Creation of new values?

[Anonymous No.19522204]

So just read Nietzsche. I'm young, so what can I do to strive to be an ubermensch? He describes the last man, and it was scarily accurate to how I live now. It sent shivers down my spine. He was diagnosing nihilism as an inevitability. He knew that we would come to face this, and that it would haunt the European mind in the coming centuries. So how do we overcome this? How can we progress to the next stage of humanity? He critiqued Christianity and Schopenhauerism/Buddhism, but what else is there? How do we go about creating new values? How do we overcome nihilism, how do we create a life affirming meaning? I have no idea what that would even look like. What did he mean by this? If western civilization wants to continue to exist, then we need to answer this question. Otherwise, we will destroy ourselves. Surely older anons on here have thought these same things, what conclusions did you come to? (Also sorry for the lower quality post, when I am on my phone they drastically decrease in quality, because I am forced to type in this shitty little window, it makes proofreading hard)

[Anonymous No.19522212]

>>19522204
Wow anon, that sounds tough. I suppose you could start improving things by not sucking eggs.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.19522223]

start by abandoning spooks like "western civilization." the ubermensch is rootless

[Anonymous No.19522233]

>>19522204
if you value "creation of new values" because nietzsche said it you will never be the ubermensch

[Anonymous No.19522240]

>>19522233
Not because Nietzsche said it, but because we need to find values and meaning without God. I mean it's either that, or we turn back to Christianity. But what if I cant live my life as a Christian, what then?

[Anonymous No.19522259]

>>19522223
Calling everything a spook isnt profound. Equality is a spook, your communism is a spook, egalistarianism is a spook, fuck it women are spooks too. See, I can do it too. The problem still remains that as a civilization, this is something that we need to overcome, this is something that we need to find an answer to

[Anonymous No.19522275]

>>19522259
Otherwise I am convinced that our future lies in a progressively worse and worse liberal capitalism, where the citizens are zombies, only living for hedonistic pleasures.

[Anonymous No.19522280]

>>19522259
> this is something that we need to find an answer to

[Anonymous No.19522364]

>>19522280

[Anonymous No.19522395]

>>19522204
creation of new values just leads to new herds with new herd mentalities. there's no win.

[Anonymous No.19522831]

>>19522204
>Life is meaningless, painful and pointless but you have to affirm it because.... you just do OK!?

[Anonymous No.19522836]

>>19522831
stfu christ cuck IT'S ALL THERE IS

[Anonymous No.19522848]

>>19522204
By being born aristocrats and not letting the parasitic nihilism corrupt you from birth. Extremely unlikely, but that's how. There's nothing you can do if you're already corrupted. Sit back and enjoy the last man experience while it lasts. And if you're really feeling restless, you can build a bridge out of your flesh.

[Anonymous No.19522874]

>>19522836
Don't affirm life, it sucks. Rebel against it, it's a scam by normies

[Anonymous No.19522894]

>>19522874
THERE'S NOTHING OTHER THAN LIFE YOU FUCKING RETARD, JUST ETERNAL NOTHINGNESS WHICH IS TRANSCENDENT, YOU SICK AND PRETENTIOUS FUCK
LOOK, I HATE LIFE TOO, BUT LIFE IS AN IDEOLOGICAL CATEGORY TO NORMIES, I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT LIFE
LIFE, LIKE THE WORLD, IS ALL THAT IS THE CASE
DEATH, NON-EXISTENCE, NON-BEING, IS TRANSCENDENT, WE CAN KNOW NOTHING OF IT
SO EITHER FUCKING DIE OR SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT LIFE AND DEATH
LIFE IS MEANINGLESS
DEATH IS MEANINGLESS
JUST SHUT UP

[Anonymous No.19522914]

>>19522259
Give me a break. All that spooky stuff like civilization, religion, values. They're all pyramid schemes. None of it is for your benefit unless you're at the top, and if you're posting here you're not at the top

[Anonymous No.19522919]

Fred is dead.
T. God

[Anonymous No.19523083]

>>19522204
Read more (something besides nietzsche) and keep reading until you realise how retarded this post is

[Anonymous No.19523135]

>>19522914
Can you justify what you are stating here without spooking me?

