[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 64 KB, 535x606, Nietzsche 2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10965305 No.10965305 [Reply] [Original]

has there been any truely original thought since this guy? i havent come across anything that is—maybe some parts of joyce

>> No.10965334

>>10965305
Freud and Jung. Heidegger, Ellul..

>> No.10965423

>>10965305
In what way was he original?

>> No.10965486
File: 79 KB, 398x700, nietzsche-uniform-1864.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10965486

>>10965305
Nietzsche is honestly one of the least original major philosophers in history. You can basically find all of his ideas elsewhere in his predecessors: Goethe, Emerson, Carlyle, Schopenhauer, Machiavelli, Spinoza, Darwin, Dostoevsky, Feuerbach, Leopardi, and Gracian. He just combined the ideas and wrote with enough style at the right time that he is considered a great thinker, but really he hasn't got much of a unique voice.

>> No.10965512

>>10965486
People just like him because they actually believe he was the smartest man to ever live and it makes them feel mentally good to relate to that

>> No.10965523

>>10965305
Self-consciousness died with Nietzsche.

>> No.10965527

>>10965305
>MIGHT is RIGHT lmao
that'll be 200 years of respect and admiration of neckbeards please

>> No.10965528

>>10965334
heidegger's a good one, you should drop freud and jung

>> No.10965534

>>10965334
Freud admitted he said little that Nietzsche had not said or implied and Jung was a fraud. Heidegger's good stuff though. As was said though Neechee wasn't exactly original either nor did he really make grand claims to be except when he was going nuts or literarily ironic shitposting which was like at least a fifth of his corpus. Originality is a spook anyways.

>>10965512
I think a big part of it was the breakdown and mental illness, people romanticize that shit for reasons I will never fully understand.

>> No.10965538

>>10965423
by singlehandedly destroying Christianity

>> No.10965539

>>10965534
dood he was literally so smart he thought himself into a retard

>> No.10965544
File: 402 KB, 640x480, 1520976328836.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10965544

>>10965528
>heidegger's a good one

>> No.10965668

>>10965486
But how did they influence him? anyone who had thoroughly read Nietzsche knows that he wrote AGAINST them.

Brandes,Strindberg and many others of his time were stricken by how original his work...you sound like you've only read his quotes.

It's true that he has been influenced by previous but who hasn't? no one can claim to be 100 percent original. Of course he is probably the most courageous and straightforward thinker and the first to directly attack christian morality, all others were bound by it...

>> No.10965704

>>10965305
Did none of the postmodernists have an original thought?

>> No.10965726

>>10965423
Who else produced a perfect manifesto for the post-Christian world (Thus Spoke Zarathustra) and formulated the will to power?

>> No.10965750

>>10965726
Crowley...?

>> No.10965753
File: 21 KB, 214x317, MV5BNjdmMzNkODktYWVjMi00NWRjLWEzMGEtMjdmYjNkZTk4YzQ3L2ltYWdlL2ltYWdlXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNDkzNTM2ODg@._V1_UY317_CR12,0,214,317_AL_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10965753

>>10965668
In my opinion he draws far too heavily from each of them for those thinkers to be considered just "influences." You can trace back basically every key idea of his to one of those philosophers. One of the only truly unique things about Nietzsche is his criticism of Christianity which ends up being more a criticism of utilitarians and materialists than the core of Christian thought anyway. What do you consider a truly unique aspect of his philosophy?

>> No.10965756

>>10965750
Nope.

>> No.10965762

>>10965726
>Who else wrote some fancy poetry and came up with the idea that humans want power
Gee, I don't know, sounds pretty original to me.

>> No.10965777

>>10965762
>If I reduce it to an absurdly simple level, I'll appear smart
Doesn't quite work like that.

>> No.10965780

>>10965704
no?
philosophy IS deconstruction, that what philosophizing means, to deconstruct/disseminate.
It's literally what all the per-socratics did, finding the Arche.

>> No.10965793

>>10965777
I'm right and you know it. That's why you decided to use blown-up language to describe his "discoveries" in the first place. They don't actually hold any content.

