/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11826487]

I really like this guy but a lot of people say he was actually a retard or just a sophist who didnt say anything of value or that he was more of a poet than a philosopher and his philosophy because of this doesnt have a place in serious philosophical discussions, or that he just "made it all up" and blah blah blah
Where are these people coming from?

[Anonymous No.11826501]

>>11826487
They have an arbitrary criteria for meaning and misunderstand the variety that is (or could be called) philosophy

[Anonymous No.11826531]

>>11826501
Let me reformulate my question:
What kind of philosophical prejudices would be the ones of someone who dismisses his philosophy in this way? And what kind of temperament could be associated with them?

[Anonymous No.11826540]

>>11826531
moral realists, analytics, and empiricists.

[Anonymous No.11826590]

>>11826540
What is it about them that makes them dislike N?

[Anonymous No.11826605]

>>11826590
IMO? They have sticks up their asses and are made uncomfortable by the implications of Nietszche's work. This isn't to say there aren't valid criticisms of him, but that he doesn't deserve to be called a retard.

[Anonymous No.11826624]

NietzscheCuckedEternally.jpg
>resented Socrates so much that he turned him into the Third-Man argument against Ree
>resented greece so much that he turned it into the Antaeus of its own degrecoisation
>resented dionysus so much that he turned him into a maenad voodoo-doll of his own eternal cuckoldry
>resented christianity so much that he crucified himself as the last man incapable of being born again
>resented the flogged horse so much that he disgorged himself into the carcass of Salome
>and in the end resented himself so much that he became the slave morality of his own hubris

Now let us never speak of this dirty business again.

[Anonymous No.11826655]

>>11826624
He will never recover from this one.

[Anonymous No.11826659]

>>11826487
Nietzsche is like a math book.
The proofs are left for the reader.

[Anonymous No.11826663]

>>11826655
I know. But the cult of personality props up even stranger things.

[Anonymous No.11826682]

>>11826659
Comparing Nietzsche to math is like comparing an actual physical basket of fruits to a blueprint for a fruit that everyone is constantly arguing over, even though that basket of fruits over there was wrought with and by an intelligent creators design.

Think about that analogy for a minute then you’re allowed to type

[Anonymous No.11826692]

>>11826590
Nietszche is one of the few honest atheists in that he seriously considers the consequences of the metaphysical commitments (viz. materialism) of most moderns. Some, as I do, will reject his ideas because they simply do not accept those commitments, while others will reject them because they don't think these commitments lead to his conclusions, but they do.

[Anonymous No.11826693]

>>11826682
Oh shit my bad flip that analogy around.

It’s currently ordered A:B::a:b but it should be A:B::a:b ofc

[Anonymous No.11826695]

>>11826693
I mean it’s currently ordered A:B::b:a

[Anonymous No.11826700]

I never liked Nietzsche because he couldn’t make up his damn mind. He would absolutely demolish one thing and build it back up again, or just demolish the other side of the argument. He just pissed off as many people as possible in an opium induced rampage of a pen

[Anonymous No.11826705]

>>00000001
hi

[Anonymous No.11826722]

>>11826700
The point is too keep thinking in new ways and not being a closed minded autist

[Anonymous No.11826739]

>>11826722
It’s great to look at new perspectives and all that but just insulting everything makes you a contrarian prick. Make up your mind and explain, don’t just rant about everything under the sun

[Anonymous No.11826741]

>>11826487
Critique of Nietzche should start from his understanding of history.

As a man of extraordinary laziness, I have always been the overman.

[Anonymous No.11826742]

>>11826487
he didn't adhere to or really even attempt to develop a rigid system of reasoning. he grappled with very loosely defined ideas like 'transcendence' and the inconsistencies in his work are probably the result of the frequent oscillations of his mental state.
people are right that he was part sophist, part poet, part philosopher. he dresses up scathing social critiques in what resembles existential philosophy, and is actually relatable and enjoyable to read. i believe he had the most realistic, widely applicable takes on the human condition, because he was not afraid of writing as himself with all of his personal flaws front and center.

