/lit/ - Literature

>>16891053
he's still loved by pseuds

>>16891053
he be full of shit and writes like a middle school retard

He was always full of shit to anyone with a brain

Is he worth reading or is he a waste of time?

>>16891053
>especially for his defiling of the perception of Christ?
another butthurt ChristLARPer
Zzzzzzzz

>>16891053
he rights like a dumbass and it doesn't surpize me that burg er academic love him so much

>>16891053
>plato literally warned us of the dangers sophist like Nietzsche brings
>people still fell for it
How do we cope bros?

>>16891083
>he rights like a dumbass and it doesn't surpize me

>>16891120
nietszche be sayin day dose who be believin in grammar are stoopid cuz like dey be in white myn logic
dis language be my truth and all interpretatation be interpretatations so like liderally you be Nazi
lanfuage be volvin n sheit

>>16891137
Nietzsche would kill postmodernists alive right now

>>16891137
strawman so big the server needed an hour to upload your post

>>16891177
Nietzsche was the first post-modernist, bruh. He set it off.

>>16891217
neitsche be like ideologikly flooid
he be floatin one box to anotha but like liderally he be sexy

>>16891233
Nietzsche is the only real dude.

>>16891217
You're a stupid ass who doesn't know anything about Nietzsche. He was a militarist who warned us about postmodernism.

>>16891053
Cope harder, Christcuck.

this guy clearly respected jesus a lot. he spent his whole life trying to be anti jesus

>>16891386
>transcendental
Not really a word he would use. He also didn't start postmodernism (or Western nihilism in general) at all, he was simply the first one to identify it.

>>16891399
Yeah, transcendental was not the right term. I just thought of it cuz if you differentiate a transcendental function it's the same. Whatever you do to power it still comes down to power. I guess that's what I meant.

Nietzsche wasn't a nihilist. Try reading him, christcuck.

>>16891399
Nietzsche isn't a nihilist.

>>16891217
I have read Nietzsche, it is certainly true that he was one of the first (don't know enough about postmodernism to state I know he was the first) postmodernists, but his philosophy is nothing like modern postmodernism. The prescriptions are completely opposite. Nietzsche prescribes using slaves when you are a master, Nietzsche prescribes amor fati and strength. Nietzsche prescribes oppression and thinks it justified. We both know that is not what modern postmodernism (hah) is about.
It's showing of a complete lack of understanding in what way Nietzsche was a postmodernist if you use modern postmodern arguments against him.
I know Nietzsche very well, postmodernism enough.

>>16891444
Brainlet take.

>>16891053
>makes christcucks and egalitarian cucks seethe uncontrollably
He was based

>>16891458
Yes, I see your argument. Good insight on Nietzsche, thank you for bringing your highl evel thinking to the table.

>>16891427
I know. I was saying that the people who attribute postmodernism or modern nihilism to him are mistaken.

The reason why they attribute these things to him, which you might already understand, is because he was the first to draw the larger conclusions of early 19th century philosophy and science, specifically Schopenhauer and Darwin, who, combined, alluded to the "death of God," or in order words, the eventual destruction of the Socratic Judeo-Christian hierarchy that Europe had been embraced by for the last ~2000 years. The difference between Nietzsche and the "champions" of postmodernism and nihilism who would come later is that he wasn't an effeminate weakling like they all were/are.

Both Nietzsche and these weaklings share one aspect of their worldview — that everything is will to power / power struggles — but that's where their similarities end, and they don't even reach that worldview from the same angle (Nietzsche arrived at this ultimate anti-logical view from arduous logical study, while they arrive at it by being so utterly braindead and weak that their only means of survival is to stab it in the back and overthrow it).

>>16891458
With 'prescribes oppression' I meant fom the master to the slave, I am well aware that Nietzsche was not a nationalist or a protonazi. Aside from other possible misinterpretations on your part, I am confident that I am correct.

>>16891458
And obviously he did not literally mean master and slave, those are just the two types of moral code in Nietzsche's thinking twhich could be present in the same person).

>>16891083
>he rights like a dumbass
This is satire, right?

I loved Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Haven’t read any of his other books.

>>16891053
He's like Freud, in many ways.
>Commonly known amongst normalfags, usually for something negative (incest, nazis)
>Had a lot of wildly speculative ideas that kind of became talking points based on observable patterns
>Majority of the ideas were garbage and likely the result of personal posterior pain
>Most of the "greatest" ones were already done by someone else READ THE GREEKS
>Maybe a handful were partially original, kind of insightful, and arguably pushed the field by a small margin

>>16891346
you'll never be a woman

>>16891053
Love Nietzsche. <3
And honestly, he is absolutely right about Christianity.

