/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.13573831]

What is Nietzsche's self overcoming if not identical to the ascetic ideal he criticizes in GM?

Say someone practices self-overcoming by denying himself ice cream. Is this not simply self denial in the Christian sense? Perhaps the reason for the denial is the difference. Ascetics deny pleasure out of distaste. Those who deny pleasure to self-overcome do so in service of a higher cause, to ascend.

https://www.cgg.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Library.sr/CT/BS/k/54/Overcoming-Part-5-Self-Denial.htm
"Jesus calls upon His followers to reject the natural human inclination toward self. [...] Our own pleasures and happiness can no longer be primary goals."

I recognize that I may be conflating whatever he meant by self-overcoming with those ideas of modern day self-improvement communities. I also may misunderstand the critique of the ascetic ideal.

[Anonymous No.13573871]

>>13573831
I don't think the critique of the ascetic ideal is necessarily a critique in the exclusively negative sense.
From page 77:
>"The ascetic ideal points the way to so many bridges to independence that no philosopher can refrain from inwardly rejoicing and clapping hands on hearing the story of all those who, one fine day, decided to say ‘no’ to any curtailment of their liberty, and go off into the desert: even granted they were just strong asses and the complete opposite of a strong spirit. Consequently, what does the ascetic ideal mean for a philosopher? My answer is – you will have guessed ages ago: on seeing an ascetic ideal, the philosopher smiles because he sees an optimum condition of the highest and boldest intellectuality [Geistigkeit], – he does not deny ‘existence’ by doing so, but rather affirms his existence and only his existence, and possibly does this to the point where he is not far from making the outrageous wish: pereat mundus, fiat philosophia, fiat philosophus, fiam! . . ."
Further, from page 80:
>"Finally, with regard to the chastity of philosophers, this type of spirit obviously has a different progeny than children, and perhaps maintains the survival of its name, its bit of immortality, in some other way (in ancient India it was said with even more presumption, ‘why should the man whose soul is the world need to procreate?’). This has nothing of chastity from ascetic scruple or hatred of the senses, any more than it is chastity when an athlete or jockey abstains from women: instead, it is their dominating instinct, at least during periods when they are pregnant with something great. Every artist knows how harmful sexual intercourse is at times of great spiritual tension and preparation; for those with greatest power and the surest instincts, it is not even a case of experience, bad experience, – but precisely that maternal instinct ruthlessly takes charge of all other stockpiles and reserves of energy, of animal vigour, to the advantage of the work in progress: the greater energy uses up the lesser."

[Anonymous No.13573922]

oh god, is this what i've been doing all along? i'm really insane.

[Anonymous No.13574067]

The ascetic ideal will overcome itself - like all things, 'tis a Gesetz des Lebens - when it will finally question truth, its last frontier, for the good freethinking ascetics

[Anonymous No.13574579]

>>13573871
>page 77
You should cite by section/aphorism, not page.

[Anonymous No.13575111]

>>13574579
noted