Men who followed their word

[Anonymous No.21468622]

Nietzsche was a titanic intellectual, but remains a poor example of the Overmen. Who is not? Which men actually embodied the philosophies they espoused?

[Anonymous No.21468631]

Marcus Aurelius

[Anonymous No.21468644]

>>21468622
Only a fucking wank would waste his time reading and writing books. The reason these people are known as "thinkers" is because they never did anything.

Uncle Ted is a based schizo

[Anonymous No.21468705]

>>21468644
should've transitioned and 40% like most troons

[Anonymous No.21468721]

>>21468622
>Nietzsche was a titanic intellectual,
false, Nietzsche is a postmodernist since he hates truth and is just desperate to salvage atheism (ie death of Judaism-christianity) by trying to use the relativism that the atheists used to take power without falling into nihilism. of course being an atheist he failed miserably. Atheism=nihilism=hedonism forever

his retarded idea was that relativism is true so now people must compete for imposing their values onto others. Ie what you have now with the leftists. This is why socialists of all eras took Nietzsche as their gurus. the nazis and the socialists today idolize Nietzsche.

You really have to be an atheist bug to admire this piece of shit that was Nietzsche.

[Anonymous No.21468729]

>>21468705
He probably did attempt suicide (which is what 40% means, contrary to what illiterate/pol/cucks will suggest)

[Anonymous No.21468736]

>>21468705
That would go against his philosophy.

[Anonymous No.21468749]

>>21468622
albert chadmus

[Anonymous No.21468788]

>>21468644
Most "philosophical" works are poorly condensed brain waste excerpts written with no respect for the reader. And I've never read something and thought "how profound!". Writers are all midwits. I hate bookreaders so much.

[Anonymous No.21468791]

>>21468622
>Which men actually embodied the philosophies they espoused?
This guy
>"I learned that all moral judgments are 'value judgments,' that all value judgments are subjective, and that none can be proved to be either “right” or “wrong.” I even read somewhere that the Chief Justice of the United States had written that the American Constitution expressed nothing more than collective value judgments.
>Believe it or not, I figured out for myself—what apparently the Chief Justice couldn’t figure out for himself—that if the rationality of one value judgment was zero, multiplying it by millions would not make it one whit more rational. Nor is there any “reason” to obey the law for anyone, like myself, who has the boldness and daring “the strength of character” to throw off its shackles. . .
>I discovered that to become truly free, truly unfettered, I had to become truly uninhibited. And I quickly discovered that the greatest obstacle to my freedom, the greatest block, and limitation to it, consists in the insupportable “value judgment” that I was bound to respect the rights of others. I asked myself, who were these “others”? Other human beings, with human rights? Why is it more wrong to kill a human animal than any other animal, a pig or a sheep or a steer? Is your life more to you than a hog’s life to a hog? Why should I be willing to sacrifice my pleasure more for the one than for the other?
>Surely, you would not, in this age of scientific enlightenment, declare that God or nature has marked some pleasures as “moral” or “good” and others as “immoral” or “bad”?

[Anonymous No.21468798]

Diogenes

[Anonymous No.21468806]

Basil the Blessed

[Anonymous No.21468816]

>>21468788
The problem is that bookreaders are the same as anime trannys and reddit podcast consoomers, but they've tricked themselves into thinking their hobby is a great intellectual asset because most people, understandably, find the activity borning.

[Anonymous No.21468851]

>>21468644
>Faggot that rejects literature because it is... not le based for him
>He also considers that a retarded terrorist is le.. based

[Anonymous No.21468873]

>>21468851
Yeah, acting on a strongly held belief is based. The fact that you would even deny this is why I hate you book niggers.

[Anonymous No.21468882]

>>21468622
Cioran

[Anonymous No.21468986]

>>21468622
You’ve never read Nietzsche.

[Anonymous No.21469225]

>>21468721
>Judaism-Christianity
stop this meme

[Anonymous No.21469421]

Mainländer, Weininger, Améry

[Anonymous No.21469460]

>>21469421
Don't forget Carlo Michelstaedter

[Anonymous No.21469476]

>>21468622
Jesus Christ is the only one.

[Anonymous No.21469482]

>>21469476
This.

[Anonymous No.21469501]

>>21468622
Did you even read a lick of it?
We cannot get to the Übermensch without laying a groundwork for a new society. They’re only found in fiction, and they’re not usually perfect examples as is. So rather you should be asking “Which fictional characters embody this Übermensch?”

