Wait

[Anonymous No.19751592]

Bros, what's going on, what did Nietzsche mean by this?

Paragraph 195 of The Will to Power:

"Christianity has become something fundamentally different from what its Founder wished it to be. It is the great anti-pagan movement of antiquity, formulated with the use of the life, teaching, and "words" of the Founder of Christianity, but interpreted quite arbitrarily, according to a scheme embodying profoundly different needs: translated into the language of all the subterranean religions then existing.

It is the rise of Pessimism (whereas Jesus wished to bring the peace and the happiness of the lambs): and moreover the Pessimism of the weak, of the inferior, of the suffering, and of the oppressed.

Its mortal enemies are (1) Power, whether in the form of character, intellect, or taste, and "worldliness"; (2) the "good cheer" of classical times, the noble levity and scepticism, hard pride, eccentric dissipation, and cold frugality of the sage, Greek refinement in manners, words, and form. Its mortal enemy is as much the Roman as the Greek.

The attempt on the part of anti-paganism to establish itself on a philosophical basis, and to make its tenets possible: it shows a taste for the ambiguous figures of antique culture, and above all for Plato, who was, more than any other, an anti-Hellene and Semite in instinct.... It also shows a taste for Stoicism, which is essentially the work of Semites ("dignity" is regarded as severity, law; virtue is held to be greatness, self-responsibility, authority, greatest sovereignty over oneself—this is Semitic.) The Stoic is an Arabian sheik wrapped in Greek togas and notions."

[Anonymous No.19751597]

>>19751592
Paragraph 341 of The Will to Power:

"The origin of the ideal. The examination of the soil out of which it grows.

A. Starting out from those "æsthetic" mental states during which the world seems rounder, fuller, and more perfect: we have the pagan ideal with its dominating spirit of self-affirmation (people give of their abundance). The highest type: the classical ideal—regarded as an expression of the successful nature of all the more important instincts. In this classical ideal we find the grand style as the highest style. An expression of the "will to power" itself. The instinct which is most feared dares to acknowledge itself.

B. Starting out from the mental states in which the world seemed emptier, paler, and thinner, when "spiritualisation" and the absence of sensuality assume the rank of perfection, and when all that is brutal, animal, direct, and proximate is avoided (people calculate and select): the "sage," "the angel"; priestliness = virginity = ignorance, are the physiological ideals of such idealists: the anæmic ideal. Under certain circumstances this anæmic ideal may be the ideal of such natures as [Pg 276]represent paganism (thus Goethe sees his "saint" in Spinoza).

C. Starting out from those mental states in which the world seemed more absurd, more evil, poorer, and more deceptive, an ideal cannot even be imagined or desired in it (people deny and annihilate); the projection of the ideal into the sphere of the anti-natural, anti-actual, anti-logical; the state of him who judges thus (the "impoverishment" of the world as a result of suffering: people take, they no longer bestow): the anti-natural ideal.

(The Christian ideal is a transitional form between the second and the third, now inclining more towards the former type, and anon inclining towards the latter.)

The three ideals: A. Either a strengthening of Life (paganism,) or B. an impoverishment of Life (anæmia), or C. a denial of Life (anti-naturalism). The state of beatitude in A. is the feeling of extreme abundance; in B. it is reached by the most fastidious selectiveness; in C. it is the contempt and the destruction of Life."

[Anonymous No.19751601]

>>19751597
Paragraph 401 of Will to Power:

"Why the Antagonistic Values always succumbed.

1. How was this actually possible! Question: why did life and physiological well-constitutedness succumb everywhere? Why was there no affirmative philosophy, no affirmative religion?

The historical signs of such movements: the pagan religion. Dionysos versus the Christ. The Renaissance. Art.

2. The strong and the weak: the healthy and the sick; the exception and the rule. There is no doubt as to who is the stronger....

General view of history; Is man an exception in the history of life on this account?—An objection to Darwinism. The means wherewith the weak succeed in ruling have become: instincts, "humanity," "institutions." ...

3. The proof of this rule on the part of the [Pg 323]weak is to be found in our political instincts, in our social values, in our arts, and in our science."

[Anonymous No.19751608]

>>19751601
Paragraph 851 of The Will to Power:

"Christianity, Nihilism, tragic art, physiological decadence; these things would then be linked, they would then preponderate together and assist each other onwards—downwards.... Tragedy would thus be a symptom of decline.

This theory may be refuted in the most cold-blooded way, namely, by measuring the effect of a tragic emotion by means of a dynamometer The result would be a fact which only the bottomless falsity of a doctrinaire could misunderstand: that tragedy is a tonic. If Schopenhauer refuses to see the truth here, if he regards general depression as a tragic condition, if he would have informed the Greeks (who to his disgust were not "resigned") that they did not firmly possess the highest principles of life: it is only owing to his parti pris, to the need of consistency in his system, to the dishonesty of the doctrinaire—that dreadful dishonesty which step for step corrupted the whole psychology of Schopenhauer (he who had arbitrarily and almost violently misunderstood genius, art itself, morality, pagan religion, beauty, knowledge, and almost everything)."