>>16891053
Nietzsche is a postmodernist; both deleuze and foucault build heavily on his works.
also the idea that because someone disagrees with "the greeks" (not a remotely cohesive group of thinkers) means they are wrong shows you know nothing about philosophy--Plato is btfo by Kant in the first critique, and most modern phil is built on Kant more than Plato

>>16892012
Nah.

>Nietzsche bad Christ food

There’s no reaching these people, frontal labatomy only

>>16892100
Wasn't there a study about decreasing faith in God by deactivating parts of the brain with magnets?

>>16892045
>both deleuze and foucault build heavily on his works
But they aren't Nietzsche, and he differs greatly from them. See >>16891519

Has Freddy ever debunked any arguments by Aquinas or CS Lewis?

>>16892114
So atheists don't have a fully functioning brain? Great self-own.

Neechee doesn't have one good argument against God, it's all a waste of time. If there's any good argument of his, summarize it in this thread so we can laugh at it.

>>16892155
>Neechee doesn't have one good argument against God
He has good arguments against substance. Is God not the ultimate substance?

>>16892170
God isn't bound by logic. Can't refute Him that easy. Name those arguments, so I can see either way

>>16892191
>God isn't bound by logic.
Neither is will to power. It's actually mistaken to pit Nietzsche against God. He simply reinterpreted the concept to fit Darwinism.

Here is one of dozens from his unpublished notes:

>Psychological derivation of our belief in reason.—The concept "reality," "being," is taken from our feeling of the "subject." "The subject": interpreted from within ourselves, so that the ego counts as a substance, as the cause of all deeds, as a doer.

Hard to deny that there's a psychological mechanism behind these ideas in us when we start to really observe ourselves, which means that these ideas are manufactured by us, which is why he then writes:

>We have no categories at all that permit us to distinguish a "world in itself" from a "world of appearance."

This means that logic is merely how our will to power orders things so that it can express itself, or in your language, how God expresses Himself through us. God is, however, merely will to power.

>>16892149
I'm not an atheist.

>>16892155
Nietzsche wasn't really a fedoratheist. His Death of God was not an acclamation but rather a recognition of where Western civilization was and where it was headed. He was influenced by Dostoyevsky on this.

>>16892232
I don't understand; how did you arrive to the conclusion that God is "will to power?" With regards to us, manifestations of His will, He could be will to power; but beyond His mask of ordered, logical interfacing with us, He is transcendental, acausal, irreducible, all that jazz.

>>16892264
>how did you arrive to the conclusion that God is "will to power?"
Will to power is not bound by logic either, and we are all "manifestations" of it. "Will to power" and "God" refer very much to the same concept, except that the former is how the master moralist feels towards the concept, while the latter is how the slave moralist feels towards it.

>>16892281
The master moralist is deluded and coping.

>>16892312
To the slave moralist, yes. Your reality is derived from your psychology.

>>16892281
You have not yet explained the relationship between God, in His fundamental, ineffable nature, and the "Will to Power" which is anything but ineffable because we are able to clearly define it and argue about it.

We are manifestations of the will to power? Did the will to power also create us? What is it? You know the atheist-skeptic schtick; give me the rundown on it.

>>16892317
Doesn't Nietzsche prescribe a solution above the master and slave morality dichotomy? Is it also not more complicated than "only slave" and "only master" mentality?

>>16892317
You cannot know my reality. You cannot even prove that I exist.

>>16891137
unironically based post

>>16892045
clearly you've read neither deleuze or foucault--Deleuze very famously wrote an authoritative commentary on Nietzsche which he weaves into his later thought. Nietzsche would have hated the kind of ressentiment laden statements like the response you recommended I look at.

>>16891083
>>16891137
Kek of the century.

>>16892384
What even is "ressentiment?" Judging others on the basis of your moral ideas? In other words, just morality? A lot of people seem to use it as a bootleg synonym of resentment; and no, morality and resentment are not bound up

>>16891053
Nietzsche's psychoanalysis of the living Christ was possibly his only truly original thought as well as by far his most interesting. I don't see how you can consider it a defilement. He obviously revered Jesus in the sense that he almost certainly imagined himself the second coming, as do all ego-maniacs.

>>16892352
>because we are able to clearly define it and argue about it
No, it can't be clearly defined. That's why Nietzsche never did so.

>give me the rundown on it.
That would be like you giving the rundown on God. It can only be engaged apophatically. We're all will to power, shaped by it and able to shape by it. It's a cosmic force.