[Anonymous No.21469530]

Mishima

[Anonymous No.21469538]

>>21468816
What is an intellectual activity to you?

[Anonymous No.21469544]

This guy.

[Anonymous No.21469740]

>>21468788
This is the whole point of philosophy and any intellectual literature in general. It is what it is because it removes that "translation for public", unlike fiction which is exactly the opposite of that and is written explicitly with focus on appealing to as many people as possible, using themes and as stories that are not individual, but general or archetypal. Intellectual writing is done through a personal subjective point since this is how you arrive at knowledge in the first place.

The reason you haven't had this "profound" moment is, arguably, you simply read the literature that doesn't speak to your true self, since you can't relate to the "condensed brain excerpts" that what subjective process of thinking actually is.

"Intellectual" or philosophical literature, or non fiction is written by certain people for certain people. If you see the whole field as a hoax, then you simply are not that person for whom it was written for. Just as fiction written by the exact opposite type of people for the exact opposite type of people from non fiction, so my suggestion is to look there.

[Anonymous No.21469760]

>>21468631
Lol, he just had to break the perfect line of imperial succession by appointing his braindead son, thus throwing the empire into civil war and destruction. Just to pet his own ego and his own flesh, completely contrary to his supposed ideology.

>>21469530
Only right answer

[Anonymous No.21469782]

>>21468622
Xenophon: military man and philosopher

[Anonymous No.21469794]

>>21469538
Outdated AI

[Anonymous No.21469809]

>>21469740
so you think fiction is for stupid people and philosophy is for smart people?

[Anonymous No.21469825]

>>21469538
Masturbating

[Anonymous No.21469833]

>>21468622
I think something like 40% of Americans think that Jesus is coming back any day now and actively deny science. Imagine thinking we’re anywhere close to seeing an “overman,” but let’s be honest you haven’t read Nietzsche let alone understand the concept and what it entails.

[Anonymous No.21469860]

>>21468622
Marcus Aurelius

[Anonymous No.21469873]

>>21468622
Epicurus

[Anonymous No.21469875]

>>21469860
Lol, he just had to break the perfect line of imperial succession by appointing his braindead son, thus throwing the empire into civil war and destruction. Just to pet his own ego and his own flesh, completely contrary to his supposed ideology.

>>21469530
Only right answer

[Anonymous No.21469886]

>>21469501
based, we need superior humans if we’re going to herald the coming of the superhuman

[Anonymous No.21469929]

I'd say Sayyid Qutb and Khomeini. Qutb was imprisoned, tortured, and even given the opportunity to be pardoned if he publicly endorsed the president, but he refused and became a martyr instead.

[Anonymous No.21470224]

>>21469809
Fiction is for everyone, philosophy is for smart people.

[Anonymous No.21470621]

>>21469809
..now that was a quick way to summarize the whole thing..

Not really, its just.. different. For that exact conclusion I was thinking about works such as Parcifal or Faust, and people like Goethe and Wagner in general. I don't know much about literature myself, but I can safely say that fiction of that caliber, basically any of these "greatest" books are perfect examples of that greatness from antithetical approach to literature from nonfiction.

The reason I say different is because that intelligence that is mostly associated with "smartness" is very much composed of many things. It just happened to be that it's the most clear and seemingly obvious representation of it is through subjective brain aneurysms that is non fiction literature.

Yet fiction works that achieved legendary status possesses much more of that "realism" or should I say "truth" that is mirrored from the world we live in. And so it takes a very special person to do so, one may say an intelligent one to deliver such work that would be so welcomed by the general public.

Now, I haven't completely comprehended the work that I'm reciting here, but from what I understand, the main difference that is between supposed "smart people" and others is the amount of natural intuition they possess, or rather how little those supposed "smart people" have it in comparison.

This amount of intuition, considering many things, reflects on your general comprehension of reality. The fact that there is a clear difference in approach and reach between fiction and non fiction is reflective by product of the perception types that individuals possess.

Wide and shallow, thin and deep are the characteristics that define this difference. Keep in mind that this fact reaches far beyond just literature, yet it is a good example non a less. Also, it does not necessarily set a rigid rule. Wagner being proof of that, having a decently wide approach, yet absolutly not compromised in depth. It's just an approximate border from which we can work around.