Paragraph 1004 from The Will to Power:

'We, many or few, who once more dare to live in a world purged of morality, we pagans in faith, we are probably also the first who understand what a pagan faith is: to be obliged to imagine higher creatures than man, but to imagine them beyond good and evil; to be compelled to value all higher existence as immoral existence. We believe in Olympus, and not in the "man on the cross."'

[Anonymous No.19751617]

>>19751608
Paragraph 1052 of The Will to Power:

"The two types; Dionysus and Christ on the Cross. We should ascertain whether the typically religious man is a decadent phenomenon (the great innovators are one and all morbid and epileptic); but do not let us forget to include that type of the religious man who is pagan. Is the pagan cult not a form of gratitude for, and affirmation of, Life? Ought not its most representative type to be an apology and deification of Life? The type of a well-constituted and ecstatically overflowing spirit! The type of a spirit which absorbs the contradictions and problems of existence, and which solves them!

At this point I set up the Dionysus of the Greeks: the religious affirmation of Life, of the whole of Life, not of denied and partial Life (it is typical that in this cult the sexual act awakens ideas of depth, mystery, and reverence).

[Pg 421]

Dionysus versus "Christ"; here you have the contrast. It is not a difference in regard to the martyrdom,—but the latter has a different meaning. Life itself—Life s eternal fruitfulness and recurrence caused anguish, destruction, and the will to annihilation. In the other case, the suffering of the "Christ as the Innocent One" stands as an objection against Life, it is the formula of Life's condemnation.—Readers will guess that the problem concerns the meaning of suffering; whether a Christian or a tragic meaning be given to it. In the first case it is the road to a holy mode of existence; in the second case existence itself is regarded as sufficiently holy to justify an enormous amount of suffering. The tragic man says yea even to the most excruciating suffering: he is sufficiently strong, rich, and capable of deifying, to be able to do this; the Christian denies even the happy lots on earth: he is weak, poor, and disinherited enough to suffer from life in any form. God on the Cross is a curse upon Life, a signpost directing people to deliver themselves from it;—Dionysus cut into pieces is a promise of Life: it will be for ever born anew, and rise afresh from destruction."

[Anonymous No.19751633]

>>19751617
As for anybody who wants to confirm what I am posting, here are the links:
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/52914/52914-h/52914-h.htm
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/52915/52915-h/52915-h.htm

If you want to find the specific passage, then just ctrl+f and type the paragraph number for the text (ex.'1052' without the quotes). If it doesn't show up in one, then it is in the other. The first link is paragraphs 1-465, the second link is paragraphs 465-1067.

[Anonymous No.19751726]

Nietzsche was muslim

[Anonymous No.19751834]

>>19751726
Newfriend, you should read his works first before you post and comment on them!

[Anonymous No.19752037]

I found these quotes quite interesting, I'm surprised no on else did. If anybody is interested in discussing Nietzsche and his views on paganism, then reply. I'm off to get some work done, I'll check on the thread later

[Anonymous No.19752085]

>>19751834
Or we can consult people we trust, if we're busy.

[Anonymous No.19752334]

>>19751592
The Will to Power is not from Nietzsche, you can stop right here

[Anonymous No.19752434]

>>19752334
The writings of Nietzsche isn't Nietzsche's?

[Anonymous No.19752442]

>>19751592
"The Will to Power" does not exist.
Please, just this once, trust the experts.

[Anonymous No.19752479]

>>19752442
It is his most important work.

[Anonymous No.19752815]

>>19752334
>>19752442
You've already made up your mind before reading him. Anything he writes that doesnt immediately agree with your idealogical views, you put into a box, and now you don't have to think about it anymore. Your ideaology is tied together with your identity, so anything that challenges the foundations of your worldview, you perceive as a personal attack. What about actually trying to address Nietsczhe's arguments for once, instead of just coping? Nope. You already read online that it is le evil, so you dont have to engage with his ideas. Instead whatever propaganda you consume can do all the thinking for you.

[Anonymous No.19753012]

>>19752334
>>19752442
These quotes are from modern editions which have already gone through an extensive review by several scholars.

[Anonymous No.19753081]

>>19753012
As if implying that modern scholars giving an 'extensive review' of the books content would be a good thing. And no, you are incorrect, these quotes are directly from the most popular one on google, which is the Ludovici translation. If you search up 'The Will to Power PDF', or "The Will to Power online", these versions from Gutenberg are the first ones to pop up:
>>19751633
And they are dated 1913 and 1914. I also found that I like them a lot more then regular pdf's since the Gutenberg editions load quick, and look much nicer on my screen. They are a lot more readable. Regardless, I frequently compare translations, and the penguin classics ones are abhorrent, of this I am sure, and they are more recent.

[Anonymous No.19753096]

>>19753081
Like which looks better:

This?

[Anonymous No.19753139]

>>19753096
Even more so, when I zoom, the Gutenberg version actually restructures itself to fit perfect on my screen, since it's not a scan, it's just rendering the text, so I can make the text bigger and smaller as I wish

[Anonymous No.19753201]

>>19752479
It is an edited and curated collection of his notes published posthumously. It's his voice but not coming out of his mouth. He did not formalize it into a book.

