/lit/ - Literature

>>19044129
>But I'm sure you knew that already.

>>16964663
>objectivity
Of? The only objective thing we are referring to here is a force which is not comprehensible to us, because it is not a substance of any kind, but which is certainly real nonetheless. Only its effects (ourselves) are felt, and by those effects we have given it a name, the "will to power."

>>16964666
>I denied the idea that the devil "constructed evil,"
Well, then I guess you didn't actually address my point about slave moralists using the devil as part of their cunning back then.

>What is wrong with following the best set of values, as opposed to whatever the "master moralist" conceives of?
Again, I'm not saying slave moralists should adopt master morality, so this question is pointless.

>I'm not talking about God but Jesus Christ
I know, but Christ is the son of God, so you still need that God to be in the "beyond" for you to care about either.

>So why then should I accept his ideas?
You shouldn't unless you understand them and realize that you share them. Let me remind you that our conversation started with you asking for an explanation on what master and slave morality even were. I didn't start talking to you to try and convince you of the ideas. I'm still not trying to do that.

>What does Christianity negate and how does it not affirm?
Life, because it places all value in a "beyond."

>>16964763