> I mean to say, at least move on to something more interesting. If you go through Nietzsche as a stage that is understandable, but staying there is kind of embarrassing if you're older than 25.
The juvenile readings of Nietzsche are only an aspect of his philosphy, and do not truly grasp him. It is like those who thought the point of Fight Club was to fight and destroy shit. Nietzsche had inspired some of the greatest thinkers and artists of the 20th century. These people were not stupid nor juvenile.
The juvenile readings are often not wrong, but just limited. His writings often have multiple meanings, so even if you have a reading that is not wrong per se, it doesn't mean it's the whole truth. I've seen it before also with a christcuck on this board who had a valid perspective on will to power, but absolutely seethed at the idea that there was more to it than his interpretation, because all he wanted to do was to "refute", as if refutation of a philosophy of the kind that Nietzsche writes is even possible.
An example of what I'm thinking of is the concept of the Overman from TSZ. The juvenile reading of the Overman is individualistic, might is right, egoist. This is not necessarily a wrong interpretation, but it is the least interesting, in my opinion. The Overman is also a social idea, the idea that the meaning of humanity can be achieved by emergence, that humanity can justify itself by achieving something beyond itself. The Overman is the antithesis to the Last Man. It is an imperative, a call to action that is both social and personal, to strive to create meaning, purpose, life, both for ourselves as persons and as a society. It is fundamentally a call to struggle agaisnt the forces of nihilism and despair. If you only focus on the juvenile interpration, you lose this understanding of Overman.
The thing is, there is a fundametal tension in most of what Nietzsche writes between romanticism and cynicism, nihilism and anti-nihilism, etc. I think this is well encapsulated in his short essay 'On the Pathos of Truth', where he displays his ability to earnestly produce two well-argumented positions in direct opposition to each other. This is also why much of his writing is so fascinating. And finally, this is why it is very possible to read and learn from Nietzsche, even as a Christian. He has much to teach, and much to inspire Christians with. I'm sure many Christians have done so. But to do that, you'd have to approach him in good faith. Most christcucks immediatly think the equivalent of ORANGE BAD MAN when his name is brought up, probably because they've always been Christians and someone once told them that Nietzsche was the great atheist philosopher or something, and thus they decided to hate him, without knowing him.