/lit/ - Literature

I know, I know...another Nietzsche thread.

What do I have to read beforehand in order to get the most out of his work? It seems that whenever I have an interest in a philosopher, the best way to read him is to understand his influences, but then to understand them you have to read THEIR influences. It seems like a trickle down effect that makes it so one has to fully understand all philosophy up to the point of the person of interest.

For example, Schopenhauer had a big influence on Nietzsche (I've been told) but Schoppy straight up says you won't get him unless you read Kant. I'm no philosophy expert but I know that Kant is dense as fuck and would take years of study to have a proper understanding of.

What is an anon to do?

Geist ist das leben, das selber ins leben schneidet.

>"Spirit is the life that cuts through life."

What did Nietzsche mean by this?

The desire for "freedom of will" in the superlative, metaphysical sense, such as still holds sway, unfortunately, in the minds of the half-educated, the desire to bear the entire and ultimate responsibility for one's actions oneself, and to absolve God, the world, ancestors, chance, and society therefrom, involves nothing less than to be precisely this causa sui, and, with more than Munchausen daring, to pull oneself up into existence by the hair, out of the slough of nothingness.

The "non-free will" is mythology; in real life it is only a question of strong and weak will.

Do renowned philosophers ever spout logical fallacies? If so, does /lit/ have blatant examples of that?

Greek Tragedy