what does /lit/ think of Nietzche?

[Anonymous No.16781315]

Do you find his work compelling? Was he the most profound figure in his field at the time?

[Anonymous No.16781324]

>>16781315
To me
Nietzsche was on the doorstep of what the tantrics got into in the east
My issue is that Nietzsche discovered these things through reaction and contrarianism, and thus was not able to unveil these ideas complete untethered, uninhibited, and unhinged the way they were able to in the east. They simply lusted for life.

[Anonymous No.16781330]

>>16781315
If it weren't for his cringe perspectivism, he would have been completely based. As it is, he is still quite based, but he is also dangerous and corruptive for the weak mind.

[Anonymous No.16781335]

>>16781315
>Waaaaahhhhh people suck
The "Philosopher"

[Anonymous No.16781345]

>>16781324
He had to knock down to reveal his own creative system.

[Anonymous No.16781350]

[Anonymous No.16781358]

>>16781350

[Anonymous No.16781361]

>>16781330
What makes his perspective cringe? Also What makes him dangerous for those with a “follower” mindset?

[Anonymous No.16781367]

>>16781358

[Anonymous No.16781372]

>>16781315
He was right about everything he just had the wrong solutions. He should've seen the absurdity of his position and returned to Christ but he chose to follow a path he knew was a dead end and create the "uberman" a person who lives in a state of utter cognitive dissonance, knowing there is no meaning in the world yet fruitlessly attempting to create it.

[Anonymous No.16781378]

>>16781345
Yeah I'm not knocking him personally for it, just that the ideas themselves couldn't go full bloom as a result.
He was dismantling his environmental conditioning, and he's a pretty good intro away from monotheism into individualism.
Id say he's great for western readers, who tend to have a monotheistic eurocentric background.
I would incline to start seeking out more individualistic lines of thought from the east after this, though.

[Anonymous No.16781384]

>>16781372
One should always interpret Nietzsche neither as entirely existentialist nor as essentialist. He balances and glides between the two, one cannot say he asserts the world to be meaningless, nor can one say he believes naturally or entirely in a priorly meaningful foundation. But you cannot reject either in him.

[Anonymous No.16781390]

>>16781372
Care to recommend me one of his works? Where he speaks of the übermensch?

[Anonymous No.16781393]

>>16781378
Yes, but you are missing the essential point of difference between East and West. Much so that East cannot be solution to West, but a help. Nietzsche is still fundamentally doing something different to the East, though he may have been helped or friendfully coincided by it.

[Anonymous No.16781413]

>>16781393
Idk man
After reading tantric works, Nietzsche pretty much found the same stream of consciousness, just through his own lens and for a western audience

[Anonymous No.16781414]

>>16781390
Thus Speaks Zaruthustra is where he develops the idea. His observation about the "last man" being the inevitable result of a godless modernity is spot on but his hopes that man can somehow rise above this without turning back and recognizing that the modern worldview is rotten at its core is hopelessly optimistic.

[Anonymous No.16781424]

>>16781413
Nietzsche still belongs to a tradition, which he creates and destroys by, similarity's in consciousness or experience, are not overt similarity's in philosophy or anything larger than that, though as I said, they may coincide and help.

[Anonymous No.16781444]

>>16781361
Not his persepective, but his idea of persepectivism. He reduces truth to interpretation, logic to psychology. Since he doesn't recognize logic as the absolute arbiter of truth as other philosophers do, he allows himself to say absolutely anything that he wants without providing justification, and also attack other philosophers not on logical grounds, but by attacking their psychology (i.e., "Philosopher X disagrees with me? I will just say that he has a weak will."). This is a recipe for disaster in the wrong hands. He himself used it with good intentions, but those who followed him took his methodology and abused it to madness.

[Anonymous No.16781471]

>>16781444
Logic is more like "a logic"
Something people whom only speak a single language, or see things from a singular cultural perspective, tend to struggle with is that their conditioning is baked into their "rationality".
Even the patterns used are relative to what the individual or group acknowledges as patterns. All based on their experience.

"Justification" is really just appeasement to your conditioning or expectation.
Rationality and logic are really just a rhetorical form of hypnosis. Logic always relies on assumptions, just like math.
You can design a "web of logic" from there, sure, but the assumption is based on conditioning. Even the construction of the web and the rationality becomes relative to the individual or group as I said.

