/lit/ - Literature

Lmao

>>20102524
Yes, this is the reality of traditional religion. It is what keeps society intact. It is what keeps the weakest members of that society from crumbling in to a complete degenerate mess of a person.

For the ubermensch, traditional religion might be something to overcome, but most men today are not likely to ever attain the ideal of the ubermensch, and so it would be wise for them to find other paths.

If you can't return to Christianity, I suggest finding an alternative religious or philosophical path and a community to help you get your shit together. Personally, I have been delving in to Buddhism recently. The people are all very nice and welcoming. It's very far from a Nietzschian philosophy, but for you, that's probably a good thing.

Good luck trying to unfuck your life, anon.

>>20102524
Nietzsche is not nihilism.And how can you folow him its not like he advocates for anything perticular he just hates slave morality which is basically collectivism.

>>20102540
Schopenhauer has been a great inspiration of mine and I place him next to Nietzsche in terms of philosophical contribution and importance. I'm interested in eastern religion - vedanta or buddhism but ultimately I feel alienated by these traditions. For all the faults of Christianity, its traditions are very familiar to westerners and I'm afraid turning to the East might result in a LARP

>>20102549
You haven't read Nietzsche.

>>20102551
I understand completely. I suggested looking in to Buddhism because it is very friendly to western practitioners, compared to other eastern traditions. For example, a foreigner attempting to practice Hinduism or Shinto will be looked at with condescending amusement at best, and hostility at worst, but white European Buddhists are common. In most western countries you will very likely find Buddhist communities in your area and they will be happy to have you.

However, if you are able to return to Christianity, then that might be best for you.

>>20102553
cope redditor
And I have Genealogy of Morality and Beyond Good and evil.
and the fact that he himself was weak and fucked hookers all the time does not mean that was the meaning of his philosophy.

>>20102549
>Nietzsche is not nihilism.
Tons of Professors disagree with you. Edgy.

>>20102613
Can you cite some? Because I know scholars who diverge.

>>20102613
>Professors
They have never held much weight in philosophical discussions.

>>20102625
"Inconceivable for all who did not know Hitler and thought of him as a nihilist — he was a deeply believing man!" The Artist Within the Warlord

>>20102655
I suppose the guy is not serious. Let’s try again.

>>20102659
Please cite a work that tries to prove your thesis that Nietzsche was a nihilist. His relation to nihilism is much more intricate.

>>20102663
Nihilism.
an extreme form of skepticism: the denial of all real existence or the possibility of an objective basis for truth.

Typing fancy or long isn't effort. Research is effort.

>>20102668
Not really, no-one has denied the possibility of there ever being an objective basis of truth. It's just that no ideology has been satisfactory so far.

>>20102668
Nietzsche does not deny a real existence and impossibility of an objective truth is far from being outright nihilism (non-foundationalism, apophatism, etc). Read more books.

>>20102549
He quite convincingly attacks the ascetic religions and advocates for their opposite. This opposite is, however, for the strong willed. I am not such a man, but I was touched and convinced by his denouncing of ascetism, therefore I am left in a troublesome situation. I can't remember, does he talk about the best course of action for the mediocre in spirit?

>>20102655
>Professors
>They have never held much weight in philosophical discussions.
but they do if you are a redditor who larps as a philosopher.

>>20102531
Why?

>>20102524
If you feel sad after reading Nietzsche you've clearly missed the point

>>20102524
Nietzsche is all about knowing yourself and recognising that the only morality that matters is what works for you, as ultimately it's just a tool.
If hedonism is holding you down then hedonism is evil, not because it's intrinsically true but because it's what needs to be overcome if you're to survive.

>>20102524
You are ready for this book anon. Good luck.

>>20102668
If Jews aren't the strongest people in Europe then how come they run the world while Germans are their slaves yoked by guilt and shame?

>>20102524
>“I had refused to pay any attention to the moral laws upon which all our vitality and sanity depend: and so now I was reduced to the condition of a silly old woman, worrying about a lot of imaginary rules of health, standards of food-value, and a thousand minute details of conduct that were in themselves completely ridiculous and stupid, and yet which haunted me with vague and terrific sanctions. If I eat this, I may go out of my mind. If I do not eat that, I may die in the night.”
- Thomas Merton
Low morality = low vitality

>>20102524
This is satire or you are retarded. I follow Nietzsche's philosophy and my life is going extremely well. When I was a Christian I was constantly tormented by the ideas that I was born into sin and that God cursed humans to live in this world full of arbitrary suffering. Now I realise only I can save me from my suffering and inevitable death and I embrace pain and suffering as important aspects of life.

>>20102540
jesus christ please kill yourself for posting that image

>>20102909
>>20102944
Not him but I feel like Nietzsche only speaks to you if you're a physicalist.

>>20102949
This looks interesting. Does anyone else recommend it?

>>20102991
>Now I realise only I can save me from my suffering
and his point is that his weakness of will prevents this. Nietzsche rejects the freedom of the will

>>20102996
From where do you people get the idea that Nietzsche’s philosophy has any affinity with physicalism or classical materialism? This is so wrong. Physicalism and materialism are still too idealistic.

>>20103004
If other people are too weak to live out Nietzsche's philosophy that sounds like their own personal fault and not a fault with Nietzsche's philosophy. Just don't be weak, lol.

>>20102524
My advice would be do what Jordan Peterson did and take aspects from Nietzsche except that which contradicts Christianity and say "Jung said Nietzsche was wrong about Christianity because of the collective unconscious and archetypes" and then do a bunch of mental gymnastics about darwinism and pragmatism and then become basically a Christian. (You can start with Peterson's biblical series lectures).

>>20102991
Christianity does not pose that suffering is meaningless. Creation had a motive, just as suffering also has.

>>20103020
>Just don't be weak, lol.
through what means? What would be weak except that which is weak by nature? And what would choose a weak nature except weakness itself?

