/lit/ - Literature

I actually agree with him on most things, I just want to see him rekt because of his cringeworthy prose.

Start with Heidegger's writings on Nietzsche to begin with. I think some aspects of Kierkegaard could be used against Nietzsche, thought I haven't read him thoroughly enough to know.

>>6256326

if you cant yourself destroy him, what makes you believe he's juvenile as fuck?

>>6256326
Do you, perchance, want to self insert yourself into the touted author who will supposedly do this just so you can feel like you don't have a small weeny for not having enough brains to pick apart His logic even though you somehow found fault in it without seeing how?

You must be the type of guy that likes to see your dad fuck your mom when she's punished you for something.

>>6256326
What exactly about Neetch is 'juvenile as fuck,' or are you just trying to be cool and hate on the trendy philosophers because you're such an esoteric fella?

>>6256350
>>6256343
Why are Nietzsche's fans always so defensive? Kind of makes me want to see him get btfo

>>6256355
>him get btfo
Because his haters can't think.

:^)

>It goes both ways.

4chan contrarians are not officially too edgy for Nietzsche

>>6256361
I'm a fan of him myself. It's just weird as fuck to me to see such desperate defense of a philosopher. If he's wrong he's wrong, don't be a cuck about it.

Read Genealogy of the Morals, then the Plato's Gorgias dialogue and see how everything in the world makes sense

>>6256326
Heidegger's critique is decent.

The general consensus on Nietzsche is that his critique of metaphysics and enlightenment morality is legit but his alternative, the will to power etc., doesn't solve anything and is still subject to the same kind of thinking he was criticising. That stuff in him makes good literature and nothing else.

>>6256373
Wait what?
Isn't Nietzsche's position fine though, because perspectivism gives him some serious leeway? What exactly are the problems people see with the will to power?

>>6256326
Gr8 b8 m8

>>6256343
This.

If you aren't at least entertained by Nietzsche, you are simply an idiot and are clearly not his intended audience. Please don't worry your fragile little acorn brain about what he's trying to say if you aren't smart enough to understand.

Kill yourself OP

Nietzsche is.probably the best writer in philosophy

>>6256372
In which order?

>>6256399

>>6256397
gr8 meim m8

>>6256408

First Genealogy then Gorgias, and see what Socrates tries to say between words when they speak about justice

>>6256410
What's funny is that I guarantee you look and act more like that guy than I do.

The reason Nietzsche is so famous apart from his controversial ideas is because he is extremely quotable.
He is a brilliant writer. Nobody else writes as eloquently as he does.

>>6256419
Sure thing m8

Nietzsche philosophy is non constructive. He went insane before he could explain what the Overman was actually supposed to do.

He's great at pointing out the flaws in western society, but presents no alternative.

>>6256400
>writing has a lot to do with philosphy

>>6256393
Perspectivism is the good part of Nietzsche. But there's a tension between being a perspectivist and then positing the will to power which is essentially a theory about human nature. The whole point of perspectivism is to be suspicious of these kinds of general all-size-fits-all statements in philosophy

>>6256431
OP asked about eloquence in writing buddy

>>6256417
Alright, will do, if,just checking, I don't need to read The Republic or anything else beforehand?

>>6256350
"For the mere fact that no one guards against him is in
itself already a sign of decadence. Instinct is weakened, what
ought to be eschewed now attracts. People actually kiss that
which plunges them more quickly into the abyss.—Is there any
need for an example? One has only to think of the régime which
anæmic, or gouty, or diabetic people prescribe for themselves. [013]
The definition of a vegetarian: a creature who has need of a
corroborating diet. To recognise what is harmful as harmful, to
be able to deny oneself what is harmful, is a sign of youth, of
vitality. That which is harmful lures the exhausted: cabbage lures
the vegetarian."

Nietzsche's writings have too much vitality, that's why he's considered juvenile. OP is looking for cabbages now.

