/lit/ - Literature

I haven't seen it, do they actually engage with Nietzsche's philosophy? I figured that the contextless phrase "God is dead" entering popular consciousness accounted for the title.

Is this in any way worth watching?

>Implying anyone understands Nietzsche better than me

Keep in mind, i have 8 fedoras.

>>5266554
I'm going to guess that's the be all and end all of his philosophy in that film. Unless the same phrase is uttered by the supposed Phil prof in the film. I can't see it engaging with Nietzsche beyond that.

>>5266549
God's knot dad.

>>5266556
If one likes to see Nietzsche butchered by a bunch of Christians.

>>>/tv/

>>5266568
Gauze lot had

>>5266554
Well, they list major philosophers like Nietzsche, Camus, Dawkins and many other Atheist philosophers. In the beginning of the movie the Philosophy professor demands they write down God is Dead on a piece of paper with their signature -- I assume they pulled it out of Nietzsche's quote and implied it meant there is no God, not what Nietzsche actually meant.
>>5266556
Meh, I got really irritated 1/3th in. It's rather painful to watch even if you're watching for the laughs and giggles.

>>5266574
Just bought gauze

>>5266556
I watched it to make myself angry and befuddled and I can assure you that it worked.
This is coming from a Christian.

So if that's your thing then dive right in.
If you're expecting anything aside from Strawman: The Major Motion Picture, I'd say no.

>>5266556
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90PWFEeRApA

It's literally the 'how old is this stone' meme made to a movie.

>>5266556

in the climax of the movie, our clean-cut Christian hero beats the jew-y atheist professor by saying, "if god doesn't real, why come you hate him so much??"

then the jew-y atheist professor gets hit by a car and dies.

>>5266565
DAE all atheists and agnostics are neckbeards?!?!???!?!!?!!!!??!

>>5266572
Why the hell would I got to /tv/ to discuss the philosophy in this film? It's infested with Baneposting and threads about how European toilets are better than American toilets. No thanks.

I'm expecting to get shit for this, but what exactly did Nietzsche mean by "God is dead"?
My only experience with his philosophy was reading half of ASZ when I was 16 and not understanding any of it.

>>5266584
God works in mysterious ways

>>5266596
The ascension of the ubermensch replaces the need for man to worship god

>>5266596
God as a psychological component in culture or the people's minds and art and blah blah blah
Nietzsche says man killed God by eradicating this part of the psyche/culture/whatever. Has to do with the spread of nihilism, which I take it you're familiar with?

I think anyway.

>>5266596
"God is dead" read as "you are your own ultimate authority" and it wasn't just referring to god

>>5266596
To be as simple as possible: if Western civilisation is moving away from Christianity to a more rationalist, scientific world view there are far greater consequences to this shift than just a simple switch. Normative and cultural ideas have to be rethought and reshaped in order to account for this.

I'm sure I'm butchering that and someone more well versed in the idea will correct me in the most assholish way in due course, but I think that's the jist.

>>5266602
>>5266605
>>5266609
Makes sense, thanks guys.

>year of our lord 2014
>believing in our lord

Speaking of Nietzsche, where's the best place to start with him?
I know that Also Spoke Zarathustra and The Genealogy of Morals are his more famous ones, but should I read somethng before those?

>>5266596
God is the absolute truth behind morality, which is the way for the weak to oppress the strong; if there is no "truth", but perspectives (Spinoza! my man!), then an overturning of metaphysics, thus of values (I was the first to recognize lies as lies --- my genius is in my nose), produces the "death" of this truth - this lie - ; man at this point thus has no absolute, nothing to aspire to, and nihilism occurs, thus new values must be instituted for man to aspire to, else you end up with the last man; would God then be, --- a clumsy attempt at truth?

Had Plato listened to his degeneratelord Socrates, having offered nothing but the "life without examination is worth nothing" ---Kierkegaard was to say that behind Socratic irony hid nothing but nothingness---, he would know that he knew nothing, and thus "truth", would not be something, but rather something to aspire to ---a woman---, and christianity wouldn't have happened.

>>5266649
>The Genealogy of Morals
Or Beyond Good and Evil and the ones I would recommend.

>>5266649
Yes bae

Start with New Moon :^)

>>5266647

>>5266655
>not starting with twilight
pleb

>>5266549
Better though of as 'how can you hate the idea of God if you no longer need it?'

>>5266578
>demands they write down God is Dead on a piece of paper with their signature

Wtf , that sounds retarded and stupid .Why would you do that

>>5266583
>science supports his existence
>empirical observation supports metaphysical entities
What? Does he continue on? Even the dumbest religious person knows that you can't do that.

