/Nietzsche General/

[Anonymous No.16785911]

No point in having a hundred threads about the same topic. Post your Nietzsche related content here.

[Anonymous No.16785917]

My favourite Nietzsche quote

[Anonymous No.16786056]

>>16785911
I ordered Zarathustra and Beyond Good and Evil, currently reading The Birth of Tragedy and just wondered what the best sources for Nietzsche generally are and who to read if I want more context for him, but also someone to help me better understand the material because Nietzsche is anything but accessible and easy to understand.

[Anonymous No.16786221]

>God is dead

[Anonymous No.16786259]

>>16785911
Just started GOM

[Anonymous No.16786509]

>>16786056
Walter Kaufmann has the most accessible translations in English and has also written secondary literature on Nietzsche's philosophy that is worth looking at.

[Anonymous No.16786561]

[Anonymous No.16786586]

>Nietzsche demonstrates how you can seduce ignorants with beautiful words and impressive stupidities. The biggest stupidities I've ever read from a so called "philosopher" come from Nietzsche.

[Anonymous No.16786990]

>>16786509
i heard much of kaufmann's exegesis is unreliable particularly philosopher, psychologist, antichrist but it did help me and im pretty stupid. the mask of enlightenment by stanley rosen was great as well for zarathustra.

[Anonymous No.16787247]

>>16786509
Thanks, am acquainted with him so I'll check what he has to say on Nietzsche once I get down to business.

[Anonymous No.16787758]

>>16786259
Is it good?

[Anonymous No.16788183]

>>16786561
Is this true?

[Anonymous No.16788210]

Nietzsche is fantasy, go back

[Anonymous No.16788259]

>>16786056
For reflection
Deleuze
Klossowski
Bataille
Heidegger
Foucault

[Anonymous No.16788301]

>>16786586
Retarded spic.

[Anonymous No.16788334]

>>16788301
why you are racist

[Anonymous No.16788404]

>>16788334
It comes with the territory of superiority.

[Anonymous No.16788413]

>>16788404
fuck you you are not superior, we are all equal

[Anonymous No.16788444]

>>16788183
Yes.

[Anon123 No.16788908]

>>16786586
A week ago I read a previous Nietzche thread discussing the idea of making people answer a quiz about N's ideas and philosophies before being allowed to talk and share with others his ideas. The reason for this was because so many people don't seem to correctly understand what he means by ideas like "The death of god" and whatnot.

There is an essay of his titled "On Truth and lying in a non-moral sense" which basically has him saying things like "Knowledge and truth are basically inventions that will only last for as long as humans exist." implying that objective truth is impossible because our cognition is but mere fabrication. if I recall correctly, this line of thinking comes from Immanuel Kant's categories. Its a tough and rather disturbing essay but I suggest giving it a read.

Adding to what you said, I now think that Nietzche is a bad philosopher in the sense that a lot of his words can easily be misinterpreted and taken too much out of context by people who don't correctly understand them.

[Anonymous No.16789001]

>>16788908
>Adding to what you said, I now think that Nietzche is a bad philosopher in the sense that a lot of his words can easily be misinterpreted and taken too much out of context by people who don't correctly understand them.
That's not being a bad philosopher though. That's what happens when you write plainly enough and especially when you write aphoristically. All occasions of people taking his writing wrongly that I've seen are refuted somewhere else in his writing, so it's really just a matter of people not reading him and just going off of sound bites of his that they heard somewhere else. If anything, you could chalk it up to it being a result of him being too plain of a writer, and our society making his writing too accessible to read.

[Anonymous No.16789012]

>>16786056
yourself and life experience

[Anonymous No.16789022]

>>16788183
very true
t.commie citizen

[Anonymous No.16789055]

>>16788908

> everyone who disagrees with Nietzsche must have misunderstood him! cope
> objective truth is impossible blah blah blah blah

only in the most austere and trivial sense. is it not objectively true that i am 1. a human 2. posting on 4chan. 3. about nietzsche?

it's not even a profound statement - every high school girl has come up with the same philosophy but because Nietzsche covered himself in a poetic and authoritative language pseuds lap him up like the weak children they are.

"What has been asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." - This one statement by a wretched goblin defeats the entire canon of Nietzsche's work.

