[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

Search:


View post   

>> No.18561822 [View]
File: 38 KB, 333x500, 51YSf4h9tEL.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18561822

>This is not a philosophical race – these Englishmen. Bacon signified an attack on the philosophical spirit in general; Hobbes, Hume, and Locke indicated a degradation and a depreciation in value of the concept “philosopher” for more than a century. Kant rose up and rebelled against Hume; and it was Locke about whom Schelling was able to say “je méprise Locke

>> No.18520617 [View]
File: 38 KB, 333x500, 51YSf4h9tEL.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18520617

could have just said "it's all subjective man" instead of stretching it for 200 pages

>> No.17115257 [View]
File: 38 KB, 333x500, BGE.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17115257

>> No.16819567 [View]
File: 38 KB, 333x500, BGE.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16819567

>>16811886
Beyond good and evil by Nietzsche

>> No.16584998 [View]
File: 38 KB, 333x500, bookrec thread with no text.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16584998

.

>> No.15337504 [View]
File: 38 KB, 333x500, 51YSf4h9tEL.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15337504

>>15337380
There is MASTER-MORALITY and
SLAVE-MORALITY,—I would at once add, however, that
in all higher and mixed civilizations, there are also attempts
at the reconciliation of the two moralities, but one finds still
oftener the confusion and mutual misunderstanding of
them, indeed sometimes their close juxtaposition—even in
the same man, within one soul. The distinctions of moral
values have either originated in a ruling caste, pleasantly
conscious of being different from the ruled—or among the
ruled class, the slaves and dependents of all sorts. In the
first case, when it is the rulers who determine the conception ‘good,’ it is the exalted, proud disposition which is
regarded as the distinguishing feature, and that which determines the order of rank. The noble type of man separates
from himself the beings in whom the opposite of this exalted, proud disposition displays itself he despises them. Let
it at once be noted that in this first kind of morality the antithesis ‘good’ and ‘bad’ means practically the same as
‘noble’ and ‘despicable’,—the antithesis ‘good’ and ‘EVIL’ is
of a different origin. The cowardly, the timid, the insignificant, and those thinking merely of narrow utility are
despised; moreover, also, the distrustful, with their constrained glances, the self- abasing, the dog-like kind of men
who let themselves be abused, the mendicant flatterers, and
above all the liars:—it is a fundamental belief of all aristocrats that the common people are untruthful. ‘We truthful
ones’—the nobility in ancient Greece called themselves.


. The Jews—a people ‘born for slavery,’ as Tacitus and the
whole ancient world say of them; ‘the chosen people among
the nations,’ as they themselves say and believe—the Jews
performed the miracle of the inversion of valuations, by
means of which life on earth obtained a new and dangerous
charm for a couple of millenniums. Their prophets fused
into one the expressions ‘rich,’ ‘godless,’ ‘wicked,’ ‘violent,’
‘sensual,’ and for the first time coined the word ‘world’ as a
term of reproach. In this inversion of valuations (in which
is also included the use of the word ‘poor’ as synonymous
with ‘saint’ and ‘friend’) the significance of the Jewish
people is to be found; it is with THEM that the SLAVE-INSURRECTION IN MORALS commences

There is a lot more but he's not succinct enough to quote it all here. He is clearly contrasting thenoble concept of themselves as good, and the poor, the commoners as bad, with the slave morality of the nobles as evil, and the slaves as good.

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]