/lit/ - Literature

ya'll make fun of him but deep down you know nietzsche is interesting as fuck and the greatest thinker since the fuckin greeks

Hello /lit/. The more I read this fucker, the more of a jerk I am. Is there any quality critique of his ideas?

Also, can you think of any Nietzschean literary fiction? The more modern the better.

>Love of one is a piece of barbarism: for it is practised at the expense of all others. Love of God likewise.”

I stopped listening to the podcast halfway through (might finish it later today) and as irritating as Sam Harris is, it was Jordan Peterson who ruined the conversation by misunderstanding Nietzsche's answer to the question "what is true?" and linking him to romantics like Schelling and pragmatists like William James. This error, along with Peterson's willingness to redefine and obfuscate the concept of truth, makes me think he is not as concerned with getting to the bottom of things as he is with warding off boredom by reveling in the confusion he stirs up within himself.

Nietzsche believed that happiness and unhappiness, utility and disadvantage, and conclusiveness to the preservation of life, are all irrelevant to the truth of a proposition.

"A belief may be necessary condition of life and yet be false."
"...what presumption to decree that all that is necessary for my preservation must also really be there! As if my preservation were anything necessary!"

From Kaufmann: Nietzsche doubts that there is any "pre-established harmony" between truth and pleasure. Nietzsche concludes that the "will to truth," not being founded on considerations of utility, means—"there remains no choice—'I will not deceive, not even myself': and with this we are on the ground of morality."

Nietzsche goes further: "appearance, error, deception, dissimulation, delusion, self-delusion" all aid life; life "has always shown itself to be on the side of the most unscrupulous polytropoi (the wily and versatile)": is not then the "will to truth" a mere "quixotism"? No, says Nietzsche—it is something rather more terrifying, "namely a principle that is hostile to life and destructive," perhaps even "a hidden will to death."

Thus Nietzsche scorns any utilitarian or pragmatic approach to truth and insists that those who search for it must never ask whether the truth will profit or harm them—and yet he considers the will to truth a form of the will to power.

Nietzsche values power not as a means but as the state of being that man desires for its own sake as his own ultimate end. And truth he considers an essential aspect of this state of being.

When Nietzsche describes the will to truth as "a principle that is hostile to life and destructive," he is entirely consistent with his emphatic and fundamental assertion that man wants power more than life. Nietzsche does not condemn the passion for truth but declares truth to be "divine." Power is a state of being for which man willingly risks death and from which he excludes himself if he "tolerates slack feelings in his faith and judgments." Untruth, in short, is weakness, and truth is power—even if it spells death.

anyone else's life improve drastically after readin nietzsche?

is anybody on this nigga's level

>>8785958
Lear, Tolstoy and the Fool
http://www.orwell.ru/library/essays/lear/english/e_ltf

I see parallels between Orwell and Nietzsche's thinking in regard to "the quarrel between the religious and the humanist attitude towards life." Then there is the fact that Tolstoy was influenced by Schopenhauer and Wittgenstein was influenced by Tolstoy and, to a lesser extent, Schopenhauer. And how Nietzsche's philosophy is a reaction against Schopenhauer. Then there are the attacks on Tolstoy from Nietzsche and on Nietzsche from Tolstoy. It seems like there is a fundamental psychological split here with Wittgenstein, Tolstoy, Schopenhauer's philosophy, Christianity on one side and Nietzsche, Shakespeare, Schopenhauer's personality, humanism on the other.

If it helps I have read almost everything by Nietzsche. He is the only writer that I really love. Before him it was Schopenhauer but now I am not too interested in him because I see flaws in his philosophy. In a way, I am looking for something to complement Nietzsche. It is difficult for me to read fiction and poetry but sometimes I feel that I should force it on myself because I will appreciate it later. It is easier for me to read non-fiction like philosophy and history and books on politics.

Is morality/God being alive really as important as pic related thinks it is? Aren't there biological explanations for why people don't kill each other? Plus, there's laws and crap. It's like he's making a big deal about a minor thing just because he wants to be famous and get lots of posthumous audience pussy.

https://www.amazon.com/Mask-Enlightenment-Nietzsche%C2%92s-Zarathustra-Second/dp/0300104510

interview with the author
https://www.c-span.org/video/?160717-1/works-friedrich-nietzsche-discussion

>>8424452
his early stuff isn't as good as his later stuff, i would start with the late works (beyond good and evil to ecce homo/nietzsche contra wagner) and go back to early stuff
in a letter to i forget who nietzsche says a good way to understand his work is to read all of the introductions/prefaces to his books in order (most of them were written in late period, even for his earliest books)

what's next step:

1. the world is awesome :) + affirm it
2. life sux :( + deny it
3. life sux :( + but affirm it anyway lol

>Ye preachers of equality, the tyrant-frenzy of impotence crieth thus in you for "equality": your most secret tyrant-longings disguise themselves thus in virtue-words! Fretted conceit and suppressed envy—perhaps your fathers' conceit and envy: in you break they forth as flame and frenzy of vengeance. What the father hath hid cometh out in the son; and oft have I found in the son the father's revealed secret. Inspired ones they resemble: but it is not the heart that inspireth them—but vengeance. And when they become subtle and cold, it is not spirit, but envy, that maketh them so.