>>20103017
Well, he calls out "world denying" ideologies so I would assume that as some kind of nondescript idealist, his philosophy is antipodal to my beliefs

>>20103004
The weak can save themselves from their suffering. They just need to be so much more clever about doing it.
This is what's going on when Nietzsche praises the Jews as the most indominable people on Earth in one passage then blasts them as the inventors of slave morality in the next. The Jews were smaller than the Romans, they were poorer than the Romans, their intellectual traditions were crude in comparison to the Romans, and yet Christianity conquered Rome like Rome conquered Carthage. "Strength" often appears in the most counter intuitive ways, even a will completely born of resentment can sometimes overpower everything around it.

>>20103078
They can save themselves, theoretically, but no man can be blamed for their actions. Strong and weak is all that is, there is nothing free or unfree. This is his position. This innocence is at once a great consolation, and a troubling dependence on the conditions which spawned man.

>>20103049
Idk ask someone who was weak and overcame it. I never head that problem.

The essential truth of the Christian faith is in Romans 1:18 - 1:32. When we reject God, He gives us up to our debased minds, the evil in our hearts, and our essential weakness. Nietzsche points out:

>No people could live without first esteeming… A tablet of the good hangs over every people. Behold, it is the tablet of their overcomings; behold it is the voice of their will to power.

For Nietzsche, man is an embarrassment and something to be overcome. The tablet of the Christian faith is one of many possible ways, but Nietzsche envisions the overman as being somebody who strong enough to smash the tablet and create a new one without descending into depravity and self-debasement.

This is hard. In the West today, part of the dilemma for people of weak will or middling intelligence (not exempting myself) is that there is no singular tablet of the good hanging over us. We inhabit a world without a clear telos, where there are still “a thousand goals”, and we end up shopping around between different contradictory ascetic practices (as in this thread), quixotically trying to “return to tradition”, or submitting to the ideal of the last man that the West set for itself during the enlightenment. It was impossible for the peoples Nietzsche studied in ancient Greece, Israel, etc to detatch themselves from their culture and its belief system in the way that we are now. The power of these belief systems is consequently neutered.

>>20102613
A better question is how is Nietzsche remotely nihilist at all?

Nietzsche dismisses all categorical attempts to give life value, he dismisses blanket pro-life claims as much as anti-life claims. The only life a person can judge is their own.

Which is why, though judgements of life are meaningless in themselves, they are incredibly valid ways to diagnose a person. If someone claims life is meaningless, since they have only experienced their own life, that claim can only possibly be a statement of their own sense of their life.

Nietzsche surprisingly doesn't try to convince you not to be nihilistic, he more sits back and studiously analyzes the behaviors of those who proclaim it.

He does do so hoping you'll see that nihilists are reprehensible and avoid them, but he's clearly not a nihilist so you'll have to explain yourself.

>>20102668
That is an incredibly retarded definition of nihilism.

>>20102524
>I rejected christianity
>only to replace it with another form of slave morality that looks to someone outside of myself for guidance
Stop defaulting your thinking to other people (biblical or otherwise) and start thinking for yourself. Following Nietzsche like a dog with abandonment issues is just about the least Nietzschean thing you could possibly do.

>>20102531
FPBP
op is truly a faggot

>>20103460
Seething larper

Here's the thing about Nietzschean philosophy, which I find rather amusing: none of us are good enough for it.

It's rather comical, actually. Everyone reads it, and then fancies themselves as being Ubermensch, of being better than society, etc.

If youre already at that point of sitting there, reading dusty books, struggling to find reason to act, you're already decadent. We're all decedents. None of us could eat a Spartan diet for the rest of our lives. None of us have the discipline to train like a Legionnaire. None of us have the rhetorical chops to be a senator.

What's unfortunate for us is that none of us are capable of escaping the conditions of our births. Western society is built to pacify and fatten people, to make us stupid. And in the end, all of us are a bit pacified, fattened, and stupid.

Don't learn to hate it, learn to accept and adapt. Trying to heroically resist your circumstance will wear you out and make you fail. Only honest assessment of your place will let you navigate a society meant to neuter you.

>>20102531
Fpbp
>>20102668
>Jews are self interested and determined to succeed
This is undeniably true, and in fact what most antisemites believe.

>>20103518
>which I find rather amusing
>It's rather comical, actually.
>fancies themselves

>>20103555
stay mad

You’re not a Christian because you act right, you’re a Christian if you have the spirit of God living in you. This isn’t hyperbole or something, I mean a real tangible occurance happens where God puts His spirit in you. If you don’t have the spirit of God in you then you were never Christian. Of course, im talking about Christian in the sense that the Bible does (rom 8:9; Luke 11:13; Ezekiel 36:27; etc) I understand there is a form of Christianity that is a philosophy, tradition, mindset, some sort of human culture that we are losing, but nevertheless true Christian have no confusion about whether they will follow God because they have God inside of them as they move on this earth. This is a supernatural occurrence and it is why the Bible and church have lasted 2000 years. Of course, acting right is better for you. God would not give commandments just cause, He gave them because sin is bad for you. When you sin you place yourself under its leadership and it becomes your master. It promises you pleasure, but what it doesn’t tell you is that you will get less and less pleasure as you indulge in it and eventually receive no pleasure only emptiness. Like Adam who obeyed Satan and Satan became the ruler of this earth (yes this is in the Bible - Luke 4:5-7 when Jesus is tempted by Satan Satan says that he has authority over all the nations. This would not be a real temptation if he didn’t actually have control over them. Also 2 Corinthians 4:4 tells us Satan is the god of this age, he is a usurper and will be conquered) Satan promised knowledge but in the end it lead to man becoming mortal and a slave to Satan and sin. So yeah it’s no surprise that sin is bad for you, but make no mistake a true Christian has received Gods spirit in a real way, in a powerful way. God bless you all in Christ.

