Women Amirite

[Anonymous No.12858699]

>SUPPOSING that Truth is a woman--what then? Is there not ground for suspecting that all philosophers, in so far as they have been dogmatists, have failed to understand women--that the terrible seriousness and clumsy importunity with which they have usually paid their addresses to Truth, have been unskilled and unseemly methods for winning a woman? Certainly she has never allowed herself to be won; and at present every kind of dogma stands with sad and discouraged mien--IF, indeed, it stands at all!

[Anonymous No.12858854]

>>12858699
you're so retarded it's kind of amazing
here's your price

[Anonymous No.12858921]

>>12858854
>Among human beings there is no greater banality than death. Second in order, because it is possible to die without being born, comes birth, and next comes marriage.

[Anonymous No.12859029]

>>12858699
He's shitting on philosophers there, not women.

[Anonymous No.12859250]

>>12859029
>doesn't get it

[Anonymous No.12859254]

>>12859029

[Anonymous No.12859281]

>>12859250
No, I get that OP was just shitposting.

[Anonymous No.12859298]

>>12858699
>roasting philosophers is now fedora
Then /lit/ is a fedora, and so by extension all is none, and there is no fedora.

[Anonymous No.12859301]

>>12859281
>when you're dumber than a shitpost

[Anonymous No.12859306]

>>12859298
>also doesn't get it
Mandatory post. The average poster on /lit/ does not understand the basics of the philosophers they shill for.

[Anonymous No.12859328]

>>12859301
>Let's just allow shitposters to fill a literature/philosophy board up with their nonsense and not flatly correct them ever. Surely the board will remain quality for a long time that way.

[Anonymous No.12859344]

>>12859328
>let's not understand basic logic while arguing over a philosophy post, now THAT will epically improve the board

[Anonymous No.12859396]

>>12859306
Oh, you are the one from the other Nietzsche thread who got BTFO'd on his interpretation, and then made the OP post in his narcissistic resentment. You are being pathetic.

[Anonymous No.12859458]

>>12859344
Women aren't even shallow to Nietzsche, he considers them outside the reaches of comprehension. They have nothing to do with the process of being comprehended, just like truth. He is saying that philosophers have pursued trying to comprehend that which is incomprehensible and that it's no wonder that we are descending into an age of nihilism finally.

[Anonymous No.12859466]

He's saying that philosophers who are so adamant in believing their own axioms are like those men who think they know women like a science

[Anonymous No.12859489]

>>12859396
>samefag

[Anonymous No.12859490]

>>12859466
>doesn't get it

[Anonymous No.12859496]

>>12859396
Stop avatar fagging you cunt.

[Anonymous No.12859521]

>>12859458
>he considers them outside the reaches of comprehension
Ain't that the truth. The Supreme Gentleman does not resent.

[Anonymous No.12859524]

>>12859458

Thats nor true at all. () women to neitsche are like men plus more. They have all of mens qualities and also more equalities, but because of this they are easily ignoralble yapping beings. If a woman knows about philosophy it’s because she was bread for millenia to take dick and something went wrong that caused her tovalue philosophy over dick, everyone has always known this, neitzsche just made it fashionable.

His “ if you stare into the abyss” line only makes sense if you picture him, furrowed brow and all, in a strip club spreading a girl open

[Anonymous No.12859544]

>>12859524
"Women aren't even shallow" is a direct quote from Nietzsche, in TSZ iirc.

[Anonymous No.12859874]

>>12858699
b

[Anonymous No.12859955]

I don't get it it litteraly make no sense

[Anonymous No.12861520]

>>12859955
The quote or the joke?

[Anonymous No.12861730]

>>12859544
they are a surface, philosophers court truth the way a rake courts women, their attempts at winning over the audience amount to playful teasing, lusty proclamations, polite compliments, then finally back them against the wall, look straight into their eyes, say 'I will have you, with me you will know no greater joy,' a homosexual once called me a serial rapist with a proclivity for melodrama, likely for the edification of his female companions, his observation was appropriate for he and I and all philosophers through the ages

[Anonymous No.12862066]

>>12861730
Fuck off BAP.

[Anonymous No.12862098]

>>12858699
>Women Amirite
Agreed<div class="like-perk-cnt">&#x1F40A;</div>

[Anonymous No.12862137]

>>12862098
Disgusting.

[Anonymous No.12862652]

>>12861520
Both I guess

[Anonymous No.12862871]

>>12862137
why are her legs so thin but her butt so big?

[Anonymous No.12862876]

>>12862652
accelerationist humor is hit or miss

[Anonymous No.12862989]

>>12862876
Definitely not an accelfag.

[Anonymous No.12862996]

>>12862871
Corn syrup, pill menopause combined with monsantopause, and instaposting.

[Anonymous No.12863076]

>>12859254
What the fuck were they doing?
Why is Nietz so skinny? Didnt he loved power and strength?

[Anonymous No.12863173]

>>12863076
Only his form of power.
Which resulted in this form of power.
And which is power in its own way.
Dyn-O-mite guns.

[Anonymous No.12863219]

>>12859458
>>12861730
Stop pretending to have read Nietzsche

[Anonymous No.12863233]

when a stereotype means both "white knight" and "misogynist", "alt-right" and "commie", "conspiracy theorist" and "blind skeptic", that's usually a sign it represents none of the above

[Anonymous No.12863317]

>>12863219
Not previous anon. But care to then explain what he was trying to say?
Honestly i would have a similar interpretation to him on equating understanding women to understanding the "truth" and i've read twillight of the idols and will to powa.
He really makes various instances of saying that women are in a point beyond shallow and how they think of themselves of deep creatures.
Its really funny to me how so many people read the same thing about Nietzsche and yet they all take things diferently.

[Anonymous No.12863336]

>>12863317
it's as though nietzsche is an edgelord and people are just interpreting him based on internal biases

[Anonymous No.12863345]

>>12863317
While he is partially right, in his neurotically overdetermined way, the joke is that if Truth is a woman why would we trust the advice of an incel to win her over?

[Anonymous No.12863346]

there is one guy who really doesn't understand nietzsche and really hates it and keeps spamming anti-n posts and thread

[Anonymous No.12863367]

>>12862871
fat + in heels

[Anonymous No.12863374]

>>12859254
post the full picture, you dingus

[Anonymous No.12863428]

>>12863336
True, but i think that was he wanted really to happen in order to escape nihilism. He very often rises agaisnt tradicionalism and other forms of christian values but in my opinion i could literally use his theory of creating a set of "positive", affirming values stil back up most (not all) of the tradicional or christian values in some way if i felt the desire to.
I think anything from an incel wanting women to remain ""pure"" or even a polyamorous hyper sex beast could cut the values they wanted from any god or imperative philosophy and still hold to them as they affirm their desires and give them power from their diferent prespectives.

>>12863345
While i consider your instance right i also consider his interpretation right awell since Nietzsche comes from a point of view that admits nihilism and that there are no truths and so he starts building up from there.

[Anonymous No.12863440]

>>12863428
>True, but i think that was he wanted really to happen
*that was what he really wanted to happen
My bad.

[Anonymous No.12863468]

>>12863374

[Anonymous No.12863487]

>>12863468
Was early swans based off some extreme Nietzschean view point?

[Anonymous No.12863807]

>>12863219
https://antilogicalism.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/the-portable-nietzsche-walter-kaufmann.pdf

The OP post is crystal clear. Stop trolling.

[Anonymous No.12863860]

>>12863807
Does he say this because women dont understand their deepest desires for powah? And instead lie to themselves in some form of pseud-romantiscism?
Is that what he is trying to imply?