[Anonymous No.11826748]

>>11826693
Nietzsche strongly rejects any sort of definitory discourse. As such you literally can't systematize him, not even in his own arbitrariness. He does not define any of the terms he uses, nor he keeps using them in the same context. You can only interpret them, and he is very clear about it, he even gives you a full fledged example in the third section of GoM (which is just Nietzsche's interpretation of the last aphorism from the second section).

[Anonymous No.11826750]

>>11826739
But thats not all he does. He likes some people, like Spinoza and Stendhal

[Anonymous No.11826834]

>>11826748
That was my point, yes

[Anonymous No.11826872]

>>11826692
I almost forgot the most important class of these men, a group that makes Nietzsche's primary target: the bugman, otherwise known as the liberal, the literal last man. For obvious reasons, these people will hate his ideas and work.

[Anonymous No.11827113]

Hi guys, would you agree that Neeshie embodies well the mental condition of "anxiety" which of course is just a medical term but the symptoms quite remind me of Nietzsche's way of examining everything and being extremely unhappy? Anyone else?

[Anonymous No.11827146]

>>11827113
No. His deconstructions are counterweighted by visions of grandeur and transcendence. His work is very life-affirming, even if it's not often cheerful.

[Anonymous No.11827169]

>>11827113
He seems more like bipolar to me

[Anonymous No.11827188]

>>11826663
capital is sentient

[Anonymous No.11827504]

>>11827146
That sounds like a sophism.

[Anonymous No.11827542]

>>11827146
Actually, never mind, that's not a sophism, I missed the "life-affirming" part of your comment. Do you believe that anxious people can't be either life-affirming and/or transcendant?

In the physical world: did his body live through a phenomenon we now know as "anxiety"? maybe in the following ways: pessimism, strictness, lonesomeness, no beliefs, no faith, no confidence, general bitterness, depressism and realism?

[Anonymous No.11827547]

>>11827169
Does one exclude the other?

[Anonymous No.11827553]

>>11826624
>Dionysian
>didn't drink

[Anonymous No.11827557]

>>11827547
i am like a case study for bipolar and anxiety acording to my doctors. however in recent times they are now trying to say i also have borderline personality disorder and schizoaffective disorder. I am starting to eye them as being dicks, and think I should just enver think about anything ever again- you cannot be insane if you block out all thought and operate like a zombie is my thinking.

[Anonymous No.11827564]

>>11826624
LMFAO said the satin-clad υπάλληλος, lethargically.

[Anonymous No.11827577]

>>11827557
If it's not helping, sure. and finding a routine that works for you and blocking the bad thoughts and habits might be eventually possible? Benediximus to you.

[Anonymous No.11827588]

>>11827577
benediximus to you too then anon, nice word
benedico is bless or praise?

[Anonymous No.11827595]

>>11826624
Based retarded ”””enlightened””” moralist

[Anonymous No.11827608]

>>11826682
Yo you gotta redo that nikka i'm 2 stoned sonnn hahahaahhaah yoooo
Seriously, redo the analogy.

[Anonymous No.11827638]

>>11827595
>thinking this is a moralist argument

[Anonymous No.11827719]

>>11827146
What do you mean by "his deconstructions"

[Anonymous No.11827872]

>>11827542
He was definitely anxious by your definition which is not exactly what I was thinking but whatever let's roll with it
I don't think a person who can be characterized more by their anxieties than their positive contributions can be called life-affirming, because no one is going to look to someone completely succumbed to anxiety as an example to be followed. There is nothing worth admiring or uniquely "alive" about that. I would characterize N by ideas that may have come to him partially as a result of his anxieties, but not by the anxieties themselves.
>>11827719
Brutal critiques of powerful institutions and popular ideas, without presenting immediately obvious positive alternatives.

[Anonymous No.11828577]

>>11826700
>looking for easy answers in philosophy

[Anonymous No.11828597]

>>11826487

You can have very strong personal experiences with Nietzsche's books, which means they can be extremely meaningful to you in certain moments of your life. That said, he is criptic and difficult to make sense of in "scientific" terms - i.e. he's very difficult to study as an objective, systematically organized or evolving thinker, which is what bothers academia.
Nonetheless, I think he is really worth reading. It will make you think and you'll get something out of it, which is what matters about reading experiences.