>>5266583
oh my god worst trailer i've seen in my life
so many problems
>"in that classroom i am god"
>christian rock
>student 'smarter' than professor
>ridiculous portrayal of both christians and atheists
>corny love interest
>college philosophy class about god's existence
>professor misunderstanding nietzsche
>obligatory church scene
>'god on trial' -- copying bbc film
>"i want them to make their own choice, that's what god wants!" -- i want to force you to make a choice based on my beliefs

>>5266674
According to the film you need to ditch religion and God in order to into philosophy.

It really bugs me that the title of this movie is "God's Not Dead" instead of "God is Not Dead"

The original quotation is "God is dead," so what gives? Why insert the contraction?

>>5266719
cuz they hip and young

>>5266719
Because the intended audience only know that quote from the Newsboys song which has nothing to do with Nietzsche.

>>5266696
>>christian rock

This movie grossed 63mil on a 2mil budget

Christians - 1
Atheists - 0

>>5266596
what I got from reading Nietzsche is the following

a. Most western human institutions were founded on the platonic idea, later adopted by christians, that a suprasensible or metaphysical world exists, and that our life on earth is just a vale of tears, relatively worthless compared to what the afterlife is.

b. People started to question the existence of the afterlife ("we kiiled [God]"), unknowingly attacking the very foundations of human life back then. Nietzsche argued that this more rational attitude towards life was on the rise (and in this he was correct indeed) and that this would lead to nihilism

c. He said that we must try to recover the worth of the material sensible world we live in, that me must set up new human values and social norms, based on Happiness rather than on the afterlife

>>5266798
Holy shit. that is a nice fucking profit

>>5266798
They walked away with a completely innacurate idea of all the subjects portrayed in the film that shames all involved.

I think the only winner here is whoever is lining their pockets.

>>5266578
>Nietzsche and Camus
>Dawkins

Why would you put those masters on the same list as that pleb?

Why did Nietzsche suck Kierkegaard's dick so much when Kierkegaard was the most christiany Christian who ever christianed?

I watched the first 15 minutes of this movie and had to turn it off because I was worried I might develop a persistent cringing.

Are there any good Christian movies?

>>5266556
As a serious work or as a work to analyze?

As a serious work it's the dumbest thing ever, as a profound statement on fundamentalism it's pretty good

>>5266596
God is dead = metaphysics is over

>>5266798
This is funny because the arguments in it are blatantly bad and pandering to retards. Screenplay done got writ by an atheist, bitch, it's the bible all over again.

>>5267026
I also hear Kent Hovind was called in as an expert (you know, that dude who's literally a fucking mafioso putting on retarded seminars for retards).

>>5266649
untimely meditations then proceed chronologically skipping maybe dawn and irrelevant shit about wagner

>>5267019
Nazarín
Andrei Rublev
Stalker
La Passion de Jeanne d'Arc
The Last Temptation of Christ
The Seventh Seal

>>5266584
The worst part of the film is when the Muslim father beats his daughter and kicks her out in "God's name". They have a quick shot that shows his face like he's in emotional pain, as he's kicking her out forever with a black eye for listening to a Christian evangelical.

They're literally humanizing Islam fundamentalism and abusive parenting. Every atheist in the film is sickly mocking and emotionless. And every Christian is funny, likable and perfect

And only good things happen to the Christians, of course

It's really disturbing though that they portray abuse in a sympathetic light (clearly to parody what goes on in many Christian households without making Christians look bad)

>>5267036
if it was a true Christian film the Christians would only have bad things happen to them and be redeemed in the end

>>5266549
Pretty sure the title is just a reimagining of a popular phrase.

See: "He's just not that into you" and "It's kind of a funny story" and "That Awkward moment"

>>5267040
Yeah you're probably right. Christianity started out as a cult for poor people

>>5267046
weak* people

yup

>>5266596
it means nietzsche had an acid trip where he physically killed god, and so god is dead

>>5267019
Ordet by Dreyer is the best Christian film I've ever seen. It's subtle yet powerful, there's something that's deeply mystical about this film. While I was watching I was under the impression of witnessing a true miracle.
Bergman made some good Christian movies too ("Winter Light" comes to mind) but it's mostly about the dark side of faith.
"Diary of a Country Priest" by Bresson is a masterpiece of gothic horror and Christian cinema.

>>5266649
Read Kaufmann's Nietzche, then read Kaufmann's translations of everything nietzche published in order. Then read Zarathustra more closely a second time. Then read Ecce Homo closely a second time. If you do get Kaufmann's translations, read the books in this order: Nietzche: philosopher, antichrist, etc., Basic writings of Nietzche, Geneology of Morals & Ecce Homo, The Portable Nietzche. Pay more attention to his later writings as they are more coherent and (confusingly enough) __foundational to his earlier statements__. This is what trips most people up.