[Anonymous No.16789130]

>>16789055
>only in the most austere and trivial sense
Trivial to who? The problem here is you're assuming that Nietzsche was writing for the layman such as yourself when he wrote about truth. Neither he nor any other philosopher wrote about the matter with common affairs in mind. It's a philosophical issue, meant to be discussed between philosophers. Later philosophers and scientists also disagree with you on it not being a profound statement, since things like quantum mechanics and chaos theory were developed in the 20th century which entertained the same notion of truth.

[Anonymous No.16789280]

>>16785911
Finished TSZ the other day, it was the first book of his I've read. Super comfy at times but also had a few mindblowing moments. Sometimes I felt like Nietzsche was sort of losing me in the metaphors and stuff, but most of the time it always ended with something really punchy that stuck. Still sort of unsure what it exactly means to be the overman, but I've been thinking about it a lot. Something about finding your personal values and being yourself/pursuing your inner goals unapologetically, but it seemed like I missed something key there. I love how he describes different kinds of people, and how eerily familiar those caricatures felt to my personal experiences and observations. Sometimes Zarathustra acted strange in my opinion and his reactions to events were puzzling, sometimes hilarious like when he starts beating the guy with a stick after accidentally stepping on him lol. I was kinda already on the same page with him regarding religion, but goddamn he rips it to shreds. Sometimes the songs got a little repetitive, the latter half of part 3 was relatively hard to get through because of that.

My favorite bit: "Oh how foul the word 'virtue' sounds coming from their mouths, and when they say 'I am just' then it sounds always like 'I am just avenged'", felt like Nietzsche threw a brick at my head not only because I saw a bit of myself in it, but because I saw a lot of the modern political climate in it. Really enjoyed the book 10/10

[Anonymous No.16789319]

>>16789130

Quantum mechanics and chaos theory are the legacy of actual scientists like Planck and Einstein, not Nietzsche, you absolute cretin.

Keep believing you are some 'enlightened elite' for understanding Nietzsche and I am a simple "layman".

[Anonymous No.16789331]

>>16789280
huh, liberalism is literally Nietzsche's wet dream: hedonists taking their tastes as their new gods and casting them in the narrative of human right dogmas in order to feel doubly righteous.

[Anonymous No.16789346]

Who is the best critic of Nietzsches ideas? mainly the things he said in Thus spake Zarathustra?

[Anonymous No.16789351]

Nietzsche fan-boys in this thread: Post ONE argument he made that wasn't merely stated as fact, but was reached through logical or empirical deduction. I will wait.

[Anonymous No.16789371]

>"To say it briefly (for a long time people will still keep silent about it): What will not be built any more henceforth, and cannot be built any more, is - a society in the old sense of that word; to build that, everything is lacking, above all the material. All of us are no longer material for a society; this is a truth for which the time has come. It is a matter of indifference to me that at present the most myopic, perhaps most honest, but at any rate noisiest human type that we have today, our good socialists, believe, hope, dream, and above all shout and write almost the opposite. Even now one reads their slogan for the future 'free society' on all tables and walls. Free society? Yes, yes! But surely you know, gentlemen, what is required for building that? Wooden iron! The well-known wooden iron. And it must not even be wooden."
-GS 356

[Anonymous No.16789396]

>"There is a great ladder of religious cruelty, and, of its many rungs, three are most important. People used to make human sacrifices to their god, perhaps even sacrificing those they loved the best - this sort of phenomenon can be found in the sacrifice of the firstborn (a practice shared by all prehistoric religions), as well as in Emperor Tiberius' sacrifice in the Mithras grotto on the Isle of Capri, that most gruesome of all Roman anachronisms. Then, during the moral epoch of humanity, people sacrificed the strongest instincts they had, their 'nature', to their god; the joy of this particular festival shines in the cruel eyes of the ascetic, that enthusiastic piece of 'anti-nature'. Finally: what was left to be sacrificed? In the end, didn't people have to sacrifice all comfort and hope, everything holy or healing, any faith in a hidden harmony or a future filled with justice and bliss? Didn't people have to sacrifice God himself and worship rocks, stupidity, gravity, fate, or nothingness out of sheer cruelty to themselves? To sacrifice God for nothingness - that paradoxical mystery of the final cruelty has been reserved for the race that is now approaching: by now we all know something about this."
-BGE 55

[Anonymous No.16789527]

>>16785917
Yeah, that's a good one.