>>20102531
fpbp

>”positive” nihilism is still just nihilism
Imagine my surprise

>>20103585
>all these words to say basically nothing

>>20103607
>I didn’t understand it so it doesn’t mean anything

>>20102893
>This opposite is, however, for the strong willed
I dont get it you think oposite of celibate is for strong willed.
He criticises celibacy because it has no point other than being a test for yourself.But banging hookers is not something you need strong will for.

>>20102531
Fpbp

Embrace Nietzschean Christianity, weakling.

>>20103824
I understood it fine, you just said nothing of value.

>>20103900
No such thing. You're in or you're out.
>b-b-but i want to be like le Jordan Peterson and be a heckin self-help chad :(

>>20102524
I've never been an atheist but I've also never understood how anyone could seriously buy into Christianity, unless they were raised into it I suppose. It's just so ridiculous, I don't get it. Same thing for all abrahamic faiths really, and a lot of eastern ones too.

>>20102957
The world is made of material greed. Jews min maxed their activity to participate in material trading and abstract value management professions. The old world used to be ruled by the sword and Jews were btfo. When the world reached a level of abstraction that material wealth could translate to amassing swords the Jews started their ascent to the top. As long as we are a greedy planet who values the abstraction of value we will be ruled by Jews or another race with near identical ethos.

>>20103917
"Nietzschean Christianity", as known as "just Christianity". Salvation for free is a protestant perversion and shouldn't be treated seriously.

>>20102998
yes it is good and it makes churchies seethe

>>20103555
Kek lmao

>>20102986
that’s funny a lot of nietzschean elarpers are fucking obsessed with nutrition fads

>>20103518
"Society","Conditions","Circumstances", those are all excuses to justify your inability to achieve the ideal of some dude who died crazy several centuries ago.
The reality of it is that there is no superhuman entity judging you from above, so it's impossible to fuck up. You can't possibly "lose" or "win" at life regardless of what you do because everything is just people's opinion, even if it is Nietzsche who said it.
Ultimately being "weak" or "strong" or an "ubermensch" only depends on your point of view and is not absolute ideal to achieve.

>>20104173
Nobody even remotely achieves Nietzsche's ideal. Not that it matters.

>>20104029
Knee-chee himself was.

>>20102531
FPBP, /thread

>>20103518
Your goal isn't to become the ubermensch, but to pave the way for his arrival by being less of a faggot.

>>20104973
That's the point of his philosophy, he says so himself, please read the Zarathustra.

>>20105692
>the point is there is no point bro!

>>20105696
I'm talking about the ideal, not the other part.

>>20102569
what's "weak" about fucking hookers?

>>20104173
Science has not come close to being able to honestly substantiate a claim that there are no 'higher powers' so your claim that you cannot win or lose, while priniciply true on the existential scale, is in the material stratum and it's biological substrates, hopefully assumptive. For that commandeering of your strength of opinion, I commend you. Science has converted stones into numbers and nothing more. It is naive to think that even the most unalive mechanisms do not lord in some abstract way over humans. This is no problem because Nietzsches philosophy is even richer in a world where they (might even just a little bit more than they might not) exist. Proof: read Nietzsche on women.

>>20105692
I have faggot. YOU'RE not gonna be the ubermensch, faggot.

Almost every real Nietzschean I have met is weak-willed and a natural slave. A spiritual weakling. Almost every single one of them regurgitates leftist talking points and reinterprets Nietzsche to fit them. For all their bloviating about master/slave morality (often under a fateful misapprehension of Nietzsche in reducing to master=good; slave=bad), the anonymous Nietzschean on the internet is often a coward who's "will-to-power" is unable handle minor threats of social alienation.
And what do these supposed self-willed masters appeal to in their apologetic for their syphilitic god? His popularity, influence, and eminence. What slavish, obedient impulses causes one to worship traits like these.
To this charge, they may say what they will, but they will never live by what they say. They are dogs.

>>20102524
The disciple John used to say to skeptics he encountered as he traveled to preach the teachings of Jesus Christ: “keep the good!”
Meaning, if there is something you like about the Christian teaching, hold onto that. You don’t have to accept everything about the teaching at once. Clearly you’ve noticed things have gone worse for you since you stopped “keeping the good”. Maybe get back to it? God is waiting for you with open arms

>>20106816
it's disingenuous to start the post by calling them "Nietzschean"s and then describing morons who know nothing about him and just parrot some quotes they read on goodreads to sound cool and intelligent
It's more of a problem of someone who's telling you "I follow x philosopher" is going to be a huge faggot always (religious people are sometimes an exception to this). especially in this case.

>>20102524
Read Camus

>>20102524
The first half of Nietzsche is about destroying the obsolete values within yourself. The second half is about understanding the need for new ones, and endeavoring to generate them. You haven't begun the second half yet. I can't tell you how to do it, but a word of advice: don't insult yourself the way you did in the OP, it's a self fulfilling prophecy and Nietzsche would not suggest it.

>>20102569
>hasn't read thus spake zarathrusta or the gay science

opinion discarded

>>20102524
>replaced it with Nietzsche
Since you apparently have no clue what self overcoming is, you apparently only replaced it with a poor understanding of Nietzsche.