>Doesn't Nietzsche prescribe a solution above the master and slave morality dichotomy?
No. There's master and slave morality; he didn't define a third one. A free spirit merely can move between both, like opposite polarities on a spectrum.

>>16891519

Nietzsche was an effeminate weakling though.

>>16892359
I can if my will to power is greater than yours.

>>16892446
You wish, figment.

>>16892444
No he wasn't. According to his sister, he was athletic in his youth and a swimmer. He had extraordinary vitality and a love for the military all his life. Physical illness is not the same as effeminacy or weakness.

Nietzeche was based.

>>16892404
ressentiment factors into morality, but it's more expansive. one good way of looking at it is a reaction of the weak to attack the strong, and Nietzsche's phil opposes "bad" reactive force to "good" active forces. Christian morality is the prime example, but the response where the guy calls people he doesn't like brain dead and points out their "bad" process serves equally well.

>>16892452
"According to his sister, he was athletic in his youth."

Dude do you not hear how effeminate this sounds lmao.

>defiling of the perception
of Christ?
Kike on a stick

>>16892495
You're confused if you think that makes him seem effeminate.

>>16891053
I the Nietzch gets the prize for Most Narcissistic. Most narcissists are annoying to behold with but the sheer grandiosity of Nietzch's eneavours can only be perceived as comical. And then it hits you. He's not being ironic. And then all you can feel for him is pity.

>>16891053
I was always awake, though it took Stirner's work to cleanse my eyes of the filters before them. I'm my own owner, I need not change nor stay the same, I need not aim to be some übermensch for I'm already perfect.

>NOOOOOOOOOOO NOT THE HECKING CHRISTERINO!!! NOT THE DUCKING MESSIAHRINO!!!
>OHNONONONONONONO YOU’RE NOT ALLOWED TO SAY THAT, THAT TRIGGERS ME AND HURTS MY RELIGIOUS FEEFEES!!! STOP IT!!!! NOW!!!!

>>16893327
>And then it hits you. He's not being ironic.
He is - or, perhaps, post-ironic. It's amazing that people are unable to perceive the gaiety intrinsic to Nietzsche's philosophy. He is having fun all the time he is writing. His prose style is so playful.

>>16891053
>>16891068
>>16891069
>>16891072
>>16891083
>>16891116
>>16892114
>>16892133
>>16892155
>>16892191
>>16892429
>>16892444
>>16893333
>>16893327

The amount of resentment and slave morality in this thread is astonishing. Grow some fucking balls and stop lying to yourself about Christianity. It's a cope for the weak.

>>16893425
>Morality
Spooked, holy shit. Go crawl back into the woods and see how your morality stops a bear.

>>16893436
You don't even understand slave morality, go fuck yourself

>>16893444
>I need to understand something to your liking to criticize it
Nah.
>Morality
Spooked.

>>16893453
cringe stirner poster

>>16893456
>Cringe
Glad I make you cringe, spookmonger.

>>16893467
>MUH SPOOOOKKK NOOOOO NOT THE SPPOOOKERINOOOOOO
>MOMMIE HE IS A SPOOOOOOKERINOOOOO

>>16893474
Yes. To hold an idea above I, even an idea of myself, is absurd and untruthful. This is because all thoughts, all ideas, and all of reality is.. mine. Morality is an idea that I can choose to use or destroy, thus it is inherently beneath me. If I am currently unable to get rid of an idea, then it owns my mind but it can never own I. In time, that, too, can be thrown away.

>>16893492
Keep coping

>>16893505
I will. I cope with existence every day, as I notice I lack the might to gain what I desire often. It's what drives me to exercise, read, and train. I need not change, I *want* change. Yet, often, once I have enough might to create said change I realize I no longer want said change. I find it interesting, how much I change from my previous self.

He was a son of a bietzsche, wasn't he?

>>16893724
This is the third time, anon, it’s dead.

>>16893727
I'll beat this horse until it rises from the dead. My sheer will to power will make it into the next big /lit/ meme.

>>16891053
A good punch will cure you, faggot out of safe space.

>>16893425
As if turning Nietzche into a god is a cope for the strong.

>>16893327
>Nietzch gets the prize for Most Narcissistic
>not your average devoted Christian who can't even admit that his prayer is motivated by his massive ego

how do you guys think that Nietzeche developed NPD?

>>16893425
Wow, the amount of seethe in this post is astonishing and pathetic. Keep coping.

>>16894362
Are you talking about public prayer? Seems like a strawman.

>>16893358
Fag

>>16891078
anyone who makes this many people seethe is usually a good read. you have to ask why he has this affect?

>>16893518
Cringe af

>>16895499
Their beliefs as a whole are motivated by it.