/lit/ - Literature

>>11976350
How deep of a dive are you willing to take?

>>11938475
Maybe, but Christianity has been very weak in recent years. The art is bitching but they seem neutered these days

your gf sounds like a beta virgin

what's her phone number?

pomos forget the he literally advocated for hard material determinism

>christcucks are a bunch of sour grape losers
who woulda thunk

Why have we killed God? What is Nietzsche's explanation for the death of God?

>>8880908

It's fine.

>>8881000

No, he attacks asceticism in general.

He particularly lays into Schopenhauer's asceticism, for example, which is far from Christian. Also Wagner's, and chastity in general.

Chastity/poverty/etc - in short, what we associate with asceticism- particularly when presented as 'virtues', all come under fire from Nietzsche.

>>8858798

>1. Anyone who thinks Nietzsche is an optimistic, life affirming philosopher is deluded because they think this because they believe that they themselves are ubermensch and capable of achieving the level of self-mastery needed to becoming one

You're conflating life affirmation in general with the ubermensch. They are not one in the same.

>2. Nietzsche's solution to nihilism only applies to a very select few, and yet almost everyone who reads Nietzsche and follows him believes that they are that select few

Nietzsche considered nihilism to be a universal problem - a problem for all humanity. I suspect you don't know what Nietzsche means by "life affirmation", "saying 'yes' to life" and so on. Regarding the rabble, for example, it is simply a case of keeping them oblivious to anything that would have them "saying 'no' to life." This is why he was so suspicious of Socialism/Anarchism/etc, for example - it taught the herd (working class/labourers/etc) to be dissatisfied with life, and to express that fact. In short, to say 'no' to life as they knew it. For the aristocrats, however - by which he meant 'Great Men', 'Geniuses' and so on, he felt it was more a case that they should actively affirm life - as in, say 'yes' to life'. I could go on, but I won't.

>3. Nietzsche, despite what these deluded "followers" of Nietzsche believe, is a nihilistic, negative philosopher for most of humanity.

He recognized that fact himself. Don't accuse him of something he freely admitted. The beginning of Thus Spoke Zarathustra sees Zarathustra learning that it is pointless to proclaim his message to the rabble - and that he should limit it to his "fellow creators." Take the hint. In one of his aphorisms, he actually wishes every kind of pain/misfortune/etc upon those who profess to follow him - namely because he deems suffering to be the true test of his philosophy.

>4. After growing up and realizing that they are unable to become ubermensch, do not have the strength of will to achieve self mastery, the followers of Nietzsche usually begin to disregard him and think of him as childish, immediately thinking of Nietzsche's philosophy as bad, and his mindset immature, instead of admitting their inability to succeed in it.

People say this sort of thing all the tie. The whole idea that Nietzsche is popular chiefly with college students/pseuds/etc is wrong - or at the very least outdated. Nowadays he's very unpopular and associated with the Nazis/etc - in Europe at least.

>5. Almost everyone who goes through a Nietzsche "phase" is a childish deluded narcissist, unable to gain a mature acceptance of their irreversible inferiority, at all stages of their development.

See above.

Nietzsche got me laid and I don't even buy into most of his shit.

/pol/ isn't as wrong as many think when it comes to the Frankfurt School, but where they're right is pure coincidence.

Most of what they rail against is Gramscianism, but I suppose 'The Frankfurt School' and 'Cultural Marxism' suggests movements/multiple people, which perhaps lends itself more to the conspiracy-minded - as opposed to one Italian guy who wrote a load of shit in a prison cell.

More generally, it's moral/cultural relativism at large that seems to grind their gears. They still haven't realized that they can use this to their advantage though, which they would if they'd bother to read the likes of Nietzsche - as opposed to the many 20th century thinkers, generally French and/or left-leaning, who've been riding on his coattails.

>>8648573

99% anti-political. The remaining 1% is because it's hard to remain indifferent to a political system that is almost entirely composed of Last Men.

>>8648580

He's a symptom of a cause. The modern Left has been acting like Zarathustra at the start of Thus Spoke Zarathustra, when he's preaching truths to the masses indiscriminately - that is, prior to being told by the old lady that some truths are better kept quiet, which makes Zarathustra realize that he's better off preaching to his fellow creators.

In our case, these indiscriminately preached truths include calling 50%+ of Americans retarded/racist/bigoted/sexist/etc for years on end, laughing at them non-stop on the likes of the Colbert/Oliver/Stewart/etc shows, then wondering why they turn to someone like Trump instead of Hillary. If the modern Left had worked AROUND these people, and left them to their small beliefs/ideals/devices, then Hillary wouldn't have had any problems getting elected. It wasn't THAT long ago that the Republicans were generally regarded as a dead party, with no viable candidates for this election.

Not that I prefer Hillary to Trump, especially after Wikileaks/etc, nor do I care very much in general. Whoever keeps the masses placated is fine by me. Just saying that for those who do, this is why they're having problems.

>>8640200

>Rousseau

AKA The Last Man par excellence.

Parliamentarism, that is to say, public permission to choose between five main political opinions, insinuates itself into the favour of the numerous class who would like to appear independent and individual, and like to fight for their opinions. After all, however, it is a matter of indifference whether one opinion is imposed upon the herd, or five opinions are permitted to it. But he who diverges from the five public opinions and stands apart, has always the whole herd against him.

>>8574349

There's nothing to suggest that as one culture achieves the status of the dominant culture, peaceful coexistence among mankind ceases to exist.

Generally speaking, up to and including the present day, most people peacefully and willingly give up certain cultural traits (food/music/dress/language/etc) as they assimilate themselves into the dominant/prevailing culture. This is done for many reasons: typically, the economic and social advantages to be garnered by catering oneself to the prevailing/dominant culture of wherever one finds oneself ASAP. Narry a blow is struck.

With the possible exception of Witty, why hasn't there been a single philosopher of worth since Mr N? Or the year 1900, to be more specific.

>>8545526

>Most of his work on ethics is just wrong, not only in the conclusion, but the whole method.

Far from it, champ.

>Niezsche is more of a historian/sociologist than a philosopher.

He was all of those things in varying degrees. You say that like it's a flaw.

>>8530119

Universal university/college education would have been closer to the truth, OP.

He was a big fan of the old-school Prussian education system, and so was most of the world in the early/mid-20th century in fairness. You even had Americans learning German, just to get educated in Prussia.

This old-school was much more thorough, and far more particular in its choice of students than even the most allegedly 'prestigious' universities today. Nietzsche believed (to paraphrase him) that the only thing that justified states as we know them, which permit so many wretched human beings to exist, was the existence and fostering of genius. He believed that the ideal society would be ruled not by a single tyrant, but by several 'geniuses' (or 'creators' if you want to add a little Zarathustrian spin), a belief which was also partially shared by Plato. These geniuses would act as an Ancient Greek-esque 'check and balance' against one another, all of whom simultaneously being the cream of the crop.

He certainly didn't advocate neglecting the plebs, although they do have their place. One of the most memorable quips to me, early on in Thus Spoke Zarathustra, is that "small people have small values." He just didn't think the higher tiers of education should be open to them

In many ways he was absolutely right. Universal higher/third-tier education means we have a wealth of worthless degrees. Education, now more than ever, has become a racket.

Read Nietzsche's lectures on education. It's worth adding that he was a bit of meritocrat in this regard, believing that genius should be fostered wherever it is found.