What should a weak like me do?
Kill myself?
What does Nietzsche say about this

>>20108834
He doesn't talk about the weak, he talks about what the strong should do with the weak, at best. So, keep doing what you're doing, you're probably being run over as we speak by a group of people more powerful than you

>>20108848
Didn't he mention something like the weak should be getting help to go extinct?
I was born mentally and physically weak, I thought if i live or cling to life something good may happen but it's just life being bullied by much stronger and smarter guy

>>20103049
>>20109183
You have no idea how true that is, I'm an obscenely adorable girl, probably the most adorable to ever live no joke, on top of being extremely high IQ, and it's EXTREMELY difficult to interact with boys because it's always an "oh shit she's talking to me" moment and never natural. Not even just the boys but even the girls will blush and get quiet when I come around. Literally just a few notches lower all around would improve my quality of life tremendously, instead I'm some sort of fairy queen all the time. And it made me realize how weak everyone is, weak willed, weak minded. Sometimes I wonder if I'm one of the very early cases of the Overman, like literally at the genetic level instead of just philosophically. My superiority feels that extreme

>>20109241
Be my way over my league gf

>>20109246
It would make my life if some boy just walked up and said that to me irl lol, should definitely use that yourself someday

>>20109279
Nah I don't talk to real life women.

>>20109241
Are you actually high IQ or just using it colloquially?

>>20109292
Actually. I got in trouble when I was very young at my Christian private school and got in an argument with my headmaster where I revealed I was an atheist, expecting to get expelled. Instead he suspended me and kept me under personal supervision in his office and would write out essays explaining why he thought I was wrong about this or that, for my edification, and then instead I'd just respond with my own essay disagreeing. He realized that I was way precocious, I was quoting Schopenhaur at him and we got into these legitimate debates of thousands of handwritten words. He recommended me Augustine and Acquinas and I would walk around school hauling around these massive tomes to the complete bewilderment of my peers. He told my mom she should have me tested and I don't know if I should share the exact score, if that would be doxxable or whatever but I'm in Mensa. But that doesn't actually mean anything to me, just responding to your question. For me it's just clear in my academic progression and day to day life that I'm in a different league of the brain. I never miss anything socially, in fact it very often feels like I'm seeing things nobody else is, like in conversations I can always see the ulterior motives and private thoughts in their faces to a point that feels psychic, whereas everyone else is only operating on the surface.

>>20102996
That makes sense why Kant is more my speed, though "On The Genealogy Of Morals" is kino

>>20103033
What about Mortification if the flesh?

>>20109351
kek meanwhile midwit misogynists online be like "girls are so dumb bros why can't they be smart like me amirite fellas"

Where does The Antichrist rank among you Nietzscheans?

>>20109395
I lied about that entire thing. Why are you so gullible? Go back.

>>20109395
>>20109428
Lol not me, stop that

>>20109359
?
Don’t people lash themselves out for a reason?

>>20102524
average neetzsche fan

Alexander is the only overman to have been so far. Napoleon got close.

>>20109279
>some boy
Don't pretend that your standards aren't as high as your sense of self-importance

>>20102524
Read Spinoza

>>20103910
I understood him perfectly. May be tone down bitterness and read more

>>20102996
I kind of agree. Even he said in Ecce Homo that his concerns where that of physiology, nutrition, medicine, etc. His points even on morality and behavior often come back to life conditions, to diet, etc. For some reason this points get overlooked.

>>20109489
Alexander was subhuman compared to Napoleon. He was not even close to overman

>>20109351
how do you decide if those ulterior motives are really there or product of your imagination?

>>20102569
Fucking hookers fit perfectly into his worldview and is only 'weak' from a Christian viewpoint.

>>20109720
I fucked several hookers and always felt bad afterwards. And I don't give the slightest shit about christianity.

>>20109689
Because of the ramifications, most of the time, like I'll realize a week in advance what's going to happen with different situations and then it does. But it's true that other times it's just subjective

>>20102524
Religion has it's use and Nietzche recognized that. Being a free spirit isn't exactly easy.

>>20102524
>>20102540
Yes you have to do actual work. You have to create your own philosophy on life and then live according to it. Which isn't easy. If you neglect that part then it's easy to just become a hedonist and fall to pleasure, once you develop something to adhere to it becomes so much easier to get somewhere. You need a plan.

>>20104005
based

>>20102540
>but most men today are not likely to ever attain the ideal of the ubermensch,
no one ever will "attain the ideal of the ubermensch", that is the definition of "ideal", but that shouldn't stop one. It's about trying to overcome yourself, it's to be proud and happy about facing struggle, it's not about "either I reach perfection or it's all worthless".

>>20102524
For whosever exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted

>>20109894
He who sneeds will feed

>>20109894
Slave morality
>>20109911
Mastery

>>20109975
I don't think being humble is slave morality, is it?

>>20109986
Of course it is. The slave is the one who "humbles himself" first, out of necessity of his condition.

OP, all you have to do is read Kierkegaard, if you want the same Nietzschean intensity, honesty, authenticity, longing and inspiration within a Christian sphere. Start with Fear and Trembling or The Sickness Unto to Death or The Concept of Anxiety.

People forgot the subtitle to Zarathustra is: A book for none and all...The "none" is not some larp, I don't think Nietzsche was genuinely sure what he was saying was valid, nor that it wasn't...it was sort of a gamble, but one of the most beautiful poetic gambles ever made...

>>20109864
doesnt this struggle also exist in christianity- the striving towards the perfection of God

>>20102524
Which is what Evola sought to rectify through Traditionalism and aristocracy. Are you a nigger? No? THEN WHY ARE YOU ACTING LIKE ONE?

>>20102524
>This is a dangerous path for the many, but a path to liberation for the few. It's more likely you're of the former type of person
There's no salvation outside of the Church

>>20102524


You seem to believe that Christianity is accepting of perpetually weak willed individuals; it is not; you are most probably "Protestant" now, or at least "Protestantistic".


>[...]sleep on irregular times[...]

That is not necessarily a bane; that is your own problem.


Volition is freed, and reaffirmed, through virtue; rather than quantally perverting it, as extreme forms of atheism direct to do, the directive of Christianity consists in gradually converting the energy that is motilized by volition, thus, through revolutionary refinement & reinforcement, one revolverts one's own nascent forces, rather than merely recycling, and thereby stunting, them.