>>5266802
>Happiness rather than on the afterlife
More like Health, Masterlyness, Self-discipline, Curiousity, and the Will to Power. But the rest is correct.

cool fucking viral brah
REACHin' fer JEEZUS

>>5266649
The Gay Science is a really great place to start. If you get the Walter Kaufman translation it should also come with a series of Poems in the beginning and then some Songs towards the end. TGS is also the first time Nietzsche proclaims the death of god. So if that stuff is what interests you, start with the gay science

>>5266596
Secularism in Europe had progressed to the point that God was no longer important for people's day to day life, making him "dead"

>>5267026
>Screenplay done got writ by an atheist, bitch
[citation needed]

>>5266649
beyond good and evil is probably the best starting place. the gay science works too, it's a little longer and a little easier, but it's also less of what people think of when they think of nietzsche imo.

>>5267096
hollingdale is better than kaufman, at least with tsz

>>5266596
Someone asks this question and everyone approaches it with what they already think

I'll stick with Heidegger

>>5267137
Start with Gay Science if you want to learn about his philosophy, start with Untimely Meditations if you want to learn Nietzsche (his development as a person, and so on).

Nietzsche is a philosopher whose biography is extremely parallel to his thought to the point where it basically is the same thing, so I prefer the biographical approach to his works.

>>5266649
The Greeks

Seriously, they are key to understanding him

>>5267114
I personally believe that Happiness (Freude) was more fundamental for Nietzsche than any of the things you listed.

>The first thought of the day. The best way to begin each day well is to think upon awakening whether we could not give at least one person happiness on this day. If this practice could be accepted as a substitute for the religious habit of prayer, our fellow men would benefit by this change

Human, All Too Human - Aphorism 589

Since film threads are fast becoming daily staples of /lit/ I'll use this one to respond to this anonymous poster from a prematurely deleted writers thread, on the subject.

>>5267118
>Hey butter I haven't seen Daisies, [Sedmikrásky] should I? why?

I found it hilarious. It's like a dadaist cartoon.

>>5266583

What kind of shit university is that where a philosophy teacher attempts to convey a belief to his students without rigorously arguing for its correctness? Where the philosopher TAKES NIETZSCHE OUT OF CONTEXT?

Egregious strawman, 1/10.

>>5267096

>read le cough man

except for Genealogy there's no reason not to read Hollingdale

>>5267032
lel i just finsihed watching the last temptation like two minutes ago.
it was good.

>implying Nietzsche was happy about God being dead
top assumption

>>5267286
yeah actually nietzsche's one of the few philosophers who you should definitely know something about the greeks before reading

>>5267009
>Why did Nietzsche suck Kierkegaard's dick so much
what

nietzsche never wrote about kierkegaard

>>5267392
hmm
this is an interesting post we should think about

I would first say happy for the progress that could come from that, but perhaps he was happy about the event itself. I'm not sure

>>5267461
have you really never heard that thought before

>>5267464
I'm not sure but it sounded cool when he said it

>>5267487
u drunk boi?

>>5267489
i'm on aderall

>>5267490
is it wrong that adderall is the one drug i hate when people use

y'all niggas driving college curves up goddamn

>>5267501
>wah I don't take a cheap and readily available stimulant to even the playing field I hate people who take advantage of it instead

>>5267511
so you're telling me it's wrong

>>5266649
birth of tragedy was fun

>>5267501
it is my first time, usually i do vyvanse or straight up speed when i want to do speed

>>5266674
The entire film is christian suffering masturbatory fantasy. And I say that as a christian. In the end, the evil mean old philosophy professor accepts god into his life, but dies anyways.

>>5266647
>>5266583
>It's literally the 'how old is this stone' meme made to a movie.
Thanks guys, I needed that laugh.

>>5267821
>And I say this as a Christian

Why isn't great Christian art being made widely and being viewed widely by great Christians still? Man academia needs to accept a light version of Christianity already so the atheists can do this stuff again

>>5267821
Masturbation is a christian suffering.

>>5266696
you forgot "SCIENCE SUPPORTS HIS EXISTENCE"

>>5267865
I'm sure great christian art is still being created, it's just drowned out by mass marketed paint by the numbers bullshit that corporations put out to take advantage of christian money.

>>5267879
Sufjan Stevens makes great Christian art.

>>5267501
It sounds like they meant that they were high on Adderall. If Adderall made you that stupid, it certainly wouldn't be driving Bell curves up.

>>5267936
>>5267865
>>5266730
What the fuck is up with all these new tripfags?

>>5267958
>celebes and tallis
>new
you mean shitty

actually celebes is fine

>>5267967
I mean new on this board. And I agree, as far as I have seen they have good things to share, that's actually what surprised me the most.