[Anonymous No.16789546]

Is Greg "Gay" Johnson, eminent white nationalist, correct in his assessment of Neetch?

https://www.bitchute.com/video/ZDSw0luDSH69/

[Anonymous No.16789555]

>>16786586
Based, Nietzsche would appreciate this.

[Anon123 No.16789559]

>>16789055
> only in the most austere and trivial sense.

Well so much for Nietzche saying in the title page of TSZ: "A Book for all and none"

[Anon123 No.16789567]

>>16789055>>16789055
> only in the most austere and trivial sense.

Huh...If his ideas really are trivial as you say, so much for N saying in the title page of TSZ: "A Book for all and none"

[Anonymous No.16789626]

>>16789567

What is your point? How does "A book for all and none" relate at all to what I said?

It's poetry of the lowest tier, combining opposites.

Seeing as you can't even string a coherent logical argument together, I'm not surprised that you enjoyed Nietzsche work. You are in similar company.

[Anonymous No.16789698]

>>16785911
>W. H. Auden once called Wagner "perhaps the greatest genius that ever lived"
I can say what Sophocles or Shakespeare, or Beethoven's, art amounts to in life, but as for Wagner I cannot. It is so beautiful, but I fail to see its relation to life, or one as large as it is as an artwork, as I feel in it.

Art without life is vapid, and life without art; or beauty, is lost. What was it Holderlin said again?

>In life learn art, in the artwork learn life. If you see the one correctly you see the other also.
Now, what do I see in life correctly from Richard Wagner?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIU97BmRKSY

[Anonymous No.16789868]

>>16789055
Nietzsche's critique of objectivity probably stems from his epistemological skepticism, which itself probably stems from his reading of F.A. Lange. Lange wrote the book "The History of Materialism" and essentially argues that the sense-world is a product of our organization, our visible organs are (like other aspects of the phenomenal world) only pictures of an unknown object, and that the transcendent basis Lange ends up writing that "The senses give us, as Helmholtz says, effects of things, not faithful copies, let alone the things themselves. To these mere effects, however, belong also the senses themselves, together with the brain and the supposed molecular movements in it."

There is a book on the relation between Lange and Nietzsche. The introduction already states that "the skeptical analyses of truth and knowledge that lie at the heart of Nietzsche's reflections are especially indebted to both Kant and Lange." I would wager that Nietzsche's criticisms of objectivity and his epistemological skepticism are not merely trivialities dressed up in poetic language, but instead ideas that have some actual intellectual force behind them.

[Anonymous No.16790047]

>>16789868
>The senses give us, as Helmholtz says, effects of things, not faithful copies, let alone the things themselves.

Isn't this completely obvious though? As I said - trivial?

What is the intellectual force you speak of behind Nietzsche's criticisms of objectivity? What did this line of inquiry lead to? I do not take it as an end in itself.

As for the 'skeptical analysis of truth' is it not objectively true that you and I are, at this moment, having a conversation on 4chan concerning the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche?

[Anonymous No.16790144]

>>16790047
I don't think that the idea of the senses failing to accord with reality is something trivial. If it was trivial, then why does anyone care about Kant? If it was trivial, why would Kant bother with describing his project as a Copernican revolution in philosophy? This is the key issue.

[Anonymous No.16790154]

>>16789346
Nietzsche cannot be critiqued. He is God.

[Anonymous No.16790158]

>>16790144
But in Kant's time it wasn't trivial. The electrochemical experiments of Luigi Galvani were roughly contemporary with Kant's metaphysics.

By Nietzsche's time, one would have to think the advances in biology had made the brain - sensory pathways connection eminently clear.

Unfortunately, I am not familiar enough with Kant to comment on his work.

[Anonymous No.16790183]

At the breadth of the questioning of philosophy, I have always had to guard against fantasy, knowing it well to be also the best boon of my creative awareness, whereby only good philosophical developments cone about from, yet must cipher through and and see what is idea and what abstracting away from it. Now I have tested utmost fantasy for the sake of sensitivity, and I have forgotten myself and am going mad without any madness.