Above mentioned qualities, as much as they are gross simplification, still a closest note to the true definition of difference. Both of them have equal cons and pros, being equal to the duality they are, and neither should be valued more over the other. Unfortunately this is not how we view it and depending on the time and place in our history, one is more dominant and valued than the other.

Long story short, things such as "smart and dumb" are mostly superficial, definition of which changes according to historical needs and periods. Both of them possess their own achievements and uses.

I'll even go as far as to say that works of fiction are more intelligent, since as much as the stories, character and themes can be much more basic and rigid, it is through equal wide reflection from all mediums combined in reference you could start to see it's true epiphany. Im sure true enjoyers of fiction arrive at the same conclusion.. only Intuitively..

[Anonymous No.21470683]

Taleb

[Anonymous No.21470829]

>>21468721
>people must compete for imposing their values onto others
that's right and if you can't cut it tough shit

[Anonymous No.21470914]

>>21470621
damn this board really upped the quality from when i last checked

what happened?

[Anonymous No.21471227]

>>21469538
Putting your will to action. Play a game of chess against someone better than you, become better at your job, be an asset to your family and community, make something great or useful. The bar isn't exactly high. I respect the opinion of a body builder more than a consoomer bookreader.

[Anonymous No.21471302]

>>21471227
So an anti-intellectual would be an academic? Interesting.

[Anonymous No.21471423]

>>21471302
Close, but not exactly. An anti-intellectual could be anyone, but most academics are intellectual larpers.

[Anonymous No.21471605]

>>21470621
> I'll even go as far as to say that works of fiction [...] through equal wide reflection from all mediums combined in reference you could start to see it's true epiphany. Im sure true enjoyers of fiction arrive at the same conclusion.. only Intuitively..

and that "same conclusion", my dear frogposter, would be..?

[Anonymous No.21471629]

>>21470621
Fiction speaks to phenomenology, while philosophy speaks to the intellect.
Is that what you're trying to say?

[Anonymous No.21471947]

>>21468791
man just wanted to coom

[Anonymous No.21472020]

>>21468622
>Nietzsche was a titanic intellectual, but remains a poor example of the Overmen. Who is not? Which men actually embodied the philosophies they espoused?

He does embody his philosophy. Even more, his philosophy embodies him, it's an utterly honest and personal expression. The overman is just one point and Nietzsche is pretty explicit about how distant of a horizon it is, and how he is only a messenger.

Also his insanity was not a product of his philosophy or anything psychological for that matter, it was a physical issue - inherited from his father who died from the same - and it happened suddenly, there was no mental decline leading up to it.

We should be cautious to evaluate Nietzsche based on the popular talking points.

>>21468721
>Nietzsche is a postmodernist
lol no
> salvage atheism
no
>Atheism=nihilism=hedonism
no

no dude
way off, wrong planet

[Anonymous No.21472172]

>>21472020
You're completely ridiculous.

[Anonymous No.21472261]

>>21472172
I thought this was a stupid response but I want to give you the benefit of the doubt. I'm happy to clarify what I mean if there's something I've failed to make clear.

>his philosophy embodies him, it's an utterly honest and personal expression.
This may have sounded like gushing praise. It isn't. It's referring to his method. Nietzsche calls all philosophy autobiographical or confessional, says truth is perspectival, etc. He writes with these things in mind. I think it's a good rhetorical move, personally, but you're free to disagree.

[Anonymous No.21472273]

>>21469530
This. But also the Apostles of Christ, many Catholic and Orthodox Christians, some protestants, many Muslims, etc. Mishima is still one of the greatest, if not the single great example due to the amount of writings that we can be certain came from him and the actions that he took. There is nothing that confirms the authenticity of a belief more than the willingness to die for it.

[Anonymous No.21472299]

>>21471629
I mean, fiction is art. We forget that. It's easy to lump great works of fiction in with great works of philosophy on the "Literature" board, but they're not really the same, are they? Philosophy is a matter of seeking after knowledge. Fiction is a matter of creating art. The writer, like the poet, is an artist, and the philosopher is not really an artist. Hell, in the Republic we are explicitly told that artists will be banned from the city-in-speech.

Writers and poets have more in common with painters, sculptors, composers, and dancers than they have in common with philosophers.

[Anonymous No.21472331]

>>21472273
Mishima was a psychosexually ridden pervert who wanted to get fucked in the ass, kys.

