I will.”
‘Thou-shalt,’ lieth in its path, sparkling with gold—a scale-covered beast; and on every scale glittereth golden, “Thou shalt!”
The values of a thousand years glitter on those scales, and thus speaketh the mightiest of all dragons: “All the values of things—glitter on me.
All values have already been created, and all created values—do I represent. Verily, there shall be no ‘I will’ any more. Thus speaketh the dragon.
My brethren, wherefore is there need of the lion in the spirit? Why sufficeth not the beast of burden, which renounceth and is reverent?
To create new values—that, even the lion cannot yet accomplish: but to create itself freedom for new creating—that can the might of the lion do.
To create itself freedom, and give a holy Nay even unto duty: for that, my brethren, there is need of the lion.
To assume the ride to new values—that is the most formidable assumption for a load-bearing and reverent spirit. Verily, unto such a spirit it is preying, and the work of a beast of prey.
As its holiest, it once loved ‘Thou-shalt’: now is it forced to find illusion and arbitrariness even in the holiest things, that it may capture freedom from its love: the lion is needed for this capture.

Am I going to have trouble reading this if these pages were a little harder to understand? I get that we most will our own will / have free choice. But this seems kind of convoluted. Forgive me, this is my first book on philosophy.

As the 21st century continues, how relevant do you think he will be?

Any of you ever read "The Gay Science"? It's credited as one of Nietzsche's best books, and I'm about 50 pages in. So far (Book 1), it seems to be rather common sense (things such as "not planning your days out too much"). A few chapters are very long and stand out. I'm very new to philosophy and I'm wondering if this is the general impression of the first portion of this work.

When did you realize this edgelord was the most intelligent person in the history of mankind?

>>9721331
He'll be fine as long as he thinks about it and reads the right stuff.

>>9709327
>>9709340
>>9709355
>not blaming Socrates & Plato

Have you ever come across a realization in philosophy that you would say has been actualy, unironically completely true, that has been incorporated fully into the way you view the world, and that hasn't been just another fun little concept to make the world seem more interesting for the time being? what was it? or have they all just been fun little concepts that you don't actually take all that seriously? "u cant know nuthin" doesn't count

And superman that hoe

when will people realize that he was right about everything?

Could you point the instances where Nietzsche makes a parody of the New Testament in Thus Spoke Zarathustra?

About to get into "Thus Spoke Zarathustra" and Nietzsche in general.
I've only read a few things about his philosophy (general wikipedia-tier stuff) and i already find myself in him.
What should I know before i get into Friedrich?

hey guys, recently ive noticed an edgy trend of 'anti-individualism.' i want to tell you not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. don't attack stirner and nietzsche because of the cultural impacts of pseudo-individualism. when nick land attacks consumerism as an individualist ideology, he attacks a strawman. at the limits, authentic individualism meets tradition. the enemies are not egoists, but anti-traditional, spooked-out, middlebrow materialists.

*kisses horse*

How do we know what parts were edited by his sister and which not?
Are we really so certain that all of the antisemitic stuff can't be attributed to him?

Can I understand his books and his philosophy if I never touched anything related to philosophy? I think I might be too stupid and I am afraid of trying reading.

>>9540442
Hold my beer

>The Goal of Science.
What? The ultimate goal of science is to create the most pleasure possible to man, and the least possible pain? But what if pleasure and pain should be so closely connected that he who wants the greatest possible amount of the one must also have the greatest possible amount of the other, that he who wants to experience the "heavenly high jubilation," must also be ready to be "sorrowful unto death"? And it is so, perhaps! The Stoics at least believed it was so, and they were consistent when they wished to have the least possible pleasure, in order to have the least possible pain from life. (When one uses the expression: The virtuous man is the happiest," it is as much the sign-board of the school for the masses, as a casuistic subtlety for the subtle.) At present also you have still the choice: either the least possible pain, in short painlessness and after all, socialists and politicians of all pareies could not honourably promise more to their people, or the greatest possible amount of pain, as the price of the growth of a fullness of refined delights and enjoyments rarely tasted hitherto! If you decide for the former, if you therefore want to depress and minimise man’s capacity for pain, well, you must also depress and minimise his capacity for enjoyment. In fact, one can further the one as well as the other goal by science! Perhaps science is as yet best known by its capacity for depriving man of enjoyment, and making him colder, more statuesque, and more Stoical. But it might also turn out to be the great dispenser of pain! And then, perhaps, its counteracting force might at the same time be discovered : its immense capacity for making new galaxies of Joy!

I'm new to Nietzche and this is a bit difficult for me to comprehend.

Does it basically mean that ignorance is a bliss or something like that?

I got a 25$ gift card to Amazon. Where do I start with him?

>>9391280

WEW GUYS I'VE ONLY READ 3 (THREE) PAGES FROM HIM AND HE TOTALLY CHANGED MY LIFE MY WORLD MY MIND I FEEL LOST I'M IN THE MIDDLE OF AN EXISTENTIAL CRISIS HOLY SHIT GUYS I CAN EVEN FEEL THE UPHEAVAL IN MY ASS