>>6256368

no one gets "btfo" in lit/phil. go watch a football game or play call of duty if thats what you want to see.

most critiques are attempts to build on the work, or address questions the subject of criticism leaves open so as to open new paths of research and thinking. heidegger's work re: nietzsche, and derrida's work re: nietzsche and heidegger, are great examples of this

>>6256446
>hurr fuck these anti nietzsche fags they're retarded
>several posts of this
>you still feel the need to reply to mention call of duty to me and me alone
yeah I'm sure you're into critiques and nuance matey, your post is surely all projection

>>6256437
>more eloquent than myself
>juvenile as fuck
>OP asked about eloquence
no

just kidding c/lit/ i didn't actually read BGaE I just wanted to meme and I heard Nietzsche=guarenteedreplies

>>6256428
>privileging construction over destruction

stay modern plebe

>>6256449

you've allowed a meme to influence your way of thinking my dude.

>>6256449
whom are you quoting?

>>6256450
Stop

>>6256488
>>6256479
>unironically being new

>>6256326
Heidegger called his project "inverted platonism" in the sense that he embraced appearance rather than the metaphysical, but at the same time tried to create something bigger than himself, outside time and contingency, I.e. the Overman

basically resurrecting God, in human form

tl;dr read Rorty

>>6256445
Appealing to juveniles and being juvenile are separate things. Going to space appeals to juveniles (or at least it used to), doesn't mean it juvenile.

>>6256441
I've read some others but nothing off Plato - will I be alright?

>>6256497

great post chap

There are no good critiques of Nietzsche. Schopenhauer is probably the only thinker who could give him a serious challenge, but of course he died long before Fritz became famous.

Philosophy since 1900 has been a pathetic spectacle. You could burn every book and the future of mankind would look no worse for it.

>implying Nietzsche can ever get btfo

>>6256708

wittgenstein? russell? derrida? foucault? merleau-ponty? get the fuck out of here anon. just because you havent read it doesnt mean its pathetic

>>6256724

Wiggy and Russel were far more important to the philosophy of mathematics. Neither had much mind for metaphysics. Russell was right about Hegel but Schopenhauer already covered that much better beforehand.

Derrida and Foucault were just plain buffoons. Derrida writes impenetrable claptrap in the typical French intellectual style and Foucault was overly fixated on his own abnormal sexuality.

I have no idea who the last one is and neither will posterity.

>>6256732

why do you consider derrida and foucault to be buffoons?

>>6256724
>implying Bertrand "cannot into mysticism" Russell is any sort of authority on metaphysics
>implying he wasn't totally incapable of understanding Hegel

>>6256732

>Derrida writes impenetrable claptrap

found the village idiot

>>6256739

Derrida belongs to a very old philosophical tradition which has risen and fallen is favor throughout history. He is in fact a disciple of several such traditions, including:

That which seeks to mate philosophy with politics

That which seeks to account for various ideologies by simply tracing their genealogies (the historical approach to thinking)

That which employs excessive quantities of hollow, nonsensical gossamer jargon to disguise the lack of defined concepts and clearly articulated relations in their philosophy

That which begins in abstractions and ends in abstractions, making only tangential contact with the empirical world which is common to all people

And so on. His philosophy is more an intellectual exercise (and a particularly wearying one at that) than anything. It contains very little that is of consequence to human valuation and volition.

But he also simulates profundity, which makes him a buffoon.

>>6256773
>i post on a literature board but only read the required work of my sci fi lit class

>>6256773

Focault, who was also French and therefore despicable, belongs to many of the aforementioned traditions. Madness and Civilization, by far his best and most accessible book, is of far greater historical value than philosophical. But his critiques of modernity are confined to the narrowness of a primarily historical perspective, and this limits the extent of his ability to explicate for instance the phenomena of mental illness, homosexuality, and madness. The physiological and gestative aspects of these are beyond his purview. Schopenhauer's definition of madness as a corruption of memory and the faculty of recollection is much more valuable both in theory and in practice. Many of Schopenhauer's observations and conclusions about the human mind have straightforward application in modern neurology and neuropsychiatry, such as his double aspect theory. Focault 's attempt to explain various mental aberrations as the product of internal or external power struggles, or the historical prevalence of these, has few such worthwhile applications.