[Anonymous No.21472332]

>>21472331
Spoken like true pseud

[Anonymous No.21472339]

>>21472261
He can't embody his philosophy because he's a weak, malaised moral relativist without one. If I was told Nietzsche worshipped power and strength for purely aesthetic reasons, I'd believe it.

[Anonymous No.21472360]

>>21472339
No that doesn't work. If you don't want to understand Nietzsche, you have no obligation to, but you won't have an easy time passing any valid judgments on the matter.

[Anonymous No.21472371]

>>21472332
Being a homosexual aesthete that worships muh death muh tragedy is the faggiest thing a man can do, typical Nietzschean mind virus stuff really. If he was a man and not an AGP freak he'd focus on his family instead of debasing himself in such a pathetic charade of masochistically charged spectacle. And no, he didn't die for any higher cause besides himself. Such a pathetic narcissist freak.

[Anonymous No.21472376]

>>21472371
Saved your post just for how amusing it is. The fact that someone could be so opinionated about something they don't understand is hilarious. Never change bro.

[Anonymous No.21472393]

>>21472376
>The fact that someone could be so opinionated about something they don't understand is hilarious.
I don't understand what compels a man to become like Mishima and I think anyone who even considers such a thing deserves violent beatings. Cry about it.

[Anonymous No.21472397]

>>21472393
Crying tears of joy

[Anonymous No.21472405]

>>21472397
Whatever you say, pussy. Keep pretending he's any better than a bimbo on tiktok and instagram.

[Anonymous No.21472456]

>>21468622
I ask you this. How can a great philosopher ever embody what they espouse? After all if their philosophy truly is great it's scope must surely be so vast as to embody an infinitude of beings across time and space, not merely one individual...

[Anonymous No.21472492]

>>21468622
Unironically Hitler. Pure insanity and lust for power.

[Anonymous No.21473306]

>>21472492
It's disappointing that pure power like that couldn't win. He had the whole power of German culture behind him. Luther, Bach, Beethoven, Goethe, Kant, Hegel, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Wagner, Heidegger. And he let them all down.

He let man down with his insanity.

[Anonymous No.21473398]

based

[Anonymous No.21473406]

>>21469530
based

[Anonymous No.21473414]

>>21472393
>implying that you could beat anyone with your bitch body

[Anonymous No.21473421]

>>21473406
>Mishima
>>21473414
Who the fuck is that faggot? Is /lit/ full of asian incels?

[Anonymous No.21473432]

>>21473421
feeble

[Anonymous No.21473443]

>>21473432
He was undoubtedly a faggot and you are undoubtedly an asian faggot.

[Anonymous No.21474990]

>>21472456
stupid fucking frogposter

[Anonymous No.21475010]

>>21468622
>but remains a poor example of the Overmen
He never pretended to be one. Fucking degenerate kys

[Anonymous No.21475088]

>>21472360
>y-you don't understand nietzcuck
every single time with you. there is no difference between neetch plebbitor and marxist tranny.

[Anonymous No.21475091]

>>21469740
No one can specifically demonstrate the use of these subjects. It's like religion in the modern age; totally unprovable. Except philosophy won't grant me a ticket to the Valhalla so I shan't bother.

Every good idea is condensible and does not take hundreds of pages to articulate it. Whenever I see excerpts from these prized books it reads like halfbaked rambling, designed for pseuds to nod in unison.

[Anonymous No.21475103]

>>21470621
Bookreaders are functionally unspectacular. The proof is in the pudding. Besides, 'intellectuals' that choose words do so for the forgivable fuzz that allows their silly little ideas to go without formal verification. Grifters and pseuds.

[Anonymous No.21475291]

>>21468622
9 suicides

Oh, the Pessimist.

[Anonymous No.21476396]

>>21468873
>acting on a strongly held belief is based.
we need an IQ minimum for posting on this board to keep people like you away from here.

[Anonymous No.21476410]

>>21469476
Thanks for agreeing with Nietzsche, as he said there was only one Christian and he died on a cross, you Paulites should be more like rabbi Yeshua.

[Anonymous No.21476416]

>>21468622
Jesus, desu.
Preached weakness & humiliation, led by example.

[Anonymous No.21476441]

marinetti was pro-violence, pro-war, anti-monarchy/church and pro-industry. he embraced advances in commercial printing, wrote books that were banned on christian moral grounds, and volunteered for bloody parts of every war italy waged during his lifetime. he participated in the isonzo campaign in ww1 and returned after being wounded, and volunteered for the eastern from in ww2 in his 60s.