[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 1.09 MB, 1956x2940, 3305972.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1347248 No.1347248 [Reply] [Original]

If i wanted to read a book written by Nietzsche because im interested about nihilism, where should i start?

>> No.1347254

>>1347248
What's the point of even being interested in anything at all...

>> No.1347258

I had the same question a while back. There's a book out there called "Basic Writings of Nietzsche", which was pretty helpful. It's a good place to start. Then maybe Thus Spach Zathura, or Ubermensch.
Yeah, sorry I can't spell.

>> No.1347268

>>1347258

The Overman is introduced in "Thus Spake Zarathustra". There is no text named after it.

>> No.1347278

>>1347268

Yeah, forgot about that. Sorry.

>> No.1347284

>>1347248

Nietzsche's entire philosophical project is a rabid fight AGAINST nihilism. You should probably realise this before you start.

As for where it is you should start, I don't know. I've been reading and re-reading Nietzsche's works for many many years now, and it's not the kind of shit you can just dip into and get an overview or find a system outlined from this or that book. There's a reason Bataille refers to Nietzsche's oeuvre as a 'labyrinth, pointing nowhere'. Deleuze does an amazing job in his 'Nietzsche and philosophy' of systematising it, but starting there without already having read a lot of Nietzsche yourself would probably be kinda difficult. You just have to jump in and persevere over time I guess.

>> No.1347287

>>1347284
Thank you so much
so many people seem to miss that

>> No.1347291

Zarathustra isn't a bad place to start, as you don't need too much background. Geneaology of Morals is great though if you're cool reading essays not novels

>> No.1347305

Kauffman's Nietzsche: Philosopher, Psychologist, Antichrist. You won't be disappointed.

>> No.1347315

>>1347284
THANK YOU!

people need to stop equating nieztsche with nihilism. HE IS NOT A NIHILIST far from it!

also op. read nietzsche chronologically, he constantly references himself and therefore it is necessary to read him chronologically.
If you want a little bit of an overview of his thought. Perhaps you should try reading 'will to power'. It is a collection of his notebooks and really covers everything concisely (albeit not as eloquently or with as much of a sense of humor as his polished works.)

TL;DR
read 'Will to Power' if that peaks your interest, Read the rest of his works chronologically.

>> No.1347318

If you want to become a nihilist, or see things from a nihilistic perspective--you would do better to read Sade or Bataille or Ballard or Genet or Lautreamont, Nietzsche thinks nihilists are pussies and they should "walk it off" in the epistemological sense, wut.

>> No.1347336

>>1347315
>peaks your interest

What the fuck are you doing on a literature board?

>> No.1347363

5/10, next time be a little more subtle, and include some details to highlight your ignorance.

>> No.1347452

shoot yourself

athiesm is a religion

>> No.1347882

>>1347318

If you want to become a nihilist, stop reading.

>> No.1347999

>>1347452
0/10

A hole is not a doughnut. Science is not faith.

>> No.1348178

>>1347284

perfect post is perfect.

>> No.1348185

>>1347284

>labyrinth, pointing nowhere

How could a maze point anywhere? It would be a fucking weird maze if it did. Do you mean to say it has no center to find?

>rabid fight AGAINST nihilism

Uh, no. God is dead. If God is the foundation of morality, God is dead = nihilism.

>> No.1348189

>>1347284
YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

Nietzsche is not against moral values, he is just against a lot of common attitudes about them and it's too complicated to get into and both those statements are probably wrong because too simple but whaver

Nietzsche rocks

>> No.1348193

>>1348185
>Uh, no. God is dead. If God is the foundation of morality, God is dead = nihilism.

Jesus you dumb fuck

Yes, Nietzsche says that God is dead. But one of his points is to argue precisely that God (and religion generally) IS NOT the foundation of all morality for all people. He absolutely argues against Christian morality, and therefore against the moral sentiments prevailing at the time, but that's not the same as arguing for the impossibility of any kind of value system or morality. He wanted to found a new value system, create a new moral grounding.

See Robert Solomon's essay "A More Severe Morality: Nietzsche's Affirmative Ethics"

>> No.1348204 [DELETED] 

>>1348185

Go and read "Of the Three Metamorphoses" in Thus Spoke Zarathustra. It perfectly adumbrates

>> No.1348213

>>1348185

Go and read "Of the Three Metamorphoses" in Thus Spoke Zarathustra. It perfectly adumbrates both Nietzsche's view about what you're talking about and what you're misunderstanding about Nietzsche. He is categorically not a nihilist. In fact, alongside Whitman, he's one of the great poet-philosophers of affirmation in the Western tradition.

>> No.1348214

>>1348193
>But one of his points is to argue precisely that God (and religion generally) IS NOT the foundation of all morality for all people

If you're some kind of slack jawed country bumpkin that reads at the surface of the text, this may very well be what you think Neitzsche was trying to say. However, you need to have read Kant to understand Neitzsche, and to understand that he is implicitly committed to Kant's assertion that morality is grounded in religion. We find new value systems because placing ourselves in a value systems (no matter their lack of grounding) and the Other outside of them, is a condition on the possibility of experience.

>> No.1348215

>>1348214
>Kant's assertion that morality is grounded in religion.

really. kant says that.

tell me more about the moral theories of kant and nietzsche because you clearly know what you are talking about.

>> No.1348221

>>1348214
seriously, it's breathtaking to me that you, in one post, accuse me of being a "slack jawed country bumpkin that reads at the surface of the text" and then says that (1) you need to read kant to understand nietzsche (2) that kant claims that the basis of morality is religion (3) that nietzsche is committed to a basically kantian view of morality. because 1 is maybe kind of true, 2 is flat out incorrect and insane, and 3 is maybe true in a sense but basically wrong when combined with 2. also your other point about value systems has some element of truth to it but is not particularly compelling as an argument.

>> No.1348223

>>1348214

>Neitzsche
>Neitzsche
>Neitzsche
>slack jawed country bumpkin

My you are a charming and intelligent fellow.

>However, you need to have read Kant to understand Neitzsche

That isn't true in the slightest. Of course, reading Kant is probably going to increase your understanding of... well, almost any philosopher after Kant, but reading Kant certainly isn't a requirement for reading Nietzsche with any comprehension.

>to understand that he is implicitly committed to Kant's assertion that morality is grounded in religion

What a crock of shit. Does Nietzsche think religions are value-structures? Of course. Does he think that a morality is a value-structure? Of course. Does that mean that he thinks, explicitly or implicitly, that all moralities are religions? No. I don't know where you got that idea, but I can assure you that you're very much mistaken.

>We find new value systems

In Nietzsche's eyes, we don't find them at all.

>because placing ourselves in a value systems (no matter their lack of grounding) and the Other outside of them, is a condition on the possibility of experience.

I literally don't know what the fuck you mean. Try again.

>> No.1348225

>>1348215

"That the world has a beginning, that my
thinking self is of simple and therefore indestructible nature,
that it is free in its voluntary actions and raised above the
compulsion of nature, and finally that all order in the things
constituting the world is due to a primordial being, from which
everything derives its unity and purposive connection -- these
are so many foundation stones of morals and religion."

Sure, I was speaking loosely last post. Morality isn't grounded in religion, it's grounded in God, the primordial being (see my first post).

What, you've never read the CPR?
http://www.hkbu.edu.hk/~ppp/cpr/antin.html