[ 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: 9 KB, 284x177, index.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14186443 No.14186443 [Reply] [Original]

(1/2)
Nietzsche's affirmation of life and Will To Power has to be analyzed in relational polarity. Power only exists as a relation between two entities. For an entity to express power, it must subdue a different entity, that which is not itself by acting upon it, hence its power is derived from relation to the other. Nietzsche implicitly affirms life by subjection. For this to work, one needs an infinite amount of entities available to serve as the opposite polarity for the expression of power. This leads one into having to posit some sense of an Eternity in order to "feed" the power-relational polarity the necessary entities it needs in order to express itself. If eternity is not actual in the physical sense (most but not all cosmological models subscribe to an universe with a start and an end) or consists of an eternally recurring phenomena that is not fully scientifically provable (which, at the root, would be the case by the simple virtue of the fact that no model eternal or otherwise which deals with the fundamental question of existence: "Why is there anything at all?", is provable by science), then eternity either is transcendent or at the bare minimum allows for this possibility given the lack of proof for fully enclosed systems of reality. This in the first place already refutes Nietzsche's claim that there is no metaphysical subject, the possibility of a non-physical/transcendent form such as the mere possibility of a non-physical Soul alone already significantly challenges all of Nietzsche's philosophying. For one to take Nietzsche at face-value, one has to be committed to materialism, otherwise all his utterances are pointless in light of possible physically transcendent existence. It is not hard to show this, because all his formulations can be inverted. For a Christian, Nietzsche is the one who is the slave-moralist, his philosophy a ressentiment stemming from God's Authority, etc.

>> No.14186447

>>14186443
(2/2)
Moreover the implications of this are more grievous. The eternity of a WTP mechanism can be easily and most logically re-cast as an eternal hell. If the souls (or whatever one chooses to call these transcendent entities) are not confined to the same locality or forced to interact with other souls/entities (as is the case in the world, which is physically confined, however we should be agnostic at best towards this being the case in some other metaphysical reality where the laws of physics as we know them are not necessarily the same or even exist) then the WTP relation consists on both poles of entities which are in eternal conflict with eachother, since a "slave moralist" in the Nietzschean sense would not choose to cohabit the same space as a "life-affirming" (in the Nietzschean sense) entity (to see this is the case, one only needs to read Scripture of the religion which Nietzsche many times espouses as exemplary of slave morality, which posits exactly this eternal severance of "wheat from chaff") . This is an apt description of hell. Especially so, because there does not exist an entity to be slaughtered or otherwise consumed by which one can enjoy the "fruits" of the expression of power. The only thing left is then the directionless process itself which is eternally consuming itself and its participants.

The alternative view that does not posit something transcendental is certainly not life-affirming either, as slave-moralists who defer judgement to "the next world" are necessary and indispensable for life to exist in the first place. If one runs out of slave-moralists or space for deferral, a space for meek "forgiveness" if you will, then WTP is only a process which in Darwinian fashion will (with technological advancement) lead to the destruction of life altogether, as we progressively run out of willing "slave-moralists" who are necessary components of the expression of WTP. So even though materialism is the best bet for Nietzsche's philosophy, it still ends up being wrong; what Nietzsche claims is life-affirming is anything but.

Thus Nietzsche's philosophy (as far as it makes sense to talk about it in regard to it being "right" or "wrong") is clearly self-refuting, no matter from which perspective one looks at it. Let us try however the extract a golden nugget from Nietzsche's philosophy which could be in part credited for bringing to the forefront a more serious examination of underlying mechanisms of moral values, power etc. The positive lies mostly in his methodology, one can commend Nietzsche at least for his desire to look into things with greater depth, but retroactively and now obviously, not much more than that.

>> No.14186490

>>14186443
Nice work OP

>> No.14186662

>>14186490
ty fren

>> No.14186684

I see too many big words. Wanna give me a single paragraph tl;dr?

>> No.14186700

>>14186684
Sure:
Nietzsche was wrong.

>> No.14186759

>>14186700
Thanks, that's nice to know.

>> No.14186811

>>14186700
>he argues assuming there is a soul

>> No.14186816

>>14186443
>Power only exists as a relation between two entities. For an entity to express power, it must subdue a different entity, that which is not itself by acting upon it, hence its power is derived from relation to the other.

I'll take "What Is Self-Overcoming" for 100, Alex.

>> No.14186824

>>14186811
>t. Pyrrho

>> No.14186827
File: 974 KB, 1699x1098, Chesterton quote nerves aristos Nietzsche.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14186827

>> No.14186844

>>14186811
Nope. The mere possibility of a transcendetal reality (not even proof) already collapses Nietzsche's reasoning. Nietzsche is basically a materialist, for him "life" is life in the sense described by physical equations, that is the only way his reasoning makes any logical sense. Initially. But even if you look at his work with that notion, it still ends up falling flat on its face. It's really hard to rescue his philosophy from internal inconsistencies and faulty logic. His philosophy is at best just nostalgia about his conception of some Roman or Greek nobility and how things should be. But the logic he applies to criticism of slave morality and Christianity specifically is all wrong.

>> No.14186871

>>14186844
>Nietzsche's reasoning
By saying that you have demonstrated that you haven't read a single work from him. Nice job!

>> No.14186901

>>14186443
it sounds like you read foucault and not nietzsche desu

>> No.14186914

>>14186443
>For this to work, one needs an infinite amount of entities available to serve as the opposite polarity for the expression of power.
No. Everything needing an opposite does not mean you need an infinite number of things. Newtons law of equal and opposite reactions, for example, does not necessitate an infinite number of reactions. The opposite doesn't need it's own new opposite or chain of indefinite opposites; its opposite is just the previous thing.

>This leads one into having to posit some sense of an Eternity
No. Don't jump from infinity to "eternity." There's an infinity between 0 and 1.

>Nietzsche is the one who is the slave-moralist, his philosophy a ressentiment stemming from God's Authority, etc.
No, this makes me think you haven't read him.