/lit/ - Literature

OP just blew my mind.

>>1731764
Nietzsche talks about aristocracy, not individualism. Also,he criticizes the masses and their sheep behavior. But the superior ones don't need to be individualists, just to be separated from the weak, mediocre and vulgar.

>>1731764
THAT'S SO FUCKING COOL, DOG. Shit, man. Maybe we could chill out every once in a while. Grab some beers? Catch some shows? Maybe you could ride my cock? You have a nice, tight rump that I would love to pound.

I'm getting hard just thinking about slipping my cock in between your cheeks and into your tight meathole. No lube, because I know you like it rough.

I'll slide my huge, pulsating black dick in and out of your bum until I stimulate your prostate and you jizz your hot white boy cum all over the floor.

Then I'll turn you over and unleash my hot, sweet love juices all over your face. If any drips off, I'll be sure to lick it up for you.

<3

But yeah, there are tons of misconceptions about Nietzsche. Really sucks, too.

>>1731777
This is the gayest thing I've read in a while.

>>1731777

>>1731773

>But the superior ones don't need to be individualists, just to be separated from the weak, mediocre and vulgar.

Bullshit. You should not use Nietzsche's philosophy as mean to feel better about yourself.

>>1731764

And this is also wrong.

.5/10

>>1731786
I don't.
I can quote exactly where he says this from Beyond good and evil if you want, but I'll have to look for it...

>>1731773
>weak, mediocre and vulgar
>vulgar
I like how this last word is totally needed and not at all implied in either or both of the other two concepts

>>1731794
I used those three words because Nietzsche commonly uses them.

>>1731794
also, I am NonsequiturBear, don't you remember?
I blast logic with piss.

>>1731798
I suppose the difference is that he actually knew how to use them. Worst justification I have come across in a long time.

>>1731794

something can be weak and mediocre without necessarily being vulgar. i don't see the connection.

>>1731802
Actually, Nietzsche doesn't know how to use them--Nietzsche wrote in German you fucking IDIOT

>>1731802
Thank you, this means a lot to me. Was not a justification, I do shit because I want, that was just the reason. Also, those 3 words doesn't mean exactly the same.

>>1731805
>something can be weak and mediocre without necessarily being vulgar
lol, sure thing subhuman

>>1731811

you are so incredibly boring

>>1731808
>>1731810
You guys need to try harder

>>1731818
No you do, actually." Hurr Durr nietzsche knows how to english better than you" Admit it, that little pretentious comment was totally wrong and you were just being a prick but ended up looking stupid.

why, let's take this insipid debate to oxford, chaps!

mediocre: of only moderate quality; not very good

weak: of a low standard ; performing or performed badly: exerting only a small force:

vulgar: lacking sophistication or good taste; unrefined. (dated): characteristic of or belonging to the masses.

never let some low-bred mick tell you how to use your language.

>>1731816
>you are so incredibly boring
lol u mad

>>1731824
learn the difference between words and concepts

>>1731827
lol u mad

vul·gar (vlgr)
adj.
1. Crudely indecent.
2.
a. Deficient in taste, delicacy, or refinement.
b. Marked by a lack of good breeding; boorish. See Synonyms at common.
c. Offensively excessive in self-display or expenditure; ostentatious: the huge vulgar houses and cars of the newly rich.
3. Spoken by or expressed in language spoken by the common people; vernacular: the technical and vulgar names for an animal species.
4. Of or associated with the great masses of people; common.

Definition of WEAK
1
: lacking strength: as a : deficient in physical vigor : feeble, debilitated b : not able to sustain or exert much weight, pressure, or strain c : not able to resist external force or withstand attack d : easily upset or nauseated <a weak stomach>
2
a : mentally or intellectually deficient b : not firmly decided : vacillating c : resulting from or indicating lack of judgment or discernment

If you describe something as mediocre, you mean that it is of average quality but you think it should be better.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/vulgar
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/weak
http://dictionary.reverso.net/english-cobuild/mediocre

>>1731828
can you tutor me

>>1731828
Doesn't matter..the raw truth is that Nietzsche would have had difficulty using the actual english words, he would have used German words and so you telling anon that Nietzsche "actually knew how to use these words" is false..and stupid, and stop retreating into a rhetorical corner.

>>1731831

something hurt your little feelings there, paddy?

