/lit/ - Literature

>love life enough, with all is pleasure and suffering, that youd want nothing more than to repeat it over and over
how do i do this. the idea of entering nirvana still seems more appealing than repeating life.

>he solved philosophy only because of Darwin, had he not given N the opportunity to say that the mind came from the body (and is therefore inferior to it), his whole philosophy would've never existed
thoughts?

literally every single group of people like Nietzsche and sometimes use him as a defense for their shit, all of them, feminists, anarchists, aristocrats, democrats, fascists, national socialists, etc.
why (and how) is he so liked among totally opposite groups of people? is it the fact that he contradicts himself every other page?

>>20722692
refuted by picrel

did he refute Orthodox Christianity?

I see a lot of trannies claiming that if Nietzsche were alive today hed support trans people, is this true? personally, i dont think it is, most of them say he said "become who you are", but i think he meant that in relation to one's values and following them instead of a universal moral system, also the quote implies (somewhat) that the person you are is already there and you just have to let it out, so changing one's body to fit one's mind seems absurd, because it isn't something that comes from within you, but outwardly. additionally to that, N also liked Darwin a lot and was a materialist, so i dont think he would like the idea of one's "soul" (or mind) being incompatible with one's body, as they are one. also the way trannies fight for "equality" seems pretty slave morality to me, but what do you all think? would he support or oppose them?

>you need to leave TSZ for last, read all the others before it
why do retards say that? literally all you need for Zarathustra is the 3 books prior to it (human, all too human;daybreak;the gay science)

He plagiarized almost everything he wrote
>Philosophers believing their subjective observations to be true - from Spinoza
>Morality being cringe and radical individualism - from Stirner
>Will to power - from Hobbes
>Rejection of rationalism - Schopenhauer
>Feel free to add any other ideas he stole
How is he original again?

Hello, I have been reading Nietzsche the past couple of months, life has been going great, but today I remembered about Schopenhauer and I read part of WWR vol. 2 and now I'm feeling depressed and don't wanna do anything, how can I reverse this?

In the end of part 1 of TSZ Zarathustra tells his students to go their own ways and that he shall return when they no longer find him a good teacher, is this Nietzsche saying to leave the book for a bit and come back to it after our own philosophical journey?

in what order should i read his books?

Hello, I planned to spend my summer studying Jung, Epictetus, Aristotle and Machiavelli, but I will have to study a lot when I get back to school if I don't want to ruin my life, should I study him to develop my will and become mentally stronger so I can study better or should I go about reading as I already have planned it and possibly fail (as I am not very motivated to study)?

Where do I start with him?

>>17010794
>idk nietzche what do you think
>i hate fags
>damn would have thought you were against christians
>i hate fags
>why
>i hate fags
>...
>i hate fags

>>15505685
No, but dropping out is.

What are your opinions on the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche?

nietzsche’s will to power explains the fundamental incentive structures that govern man. the fact is that every action one takes is in seeking to become of higher social standing, higher authority, or higher internal idea of superiority. any example of any human action can be explained in this framework.
the statist liberal who seeks to use government authority in order to control human nature. this is not merely an attempt to create social equality or reparate wrong doings, this is to gain control over others. on the other hand, the libertarian seeks to remove all repressions from their individual liberty. he wants to gain control over his situation by removing others from intervening in it.
the natalist who has many children. he seeks to progenate his lineage and carry forward his genetics. the anti-natalist who promotes no procreation. he desires to remove all humans, and that is what he believes to be necessary. he seeks to control human nature in order to advance his own beliefs about the world. the aim is power.
the generous philanthropist seeks to alter the world in a way that is accordant with his own beliefs. the meek coward who commits suicide does so as his last act of self-control, he is utilizing his autonomy to put himself in a place that is believed to be more desirable.
a human relationship is not based in love, it is based on a belief about synergy. the idea is that two people coming together creates a whole that is larger than the sum of its parts. economic thought would posit that any belief opposed to this is illogical.
control, power, control, power, control, power, control, power, control, power.
history is the story of man’s attempt to control nature and the nature of his fellow men.
“life itself, in its essence, means appropriating, injuring, overpowering those who are foreign and weaker. oppression, harshness, forcing ones own forms on others. corporation, and at the very least, very mildest, exploitation. life simply is the will to power.”

>The last man is only possible by mankind having bred an apathetic person or ethnic group who are unable to dream, who are unwilling to take risks, and simply earn their living and keep warm.

Are basedboys the last man Nietzsche was talking about?