>>20109986
You have to consider the context. Jesus is saying those who are exalted in this life, the worldly masters, will be humbled before the absentee great master, the skydaddy, while those who are humble now in this life will be exalted in the next. Suppose you didn't like your boss, but had to do what he said. It would be nice if your boss had a boss who would punish him for making you feel bad, and moreover, reward you for having been weak. That's the idea.

>>20109986
only if you let it be, the decision lies with you in the end
t. ubermensch

>>20106018
What makes you think that in the "material stratum" and "biological substrates" there is a form of a higher power exactly ?

I said that there is no higher power because it sounded catchy but actually I don't think it even matters.
What matters is that if there are absolute values on which we are being judge, there is only three possibilities :
Either we are supposed to know them, in which case the higher authority would have used a fool-proof and unquestionable way of sharing them to us if it's intentions are good, and if not than said authority is ill-willed and cannot be trusted, so you might as well live the way you want
Either we shouldn't know which values we are being judged on, in which case you might as well not know about a higher authority on this particular matter
Either it doesn't matter if we know them or not, in which case it also doesn't matter if you know about the higher authority on this particular matter

So in the end, whether or not there is a higher authority, the only way that we would fairly be judged would be if said authority had explained the rules in an unquestionable manner. Since it is not the case, either there is no authority, no values, or there is an evil authority that is trying to trick us and there is no obvious way of winning. That's why I think there is no absolute judge of our actions, regardless of what exists above the world. That being said I've been reading the Tao Te Jing from Lao Zi for some time know, and I do find comfort in what I think the Tao is.
Also I'll be glad to read some literature on the subject if my reasoning is wrong or if it can be further shaped out.

>he thought he could replace his Christian soul with vanity
Many such cases. Sad!

>>20110371
>Playing make believe as a terminal midwit
Many such cases. Sad!

>>20110145
You've been told this before, and it should be a clue to you that your idiocy on this subject is so distinctive, but your superficial Sunday School reading of Kierkegaard isn't wanted or needed anywhere.

>I abandoned truth for some edgy shit for teenagers
Bravo OP

>>20110687
>You've been told his before
lol, what??
did i offend you anon?

What exactly did you glean from the little that I wrote as to what my "reading" of Kierkegaard is?

And if you manage to answer that as you simultaneously remove the giant stick stuck up your psyche's ass, do please tell us your profound (you know, the opposite of 'superficial') reading of Kierkegaard is since you presume to have one.

Also thanks for the 'distinctive' compliment, kek.

>>20110761
Uh huh. You know exactly what I'm talking about. You love to invade every thread and make Kierkegaard sound like a Sherwood Baptist Church production.
>do please tell us your profound (you know, the opposite of 'superficial') reading of Kierkegaard is since you presume to have one
This perfectly encapsulates my point, it's impossible for you to ever read anything without doing so "as a Christian". Kierkegaard is a Christian so he's on my team! Read Kierkegaard highly recommended! Why? Because he's a Christian! Anything else to add? Well uh..
Yeah Kierkegaard'z selling point isn't Christianity, he was a real life philosopher with much to contribute than Joel Osteen.

>>20102957
I guess whites were the strongest people back when we were "oppressing" everyone and ran the world? Or does that logic not extend to us?

>>20110881
you're severely presumptuous

read OP's post again, my response was specifically for him, the "all you have to do..." was obviously a tongue-in-cheek 4chan nonsense

also this is my second time posting on /lit and the first time was not about Soren, now fuck off

>>20102524
Then you didn't understand Nietzsche. He was extremely against degeneracy, and considered hedonists to be lesser than animals (Last Men).

>>20110360
Bhagavad Gita and some of the Upanishads work as an easy introduction to what I think is the better concept of God. They are also compatible with German Idealism, or at least the abstractions are similar in a way. The 'Higher authority' version of god also known as sky daddy has been pretty much abandoned in favor of a more mysterious/unknown space.

>>20110986
... How is this a real post... People drive me crazy man. Yeah you're completely fucking wrong and should probablt read Nietzsche sometime by the way, great read

>>20110940
Ok I mistook you for someone else and it's cute that you've only posted here twice, my apologies and stick around not everyone is as rude as me.

>>20102524
Seek therapy

>>20111553
>Yeah you're completely fucking wrong
Are you sure I'm the one who didn't read Nietzsche? He literally called hedonists Last Men, the opposite of the overman.

>>20111614
Yes, I'm sure. But I'm not going to quibble about what you did or didn't do, getting serious, Nietzsche makes a point many times of idealizing a man who doesn't reign himself in because of abstract notions of morality or afterlife or so on, but lives according to his natural impulses. You can find this early on in Twilight of the Gods for instance, too lazy to pull it up and quote directly. He rants against people who "turn inward" and turn ascetic with visions of it meaning anything in this life or the next. Sensuality is a perfectly correct thing to indulge in, even to the point that the less it regards social mores the better. A very different picture from what you're trying to paint.

>>20111614
Adding on to say that basically your confusion is in equating the laziness of the Last Man with "hedonism" in general. The Last Man is a very specific type of hedonist, one who doesn't move. Dionysus is another type of hedonist however, which Nietzsche approves.

https://youtu.be/8sROESLRudM

>>20106816
>Almost every real Nietzschean I have met
Where the hell did you meet these Nietzscheans please tell, because its the same as a Christian saying "every pagan I have ever met" when 1 in 10.000 people would fall under that label.

>>20111771
not an argument

>>20111745
HOLY FREAKING WOWZERS THAT'S ONE HELL OF A DMT TRIP!

>>20109745
Weird that rarely bothers me, in fact I was surprised how little it bothered me.

>>20111777
I am clearly not making an argument, I was asking where you meet those Nietzscheans, but because you dont awnser it is clear you have never met one

>>20111790
that's not a rebuttal
read neitchze before you reply to me again

>>20111804
I already know the awnser lol

>He blasphemed the holy spirit
nigga thats literally the only unforgivable thing you can do

>>20111820
Buddy it's all in your head. It's gonna be ok.