[Anonymous No.19523157]

>>19522204
Get off 4chan, this place is a massive bastion of slave/christian morality. Go out there, and *do.*
I recommend watching Meme Analysis up on YouJew.

[Anonymous No.19523264]

>>19522914
Reminder that you yourself are indeed a spook. So is your mom. But when I fucked her she wasnt a spook, she was nice, pale, thick and white. She loved my cock. My cum wasnt a spook either, but she sure was spooked by it, as I blew my load inside her, which I could tell from her gaze.

[Anonymous No.19523354]

>>19522204
Nietzsche was the first philosopher I ever seriously read. I read basically everything he published from 18-19.

First, recognize that Nietzsche's enormous influence has more to do with his appeal for artists, than his direct effects of philosophy as a whole. Not that Nietzsche wasn't a brilliant thinker, but he also isn't laying out a great system like Hegel or Plato. I didn't come away from reading Nietzsche's works with a clear ontology, philosophy of language, epistemology, or metaphysics, only a clear philosophy of mind, and that had as much to do with studying psychology as reading Nietzsche.

So when I began taking philosophy courses, I was actually surprised by how many problems Nietzsche doesn't cover. I started out thinking Nietzsche's problem was THE Problem.

So part of solving the problem for yourself, is first disabusing yourself of dogmas. If you're like me, raised atheist in the developed world, you have likely inherited a fairly comprehensive model of the world. It starts from particle physics, the standard model, and moves up through various levels of emergence all the way to the social sciences. Minds result from the activity of brains. Knowledge comes from experimentation. Mathematics is something intrinsically true, parallel lines never meet, etc.

What you'll discover is that few scientists actually believe this. These models are generally established on pragmatic grounds, that they are useful for making predictions and developing technology. Indeed, we often know the models and laws to break down in various cases. There are also serious logical issues with empiricism and how we think about how we know things. At the level of physics, though kids will inherit an almost corpuscularianist conception from their education, there is in fact dueling conceptions, physicalism as fields, as information, etc.

You can step into semiotics and the philosophy of language (Wittgenstein, Sausser, Pierce, and Quine are all good starting points) and realize that you have a whole new set of problems with the very language you're using to pose your value problems.

In the end, I'm glad I started with Nietzsche, because he is one of the most fun philosophers to read and it got me started. At the same time, he's hard to read well, and it's very easy to turn him into a simplified non-economic version of Ayn Rand. Indeed, this is probably how most people who read him see him, and they go off to fetishize Chad, being "alpha", Spartans, etc. and think they are becoming warrior super men, not realizing that lashing out for conflict in order to achieve recognition from and power over others is definitely not Ubermensch behavior. This is basically just regression to the first stage of the human quest for recognition in Hegel, not the leap forward Nietzsche had in mind, which was only seeking recognition from one's self.

The best starting places I can recommend for a wider study is Kenney's A New History of Western Philosophy...

[Anonymous No.19523400]

>>19523354
Second, the Great Courses have some good philosophy lectures that are cheap on Audible. Modern Philosophy: From Decartes to Derrida is quite good, if very thin due to how wide it is. Mind Body Philosophy is an absolutely fantastic introduction to the topic, better than any book I've found. The Hobbes to Habermaus political philosophy none is pretty good too.

Personally I think it is a mistake to go too deep on philosophy by itself. Introductions on neuroscience/cognitive science, physics, complexity, information science, mathematics, linguistics, semiotics, etc. are all worth reading before you get too far in. These topics sum up a lot of the work of generations of philosophers and vet the different models with empirical rigor.