Learn more languages and see the merits of other ways and you'll begin to understand.
Once you unravel this, you begin to see a lot of verbal manipulation at play.

Though any time I make this comment, absolutists always work to refute and never indulge.

[Anonymous No.16781505]

>>16781471
Thanks for the suggestion, but I already speak three different languages and have lived in three very different cultures. I already know all this. The problem is, as philosophers, we still need some rules to play by. Some arbiter to whom we could appeal. Logic traditionally fulfilled this role, even if imperfect. If we don't recognize logic as absolute, everything becomes arbitrary. I could say anything I want and you could say anything you want, and we will never get anywhere. Logic is the core foundation of philosophy. If we were to abandon logic, we would also be abandoning philosophy.

[Anonymous No.16781510]

By age 30 onwards, to be positive, you'll live and die alone.

[Anonymous No.16781513]

>>16781471
People who have no perspective, or unitarians, were always viewed as the ideal subjects for totalitarian governments according to Arendt.

[Anonymous No.16781516]

>>16781513
>according to (((Arendt)))
Thanks anon, I will keep her input in mind.

[Anonymous No.16781518]

https://youtu.be/0-pZxFmKCx8?t=672

[Anonymous No.16781545]

>>16781505
>everything becomes arbitrary
Yes

[Anonymous No.16781555]

>>16781545
Mind you, this is the doctrine the so called "new left" holds so dear to heart. I wouldn't have had a problem if Nietzsche's values were enforced, but instead they took his methodology, and as I said, abused it to madness. Now you can't even reason with them. It's absolute madness.

[Anonymous No.16781556]

>>16781505
I'm sorry anon but it's verbal hypnosis.
The stage rotates and what takes the stage is relative to the uprising energy and, generally, the inversion of that which went too far previously.

I'm far more inclined to pull the trigger on experimentation.

It's all based on feels at the end of the day. That's contextual, it changes, depends who you're representing, where you are, etc.
It's all arbitrary but it's really just whether or not we are willing to be sold on something, generally if it aligns with our current conditioning.

Logic is just hypnosis dude lol

[Anonymous No.16781562]

>>16781444
So you have a problem with any personalist amongst philosophers? Because Nietzsche isn't exclusive on that by any means.

[Anonymous No.16781575]

>>16781505
This is called being afraid of modernity. Being afraid of having a free consciousness. Typically a perspective that comes from those who can't deal with art as the ultimate genuine source of philosophy, which IS perspectivism in a nutshell.

[Anonymous No.16781580]

>>16781555
They didn't "take his methodology"
What you see is truth acting out before you.

You only think that your rationality and standards are what should be upheld because you've conditioned within them.

Any system with the amount of resource, energy, effort, and acceptance as the one we've created and maintained will result is something profoundly well developed

[Anonymous No.16781585]

As I said it's not even "rationality", it's "a rationality"
All of it is based on belief and thus feelings.
Math and logic calls these "axioms" which is just a fancy word for "assumptions"

[Anonymous No.16781594]

>>16781562
>The stage rotates and what takes the stage is relative to the uprising energy and, generally, the inversion of that which went too far previously.
I agree with this line, but not with the rest. Logic forms our reality a priori, even if our reality is arbitrary. Not recognizing logic as the arbiter is, by definition, madness. In Nietzsche's case, it was a noble and admirable sort of madness, but those who followed him weren't as noble.
>>16781562
Yes, if a philosopher doesn't employ logic as his main tool, he is, so to speak, cheating in philosophy. It used to be that no one who did not adhere to logic was taken seriously (thanks to Plato), but after Nietzsche it became a common and ugly trend.

[Anonymous No.16781602]

>>16781575
Anon please open your eyes. In classical times art flourished. In your modernity ART IS DEAD. I'm very much concerned with arts, and I'm convinced this relativization of reality is, for the most part, to be blamed for the death of art.

[Anonymous No.16781608]

>>16781580
>Any system with the amount of resource, energy, effort, and acceptance as the one we've created and maintained will result is something profoundly well developed
Can you elaborate on this? What system have you (or we) created? And why do you think it will lead to something great?

[Anonymous No.16781630]

>>16781585
>Math and logic calls these "axioms" which is just a fancy word for "assumptions"
This is true. All the more reason to look for better axioms and foundations, and not a reason to level the whole palace to the ground.