>>6256795

>I use greentext and silly ad hom attacks to respond to thoughful and well constructed posts on a literature board

>>6256805

>i think regurgitating memes qualifies as thoughtful and well constructed posting

>>6256809

>I have no idea what a meme is but I've seen other people talking about them on here with a tone of contempt

>>6256798

Foucault*

Phone spellchecker doesn't recognise all these French surnames

>>6256814

ok kid

It isn't easy to blow him the fuck out because, as G.K. Chesterton said, he wrote like a coward. But anyway, read this for a roast: http://www.friesian.com/nietzsch.htm

itt: how much has foucault influcenced your actions?

>>6256431
It's been the primary means of expressing philosophical ideas for over 2000 years.

>>6256732
>I have no idea who the last one is and neither will posterity.
lmao

>>6256958
>http://www.friesian.com/nietzsch.htm
Nietzsche waz le nazi!!!!!! xDdDdDdD

>>6257324
He was an autist, though. No arguing that.

>>6256343

>>6256460
>he thinks anyone on /lit/ reads

Stirner

Then again he blows everything the fuck out ;)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XkjI8IZNww

Read Leiter's books on Nietzche especially the one on morality. http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/product/9780199285938.do

>>6257382
Marx blew Stirner the fuck out.

>>6256338
I'm the opposite with Nietzsche. I think he's all style and no substance. At least with the original German, he's praised for eloquent prose.

>>6256343
>You must be the type of guy that likes to see your dad fuck your mom when she's punished you for something.

Jokes on you, I fuck her myself.

>>6257598
samefagging so you watch this video

>>6256441
No, you don't need to read pretty much anything before Gorgias. But, If you really wanna read something, so you don't come to it without anything, you can read Protagoras and Meno.

>>6256343

>Do you, perchance, want to self insert yourself into the touted author who will supposedly do this just so you can feel like you don't have a small weeny for not having enough brains to pick apart His logic even though you somehow found fault in it without seeing how?

This was the most poorly written sentence I've ever read.

Nietzsche has enough interesting things to say that it makes it worth trudging through chapter after chapter of "waah Wagner won't fuck ny boypussy anymore, wwaah Germany sucks, waah females r stupid". I just don't understand how people can honestly think that he's for teenagers. He's not even an atheist in the New Atheism sense.

>>6256540
>>6257639

Apology and Crito wouldn't hurt, it make you know more Socrates personal point of view

Also they are epic

>>6257611

lel yeah boy, i'm pretty sure since he awaited until max were dead before publishing the critique :^)

>>6257806
How do you think he died you IDIOT.

>>6257324
Assburned.

Where does one start with Nietzsche?
Started with Zarathustra but everything just goes over my head..

>>6257690
Have you not read Pynchon yet?

>>6260291
Never start with that book. Start with Twilight of Idols as a sort of intro, then if you got the time go onto Genealogy of Morals, then Beyond Good and Evil.

Thread full of idiots. Glad I rarely come to this place any more.

Total fucking shit show.

>>6257010
none, faggot, im not a degenerate

>>6257694
>He's not even an atheist in the New Atheism sense.

Are you implying that this is a bad thing?

>>6256326
He was a permavirgin.

>>6262260
>all of /lit/

>>6256500
>Rorty
Seriously? That weak faggot?

>mfw /lit/ is so contrarian it hates Nietzsche now

>>6262278
It's meta contrarian. 4chan's crossed over from ironic to new sincerity a long time ago, the edge has been dulled.

>>6262425
Nah its just they are afraid of being fedoras on their soul, so they avoid fedoras thoughts entirely

>I don't like this because I disagree with it, but I can't actually argue my opinion since it's a kneejerk reaction without any actual consideration. Can somebody please show me a considered argument against what I read so I can take it as fact and not have to worry about having real opinions?

>>6262278
Just like Neetchy.