/lit/ - Literature

>>16816533
When Nietzsche talks about power he's not necessarily talking about the power to control others. He's chiefly talking about power over oneself, the ability to transform will into action. When we're able to succeed and solve a problem that was plaguing us or accomplish something we could not before then this represents heightened power over oneself.
In this way money does not bring power but to seek money is to engage in the power process, and society tries very hard to see to it that our will to power operates only along these financial channels.

>why is empathy and compassion a slave morality or are there different kinds of empathy and compassion?
Empathy and compassion aren't slave morality, nor is Nietzsche saying slave morality is "bad" (if you're a slave then slave morality is probably good). What slave morality does is it exalts the habits and virtues of the slave-class, humility, non-violence, poverty, the otherworldly and demonises the habits and virtues of the master class, pride, violence, opulence, the this-worldly. The problem lies in that "empathy and compassion" as used by slave moralists are just a by-word for herd behaviour, what is good is that which is good for the herd.

IRL Nietzsche had lots of compassion to give.

This board is fucked. You've let /pol/ influence it to the point that it is a rotten place for discussing literary ideas and philosophy. (No, /pol/ "philosophy" is not philosophy.)

Don't y'all ever get tired of talking about how "niggers are unfit to live in the West" and equally heinous ideas? Don't you want to live in dignity, away from pathetically fragile ideas like those of /pol/? What is so attractive to you about living with the mind of a cretin? It's as though everyone here is a philistine who thinks he's brilliant.

>>14401229
>tfw no sexy furry cokehead gf

>>13920980
The fundamental meaning of the story as I interpret it is that all your relationships are contingent on qualities of yourself and facts surrounding you that you have absolutely no control over whatsoever. It is not at all unreasonable for you to (metaphorically) wake up one morning and have your status reduced to that of an insect in the eyes of your own family.

Is anyone here even happy? Does anyone here actually live a fulfilled life? Or is the preoccupation with literature just a cover for a deeper lack of drive?

>>12089258

Back to the philo-memery, with some Freddy, Untimely Meditations, "On the uses & disadvantages of history for life":

> "'In any case I hate everything that merely instructs me without augmenting or directly invigorating my activity.'

"These words are from Goethe, and they may stand as a sincere ceterum censer at the beginning of our meditation on the value of history. For its intention is to show why instruction without invigoration, why knowledge not attended by action, why history as a costly superfluity and luxury, must to use Goethe's word, be seriously hated by us -- hated because we still lack even the things we need and the superfluous is the enemy of necessity.

"We need history, certainly, but we need it for reasons different from those for which the idler in the garden of knowledge needs it, even though he may look nobly down on our rough and charmless needs and requirements.

"We need it, that is to say, for the sake of life and action, let alone for the purpose of extenuating the self-seeking life and the base and cowardly action."

>>11330800
>read peacefully
>remember embarrassing things from my past
>pop a valium
>read peacefully again

Die Schwule Wissenschaft

>>11167977
dude mountains lmao

>>10101325
It's okay to rant about stuff that you're obsessed w/ or interested in if you're drunk because that just comes across as you endearingly "forgetting" yourself momentarily because of the strength of your interest in combo w/ the alcohol, but if you (anon) started talking to me about "Joyce's imagery" to my face in a normal social situation I'd just nod along and look at my phone till you went away, and he's one of my favorite writers. Because I'd assume you were either trying some weird superiority thing, or you didn't understand how casual conversation is the worst possible forum for talking about art and literature in a detail-oriented way.

Just write an essay dude

Are there times when suffering isn't productive?

Also, did Nietzsche really hug the horse? Is there any evidence of this event?

is the /lit/ discord chat still around? if so, can anyone post the invite link?

>>8887316
>using a Nietzschian concept to disregard the entirety of post-modernism

Ask me how I know you're shitposting or retarded

>freshman in university
>have to take third subject
>quite like philosophy, nietzsche and kierkegaard and all that
>decide to sign up for philosophy
>lecturer comes out first day
>tells us that "logic is king"
>spends the rest of the time giving us a lecture about literal neuroscience
>ends up suggesting I don't actually have a mind because science says minds are "spooky"
>mfw when I didn't realize it was an analytic department
>mfw I don't have aspergers

Scary

Wait a fucking second, was he a horse girl?

He debunks himself

>>8512391
>>8512384
>life is fuckin epic bro! your juts /r9k/ if you don't see it!
Someday your horses will come. Until then, Schopenhauer sits, patiently waiting.

Which Philosophers do you think represent each individual 4chan board best?

I'll start:

/mlp/- Weird sexualised view of horses so Nietzsche

/r9k/- Absolute disdain for all women-Schopenhauer

/ck/- Epicurus perhaps?

If you had to spend the rest of eternity with 2 literary figures of your choosing who would they be and why?

I'd pick Nietzsche and the Buddha
I believe that the two guys were on a similar set of ideas but they expressed them very differently in ways that were relevant to their own times. Also I'd like to hear Buddha's response if Neitzsche accused him of being a "moralizer"


inb4 the Buddha wasn't a literary figure

>>5302674
He'd have been a brony.
We've had this discussion before. So, no SJW, but yes to giving a TV interview in which he stared madly into the camera while explaining his desire to cum inside cartoon pone.

>>4986303
Nietzsche's philosophy was based on the affirmation of life, not nihilism.
Nietzsche suffered from syphilis and/or brain tumors throughout his life, was hated by his contemporaries (and even his friends said that Thus Spake Zarathustra, his pride and joy, was a load of gibberish), and then he damn near went blind. The eye sight issues forced him to use a primitive form of typewriter that was not only poorly designed, but the specific one he was sent had factory defects that made it just a cunt's hair better than useless.

If he'd been a nihilist, he'd have lived up to his comments on suicide and offed himself before becoming a living embarrassment rotting away in his sister's attic and being used to support proto-Nazism.

Nietzsche's philosophy, like I said, was an affirmation of life and vitality as positives, because that was the only way he could justify living. If he'd believed in a god or anything outside this existence, then he'd have believed in an afterlife, and then he'd have gone on to it decades earlier. We're talking about someone who's refrain in Ecce Homo is the self-pitying "Has anyone understood me?"

Nietzsche was an atheist, yes, but he was not a nihilist. If he had been a nihilist, he would have written maybe the Birth of Tragedy, but he'd have done himself in before he produced the output that made him famous.

>>4968366
That's what he'd want you to think.