[Anonymous No.16781632]

>>16781594
Sorry my guy but these concepts can't be made sense of to clingers.
If you want to try to understand, consider that it's made up verbal hypnosis. Even Buddha said wisdom is made up.
What you're doing with logic is basically the long format version of their will to power, you just don't realize it.
You want to maintain an environment that reflects your identity or interests, and these long format verbal persuasions contains cultural and lineage background conditioning that seems "right" because it's developed and lots of people with similar conditioning agree.. because of similar conditioning.
It's the same thing with laws. Laws are based on the values of different groups, but they don't reflect everyone.

Anyway this is why your "reasoning" doesn't work. I'm not trying to be an was but you legit can't see how your reason is based on your values, identity, desires, expectations. Same thing with your logic, it has your cultural conditioning baked into it.
This is the problem with spending too much time around like minded people.

Plenty of the east has philosophy that is not "logic" driven.
Imagine logic as a shape, alright. Let's say this shape has a top and a bottom. The bottom is the assumption you start from, the top is where it goes. The assumption is made up for whatever reason, and the top is an ultimately unknown destination.
Logic acts between these. It's merely a vehicle. It can be any possible shape. This is some sort of visual interpretation of what I mean by "a logic".
Your convoluted reasoning is conditioning to abide by certain rhythm.


If you ever get to "the wordless place", you will understand. It's just hypnosis. It's a fucking waste of time if you ask me. Just experiment.

[Anonymous No.16781639]

>>16781350
>>16781358
>>16781367

[Anonymous No.16781646]

>>16781608
I meant some of the processes around western and European cultures.
Basically we've been trying to make large scale societies work for so long, that eventually we've just adopted the identities necessary to make them work, as well as imperialism racking up a lot of resource, and a lot of energy or think tanks putting a lot of effort in figuring out what system will work


The thing is, the system doesn't matter. Any system can work. It's the identities and values that matter.

[Anonymous No.16781660]

>>16781630
"Better" relative to what lol
You still have to give me an assumption of something relative to your personal conditioning.

Play the field
Excite energy
Wield energy

[Anonymous No.16781676]

>>16781632
Anon, as I said I perfectly understand these concepts. I used to agree with Nietzsche when I was new to philosophy. If we were to have mystical and artistic doctrines oblivious to logic, I would be sympathetic depending on their aesthetic and spiritual value. I also perfectly understand that behind all these intricate arguments of philosophers, there without exception an ulterior motive based on irrational volition. But again, as I said, if we want to keep philosophy as "philosophy" and not an echo chamber of madness, we need to keep our logic intact.

[Anonymous No.16781686]

>>16781315
>what does /lit/ think of Nietzche?
Didn't have a tough life.

[Anonymous No.16781699]

>>16781646
Well then, what do you say about the fact that art and culture are dead? That today weakness is worshiped while strength is suppressed? That hedonism is the primary value system? I'm afraid you are somehow blind to the decadence around us. Nietzsche wouldn't approve of our predicament.

[Anonymous No.16781705]

>>16781676
Philosophy is like deities and archetypes on Tibetan Buddhism
They all have merit, they are all only different ways all with meaning, you can choose any you wish and it's permissible.

Philosophy is meant to be lived, not argued and debated about what's better.
Anything with gravitas will start to warp the pages of history.
Any path can be any type of scarlet letter and have it's own power. Only once it has come into it's element will people realize it's merits.
Your logic is an illusion that keeps you safe and snug from having to shred through the infinite

None of these borderline retarded leftists have any idea about Nietzsche, and yet look at them personify some of his ideas perfectly.
True nature reveals itself.
Verbal hypnosis is on a sharp decline friend, and that's a good thing. It's intrinsically tied to the stagnation in our sciences which too will be attacked for it's absolutism.
An illusion is only useful so long as it is generative. Stagnant and fruitless dogma gets the axe. All that matters is what you come up with acting as a potent battery, or, being the necessary force given the times.

[Anonymous No.16781717]

>>16781660
>Play the field
>Excite energy
>Wield energy
Suppose I did, but to what end? You might assert some arbitrary value, and I will use your own tactic to remind you it's very much arbitrary.

[Anonymous No.16781730]

>>16781699
I could see art going through a renaissance.
Death brings new birth. I'm excited to see what we come up with. I have a feeling "cinema" is going to see it's greatest day, though probably much, much more short form.

I think people will unplug and dissociate a bit more in the not so distant future.