Forgot to mention that I'm trans btw. I didn't want to mention it in the original post and risk distracting people from the main content but in retrospect I think it provides important context (it was probably obvious though)

>>20102524
LOL if you have to curse christianity or do anythig because someone told you to, too much credit is given to these writers and philosophers it makes me question if people are capable of developing their own thoughts and feelings, life is meaningless even if there was a god, life is nothing more than a series of copes and most of us look for copes that will keep our sanity intact

>>20102524

"I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

Anon, there are no other paths to salvation. He is the answer. Do not let people like >>20102540 convince you to see Christ as just another option.

Eternity is a long time, anon.

>>20103518
I'm well aware I'm much closer to the last man the any sort of übermensch. Nietzsche is still a good and sobering read.

>>20102661
>we already have the limes

What did he mean by this? Is this a literal translation of a German idiom?

>>20111825
Oh are you now... what's your genetalia like if I might ask... I just so happen to be a tranny appreciator...

>>20109570
Only Marxists like Spinoza because they think he's a proto Hegel

>>20111824
he's right you fucking nigger if you blaspheme the holy spirit you can't receive God's resurrection in christ

>>20111845
>Solves the Universe
*extremely high IQ voice* Only Marxists like this

>>20102540
>the second reply doesn't make a strawman out of nietzsche and is not ridiculizing op
I don't recognize /lit/ desu
it seems like old /lit/

>>20102569
>>20108039
desu desu desu thus spoke zarathustra is basically his whole philosophy but in parables
I found it better than beyond good and evil; it's basically the same thing for the most part, but more concise

>>20111745
so regardless of what we do, we end up in hell anyway

>>20110707
But he didn't, he abandoned Christianity, which is most definitely not even close to truth

>>20111820
Imagine believing in this silly bullshit. Unironically touch grass

>>20102531
This dude gets it. OP sounding like a histrionic Ignatius Reilly motherfucker

>>20111830
No such thing as "salvation", that is a purely abrahamic concept. Your religion makes no sense and you are trying to guilt trip people into it. You're pathetic

>>20102524
>I feel weak and lethargic, I have no will power to act upon my values
>>20102893
>This opposite is, however, for the strong willed. I am not such a man
>I can't remember, does he talk about the best course of action for the mediocre in spirit?
"Not that I on that account upbraid them: but serving ones do they remain, and harnessed ones, even though they glitter in golden harness.
And often have they been good servants and worthy of their hire. For thus saith virtue: “If thou must be a servant, seek him unto whom thy service is most useful!
The spirit and virtue of thy master shall advance by thou being his servant: thus wilt thou thyself advance with his spirit and virtue!”
And verily, ye famous wise ones, ye servants of the people! Ye yourselves have advanced with the people’s spirit and virtue—and the people by you! To your honour do I say it! "

Dumb phaggot, you haven't read Nietzsche.

>>20111830
Your retarded primitive fear tactics were btfo in another thread, spiritual semite

>>20111972
>>20111994
hello, reddit

>>20112006
Not an argument, cultist. Stop preying on weak minds with your disgusting ideology

>>20112013
>>/lit/?task=search&ghost=&search_text=spiritual+semite

it seems you're the weak disturbed mind here. so angry. what's the problem? does your life suck so much?

>>20109251
>>20109337

>>20111994
seek treatment

>>20112017
>>20112034
I'm not the first to use that term but sure, keep deflecting and not making an argument. We both know who's seething that his cult tactics got called out here.

>>20111830
The concept of an eternal hell is a really stupid invention and makes no sense. God loves you but made this eternal torture chamber for you because you didn't guess right? Sure thing
Hell only works as a temporary purification process like in dharmic religions

>>20106018
>Science has not come close to being able to honestly substantiate a claim that there are no 'higher powers'
Not him, but: it has come however close to being able to explain to you, that your cognitive toolkit, with which you are trying to grasp your 'higher powers' and 'non-material stratum' is seriously flawed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTNmLt7QX8E
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choice_architecture

>It is naive to think that even the most unalive mechanisms do not lord in some abstract way over humans
It is naive to think that unalive mechanisms have *intentions* of lording over you. A smiling face on a robot could mean anything.
It merely means, that your intentional biomechanical toolkit (praying, for example) heuristically suited for dealing with other apes, is now *misapplied*.

>Nietzsches philosophy
"People interpreted the origin of an action in the most particular sense as an origin from an intention. People became unanimous in believing that the value of an action lay in the value of the intention behind it. The intention as the entire origin and prehistory of an action: in accordance with this bias people on earth have, almost right up to the most recent times, given moral approval, criticized, judged, and also practised philosophy. But today shouldn’t we have reached the point where we must once again make up our minds about a reversal and fundamental shift in values, thanks to a further inward contemplation and profundity in human beings? Are we not standing on the threshold of a period which we might at first designate negatively as *beyond morality*, today, when, at least among us immoralists, the suspicion stirs that the decisive value of an action may lie precisely in what is *unintentional* in it and that all its intentionality, everything which we can see in it, know, “become conscious of,” still belongs to its surface layer and skin,—which, like every skin, indicates something but *conceals* even more? In short, we believe that the intention is only a sign and a symptom, something which still needs interpretation, and furthermore a sign which carries too many meanings and, thus, by itself alone means almost nothing. We think that morality, in the earlier sense, that is, a morality based on intentions, has been a prejudice, something rash and perhaps provisional, something along the lines of astrology and alchemy, but, in any case, something that must be overcome."