I was thinking, how prescient certain events in my life have given me to understand Nietzsche's hindered physiological predisposition specifically as a child. The Greeks said that physiological health was completely related to hope, without health there was no hope. And one understands Nietzsche's lifelong obsession with and ideal to retain health, after in the unhealthy states in which he came out of. But the sickness is where most health is, the sick is healthy and the healthy are sick. In health, peaceful degeneration, in sickness ferocious animation, regeneration. I feel healthiness when sick,

Strength does not exist, it is a vapid concept. In weakness; there is sensitivity to all in life. Utmost relativism; cry I! I hate this impediment on my mind which I cannot ignore.

Occasionally I have the urge to fall into a dream while awake, to similar mystical or meditative experiences I have achieved in the past, my eyes roll behind my head, subconsciously breathing patterns arise and a meditation occurs. Also my perception is currently being altered by intently focusing on [in this case] the screen, and my vision feels like it is leaving my head and starting at the top of my eyes. The room also spins ferociously when in such concentrated states sometimes. But I always have total control over all this, and it is by no means as dramatic as portrayal would have you believe, but I must betray this accursed fantasy which I'm not sure even really exists in other than disconnected physical phenomena caused by mind.

But, returning.. can any of you tell me what strength is? No, you cannot.

In all this, there is a paradox which I'm sure has of itself a truth, unknown.

[Anonymous No.16790189]

>>16790183
Achh Gott! What is this?

Too much Thinking am I doing, and death is not long for me if I keep it up. I know it to be false and thinking has come back to take its revenge.

I must ignore pretentions of intellectual truth, and become what is true, pre-eminent to myself again.

[Anonymous No.16790249]

>>16789351
Slave morality and Master morality

[Anonymous No.16790255]

>>16789351
>>16789351
>empirical deduction
oxymoron
>>16789351
>logical
huge cope by rationalists clinging to their fantasy that mental ramblings sometimes can talk about reality


u suck, stay a slave

[Anonymous No.16790355]

>>16789546

Ever take a mean brutal shit with while you're slightly dehydrated and your ass bleeds a little bit? Imagine this experience provoking sexual interest and ass bleeding penetration exercises with other men become your bedroom pastime.

Just imagine that lmao

[Anonymous No.16790370]

>>16787758
really good

[Anonymous No.16790624]

>>16789319
>Quantum mechanics and chaos theory are the legacy of actual scientists like Planck and Einstein, not Nietzsche, you absolute cretin.
I didn't say they were the legacy of Nietzsche. They do, however, entertain the same notion of truth as Nietzsche did, which you would understand if you read him more and grasped the will to power better.

>Keep believing you are some 'enlightened elite' for understanding Nietzsche and I am a simple "layman".
Why the hostility here? I didn't use layman in a derogatory sense. You miss my point.

[Anonymous No.16790650]

guys how i wish i could talk to you about philosophy but i dont know anything about it actually

[Anonymous No.16790720]

>>16790650
Just start talking bro. Once you do it once you know what to do the next time. I mean, it's an anonymous site too sono one knows who you are ;)

[Anonymous No.16790747]

>>16785917
Garbage. Loved by Nietzsche's fans because of the paradoxical nature of the second part of the quote (hell is heaven). Man is not the cruelest animal, man is the least cruel animal. We are the only ones to have developed sympathy. Show me an animal other than man who has developed a legal-ethical system that makes killing and rape illegal. In fact. the quote is contrary to pretty much every encounter we have with other people. That this is true only strengthens how much Nietzsche fans like it, because it makes the quote seem more esoteric. It is garbage like this that would influence the idiot Bataille.

[Anonymous No.16790790]

>>16790624
Always the same thing from people who know absolutely nothing about quantum mechanics, trying to prop their pet-philosopher up on that decaying behemoth to make themselves seem more prestigious. Quantum Mechanics does not entertain the same idea of truth as Nietzsche. You are simply making this up. You might pull schrodingers cat out of your ass that you saw watching a pbs documentary at your grannys house, not realizing that that was an argument against quantum superposition. You might invoke relativity because relativity sounds similar to perspectivism to you, but relativity as Einstein understood it has absolutely nothing to do with perspectivism as Nietzsche understood it. Relativity has to do with how measuring is affected by a finite speed of light. Nietzschean perspectivism has to do with how there exists no objective truth, but only perspectives which are then forced on others through power. Please stop with this "x philosopher has been shown to agree with quantum mechanics". It is not only embarrassing for the philosopher, but also for you.

