[ 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: 79 KB, 480x635, nietzsche-l.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19528853 No.19528853 [Reply] [Original]

The unfathomable amount of times he contradicts himself makes me think that that was the actual purpose of his philosophy, to not take philosophy so serious. This is shown by his attempt throughout his books to remove the seriousness out of life

>> No.19528897

>>19528853
>the anglo tries to read nietzsche
Try not to, next time.

>> No.19528925
File: 9 KB, 242x208, schopenhauer.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19528925

>>19528853
It becomes obvious when he attacks Plato and Socrates and praises the sophists. He is not a philosopher, he doesn't care about philosophy--that is, the pursuit of truth through rational argumentation--in fact he doesn't care about truth at all. He is a sophist rhetorician who merely wants to impose his will on others by the way of persuasion. All these edgy Nietzscheans who pretend to be above everything are merely those who were foolish enough to allow him to ensnare them.

>> No.19528941

>>19528897
Im portuguese

>> No.19528971

>>19528925
Ah another resentful nihilist claiming to be in perfect accord with reality through its own life denying *philosophy*.

>> No.19528986

>>19528925
Precisely. And as you say, the more ensared his follower is, the more confident he is in displaying it. It is quite comical to watch what a confused mumbo-jumbo of which Nietzsche's thought is a prime eyample, can do to an individual. It is a bit like a kid who wants that candy no matter what, and 20 years later he has developed an entire confused ideology because he wants that candy, not willing to admit it would be far easier to simply realize there are a few ways to get that candy: buy it, steal it, acquire it as a gift, find it lost, make it. Instead, he insists that the candy should pop into existence in his hand through his sheer "will".

>> No.19529047

>>19528925
>>19528986
It is normal for superficial readers not to perceive how advanced and coherent is Nietzsche’s anthropology. Seeing what kind of philosophy you people are inclined to is no surprise to find anything but superficiality.

>> No.19529062

>>19529047
Ah yes and so le too deep4u Nietzschean makes his first appearance. As usual blissfully unaware that it is perhaps the case that Nietzsche's thought is not particularly deep and that it is he, the Nietzschean, who lacks the mental capacity to see through the snare by which he is kept captive in darkness.

>> No.19529069

No it's pretty much a reaction against modernity's extreme reliance and obsession with rationality, logic and order. He's literally acting out the Dionysian archetype on purpose because the culture he lived in was excessively Appollonian.

>> No.19529078

>>19529047
May anon awaken the people and help them to see the inner-workings of Nietzsche and his anthropology

>> No.19529104
File: 86 KB, 900x571, 10665124_10152854867159308_3824742975839071292_n.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19529104

>>19528853
He was just a petty basement dwelling coomer who took himself way too seriously and cooked up all sort of grandiose nonsenses because in his personal life he was a total failure.

>Were you reading Nietzsche then?

>CIORAN: When I was studying philosophy I wasn’t reading Nietzsche. I read “serious” philosophers. It’s when I finished studying it, at the point when I stopped believing in philosophy, that I began to read Nietzsche. Well, I realized that he wasn’t a philosopher, he was more: a temperament. So, I read him but never systematically. Now and then I’d read things by him, but really I don’t read him anymore. What I consider his most authentic work is his letters, because in them he’s truthful, while in his other work he’s prisoner to his vision. In his letters one sees that he’s just a poor guy, that he’s ill, exactly the opposite of everything he claimed.

>You write in The Trouble with Being Born that you stopped reading him because you found him “too naïve.”

>CIORAN:That’s a bit excessive, yes. It’s because that whole vision, of the will to power and all that, he imposed that grandiose vision on himself because he was a pitiful invalid. Its whole basis was false, nonexistent. His work is an unspeakable megalomania. When one reads the letters he wrote at the same time, one sees that he’s pathetic, it’s very touching, like a character out of Chekhov. I was attached to him in my youth, but not after. He’s a great writer, though, a great stylist.

>> No.19529139

>>19528925
>He is not a philosopher, he doesn't care about philosophy--that is, the pursuit of truth through rational argumentation
That's how you and the Platonists certainly define philosophy, but it's not how everyone does. Nietzsche was right to pair himself up with the sophists because they understood philosophy similarly to him: as another form of poetry.

>> No.19529146

>>19528853
Because he was not trying to create a consistent philosophical system, contradictions are not much of a problem in his work, whereas they are damning for e.g. Kant or Hegel.
While the lack of consistency can be considered a point against him as a philosopher, one does have to admit that consistency may not even be possible. No one has ever been completely consistent and no one has ever made a perfect philosophical system of everything. So if you dismiss Nietzsche on these grounds, I am not sure who exactly you would not dismiss.

>> No.19529151

>Guys the author you read IS ACTUALLY A PRETENTIOUS PSEUD
>Didn’t you hear me? I said he is A PRETENTIOUS PSEUD
>A PRETENTIOUS PSEUD

>Ok, I see how it is, don’t even bother replying you know you’re already owned.