[Anonymous No.11828607]

>>11826487
what's the consensus, did he die from eating too many pears?

>With a Spartan rigour which never ceased to amaze his landlord-grocer, Nietzsche would get up every morning when the faintly dawning sky was still grey, and, after washing himself with cold water from the pitcher and china basin in his bedroom and drinking some warm milk, he would, when not felled by headaches and vomiting, work uninterruptedly until eleven in the morning. He then went for a brisk, two-hour walk through the nearby forest or along the edge of Lake Silvaplana (to the north-east) or of Lake Sils (to the south-west), stopping every now and then to jot down his latest thoughts in the notebook he always carried with him. Returning for a late luncheon at the Hôtel Alpenrose, Nietzsche, who detested promiscuity, avoided the midday crush of the table d’hôte in the large dining-room and ate a more or less ‘private’ lunch, usually consisting of a beefsteak and an ‘unbelievable’ quantity of fruit, which was, the hotel manager was persuaded, the chief cause of his frequent stomach upsets. After luncheon, usually dressed in a long and somewhat threadbare brown jacket, and armed as usual with notebook, pencil, and a large grey-green parasol to shade his eyes, he would stride off again on an even longer walk, which sometimes took him up the Fextal as far as its majestic glacier. Returning ‘home’ between four and five o’clock, he would immediately get back to work, sustaining himself on biscuits, peasant bread, honey (sent from Naumburg), fruit and pots of tea he brewed for himself in the little upstairs ‘dining-room’ next to his bedroom, until, worn out, he snuffed out the candle and went to bed around 11 p.m.

[Anonymous No.11828614]

>>11826700
words fall from your mouth like shit from ass

[Anonymous No.11829061]

>>11828607
Thats a nice rutine

[Anonymous No.11829324]

>>11826487
Can N be considered an idealist ?

[Anonymous No.11829353]

>>11829324
uh
>>11826624
Pseudo-idealism perhaps?
Idealistic relativism?
Negative idealism, basically.

[Anonymous No.11829356]

>>11829324
Pragmatist idealist

[Anonymous No.11829439]

>>11829324
Hard realist to the point where the distinction between realism and idealism is non-existent.

[Anonymous No.11829463]

[Anonymous No.11829479]

>>11828607
>and a large grey-green parasol to shade his eyes

Not only a NEET but a fag as well. FUCK Nietzsche.

[Anonymous No.11830117]

>>11827872
Thanks, that clears things up and I find myself in agreement.

[Anonymous No.11830449]

>>11826487
The sort of hot take on Nietzsche that reduces him more to being a kind of poet or culture critic, rather than a philosopher, assumes that philosophy is primarily argumentation. As such, clear and formal arguments make it easier to evaluate whatever positions one holds. Now, Nietzsche does use arguments of the form that Aristotle would describe as dialectical or rhetorical (not necessarily sophistical, by Aristotle's meaning), but he also uses rhetorical elements to conceal or emphasize certain points he makes.

Now, whether he's a sophisticated is a different matter. The ancient meaning of the word was more ambivalent, meaning either someone wise, or someone manipulative and maybe dishonest, a kind of "wise guy", as it were. For at least Plato, the issue of the relationship between sophistry and philosophy cannot be settled by mere rejection; everyone knows that Socrates is sometimes sophistical. But for moderns, we have the merely negative connotations of the term, which is also informed by Aristotle's Sophistical Refutations, i.e., the view that their arguments are also fundamentally flawed. Nietzsche is closer to Plato on the matter, much to the frustration of modern academic philosophers.

[Anonymous No.11830498]

>>11826540
How do we stop them?

[Anonymous No.11830712]

>>11830449

Aristotle would think so little of NEETzsche that he wouldn't even sodomize him.

[Anonymous No.11830723]

>>11826624
extremely pretentious