Nietzsche on SJWs?

One of Nietzsche's central questions questions is "What is the value of morality?" By morality, does he mean Christian morality (and its remnants) or morality in general: having principles concerning the distinction between wrong and wrong behavior? I know he considers Christianity to be a symptom/cause of decadence, but what about morality in general?

It would seem that by morality he means Christian morality and its remnants (for example, George Eliot's brand of atheism, democracy, socialism, science/systematic research that still relies on faith in truth, etc.) and other systems of thought that manifest the ascetic ideal (Eastern religions), the will to nothingness. Considering that he contrasts the The Crucified (the ascetic ideal) with Dionysus/Zarathustra (a new ideal that dissolves ideals but affirms and says yes to life unconditionally), he has some sense of wrong and right behavior. Likewise, I doubt he considers a master morality that affirms life as a form of decadence. But does this new "ideal" designated by Dionysus/Zarathustra abolish all constraints on the powerful to be cruel and selfish and all of the other things that are often considered immoral? Since Nietzsche considers democracy as a form of nihilism and pity as a form of mawkishness and effeminacy and cowardice, I do not see why he would be against a few centuries of misery, especially if something desirable emerges out of the destruction. He often speaks of great wars that will need to take place before a stronger race of men will emerge.

By creating new values, erecting the new "ideal" of Dionysus/Zarathustra while at the same time destroying the old world order, does Nietzsche set himself up as the creator of a new master morality that will launch a future cosmopolitan society with a new pathos of distance, with a new nobility and a new slave class that will, and as an end result, spawn various Übermensch, philosopher-poets who will create new forms of art and beauty never before dreamed of?

What do ya'll guys think of "On Truth and Lie in an Extra-Moral Sense" by Nietzsche?

Also, what the hell is intuition? I always thought it was something women pretended to have since they obviously do not have reason.

What did Nietzsche think of Jesus Christ?

How did Nietzsche look at the future of humanity? Could the honeybee in "Also Sprach Zarathustra" perhaps be an analogy on humanity at the time?
The bee has stopped gathering honey, not because it doesn't want anymore, not because it doesn't need anymore, but because it just cannot carry anymore. Just like humanity at the time. The modernistic view of rapid growth and progression keeps pushing humanity further, but there is a limit to how much progress we can manage. The honeybee that is humanity is fully loaded.
And then, in 1968, Stanley Kubrick used Richard Strauss' composition with the same name as Nietzsches book for his movie "2001: A Space Odyssey." Humanity has reached space: the final frontier. What now?
I hope my thoughts aren't too bundled, has anyone got any input on this?

Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) was one of the intellectuals who glorified the irrational. According to Nietzsche, Western bourgeois society was decadent and incapable of any real cultural creativity, primiarliy because of its excessive emphasis on the rational faculty at the expense of emotions, pleasures, passions, and instincts. Reason, Nietzsche claimed, actually played little role in human life because humans were at the mercy of irrational life forces.

Nietzsche believe that Christianity should shoulder the blame for Western civiliation's enfeeblement. The "slave morality" of Christianity, he believed, had obliterated the human impulse for life and had crushed the human will:

"I call Christianity the one great curse, the one enormous innermost perversion. . . . I call it the one immortal blemish of mankind. . . . Christianity has taken the side of everything weak, base, ill-constituted, it has made an ideal out of opposition to the preservative instincts of strong life. . . . Christianity is called the religion of pity. ---Pity stands in antithesis to the basic emotions which enhance the energy of the feeling of life: it has a depressive effect. One loses force when one pities."

How, then, could Western society be renewed? First, said Nietzsche, one must recognize that "God is dead." Europeans had killed God, he said, and it was no longer possible to believe in some kind of cosmic order. Eliminating God and hence Christian morality had liberated human beings and made it possible to create a higher kind of being Nietzsche called the superman: "I teach you the Superman. Man is something that is to be surpassed." Superior intellectuals must free themselves from the ordinary thinking of the masses, create their own values, and lead the masses. Nietzsche rejected and condemned political democracy, social reform, and universal suffrage.

Step 1: Schopenhauer
Step 2: Nietzsche
Step 3: ________ ?

Who do I into next?

Who are the 20th century heirs to Schopenhauer and Nietzsche?