[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 74 KB, 634x394, article-2402117-1B780A0F000005DC-986_634x394.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15126869 No.15126869[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Schopenhauer advocated life-denial, Nietzsche advocated life affirmation. Consequently they had opposite views on Islam. Which was right?

Schopenhauer on Islam:

>Consider the Koran, for example; this wretched book was sufficient to start a world-religion, to satisfy the metaphysical needs of countless millions for twelve hundred years, to become the basis of their morality and of a remarkable contempt for death, and also to inspire them to bloody wars and the most extensive conquests. Much may be lost in translation, but I have not been able to discover in it one single idea of value.

Nietzsche

>Christianity destroyed for us the whole harvest of ancient civilization, and later it also destroyed for us the whole harvest of Mohammedan civilization. The wonderful culture of the Moors in Spain, which was fundamentally nearer to us and appealed more to our senses and tastes than that of Rome and Greece, was trampled down ( I do not say by what sort of feet ) Why? Because it had to thank noble and manly instincts for its origin because it said yes to life, even to the rare and refined luxuriousness of Moorish life! The crusaders later made war on something before which it would have been more fitting for them to have grovelled in the dust a civilization beside which even that of our nineteenth century seems very poor and very "senile." What they wanted, of course, was booty: the orient was rich. Let us put aside our prejudices! The crusades were a higher form of piracy, nothing more! The German nobility, which is fundamentally a Viking nobility, was in its element there: the church knew only too well how the German nobility was to be won . The German noble, always the "Swiss guard" of the church, always in the service of every bad instinct of the church but well paid . Consider the fact that it is precisely the aid of German swords and German blood and valour that has enabled the church to carry through its war to the death upon everything noble on earth! At this point a host of painful questions suggest themselves. The German nobility stands outside the history of the higher civilization: the reason is obvious. Christianity, alcohol the two great means of corruption. Intrinsically there should be no more choice between Islam and Christianity than there is between an Arab and a Jew.


At 21:10 he gives a very good explanation of why Nietzsche held Islam in such high regard

https://ia800702.us.archive.org/3/items/Victo/VictoryPart02.mp3

>> No.15126877

>>15126869
Read Mainländer, he's like Schopenhauer but coherent.

>> No.15126886

>>15126877
How I Schopenhauer not coherent? He is very lucid

>> No.15127223

>>15126869
Schoppy life denial? heh, please.

>> No.15127230

denial/affirmation is the single most retarded and gay means of viewing and thinking about life

>> No.15127266

>>15127230
What instead?

>> No.15127281

>>15127230
>life
they're talking about willing retard

>> No.15127301

>>15127266
literally anything not spoonfed to you by dead Germans via mongoloids on the internet
>>15127281
>splitting hairs
typical gay retardism. the will and life are the same, there is no useful distinction that isn't simple cope.

>> No.15127310

>>15126869
Why aren’t they shooting standing up? They can’t be that weak

>> No.15127330
File: 986 KB, 155x155, 1586197676196.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15127330

>>15127301
>will and life are the same
One is living.
The other is a sort-of characterisation of the thing-in-itself known through acts of will from our inner nature?????
One is an idea build on Kant's metaphysics (and then its ironical reformation) and the other is the whole thing about being alive we're both doing right now.

>splitting hairs

>> No.15127369

>>15127301
In other words you don't know.

>> No.15127399

>>15126869
Nietzsche didn't care about truth, Schope did
now you pick one

>> No.15127529
File: 257 KB, 1000x909, 1586066178105.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15127529

>>15127399
>tfw no qt waifu who could make a post this intelligent
reee

>> No.15127580

>>15127399
This^
most converts to islam like OP only care about appearances, joining a community, and using religion to fight for political causes. Truth, God, the "Good" hardly matter, if they did they wouldn't be following a pedophile who married his son's wives, making up special rules for himself as he went along, who was being whispered to by djinns he thought were demons.

>> No.15128299

>>15127580
she was 40 at the time. Yes it was part of the declaration that the Prophet ﷺ has no sons (33:40); indeed none of his male children would survive. This has major political implications because it means his prophethood is not a dynasty and his position cannot be inherited. The story that he saw her in a state of undress and fell in love and then that’s why her husband divorced her has no isnad--that is, there is no chain or source for this, it appeared hundreds of years after his death. Here is what does have isnad: the Prophet ﷺ knew her from childhood and told her to marry his adopted son, which she really did not want to do because he was a freed slave and she was from a noble line, she looked down on him but still did it because Muhammad ﷺ told her to marry for piety and not birth . Their marriage was not happy, she had a bad temper and was very proud. He divorced her--which put her in a very bad position--and the Prophet ﷺ married her. As his wife she continued to be hot tempered and competed with A’isha (may Allah be pleased with her) for leadership of the wives, but came to her to defence when the latter was slandered. This is the account based on isnad.

I keep Salat and Jannah not dunya is my concern