>> No.19529164
File: 8 KB, 154x208, 1632488612600.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19529164

>>19528853
“A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do. He may as well concern himself with his shadow on the wall. Speak what you think now in hard words, and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day. — 'Ah, so you shall be sure to be misunderstood.' — Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.”
― Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance

>> No.19529171

>>19529069
Based Nietzsche reader. Keep seething tardlarpers you were retroactively refuted a long time ago

>> No.19529185

>>19529069
>>19529171
>reaction against modernity
HAHAHAHA no retards, it's the influence of Schopenhauer who said Will is irrational. And Schopenhauer's Will beyond these stupid categories of modernity, tradition, all of that nonsense.

>> No.19529194

>>19528853
Ive heard this meme - that he contradicts himself a lot - so many times, but never even a bit of evidence, so I'll bite and ask: where and how does he contradict himself? And what do you mean by "himself"; an anglo individualistic, unitary subject named "Nietzsche" who had his very individual opinions on things or a coherent chaos of instincts, drives affects, values, that activate according to specific situations?

>> No.19529213

>>19529185
>Schopenhauer's Will beyond these stupid categories
Ok retard, but that's not what we're talking about

>> No.19529232

>>19529139
That is how philosophers since the invention of the term by Pythagoras and since its popularization by Socrates and Plato have referred to what they do. If you do something else, you are not a philosopher. Sophists, including Nietzsche, are not philosophers. Poetry is too pure to concern itself with philosophy. Sophistry is not poetry, it's malevolent rhetoric.

>> No.19529236

>>19529213
>reaction against modernity
Like Nietzschean philosophy wouldn't be Nietzschean if it wasn't for modernity.

>> No.19529240

>>19529232
Why are you under the impression that Nietzsche had some issue with logic? His main subject was values.

>> No.19529241

>>19529194
nigger nigger nigger

>> No.19529279

>>19529240
That is false. He is fully committed to the vulgar relativism which is called persepectivism.

>> No.19529306

>>19529279
Not who you replied to, but perspectivism for Nietzsche came about through his concern with values.

>> No.19529317

>>19529306
>We do not consider the falsity of a judgement as itself an objection to a judgment ... The question is how far the judgement promotes and preserves life
I know, but this is sophistry nevertheless.

>> No.19529321

>>19529317
Sophistry is a compliment for Nietzsche, so...

>> No.19529329

>>19529321
I don't care what he likes to be called. I stand by my original claim that Nietzsche was not a philosopher and what he did was not philosophy.

>> No.19529330

>>19529236
It is absolutely a reaction against it. I know 'reaction' and 'modernity' are buzzwords for you as some species of angry tardlarper but the central question for Nietzsche was what method of evaluation would take the place of God in an unbelieving age, an age which you must by now be very well aware of as it has reached a very advanced state in which people are so dumb they assume Nietzsche favored nihilism as the alternative to theism even though he was critical of that very development and uncritically claim that since there is no god "nothing matters." And Nietzsche saw all of that coming and told you so. Reaction to modernity indeed

>> No.19529333

>>19529104
>In his letters one sees that he’s just a poor guy, that he’s ill, exactly the opposite of everything he claimed.
> he imposed that grandiose vision on himself because he was a pitiful invalid. Its whole basis was false, nonexistent. His work is an unspeakable megalomania.
So basically nietzsche is Jordan Peterson

>> No.19529339

>>19529062
>and he ignored addressing even one thing of Nietzsche’s writings in order to resort to cheap invertion rhetoric despite claiming to pursue truth or whatever

>> No.19529340

>>19529164
All the countries in the world and my ancestors had to come to America.

>> No.19529342

>>19529078
>spoonfeed me
No

>> No.19529347

>>19529329
Okay, and I stand by my original claim that your understanding of philosophy is specifically Platonist.

>> No.19529354

>>19529333
Digits confirm.

>> No.19529361

>>19529347
Do I need to repeat myself? Philosophy is Platonism.

>> No.19529366

>>19529164
Emerson is similar to Nietzsche, he added style to mask the lack of rigour.

>> No.19529370

>>19529330
You H*gelians are bunch of fucking retards.

>> No.19529401

>>19529361
For (You)

>> No.19529410

>>19529401
No. If you do not fall under the definition of a philosopher, you aren't one.

>> No.19529418

>>19529339
Would you take diet advice from an obese person?

>> No.19529420

>>19529410
>obey me or die
No, I don't think I will. I think I'll live and continue to contradict your small-minded point of view.

>> No.19529421
File: 32 KB, 480x481, 1588172599385.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19529421

>>19529370
Amazing that Hegel lives so rent-free you bring him up in a Nietzsche thread, but I'm assuming you didn't read either author

>> No.19529426

>>19529366
Nietzsche was an avid reader of Emerson, according to Kaufmann

>> No.19529428

>>19529420
You will only go on to ridicule yourself. Imagine someone walking up to a conference of mathematicians to propose an alternative mathematics without logic. That is how ridiculous Nietzsche and his minions look to anyone who pursues philosophy.