>>20112045
>The concept of an eternal hell is a really stupid invention and makes no sense. God loves you but made this eternal torture chamber for you because you didn't guess right? Sure thing
You are very ignorant of christianity and it shows. As Eriugena says it: "the fact some people drown in the sea while others swim doesn't mean the sea is bad" or "the fact some people suffer in a beautiful palace doesn't mean the palace isn't beautiful nor his builder, the problem lies in the person"

>>20112045
>The concept of an eternal hell is a really stupid invention and makes no sense.
"<...> a furious impulse to dissociate theism and religion, and thus to return the sacred to its shamanic impiety, except that nothing can ever simply return, and Hell will never be an innocent underworld again. The depths have become infernal, really so, quite irrespective of the fairy tales we are still told. <...> For well over a century all who have wanted to see have seen: no profound exploration can be launched from the ruins of monotheism unless it draws its resources from damnation.
The death of God is a religious event - a transgression, experiment in damnation, and stroke of anti theistic warfare - but this is not to say it is pre-eminently a crime. Hell has no interest in our debauched moral currency. To confuse reactive dabblings in sin with expeditions in damnation is Christian superficiality; the Dantean error of imagining that one could earn oneself an excursion in Hell, as if the infernal too was a matter of justice. Our crimes are mere stumblings on the path to ruin, just as every projected Hell on Earth is a strict exemplar of idolatry. Transgression is not criminal action, but tragic fate; the intersection of an economically programmed apocalypse with the religious anti-history of poetry. It is the inevitable occurrence of impossibility, which is not the same as death, but neither is it essentially different. "

>>20112062
Not him, but very obviously the issue with that is that God created the rules by which our experience of "the sea" is determined. In other words, he had to INVENT the possibility that people will drown. What the analogy tries to do is equate the amorality of the nonsentient sea with the morality of the sentient being that created it. Doesn't work.

>>20112088
No. The sea is instrinsically good in that analogy. The problem is the disposition of the soul: some will swim and rejoice, others will drown and suffer.

It has nothing to do with amorality of the sea. The sea HAS to be good necessarily, the problem is always in the person who will not be able to swim.

>>20112088
What is the cause for suffering/evil? The greeks will say it is ignorance. Ignorance was not created, it is the absence of knowledge. The drowning was not created. It is the absence of swimming.

>>20112107
>Ignorance was not created, it is the absence of knowledge
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnotology

>>20112062
This is an obvious bullshit cope to anyone who doesn't buy into your religion. The fact that you need to go through insane mental gymnastics to rationalize a good God making Hell possible shows your doctrine doesn't hold. Not to mention the pure incoherence that is everyone pre-incarnation being in Hell.
If the quote you posted was true then Hell would be temporary. Go on, hit me with more copes.

>>20112107
>The drowning was not created. It is the absence of swimming.
Drowning is the absence of fish gills.

>>20112096
If it's intrinsically good then it cannot cause suffering.
>b-b-but
No. Either god is evil or hell doesn't exist, that's it.

>>20112096
Being a Christian is not "intrinsically good," it's one moralizing belief system of many that a moral person might be oriented to, which is almost always determined by geographic location. To make it the deciding factor in eternal damnation is not a question of morality, it's a question of chance, and therefore inherently unfair, and therefore inherently immoral.

>>20112079
Hell in the Christian sense is so obviously a control system to keep peasants in line and yet people keep buying into it. In all religions before it, there was either a neutral underworld instead of hell, or a purgative "hell" and then the Church comes along and goes
>you better obey otherwise it's eternal suffering for you
I suppose you have to be raised into it to believe in it. No matter how they spin it, it makes no sense at all.

>>20112107
>Ignorance was not created, it is the absence of knowledge.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flicker_fusion_threshold

Cinematography was not created, it is the absence of your eye's ability to differentiate between frames at high frame-rates.

>>20112115
the cause for suffering is in the state of one's mind. If someone intoxicates himself and, at arriving in a beautiful palace, starts to vomit all over is the palace to blame? or its builder?

>>20112113
>incoherence that is everyone pre-incarnation being in Hell.
another display of ignorance.

>>20112117
What do you believe in, out of curiosity? You worded your post interestingly, like you're outside of it all, so just curiois

>>20112137
Spinoza

>>20112117
the church never held that all non-christians will go to hell. actually, it is held that every single person is a member of the church, be it formally or informally.

so yes, even non-christians are informal members of the church

>>20112127
>the state of one's mind
What does that have to do with believing that a Jewish apocalyptic preacher rose from the dead and is here to save me from what he's going to do to me if I don't accept him saving me?
>ignorance
Cope.

>>20112142
Yeah there's always that mollifying cope of easy inclusivity on that point when it comes up in these discussions, in reality it's well understood in every denomination that when Jesus said "no way in but through me" he meant it.

>>20112045
>I don't like it therefore is bad
God doesn't actually love everyone. He does not love the damned.

>>20112153
>>20108619 is a reasonable explanation

>>20112153
it doesn't mean even non-christians are not saved through him

>>20112156
>he does not love the ones he purposefully made while knowing that he would not love them
LMAO

>>20106936
>Disingenuous
Lol who cares? So what if devotees of Nietzsche are lied about, just suck it up Overman ;)

>>20112146
cope harder

>>20112164
... Yes, yes that's what it literally means. It's the whole point of being Christian. You'll recall the etymology.

>>20112164
Yes it does. That's why he was crucified. Everyone is Fallen and condemned to Hell, but through Christ and Christ alone you can be saved. It's the entire basis of Christianity.

>>20112172
I accept your concession

>>20112173
if Christ said nobody is saved except through Him it means everyone saved will be through Him. and the church never held that non-christians will not be saved. So even non-christians are saved through Him

>>20112187
No, sorry. You're absurdly wrong. This guy put it better than me >>20112183 You don't even understand why Christianity exists.

>>20112192
what is your point? all non-christians will be condemned?