Different energies come about at different times for different reasons.
A lot of the old American shape just couldn't fit into the modern day. We didn't really have anything to value, or much to believe in outside of dated fantasies.
I still don't think culture has much to believe in outside some flavor of the month stuff.

When hedonism takes the stage, it's a return to the sensory. It's away from the old convolution. The illusion that's run dry and impotent.
It'll keep going as long as it needs to.
Open space for young American men to start designing the future. Feels good desu.
Young gen z that don't align with the culture should stick to their guns, they will be shaping a lot of things to come.
Highly recommend going renaissance train of thought, studying many fields, more practical and personal studies, stuff that's applicable more to life around us etc.

[Anonymous No.16781734]

>>16781717
Lol there is no end, only advantage if you wish
Competently surf the wave and life yields it's fruit

[Anonymous No.16781738]

>>16781717
Also you can impose whatever you wish onto the world if you wish, but convolution is not going to be the language going forward, I'll guarantee that
Work on the poetics as well.

[Anonymous No.16781755]

>>16781730
>I could see art going through a renaissance.
Anon your naive optimism has quite literally got me laughing. If things are not radically changed in the near future, then a "renaissance" might eventually happen, but after a total collapse passing a few centuries (and we will still be too hopeful to wish for a collapse, for, god forbid, they might manage to systematize decadence itself to eternity). That is not to say your optimism is not admirable. May it fuel you to give birth to something great. Though I myself have quite different things that drive me.

[Anonymous No.16781761]

>>16781755
The futures not written so it's projection one way or another
Either way, the cycle tends to repeat
Old way grows tired
Only give a fuck about hedonistic things
Collapse happens
Get to rebuild anew

Formless
Form
Formless
Form
For all eternity

[Anonymous No.16781780]

>>16781761
>Old way grows tired
>Only give a fuck about hedonistic things
>Collapse happens
That would be true, if decadence itself isn't made to be a system. If the world turns into a self-sustaining meat factory (as it has already started), then we might never see such a collapse. All mediocrity, banality, worthlessness to eternity. We have every grounds to be concerned about such future (that is, if we didn't build ourselves a fantastical lens of worldview that made us blind to the reality around us).

[Anonymous No.16782799]

>>16781315
I read 2/3 of his books in this spring/summer and I was completely hooked. He is my favourite philosopher and Thus Spoke Zarathustra is my favourite book. The more time I spend with him, the more I understand him. Almost every video on him on youtube is a caracature. Not a lot of people get him. Going to read Genealogy of Morals and Will to Power in the winter.

His middle work is, I think my favourite. The Gay Science and Zarathustra are really life affirming and just wonderful. I really like Nietzsche, although I have to part with him next year, because just as Zarathustra said; If you really want to follow me, you should go away and follow yourself, then you follow me

[Anonymous No.16782802]

>>16781315
Nietzsche is like a vaccine for intellectual diseases. He cures all those diseases and give you autism, just like a vaccine.

[Anonymous No.16782814]

>>16781315
He's glorified on here because there's a lot of despondent young men on here who are seeking direction in their lives. His reputation is tarnished by that and the Christians who hate him jump on that as an opportunity to shitpost... which is a shame, because his work really is compelling and profound; he sticks out in philosophy and deserves the recognition.

[Anonymous No.16782909]

>>16781555
tiny brain take

[Anonymous No.16782913]

>>16781699
>so what do you say about *ridiculous claim*
I see why you're a Nietzsche fan, you're just pulling shit out of your ass. Try using facts or evidence or something

[Anonymous No.16782917]

>>16781755
This 16 year old larping as a world-wary jaded cynic or whatever because his teacher didn't like his fan fiction is gold

[Anonymous No.16782921]

>>16781602
>In your modernity ART IS DEAD
No, it isn't. Art is very much alive, but in modernity, there is no longer any central body to recognize them, only rogue critics.

[Anonymous No.16782926]

>>16781602
I like that your evidence is "open your eyes", just because you're too dumb to find or enjoy any art coming out nowadays doesn't mean its DEAD

[Anonymous No.16782946]

So I just read Stirner and enjoyed the book very much. It seems like giving Nietzsche a proper read is the next step. What would you recommend as a start? Zarathustra?

[Anonymous No.16782965]

>>16781315
loved by dilettanti.

[Anonymous No.16782990]

>>16781699
why isn't anyone worshipping you then - because you are obviously a weak man?