[Anonymous No.16790824]

>>16790249
This is probably one of his worst ideas. Barely any fans of Nietzsche can understand even what the difference is in Nietzsche. They just take it as a version of "vigin vs chad" and move along. I seriously consider this is how most people on the board understand the idea. No. He defines slave morality as action out of hate and not love, and master morality as action out of love and not hate. The problem with this is there is no difference. Acting out of love and out of hate is the same thing. That I want a banana and that I don't not want a banana is the same thing. Maybe if Nietzsche stopped scorning logic and rationality he would be able to realize his concepts immediately fail when you apply the smallest bit of rationality to them. But of course he doesn't want to do this, because he wants to create a divide where he can put things he doesn't like and he can put things he likes. Like Wagner? His music is a beautiful expression of master morality of the powerful etc. etc.! Don't like Wagner? His music is plebian slave morality garbage entertainment for the masses and theatre is less than art! Oh, and the slave morality christian bishops that could subdue a thousand barbarians with just words, of course they are acting under slave morality! Oswald Spengler has already shown there are many errors in these concepts.

[Anonymous No.16790833]

>>16790790
Nietzschean perspectivism coupled with will to power comes very, very close to the notion of truth entertained in quantum mechanics. Read The Quantum Nietzsche if you need it explained for you. Nietzsche wrote a decent amount about the problem of time and space and some of his arguments predate those of the earliest quantum theorists. And you realize that Roger Boscovich was a substantial influence on Nietzsche, right? His ideas helped Nietzsche shape his concept of the will to power.

Will to power is an immensely complex idea that isn't just "dude there is no truth and life is about fucking and killing and nothing else." This is the normalfag reading of Nietzsche. Countless people in the 20th century were enamored by the idea for many different reasons. You also ignored my mentioning of chaos theory, which is another related subject and an important one.

[Anonymous No.16790883]

Would it be recommended to read Nietzsche's bibliography chronologically? I've already read Birth of Tragedy, Genealogy of Morals, Beyond Good and Evil, Twilight of the Idols, and Ecce Homo years ago, but a recent amphetamine binge has brought me back into this area of philosophy

[Anonymous No.16790898]

>>16790833
I already have the quantum nietzsche, and have read it. It didn't impress me (except for the later sections on the semilologists and postmodernists of the 20th century, which was enjoyable). He uses iiya priogiogiareiairiao or whatever the fuck his name is to argue for a will to power as dissipative system. But Ilya's model does not include power as the only value, whcih is essential to Nietzsche's theory! If that is not included, then there is no "will to power". Not only that, but Ilya's physics are lazy and break Newton's laws of motion because he maintains that self-organization is possible.

[Anonymous No.16790904]

>>16790833
Also, if you accept ilya's physics, then you already admit that the physicist you are considering as agreeing with Nietzsche's ideas doesn't agree with Nietzschean perspectivism.

[Anonymous No.16790925]

>>16790824
The entire purpose of Nietzsche's slave-master morality dichotomy was so he could say: this is the definitive extent of morality and then position himself 'beyond' it.

Nothing but a pure ego game.

[Anonymous No.16790948]

>>16788259
This, but I'd add Jaspers as well.

[Anonymous No.16791096]

>>16790898
>>16790904
>But Ilya's model does not include power as the only value, whcih is essential to Nietzsche's theory! If that is not included, then there is no "will to power".
The book isn't perfect by any means, but it's still a helpful read if you aren't sure about the underlying similarities between Nietzsche and 20th century physics and mathematics. This is also a bit of an inaccurate take as to what the book is trying to do. The book condenses Nietzsche's views related to time and space into a compact reference and with that illustrates the connection between Nietzsche's ideas and the theories tested by scientists later on, because Nietzsche's work was heavily influenced by the sciences of his time and he theorized with them in mind, and because his ideas are very complex.