>>5267974
They've been here a while they're /mu/ emigrants

>>5267879
I have thoughts that real Christians or people like me who love Christianity from a materialist viewpoint are not actually making Christian art, no matter how obscure they are, because our current cultural taste scorns the climate in which Christian art flourishes. I mean could you really see Christ made into a red block or some shit

I don't want to get rid of postmodernism - I mean, we are experiencing postmoderninity, it's impossible anyways - but I think there are two ways to approach the postmodern and they have only really explored one of the ways, that being the absence of all aesthetic values adhering the absence of all narratives in philosophy.
This is way too serious and clumsy. We can still use narratives, aesthetic or grand, in our art in a light fashion thus remaining contemporary.

This is what I plan on and am doing with my art.

>>5267958
I've been posting on /lit/ for a year I think, I just haven't been on 4chan or this board in awhile

>>5268012
I started here m8 though I had always been a /mu/anon at heart

>>5266549
>Critique of Nietzche
>Bad

>>5266549
So I've checked out the movie on Wikipedia. Let's just say the plot is not very cranial.
I can think of far better arguments than "atheists are just emo" and that's what the movie is about.

>>5266556

It's about as well thought out as any other Christian work.

>>5269224
This. The movie is not based on real discussion because intellectual discussion is impossible if one side starts with an obviously faulty argument. The atheist professor bases his atheism solely on the shock of his mother's death, so it's not rational.
If the demographics of this movie is really the demographic of theists, they have already lost because IRL their "adversary" won't be anything like that professor.

>>5268166
Innacurate critique is always bad.

Dipshit.

>>5266583
Someone needs to do a version with Wittgenstein as the philosophy teacher saying that Philosophy is Dead and stuff

>>5269253
Nobody would watch it but us. So it won't be done.

>>5269200
>"atheists are just emo"
But that's really all there is to it. There's no intellectual discourse in favor of atheism in modern atheist movements, rather they are collections of people that are deeply unhappy with the way their lives turned out who seek solace in trying to make other feel bad. That's all there is to it.

>>5269268
You're the type of thinker this movie was made for.

>>5269285
How many times did your parents ground you before you realized there's no God?

>>5269268

We've reached the point on /lit/ where I have lost any ability to distinguish bait from the legitimate opinions of Christian posters.

>>5269292
I hope that it's bait. "Please believe my bullshit so I can feel good and stop believing your bullshit kthxbai". Then again, that's typical religion logic.

>>5269285
>>5269292
>>5269299
In response to a post criticizing that lack of real philosophical arguments in modern atheist (more appropriately labelled as anti-theist) movements, you lot respond with
>no u
>ur dumb
>b8
Hahaha, I just can't help but laugh at the realization that the atheists featured in OP's film are pulled right from /lit/.

>>5269268
What's "Atheist movements" are you talking about ? Physics ? Biology ? Chemistry ?

>>5269318
Exactly my point. Those who identify as atheists are actually anti-theists. There are plenty of studies which take no position on religion. "Atheists" on the other hand, are those that are interested in taking out their aggression on the happy and content religious communities that the Atheists actually envy. Atheists (again, note the capital) are intrinsically those that are incapable of feeling community with their fellow man, and that essential lacking is what drives them to modern atheists movements like the spaghetti monster church and other such nonsense.

>>5267461
Are you tripping because Tallis is here?

>>5269268
Look, all I'm saying is the movie is utter crap and nothing can excuse that. There are better arguments for "God" than "Atheists are emo", though they have a tendence to be "God of the gap" arguments based on mathematics or physics on the limits of knowledge. Read some Teilhard, for Christ's sake.

>>5269330
You are unbelievably confused, friend.

>>5269335
I haven't seen the movie, I responded to one of the posts ITT.
I have no idea if the point of the movie was to present a philosophical argument for the existence of God. But, as that post accused, if the point of the film was to attack the character and lack of intellectual depth of modern Atheist (anti-theist) movements, then the attack is well founded.

>>5269339
no ur dumb
Hahaha, do you happen to have a cameo, my friend?

it doesn't refer to Nietzsche

As an atheist who watched this film for a laugh, I can say it's actually much better quality than the trailer suggests. Also, you all could do with reevaluating your judgement when you see the list of court cases that inspired the film.

>>5269330
In the classical sense, atheists just take the absence of god in physics as the reason to say that it's not real. Most things which are not measurable can be considered not to exist. By definition, science is never 100% sure of anything, so real atheists cannot be either.

>>5269346
Implying the dummies who watch that movie would not consider it a logical argument for the existence of god.

>>5269346
Nah, it isn't. But at least you didn't say "Atheists only exist because they hate God." That's usually the talking point insecure types fall back on, and it's maybe a babystep more retarded than what you just said.