>> No.19529435

>>19529428
Imagine thinking mathematicians possess the be-all end-all of wisdom. Thankfully, we don't have small-minded people like you running everything, otherwise they'd all be run into the ground in short time.

>> No.19529436

>>19529428
>philosophy is le mathematics
How about you go to that conference and propose that and see how ridiculous you come across to a bunch of human Excel sheets.

>> No.19529439

>>19529435
That is not what I said at all. You learned your rhetoric well from your Master Nietzsche.

>> No.19529454

>>19529439
It's what you heavily implied by bringing up mathematicians as if they were relevant.

>> No.19529457

>>19529421
A filthy H*gelian isn't hard to recognize when he keep using his disgusting tricks.

>> No.19529458

>>19529454
Logical truth is as relevant to mathematics as it is to philosophy.

>> No.19529460

>>19529418
Are you not capable of exerting the very tool you claim to be the measure of truth, that is, whether what is said is false or not?

>> No.19529474
File: 383 KB, 932x601, 1624284647530.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19529474

>>19529457
Step lightly lest you awaken shai hulud

>> No.19529482

>>19529458
>qualifying truth as logical
ngmi

>> No.19529488

>>19529482
Truth is not exclusively logical, but there exists something as logical truth. Absolute state of Nietzsche minions and their reading comprehension.

>> No.19529496

>>19528925
Schoppy looked like THAT?

>> No.19529523

>>19529232
>This is how writers have written literature since its conception, if you are not writing epics, then you are not doing literature!
This is how retarded you sound, and worst part is that youre proud of your dilettantism

>> No.19529528

>>19529523
Fallacy. Philosophy is a specific practice. Not everything surrounding it falls under it.

>> No.19529549

>>19529528
Philosophy as a practice began with Thales, who described all as water. It's another kind of poetry but for a different sort of mind.

>> No.19529557

>>19529549
Calling philosophy poetry is an insult to both.

>> No.19529562

>>19529528
Im not saying philosophy is literature you goblin. I'm saying that philosophy changes its forms just like literature does. Modern genres wouldnt be considered literature by ancient writers, the same is with philosophy, a practise of thought that concerns working with abstract concepts.

>> No.19529569

>>19529562
Your definition of philosophy is inadequate.

>> No.19529575

>>19528853
Or just maybe the guy was nothing but a seething reactionary and just wasn't really all that clever.

>> No.19529587

>>19529557
Calling poetry not a kind of philosophy is an insult to both.

>> No.19529592

>>19529587
>t. understands neither poetry nor philosophy

>> No.19529593

>>19529569
No, its essential, more essential, than yours and is implicit in all theories of philosophy. What is arbitrary is that work with concepts was subordinated to a certain morality, that is no longer functional. Your definition just doesnt pass the test of time.

>> No.19529598

>>19529592
Poetry is philosophy for chads with beautiful souls. Your version of philosophy is poetry for nerd faggot autists. That's why it's dry and ugly to read in comparison to poetry.

>> No.19529606

>>19529488
>there exists something as logical truth
Sure, within a discourse of logic you will produce logical truth. It's qualified. What's your point? Are you then elevating that to skydaddy in order to escape criticism?

>> No.19529609

>>19528853
he is free to contradict himself because he has no overarching system. and really he isn’t contradicting himself at all since he makes different points in all his diff books

>> No.19529628
File: 258 KB, 1156x1600, 1588715415217.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19529628

>>19528925
Nietzsche's only purpose was to live rentfree in the head of millions of midwits, he wrote to be loved and not to search for the truth and its evident in his style
his "philosophy"'s only merit is to prove that people are retarded enough to take him seriously, just like Hegel in his verbosic diarrhea

>> No.19529639

>>19528941
The british colony?

>> No.19529640

>>19529628
Truth died in the 19th century, Nietzsche did what he had to do to resurrect it.

>> No.19529647

>>19529232
>>19529523
>>19529528
>>19529549
>>19529557
>>19529562
>>19529569
>>19529587
>>19529598
>>19529606
We can see that philosophy itself has suffered transformations throughout its history, that is because philosophy is not a defined thing, but includes poetry, mythology and theology, from which it originated. These are all deeply interrelated. Theology is the beginning of the rationalization of mythology, but still preserving the poetic character. We can see the Greek Enlightenment as the origin of philosophy for its rational enquiries. Pythagoreanism and Platonism were present in egyptian theology, and actually even mesopotamian, for the relation of the concept and the immanent nature of that concept. Philosophy is degeneration.

>> No.19529761

reading Nietzsche is like reading astrology
in the midst of all the garbage you find some truth and then you ignore all the rest

>> No.19529771

>>19529342
you seem to have missed the irony. i'm not asking you for anything because i don't think you have anything to say.