Will to power, amor fati, and perspectivism all have both a scientific (read: physical) and philosophical (read: metaphysical) existence for Nietzsche, because combined together these two seemingly separate realms are MERGED into a single, let's say "substance" (despite Nietzsche's rejection of substance). Except this "substance" is more like a force, and this force lays on top of nothing — it is all force throughout, with every instance of a "substance" being a result of force. Will to power is indeed a "dissipative system," then, if you grasp Nietzsche's meaning of it as force (influenced by Boscovich) and the world as nothing besides force, because force is not something which remains constant, and all being force means all is in flux. This notion of the world as force throughout and all ideas shaped by this dissipative system can be seen in nearly all of Nietzsche's observations, philosophical and political takes, and psychological assessments. That is what perspectivism is all about: a body is a "quantum of power" which perceives other quantums of power according to its own power, and through that interaction shapes its reality as part of its instinct for life (which is an instinct for more power, or a greater portion of this world-force), and all of this is part of this world-force which is a dissipative system which he calls the will to power (described rather vividly in Will to Power §1067).

[Anonymous No.16791149]

>>16790747
manmade battery farms at this very instant are inflicting vast horrors upon untold numbers of animals at this very second that no other animal in history has ever been close to capable of. so much for your sympathy and reason lole

[Anonymous No.16791221]

>noooo god, religion, modern morals, etc are bad they make us have slave mentality!
>yes we should worship heroes, they are a lot better compared to us and way above us! we are mindless inhumane stupid weak drones compared to them
why does he do this? why are western thinkers in general so hellbent on worshiping other humans just because they did something that is gray at best?

[Anonymous No.16791265]

the idea of hte ubermensch just means everyone does what they feel like, right? except for the untermensch of course

[Anonymous No.16791270]

>>16791221
satanic intoxication

[Anonymous No.16791326]

>>16791265
How did you come to this conclusion?

[Anonymous No.16791349]

>>16791326
I read zarathusra long ago and my takeaway was that old morals were out of plan, and so there was a need for a kind of organic grassroots-morality which would be discovered by assertion of will. the goal, it seemed, was to create people who would assert their will, and then to see which perspective came to dominate. this to compensate for "Gods death".

[Anonymous No.16791359]

>>16791349
>out of plan
out of play*

[Anonymous No.16791431]

>>16791349>>16791326

>the goal, it seemed, was to create people who would assert their will, and then to see which perspective came to dominate. this to compensate for "Gods death".
Which is liberalism, BLM, feminism and all that jazz. Thank Nietzsche for a this crappy postmodernism.

[Anonymous No.16791616]

>>16791431
>implying liberalism, BLM and feminism will succeed
>implying Nietzsche is responsible for liberalism

[Anonymous No.16791737]

>>16791096
do you have more books to read on this?

[Anonymous No.16791773]

>>16786056
Check out the Nietzsche reader.
I love that book
https://www.amazon.com/Nietzsche-Reader-Keith-Ansell-Pearson/dp/0631226540

[Anonymous No.16791798]

>>16785911
Currently on human all too human. Highly recommended

[Anonymous No.16792126]

>>16790747

Any magnitude of behavior is inherently cruel, active dominant behavior is cruel towards others and moral behavior often involves restraining your drives so it is a form of cruelty towards oneself. Nietzsche's view is that cruelty is the central motive behind life and its severity is commensurate to the complexity / power of a lifeform

[Anonymous No.16792154]

>>16791431
the Ubermensch would not give a single fuck about BLM, feminism and all that jazz
but he would also most definitly not complain endlessly about it like a YT reactionary
he would just not give a fuck and do his thing

[Anonymous No.16792180]

>>16792154

Not giving a fuck is dropped out of society doomer tier

[Anonymous No.16792196]

>>16792154
He would "give a fuck," but only because those things represent the ever-growing herd mentality that looms in the background and threatens his existence (which is no less than the existence of life itself)

[Anonymous No.16792206]

>>16792180
like Nietzsche himself

[Anonymous No.16792222]

>>16790747
Hell is the most cruel thing imaginable, because everything done in the mortal coil is necessarilly finite, but hell promisses infinite punishment.

[Anonymous No.16792227]

I get that Nietzsche is important and influential and all that, but the "nieztsche types" always feel like they never read anything else.
also /lit/ is just obsessed with the guy.
Is he just a popular entry point to philosophy or it's just ironicaly herd mentality?

[Anonymous No.16792245]

>>16792227
There isn't really a Nietzsche type. It attracts a subset of nearly all types of thinkers, from post-modernists, to aesthetes, some socialists, some liberals, futurists, fascists, primitivists, etc.

