/lit/ - Literature

>>17425695
100% unironically

>>16964604
No.
While Nietzsche's genealogy of morals is certainly a postmodern one, his prescriptions on how to live a good life cannot be compared to the ones given by Deleuze, Foucault and Derrida.

Why? Because they don't have an ethical system nor do they have any prescriptions as how to live life. They just analyse society in terms of power grids, power relations, use of language and power relations in institutions. They are the perfect example of a Nietzschean Esklavenmoral.

>>16952742
read Beyond Good and Evil and Genealogy of morals, like I've said a million times in this thread.
Nietzsche isn't some pop philosopher who can be understood through quotes--that's been one of the biggest reasons for him being so misunderstood. He has a bounty of brilliant, beautiful, clever, funny quotes and passages, but they need to be read in the works they are placed in. He was a writer in the truest sense; he understood that a book is not simply a collection of thoughts but a whole work. As such, there are so many Nietzsche quotes that seem like they're saying one thing but, when in the context of the surrounding text, are quite obviously saying the opposite. Even his aphorisms need to be read in the context of the books they were published in.
If you want to understand Nietzsche, you have to read him, and read him carefully. He will warn you of the same thing as you read--his writing is not for the impatient or the speed readers. But he is not at all impenetrable, his prose is masterful and his writing is never boring, it's also very easy to understand as long as you actually pay attention..
>>16952766
don't try to moralize at me lmao it's an insult get over it
>>16952814
yes. If someone submits to a tyrant for master moralist reasons, they are a master.
>>16952877
thinking I'm being trolled at this point but I don't care.
>You're assuming that TOLERATING that opression is LESS SLAVISH that not doing it
I never said this. I said it's slavish either way if the reasons are slavish.
Learn to differentiate between concepts. Did you know words have multiple meanings?

>>16891853
Herrenmoral

>>16891217
I have read Nietzsche, it is certainly true that he was one of the first (don't know enough about postmodernism to state I know he was the first) postmodernists, but his philosophy is nothing like modern postmodernism. The prescriptions are completely opposite. Nietzsche prescribes using slaves when you are a master, Nietzsche prescribes amor fati and strength. Nietzsche prescribes oppression and thinks it justified. We both know that is not what modern postmodernism (hah) is about.
It's showing of a complete lack of understanding in what way Nietzsche was a postmodernist if you use modern postmodern arguments against him.
I know Nietzsche very well, postmodernism enough.

Is this even a fucking question?

> Or would it be proper to count such dilettanti and old maids as the mawkish apostle of virginity, Mainlander, among the genuine Germans? After all he was probably a Jew (all Jews become mawkish when they moralise). Neither Bahnsen, nor Mainlander, nor even Eduard von Hartmann, give us a reliable grasp of the question whether the pessimism of Schopenhauer (his frightened glance into an undeified world, which has become stupid, blind, deranged and problematic, his honourable fright) was not only an exceptional case among Germans, but a German event: while everything else which stands in the foreground, like our valiant politics and our joyful Jingoism (which decidedly enough regards everything with reference to a principle sufficiently unphilosophical: "Deutschland, Deutschland, über Alles"* consequently sub specie speciei, namely, the German species), testifies very plainly to the contrary. No! The Germans of today are not pessimists! And Schopenhauer was a pessimist, I repeat it once more, as a good European, and not as a German.

> Owing to the universal inexperience of both kinds of pain, and the comparative rarity of the spectacle of a sufferer, an important consequence results: people now hate pain far more than earlier man did, and calumniate it worse than ever; indeed people nowadays can hardly endure the thought of pain, and make out of it an affair of conscience and a reproach to collective existence. The appearance of pessimistic philosophies is not at all the sign of great and dreadful miseries; for these interrogative marks regarding the worth of life appear in periods when the refinement and alleviation of existence already deem the unavoidable gnat-stings of the soul and body as altogether too bloody and wicked; and in the poverty of actual experiences of pain, would now like to make painful general ideas appear as suffering of the worst kind. - There might indeed be a remedy for pessimistic philosophies and the excessive sensibility which seems to me the real "distress of the present": but perhaps this remedy already sounds too cruel, and would itself be reckoned among the symptoms owing to which people at present conclude that "existence is something evil." Well! the remedy for "the distress" is distress.

>wake up at 10
>shower (start warm go cold)
>meditate
>write
>eat
>sometimes read
>do uni work
>shitpost on /lit/
>dinner
>read
>shower
>bed

>>14996176
Roll

https://m.imgur.com/a/a3BjA8F

don't mind me saving the thread

>"Was Socrates Greek in the first place? Ugliness is often
>enough the expression of interbreeding, of a development thwarted by
>interbreeding. In other cases it appears as a development in decline.
>Forensic anthropologists tell us that the typical criminal is ugly: monstrum in fronte, monstrum in animo [monster in the face, monster in the
>soul]. But the criminal is a décadent. Was Socrates a typical criminal?
> A visitor who knew about faces, when he passed through Athens, said to
>Socrates’ face that he was a monstrum—that he contained all bad vices
>and cravings within him. And Socrates simply answered: “You know
>me, sir"


Socrates btfo'd

Why was Neetzche such a good shitposter?

>>14946871
On ne peut penser et ecrire qu'assis [One cannot think and write except when seated] (G. Flaubert). There I have caught you, nihilist! The sedentary life is the very sin against the Holy Spirit. Only thoughts reached by walking have value.