>> No.10965809
File: 68 KB, 630x630, 1199514_1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10965809

>>10965726
>the will to power
wait.....you're telling me......that h-humans...want...p-power!? holy shit
>a perfect manifesto for the post-Christian world
>perfect
haha
>>10965668
>he wrote AGAINST them
not at all. he borrows something from one whilst claiming to disagree with everything else about their thought and then gets the rest of his own responses to those shortcomings from other thinkers. his philosophy is a composite, and is almost never original.
>many others of his time were stricken by how original his work was
novelty does not equal originality. they were mistaken as were many:
>Turgenev made the witty remark that there are inverse platitudes, which are frequently employed by people lacking in talent who wish to attract attention to themselves. Everyone knows, for instance, that water is wet, and someone suddenly says, very seriously, that water is dry, not that ice is, but that water is dry, and the conviction with which this is stated attracts attention.
this is Nietzsche's method many times. its pure style, nothing more.
>>10965538
not even close. many had made the same statements decades before him.

>> No.10965839

unironically Spengler.
just read his chapter on Buddhism and Stoicism as symptoms of the city people at the civilizational stage (the stage of cultural decline).
Even if you dont read the whole magnum opus Decline Of The West you should read this chapter. It's fascinatingly prophetic.

>> No.10965875

>>10965793
>I'm right and you know it.
Holy...

>> No.10965894

>>10965486
Who else understood western philosophy as being the source of nihilism?

>> No.10965939

>>10965809
>many had made the same statements decades before him.
yeah, but they didn´t achieved their goal

>> No.10965947

>>10965534
>nietzsche
>ironic shitposting for a fifth of his corpus
More like wasn't ironically shitposting for a fifth of his corpus.

>> No.10966001

>>10965486
>you can find his ideas in all these other guys' work (plus Schiller, Stirner, Leibniz, Heraclitus...)
>just read all their works like Nietzsche did rather than read the man who already did the decades of reading and synthesized it all into a new philosophy
>b-but the synthesis isn't new! it has no value!

>> No.10966207
File: 98 KB, 676x767, Nerd+gets+rejected+but+reveals+hes+1+in+content+on_5dce50_6390496.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10966207

>>10965305
>woah dude just like make your own meaning
I came up with this when I was 13
Why is he original?

>> No.10966591
File: 332 KB, 2000x1000, merkel_nietzsche_color-1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10966591

>>10966207
um... if you didn't call that concept an 'ubermensch' then you were clearly retarded at 13

>> No.10966739

>>10965726
Blake did it, and he did it long ago. Nietzsche only popularized it.
Read the Marriage of Heaven & Hell, it has most points of mr. N's criticism.
Unfortunately Nietzsche never mentioned that he was influenced by radical mystics.

>> No.10966772

>>10965753
Actually the core of his philosophy is extremely different from all those philosophers for it tries to justify life while all philosophy after Socrates is life negating. And yes I know that Schopenhauer was probably one of his greatest influences but that doesn't mean he is saying the same thing as him...He has more to do with Hiraclitus than any of the thinkers mentioned by >>10965486 btw


>>10965809
So he takes the portions he likes from everyone and then attacks them so people think he is smart? what do you think he is? a fucking internet poster?!

>........this is Nietzsche's method many times. its pure style, nothing more.

Write one aphorism as good as one of his and I will cut off my penis.

>> No.10966847

>>10966772
>Write one aphorism as good as one of his
I don't see where >>10965809 claimed to be a better writer than nietzsche...
Nobody said anything about him being a bad writer, just an unoriginal thinker.

>> No.10966853

>>10965947
unironic shitposting.
Might've been good if it had been ironic.

>> No.10966860

>>10965305
Wittgenstein

>> No.10966867

>>10965780
it *was* deconstruction.

>> No.10966893

>>10966772
I'm claiming history in Nietzschean terms.
Thus proving nietzsche's claims.
Therefore Nietzsche was right.

So this is the power of post-logic will?

>> No.10966922
File: 201 KB, 960x960, 1501395747444.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10966922