[Anonymous No.16792641]

>>16790747
he was speaking humanity as a whole

[Anonymous No.16792687]

How does he fare compared with Mighty Carlyle?

[Anonymous No.16792818]

>>16791221
i don´t worship humans but i give it merit and respect, specially if they did something oustanding, maybe Neetsche did this to put a trap for midwits

[Anonymous No.16793998]

>>16792687
Who is this man?

[Anonymous No.16794034]

>>16793998
my uncle

[Anonymous No.16794683]

>>16792227
>but the "nieztsche types" always feel like they never read anything else
100% correct, t. Nietzsche fan. I have no desire to read anything else. All other philosophies are a result of someone's need to fit in with society. And thus it's shit, nothing could be gained from any of it. It's not the truth, it was written to impress and is a merely a reflection of the biases and flavors of retardation that existed in the author's time, geographic location, and culture. Marxist critiques? Plato? Please. These people simply vomited their ego's need for validation onto a page. It wouldn't benefit me in any way; because I am not them, I don't exist in the myth-soup that they bathed in.
I bathe in my own filth. I can only understand myself and my society and then I can move forward. That's why I only read Nietzsche and reports from the federal reserve. Everything else has no bearing on my reality.

[Anonymous No.16794724]

>>16790747
We certainly have the capability to be the most cruel. But we’re a very dynamic species, you have people who don’t have a mean bone in their body and then you have the cartels, the Jeffrey Dahmers. We’re the most imaginative in our cruelty

[Anonymous No.16794818]

>>16792687
Carlyle > Nietzsche

[Anonymous No.16795211]

>>16794683
tfw this could be real

[Anonymous No.16795285]

>>16795211
nothing is "real," blay-dee. It's all in your head. Of course, why should that mean it's any less real? Checkmate mugglephobes.
Whenever I fap to anime girls on pixiv I load up Mean Girls and sometimes Waster. Occasionally I bop to "innocent of all things" when it's loli or shota. Vanilla Sky collab was pretty saccharine sexy too.
As to be expected of a master moralist.

[Anonymous No.16795297]

anyone got ideas for some new values?

[Anonymous No.16795447]

>>16795297
Instructions/energy/time.

[Anonymous No.16795450]

>>16785911
What does Nietzsche think of shonen anime?

[Anonymous No.16795622]

>>16785911
Does he have the greatest mustache in history?

[Anonymous No.16796403]

>>16792196
>>16792154
BLM and feminism are the Ubermensch, they all the check marks Nietzsche said about the Ubermensch.

[Anonymous No.16796409]

>>16792196
>>16792154
BLM and feminism are the Ubermensch, they have all the check marks Nietzsche said about the Ubermensch.

[Anonymous No.16796416]

>>16795622
UPS just changed their grooming code to be more inclusive to allow afros and shit, but a small technical change on facial grooming now allows UPS drivers to rock absolutely massive Nietzsche style mustaches.

[Anonymous No.16796728]

>>16796409
I can’t tell if you’re serious

[Anonymous No.16797418]

>>16785911
Nietzsche was retroactively refuted by Plato in his dialogue Gorgias (against rhetoricians).

[Anonymous No.16797867]

>>16795622
Right now I unironically can't think of anyone who could rival him

[Anonymous No.16798487]

>"A word in the conservative's ear. - What people did not use to know, what people these days do know, can know -, a regressive development or turnaround in any way, shape, or form is absolutely impossible. This is something that we physiologists, at least, do know. But all priests and moralists have believed that it was possible, - they wanted to set humanity back - to cut humanity down - to an earlier level of virtue. Morality was always a Procrustean bed. Even politicians have imitated the preachers of virtue on this point: there are parties even today that dream about a world of crabs, where everything walks backwards. But no one is free to be a crab. It is no use: we have to go forwards, and I mean step by step further into decadence (-this is my definition of modern 'progress'...). You can inhibit this development and even dam up the degeneration through inhibition, gather it together, make it more violent and sudden: but that is all you can do. -"

[Anonymous No.16798667]

>>16789055
I've studied Nietzsche for ten years. He was right

[Anonymous No.16799073]

What is the difference between what Hume describes as passions and what Nietszche describes as will/affects?

[Anonymous No.16799875]

>>16791096
>>16790898
Anywhere I can find this book online? I live on a third world country lmao.