The ones who helped me with Nietzsche's problem most? Fichte and Hegel, but they really aren't appropriate for novice reading. They require a lot of background, I had to start the Phenomenology of Spirit, go back and do about 18 months of background, then return using tapes of a year long PhD seminar just on the book and a 1,600 page commentary on it to get it to yield up its secrets.

Religion helped too, but I was only lead to religion by studying physical science more indepth and much more widely. Not just physical sciences really, but also systems theory, chaos theory, complexity, information, and particularly the Hard Problem.

Esoteric writings are an interesting source of thought for philosophy too. They approach the same questions from an experiential viewpoint. Boehme, a major influence on Hegel and Whitehead, is a great example. Reading the Gnostics also helped me understand Heraclitus and the semiotics of opposites better in some ways.

BTW, if you think Nietzsche's problem is bad, you should check out eliminative materialism and epiphenomenalism, which have far more nightmarish conclusions. The novel Neuropath is actually a pretty good introduction, packaged in a short little thriller.

[Anonymous No.19523815]

>>19523354
>>19523400
Lmao I'm actually 18 as well.

[Anonymous No.19523840]

>>19522204
if you have to ask, you didn't understand what he was trying to express. Reread the metaphor of the spirit who transforms itself and for the time being, focus on something else

[Anonymous No.19523880]

>>19523400
>eliminative materialism
What are the implications of that?

[Anonymous No.19523897]

>>19522204
He didn't really understand Buddhism and was using it as a metaphor of sorts for his idea of nihilism without ressentiment (contrary to Christianity). I recommend starting with the jeets, as the mahayana buddhist formulation of samsara being equivalent to nirvana is far from the life- and world-denying Nietzschean reading of whatever Buddhist literature was available to him at the time

[Anonymous No.19523941]

>>19523897
I already started with the jeets before reading Nietzsche. He critiqued Buddhism as a nihilism of despair. A Buddhist is one who condemns existence and seeks to detach himself from it. One who values life-negation as the highest condition of human life. I'm sorry, but I'm not interested in whichever religion of the month is being shilled this time. Come back in a month with Taoism.

[Anonymous No.19523959]

>>19522240
turning back to christianity is for the individual romanticist, not a solution for the whole of society

[Anonymous No.19523970]

>>19523897
>>19523941
What both of you are on about? iirc he actually praised what seems to be Mahayana Buddhism in Antichrist because it didn't impose ethical imperatives on its followers and didn't condemn the flesh like Christianity does, among other things

[Anonymous No.19523992]

>>19523354
Holy shit I'm so glad I'm not a philosophy autist, all of this is a load of pseud ramblings of someone who has totally lost connection to anything spiritual and lovable about life. Reading too much certainly damages your brain

[Anonymous No.19523997]

>>19522204
>How do we
>western civilization
>ourselves

>>19522240
>we need to

>>19522259
>we need to

Shut the fuck up, kid. Drop the "we" bullshit and go discover your morals first then live by them. You are in no position to dictate what will happen to "us" or what "we" need to do when you're this young, this lost. If you're thinking in collectivist terms then you didn't get Nietzsche at all. You are no great man and you cannot move society.

[Anonymous No.19524009]

>>19523941
>I'm sorry, but I'm not interested in whichever religion of the month is being shilled this time. Come back in a month with Taoism
Likewise I'm not interested in whatever you're shilling. I am merely pointing out that Nietzsche largely used Buddhism as a character in the drama of his own philosophy, one with some but not exact correspondence to the actual religion. You rephrasing Nietzsche only illustrates my point.
>>19523970
Right he uses Buddhism to beat up Christianity. He considers it beyond good and evil and free of ressentiment, unlike the more moralizing Christianity. But he also considers both to be nihilism. No Buddhist or Christian has ever argued their beliefs are nihilism, but if we follow Nietzsche in centering the definition on world or life denial, the Christian who wants to escape to heaven and be with God is a nihilist and the Buddhist who believes nirvana is in samsara is not.

