/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.15760409]

Was he correct in his proposition that the modern Good/Evil paradigm is based on the resentment that slaves in the roman empire felt towards their masters.

[Anonymous No.15760446]

>>15760409
yes definately! we (THE HUMAN RACE) didnt have a conception of good and evil prior to augustus

[Anonymous No.15760451]

>>15760409
No he was basically a retard even by 18th century standards.

[Anonymous No.15760461]

>>15760409
yep nobody had ever thought of filtering things through good/bad until a bunch of shrimp dicked gamma losers started furiously jerking their little willies out of rage for the big strong BEAUTIFUL superior men of action who bathed in dionysian spirit

Nieztche was a fucking retard and wrong about 70% of his bullshit. Literally just an incel angry at reality

[Anonymous No.15760488]

>>15760409
He was on to something. Context is important, but I side With Hegel in reading it as a moment of something much greater. You can say, hey this is how morality rose up (in the west; according to my reading and the information available to me as a single angry lonely 19th century german savant) but it is more than hasty to generalize good conduct as an example of an unchecked historical event that could have been otherwise if my team won

[Anonymous No.15760490]

>>15760461
recommend me another philosopher. I've only read plato and nietzsche.

[Anonymous No.15760532]

>>15760488
Virtue signaling is definitely from resentment, Nietzche was correct about the weaponization of morality and moralizing but incorrect about the Good/Evil dialectic itself being a way of the resentful horde to tear down the strong and beautiful

>>15760490
Depends what you're looking for. I personally enjoy Spengler a bit. Kierkegaard is sort of a Christian Nietzche (or the answer to nietzche) if you like that

[Anonymous No.15760550]

>>15760532
>Virtue signaling is definitely from resentment
you sound like a bot saying that out of nowhere
> the weaponization of morality
I’m sure thats the correct way to describe what he’s talking about, but that doesn’t mean what he is saying is true

[Anonymous No.15760568]

>>15760409
>DEY WUZ JUS JELLY N SHEEEITT
The ultimate midwit.

[Anonymous No.15761057]

>>15760409
>the resentment that slaves in the roman empire felt towards their masters.
how would we know?

[Anonymous No.15761062]

>>15760409
>was nietzsche correct
no

[Anonymous No.15761158]

>>15760409
i think that's more of a vivid example that would be repeated among any group of people who were dominated by their neighbors but i think it's much more akin to the cave allegory. 99% of humanity spends its entire life being ruled so observing a system of morality from the outside is like exiting the cave

[Anonymous No.15761230]

>>15760409
He was right. Maybe his thoughts are too cotroversolial for the retards that leach onto these threads to comment about shit they haven't even read about,let alone thought about. But they are exactly the offsprings of the ones he speaks about, weak men promoting weak outlooks. It's not even anti christian, these people despise god more than anyone else.

[Anonymous No.15762356]

>>15760409
You've misunderstood the source making your proposition redundant.

[Anonymous No.15762370]

>>15760490
Aristotle

[Anonymous No.15762425]

>>15760409
He was 100% correct.

[Anonymous No.15762497]

>>15760409
Yes. Good/Evil (slave morality) was a Semitic reversal of pagan Good/Bad (master morality). There is no good case for believing that slave morality is/was the default of the entire species, especially prior to advanced civilization. To this day, this is how the master and slave differ in how they moralize.

[Anonymous No.15762514]

>>15762497
Christian morality is the way it is because that's how God wants us to behave. Find Christ, bugman.

[Anonymous No.15762524]

>>15762514
Christians are the original bugmen from the perspective of the Romans, so don't call me a bugman, you worm.

[Anonymous No.15762528]

>>15760446
>>15760451
>>15760461
>all the same post agreeing with an OP who clearly didn't read the book

[Anonymous No.15762529]

>>15760461
>Literally just an incel angry at reality
He jerked himself off until he went blind.

[Anonymous No.15762538]

>>15762497
>master morality
yeah real tough guy

[Anonymous No.15762539]

>>15762529
>being superstitious

[Anonymous No.15762555]

>>15762529
>Wagner: doctor, I'm afraid Nietzsche may be a total wanker.
Lmao. Based beyond belief.