>>1731835
>lexical definitions
lol

>>1731836
Fab just read some books already

>>1731840
learn the difference between words and concepts

>>1731841
lol u mad

>>1731842
>Yes.
lol

>>1731847
>lexical definitions
lol

i am reading some but its hard and i dont know who Husserl is and i don't give a poop about aristotle but i have to read him for descartes and this is just a mess

>>1731844
If you say "u mad" once more in front of a mirror, an African American will appear and rob your bike.

weakness and mediocrity can be attributes of the vulgar lower classes but are by no means exclusive to them. your misguided arrogance is tiresome.

>>1731850
>Yes.
lol

>>1731844
You should learn the difference between an argument, and repetition. Or rather, you should learn the difference between a defense mechanism and intellect. Or you could learn the difference between words and concepts yourself--because then you would learn that concepts are not universal..you are upholding a fallacy their..language in itself carries meaning specific to it's own words..and the translations of Nietzsche that you read are so off from the original that you haven't actually read Nietzsche. Ha! there is the trauma you wish to avoid--the fact that you haven't actually read Nietzsche..you've read a translation. But you claim to be an NIetzsche expert..haha you can't even read his books.

>>1731857
>lexical definitions
lol

>>1731855
>classes
lol

>>1731852

the sniveling little twerp's probably never seen a black person in his life. don't scare him.

>>1731855
>exclusive to them
who said such a thing?

>>1731764

Hey OP, so, what reason do you have for that belief?

>>1731861
learn the difference between words and concepts

>>1731862
lol u mad

>>1731863
>who said such a thing?

this guy:

>>1731794

>>1731870
Ah, ok.

>>1731867

does anybody know what this girl's problem is?

>>1731867
You haven't read Nietzsche, you've read translations

>>1731875
...d&e is a girl?

>>1731875
lol u mad

>>1731877
learn the difference between words and concepts

>>1731879
I warned you...

>>1731802
If there's one author who needs to be read in original language, it's Nietzsche. Sorry, Amerifags. I'm not that sort of guy who says "mmmm read the original translation is nothing". That's bullshit, mostly it doesn't make that much of a differance. In the case of Nietzsche very much, though.

tl;dr Read him in german!

Also: It's difficult to discuss his ideas because he's not that sort of an classical scientist or philosopher about which you can argue. You can discuss Hegel very well, but Nietzsche? He does not state own theories but rather critique of everything else, and in the case of his theories (wille zur macht, übermensch), interpretation is very free. The Nazis e.g. didnt misinterpretate Nietzsche. They used him because he fitted so well. Nietzsche is an outsider in Science and Philosophy, even today there are not much seminars about him on german universities.

tl dr; don't discuss Nietzsche, read him and feel the passion, that's it!

>>1731878

he isn't.

>>1731885
learn the difference between words and concepts

Oh God...
This thread is driving me mad
>>1731879
FFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUU--

>>1731882
U mad because you can't read Nietzsche? U not mad, U insecure. It's okay.

>>1731892
learn the difference between words and concepts

>>1731893
i dont get it

>>1731893
Once again suburban kids..using flawed arguments to justify the fact that they have no abilities.

>>1731896
>>1731900

learn the difference between words and concepts

>shows Nietzsche to be an arch-enemy of genuine individualism.
>Nietzsche talks about aristocracy, not individualism.

You mean the form of individualism where everyone gets to be their "own person", free from oppression?
The point is, according to Nietzsche, I think, that most people are not capable of "individualism", most of them don't even want it.

The "masses" (Nietzsche) are the people that aspire to little more than their own comfort and decry people who attempt at any real individualism, discouraging and belittling people who attempt it.
Let's face it, what our society now esteems as the greatest, most acceptable form of individualism is the Lady Gaga type: a bit eccentric in dress but still adhering to all basic social mores.

What individualism do we have? All trends are set by random market pressures. Nobody has much political influence -- not even the politicians. Even when you join some subversive political or cultural group you get branded as anything from a hippie to a yuppie... anarchist, marxist, hipster, or whatever: even these forms of "individualism" just seem like laughable, infantile shit that kids do before they learn how the real world works-- the world of normal, well-adjusted adults.

>>1731885
Hitler misunderstood Nietzsche. Mussolini didn't, in a letter he criticized Nietzsche and Stirner because they weren't fascist (Hitler brought him Nietzsche's books).

I am the best

>>1731913

nobody likes you

jesus christ sniper fire

>>1731913
>Captain Obvious

>>1731921

they're shooting at your giant glowing insecurity

>>1731921
Indeed.

>>1731925

they are try to kill me, but I am Professional

>>1731917
Speak for yourself. I want to take his sticky and warm semen into my anus.

i think d+e is shy on the inside and that makes me d'aww hard