>>20112204
Not him and not a Christian but yes. Jesus has never been conceived as a seive for any and all to fall into Heaven through. Supposedly you can only get into Heaven by believing in him. Think of him as advocating on your behalf. Everyone is Fallen and God is dubious about letting anyone in. But then Jesus says, "You have to let this one in, he's with me." But he's not going to say that for just anyone with a smile. There's a process, which his self sacrifice allowed for. But if you don't engage in that process he'll have to say, "I never knew you." That's what the Bible teaches.

>>20112215
What a bunch of horseshit, how did this belief survive for 2000 years?

>>20109241
Nobody:
Femanon: I'm an obscenely adorable girl

>>20112224
By sword and tradition lol

>>20112224
it survived by being true. and it will outlive all your angst against it no matter how many posts you write against it.

your endeavor is self defeating

>>20112243
Sure thing buddy. You'll grow out of your larp soon enough

>>20112247
no larping. but you will grow out of your resentment. this is nothing but resentment

>>20112226
Kek at least her very Nietschean lack of humility is relevant to thread I guess

>>20112251
Christianity is the religion of resentment.
I have no resentment against it at all: I wasn't raised Christian, I'm not part of a Christian community, I was never really exposed to Christianity outside of the internet. Fundamentally I don't care, I'm as detached from Christianity as I am from Hinduism or Shinto

>>20111732
>>20111741
You don't know what "hedonism" means and you evidently do not know what you're talking about, considering Nietzsche completely eradicated the positive idea of hedonism as a British utilitarian construction. "Hedonism" is the pursuit or consideration of pleasure above all things, whereas Nietzsche stated this is the happiness of the Englishman. Higher men do not pursue pleasure over pain, they are fully aware that they are both necessary and ideal in their own right.
>but lives according to his natural impulses
The ascetic instinct IS a natural impulse, which you would know if you read him. There is nothing which is not natural.

>>20112268
your posts sound resentful and this path only leads to bitterness and mental noise

>>20112299
>clearly explain why resentment doesn't apply as a criticism here
>"n-no you're resentful"
Okay. Have a good one

>>20112268
>posts repeatedly about how stupid he thinks Christianity is
>"It's not resentment bro I just don't like it"

>>20112316
You are by far the most obnoxious community on /lit/ so I have grown to find you annoying, yes

>>20112295
Yeah you're just a shameless pseud sorry, I should have never taken you seriously. If you ever want to stop pretending, you can reread my last post, -and read Nietzsche for real vs whatever you've convinced yourself qualifies for the purposes of insisting otherwise. But honestly you don't deserve me saying even that much, you're so egregiously stupid yet so obnoxious about how smart you think you are. You didn't know what hedonism meant so I took the time to explain it to you and your response is "you don't know what hedonism means and you evidently don't know what you're talking about heh". Just hopeless. You do you, I'll do me. Beneath all the 4chan posturing you know damn well what the difference is. Fix yourself. My last response.

>>20112358
I've read every single one of his books. You have nothing to say for yourself except bland insults without substance. Boring.

>>20112358
>so I took the time to explain it to you
Where? As far as I can see I am the only one in this thread who even tried to explain it. You've said nothing except "Nietzsche liked hedonism", which is very different to explaining what hedonism is which is not only wrong but even wrong with respect to Nietzsche, because he never once put good words in for "hedonism", in fact in his diaries you'll see he lived a life of only water and the bare essentials, the only other liquid he would drink is milk.

>>20112332
So resentment, I'm glad we've established that.

>>20112303
if it's not resentment then why have you been attacking christianity for hours in multiple threads?

saying you are not resentful does not make you so. if you are that anon, who i speak of, you are full of resentment

>>20112418
You desperately repeating it doesn't make it true, but if you integrated that statement you probably wouldn't be a Christian
>>20112423
I have no other thread on Christianity open. Stop with the persecution complex, not everyone who finds you annoying is the same person

>>20112442
>You desperately repeating it doesn't make it true,
You just admitted it yourself one post ago. Don't backpedal.

>>20112442
>not everyone who finds you annoying is the same person
yet all who use the internet to attack christianity are full of resentment. same applies for the other religions. but it is more common to see anti-christian attacks obviously

i have yet to see a single person who is well established in life, living happily etc and still taking his time on the internet to attack something he doesn't agree with. only resentful people do that. realized people just go on with their lives. this is just a psychological observation

>>20112470
The only reason why I waste my time on this is that you people think you own this website and spout your takes in every thread even those that don't call for it. Obviously this is a thread on Christianity so it doesn't apply, but I'm talking in general here, the reason why Christianity is attacked more frequently than other religions is that it has by far the most annoying followers

>>20112495
so you can't stand people posting what they want so you decide to revolt against it like a resentful child who wants the world to work according to his wish

like i said, this resentment will only lead to a life a bitterness which you already are living. instead of reacting to christianity, why don't you seek to live a fulfilling life? by your posts one can see yours is miserable. you should consider changing it.

in short: take meds and touch grass

>>20112495
>you people think you own this website
This reeks of resentment bro. I can imagine early Christians saying the same thing to the Romans.

>>20102531
fpbp
OP doesn't understand christianity or niet

>>20112517
>muh resentment
Shut the fuck up about it, I'm not even a nietzschean lol. And your projection is sad is all I'll say about the rest, my life is fine if a little boring which is why I keep humoring you retards

>>20112567
>i'm not resentful guys! just bored hehe
>i just revolve around reactionary attacks
>it's just that you are annoying hehe

>>20112576
Pretty much yeah

>>20102540
Are chuds finally starting to move on from christlarping?

>>20112705
Some of us were never Christians to begin with.

>>20109241
Reminds me how neetch was titling his chapters like why I am so wise. You are truly a neetchean bitch. Give me your discord and I’ll treat you as the cock sleeve you want to be.

>>20109241
>>You have no idea how true that is, I'm an obscenely adorable girl, probably the most adorable to ever live no joke,
that's a good opening line for a book

>>20102524
Nietzsche warned you. This way is for the strong