>if you criticise something it just means you're weak and want to justify that weakness
>!!!BOOM DIONYSUS EXPLODES!!! gEt WrEkT nUbZ
>there could never be a deep or true reason for the critique, it's just will-to-power from a point of weakness
>everyone wants the feeling of will-to-power
>no exceptions
>!!!BOOM DIONYSUS EXPLODES!!! gEt WrEkT nUbZ
>meanwhile Dionysus is rotting in his bed asking over and over, 'but what if Socrates really was corrupting the youth?'
>in no way could this eternal recurrence of a shitty question be ressentiment replacing Plato with irrational modernity
>because MUH FEELINZ OF POWWA!
>!!!BOOM DIONYSUS EXPLODES!!! gEt WrEkT nUbZ
>it's okay when I do it
>!!!BOOM DIONYSUS EXPLODES!!! gEt WrEkT nUbZ
>but what if he really was corrupting the youth tho?
>!!!BOOM DIONYSUS EXPLODES!!! gEt WrEkT nUbZ
>and, just a coincidence surely, every follower asks himself eternally 'what if gommunism/fascism really is gorrupting tha youthz?'
>!!!BOOM DIONYSUS EXPLODES!!! gEt WrEkT nUbZ
>MUH OVERMAN FEELZ
>!!!BOOM DIONYSUS EXPLODES!!! gEt WrEkT nUbZ
Powerful stuff.

>> No.10966941

>>10966922
just start amoring your fati

>> No.10966952

>>10966941
Okay then.
https://youtu.be/S_ScyKztGA0

>> No.10966957
File: 49 KB, 800x600, crashing the plane with no survivers.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10966957

>nietzsche did nothing original or controversial, just synthesized previous authors
kys

>> No.10967013

>>10966847
ok, you're right....But who was ever completely orignal? This is a lame argument to discredit a great thinker.


>>10966941
I will amore your ass

>> No.10967029

>>10967013
>I will amore your ass
You will try

>> No.10967268
File: 5 KB, 274x184, absurd man.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10967268

what was is fucking problem?

>> No.10967281

>>10967268
he tried to rationalize the absurdity of his hairline
he failed

>> No.10968216

>>10967281
tfw i have same hairline

>> No.10968501

>>10965334
jung's underrated. pick the meat and leave the bones. the thought we're all walking in a waking dream is pretty deep shit.

>> No.10968523

>>10966772
>what do you think he is? a fucking internet poster?!
if neetzsche lived today he'd spend all day shitposting about normies on r9k

>> No.10969287

>>10968523
Imagine telling yourself this to feel on par with one of the greatest minds of the last 150 years

>> No.10969315

>>10965486
This is true of his general ideas. I think his thoughts on specific circumstances may be original.

>> No.10969641

Are you fucking crazy. Sigmund Freud is one of the towering giants of the entire history of philosophy. His ideas are still enormously influential and have had a profound, irreversible effect on our societies.

>> No.10969646

>>10969287
prove me wrong

>> No.10970745

>>10969641
>Every male secretly wants to fuck their mother
>Everything is sex
Freud was "fucking crazy"

>His ideas had a profound irreversible effect on our societies
Name one concrete change to the world that would or wouldn't have occurred without Freud. And not "he changed peoples perspectives in this unverifiable way and I feel like he made things different because of influence."

>> No.10970757

>>10970745
>unverifiable
you know it's a brainlet who hasn't read freud when he posts the popper meme that freud isn't falsifiable

>> No.10970812

>>10966739
>The Marriage of Heaven and Hell is comparable to Thus Spoke Zarathustra
Surface level comparison.

>> No.10970813

>>10970745
you haven't read freud, have you?

>> No.10970828

>>10969641
>Sigmund Freud is one of the towering giants of the entire history of philosophy.
For the worst. His work singlehandedly resulted in two lost generations for psychology, and it's only now that the damage that was done by him to it is being repaired.
>His ideas are still enormously influential and have had a profound, irreversible effect on our societies.
Lol no they aren't. Neuroscience (ie a verifiable object) killed Freud just like biology killed Bergson, and William James and Heidegger are back in the game.

>>10970813
Freud's work - his ENTIRE work - is a fraud. It is nothing but facile, specious reasoning. And that's it.

>> No.10970910

>>10970828
>Freud's work - his ENTIRE work - is a fraud. It is nothing but facile, specious reasoning. And that's it.

I asked you a simple question, yet you couldn't answer
in other words, no?

>> No.10970920

>>10970812
Surface level observation.

>> No.10971016

>>10970920
Please. Zarathustra couldn't be condensed to any less pages than it already is — every section of it is valuable to the work. It covers far more than Heaven and Hell does, posits a more formidable post-Christian goal, and also employs a more formidable post-Christian style.

>> No.10971255

>>10970910
I've read Studies on Hysteria, Interpretation of Dreams, Beyond the Pleasure Principle, Civilization and its Discontents and Moses and Monotheism. Only the last one gave me any enduring information.

>> No.10971277

>>10970745
Watch an Adam Curtis doco if you're too brainlet to read on his influence.