[Anonymous No.15762559]

>>15760461
based

[Anonymous No.15762564]

>>15760550
Nietzsche made explicit statements against virtue signalling

[Anonymous No.15762597]

>>15762538
You live in a world of Nietzsche's making, not the other way around, and it's because despite his inherited physical ailments and eventual brain cancer he dedicated himself to the life of a suicidal hermit in order to write some of the best books ever written. I'd say that's tough, all things considered.

[Anonymous No.15762607]

>>15762597
Nah, he was a loser pseud and so are you.

[Anonymous No.15762608]

>>15760409
>Was he correct in his proposition that the modern Good/Evil paradigm is based on the resentment that slaves in the roman empire felt towards their masters.
No, that's retarded. But I'm guessing this isn't exactly what Nietzsche said, even if it wouldn't be far from it in its falseness.

[Anonymous No.15762620]

>>15762607
Nigger, drop the shit, you don't even read.

>>15762608
If you want to know what he means by that, you have to read Genealogy and Antichrist.

[Anonymous No.15762622]

>>15760490
Carlyle, Kierkegaard, Bible, in order to reverse your retardation by Nietzsche.

You should also read Aristotle. Heidegger said one should study Aristotle for ten years before reading Nietzsche. That's an exaggeration, but it holds truth.

[Anonymous No.15762638]

>>15762620
>If you want to know what he means by that, you have to read Genealogy and Antichrist.
I'm familiar with his philosophy, but I'm not going to be in-detail presumptuous so yes I'll read his books at some point.

[Anonymous No.15762772]

>>15760490
how about me

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACG59tmAUbQ

[Anonymous No.15762784]

>>15762772
Cringe attempts at universally materially transcendental dialectics.

[Anonymous No.15764115]

>>15762597
>You live in a world of Nietzsche's making,
This is simply not true. I hate this board so much.

[Anonymous No.15764133]

>>15762622
Why are you giving suggestion when its obvious you yourself haven't read any of the things you listed?

[Anonymous No.15764446]

>>15764133
I've read Kierkegaard, Carlyle and the Bible.

Why so doubtful?

[Anonymous No.15764631]

>>15764115
How is it not true? Do you have any idea how many people read him and how much has changed exactly as he prescribed it would?

[Anonymous No.15764661]

>>15764446
>Why so doubtful?
Because you're dishonest downright to your soul, there isn't an honest bone in your body. As far as I'm conserned you're not even a Christian.

[Anonymous No.15764677]

>>15760409
>Good/Evil paradigm is based on the resentment that slaves in the roman empire felt towards their masters.

what about the good and evil as presented by Socrates?

[Anonymous No.15764678]

>>15764631
Not many people actually read him, and even less people get him, and a very few who do get him live by his teachings.
Just because he's popular to meme on /lit/ doesn't mean a thing, you shallow deluded shit.

[Anonymous No.15764687]

>>15764631
He's an important thinker but "a world of Nietzsche's making" is such extreme overstatement. There are dozens of philosophers which I would put ahead of him in terms of their impact, and hundreds of thousands of humans (across every field of life) whose accomplishes ring out louder.

[Anonymous No.15764719]

>>15764687
It's not only that, but also the fact that a world govere
ned by his outlooks is downright alien and even unimaginable. That's why his op pisses me off so much, the fact that a person can be so wrong yet so hell bent on preaching and commenting boils my blood.

[Anonymous No.15764722]

>>15764678
Many influential people read him, and as I said his writings rang more true than any others in the last 150 years, so he obviously hit the nail on the head. He predicted the communist uprisings, and the capitalist globalist system, and knew what they would wrought, for starters.

>>15764687
I don't think it's extreme. I've been reading him for 10 years and I am still surprised by my encounters with him. He offered so much and is mentioned so often that it is only reasonable to think that he played a critical part in how the world changed since his time.

[Anonymous No.15765033]

>>15762529
Kek

[Anonymous No.15765072]

Honestly it seems plausible, but I don't think there's any historicity to it, I just think it's a feature of human psychology.

There's a lot of it in politics, namely that people resent people who are more powerful than them and that this produces a different moral system. You can see it both among radical liberals like SJWs or among /pol/tards both of whom are usually complete losers who both create moral systems designed to make everything they hate seem evil and everything they believe good.

I mean, especially in /pol/, the resentment is obvious, their object of resentment are Jews which as a group is usually but not always wildly successful both economically and based on merits, while they are losers shitposting on a Mongolian tapestry-weaving forum.