[Anonymous No.19524030]

>>19524009
>I am merely pointing out that Nietzsche largely used Buddhism as a character in the drama of his own philosophy, one with some but not exact correspondence to the actual religion.
Well observed and eloquently put, anon. Though I'm not familiar with buddhism, I had a feeling that this might have been the case while reading.

[Anonymous No.19524117]

>>19522204
Nietzsche was wrong about that one, best is trim the fat and stick to the core of those values.

[Anonymous No.19524133]

>>19522204
>How do we go about creating new values?
by reading my works

[Anonymous No.19524207]

>>19522204
Nietzsche constantly repeats that there has never been an ubermensch. An Ubermensch is
a new stage of development that comes AFTER human beings. It is not something that human beings can become. Human beings can only become what they ARE; there is no way to escape your humanity.

There are certain forces Neesha believes will create better and better human beings and remove stagnation. One of these forces is the "revaluation of all values". This comes from his high valuing of conflict (war) brings out the best in human beings. Revaluation of all values is going to war against everything held dear and sacred. It means leaving no stone unturned, not settling in some cutesey fixed ideology, and constantly challenging the things you might hold dear. This involves things like "western civilization", "religion", "gender", "niggers" etc. Break it all apart, create something new out of it. If you want to overcome nihilism, go to war with purveyors of nihilism (people who reject being alive, Christians, girls on meds, etc)

It's worth mentioning that the common take on this is the French existentialist one: that you individually must find your own meaning and values. This is an interesting development, but not Nietzsche's claim. He definitely didn't think any one person could take this project upon themselves. This is because for him, values aren't something that arrive out of thin air - they are closely tied to your natural instincts. So, the chad that self-evaluates working out, fucking a lot, etc highly, isn't don't that because he created those values, he's doing it because he has the natural capacity to do so by being healthy and good looking. Also, he didn't exactly create those values either, he is following in the footsteps of the tradition of other goodlooking muscular chads.

As a final note, "destroying ourselves" is something nietzsche thinks belongs to the set of things that human beings do, and do excellently - and often it's exactly the fear of destruction that causes people to fearfully stagnate.

[Anonymous No.19524223]

>>19523992
>>19523992
>things that are spiritual are loveable about life
>things that i can't see, touch or interact with are loveable about life
>things solely in my head are loveable about life
>mentally masturbating yourself into believing you are loved is loveable about life
by being "spiritual" you're doing the low tech version of living in a virtual world. I hope you wake up some day

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.19524248]

>>19523992
i, too, am glad that i know less

[Anonymous No.19524271]

>>19523354
>>19523400
jesus christ you sound like an insufferable faggot. way to not answer a single thing that the OP asked. you're not impressing anyone here by namedropping a dozen figures and schools of thought. seriously kill yourself or fuck off back to pleddit where you belong

[Anonymous No.19524274]

>>19522204
>I'm young, so what can I do to strive to be an ubermensch?

the ubermensch philosophy is just ego-cope. have a little humility and SUBMIT to god

[Anonymous No.19524369]

>>19524117
yeah, but that’s just not how societies develop so it’s an irrelevant point. First you have to account for what’s actually possible and will happen (creation of new values), and second you must attempt to direct what will happen in a way that’s best for x concern of yours. anything else is kind of irrelevant. there is no return, only forward

[Anonymous No.19524497]

>>19522204
I was suicidal for a long time and came close to losing my mind. The complete bleakness of my situation and the lack of "purpose" made it easy for me to justify ending it and it didn't help that the more I learned the less I believed in god and it left me with a sense of dread. Nothing I believed in was true and saw that I was no different than animals in a slaughter house...but what helped me out a lot was finding something to hold on to. For me it was the belief that I want to be happy and that I loved my family. That is something that can not be easily swayed and it gave me something to base all my beliefs on.

[Anonymous No.19524614]

>>19524223
you think you are smart, meanwhile you're just a living meme

>>19524248
>encyclopedic knowledge is inherently good