[Anonymous No.19753242]

>>19753081
>As if implying that modern scholars giving an 'extensive review' of the books content would be a good thing.
They are "the experts" though. I do trust Colli and Montinari for the most part.

>And no, you are incorrect, these quotes are directly from the most popular one on google, which is the Ludovici translation.
Fair enough.

[Anonymous No.19753269]

>>19753201
So what? You have a lot of important and fundamental notes there that extend on important topics he addresses in the published books. You have one of the most important expositions about the Will to Power in one of these notes, for example.

[Anonymous No.19753293]

>>19751592
>all the subterranean religions then existing
Orphic(ist)

>the Pessimism of the weak,
All in on technology and technocracy redressing grievances against natural authority and elites

>he attempt on the part of anti-paganism to establish itself on a philosophical basis, and to make its tenets possible
No Providence or favor of the gods, only historicism, 'accidents of birth'.

>Stoicism, which is essentially the work of
'self-mastery' in this scheme is the only inward turn alternative to a subjegated people scattered to the four winds -- as opposed to the Greco-Roman understanding, which focuses and enhances the stream of drives/intention, rather than damming them up to create artificial depth

>priestliness = virginity = ignorance, are the physiological ideals of such idealists: the anæmic ideal
nescience, 'what I don't know can't hurt me'

>Dionysos versus the Christ. The Renaissance. Art.
The Nazarene that was harrowed in hell and returned vs. the mere 'kapparot' for old covenant transgressions--

>the bottomless falsity of a doctrinaire could misunderstand: that tragedy is a tonic.
'all the world's a stage...' FN has an apothegm on 'true actors' and masks in Twilight (or maybe it was Antichrist...)

>It is not a difference in regard to the martyrdom
Suppose what Christ was tempted with by Satan in the desert was the vision of all of the evils man had and would commit, and the ability to stop and erase all of it, punish it, to the point of reversing Creation even--

>>19752085
The Blond Beast and White Mandarin -- then again, better to will anything than nothing at all

>Christianity has become something fundamentally different from what its Founder wished it to be
'there was only one Christian and He died on the Cross' -- the Manichean Persian regime of the time recognized him as a prophet in the line of Zoroaster ... imagine FN gets his wish, and the west is under a Persian aegis: no such hand wringing over 'saving souls' occurs in imperial adventures, especially not central and south america, given what they found there

[Anonymous No.19753546]

>>19752815
I have PhD in philosophy.

[Anonymous No.19754271]

>>19753293
What are you even trying to say?

[Anonymous No.19754290]

>>19751592
>what did Nietzsche mean by this?
>The Will to Power

He didn´t write that book

[Anonymous No.19754303]

>>19754290
>>19752815
This was already addressed

[Anonymous No.19754310]

>>19753201
It is an edited and curated collection of his notes published posthumously. It's his voice but not coming out of his mouth. He did not formalize it into a book.
Quoted from you directly.

[Anonymous No.19754316]

>>19754310
God damn it.
Nevermind. I'm not doing it again.

[Anonymous No.19754343]

As I understand Nietsche, his primary complaint against Christianity is that it placates the masses, preventing them from engaging with the Will to Power to better their lives.

[Anonymous No.19754417]

>>19754316
I think I see where you were going with it. The sad thing is, I made this thread hoping for a discussion. Nietzsche seems to have been greatly fond of paganism and polytheism. Even just looking at this, 150 words:

"The two types; Dionysus and Christ on the Cross. We should ascertain whether the typically religious man is a decadent phenomenon (the great innovators are one and all morbid and epileptic); but do not let us forget to include that type of the religious man who is pagan. Is the pagan cult not a form of gratitude for, and affirmation of, Life? Ought not its most representative type to be an apology and deification of Life? The type of a well-constituted and ecstatically overflowing spirit! The type of a spirit which absorbs the contradictions and problems of existence, and which solves them! At this point I set up the Dionysus of the Greeks: the religious affirmation of Life, of the whole of Life, not of denied and partial Life (it is typical that in this cult the sexual act awakens ideas of depth, mystery, and reverence)."

It summarizes his views on it pretty well. Instead however, I am only met with a bunch of coping. I can't even tell if it's from Christians or commies, but it's all the same slave morality to me. Almost every reply has been just massive cope from people saying 'lalala my ideology tells me that this is bad, so I can ignore it. I'm plugging my ears, AND YOU SHOULD TOO!.' And of course the inevitable replies to them (mine included). Sometimes I wonder whether I should actually put effort into replying to these kinds of posts, or to simply post 'retard'. However, I cannot simply let it go, because I see what they are doing, and I fear that other people might actually join them in plugging their ears, so every time I see it, I feel compelled to point it out. There has been barely any discussion at all about the thread topic.

If they don't think it's valid, then they can present his views on paganism and polytheism from his other texts, and then we can have a discussion of which ones better embody his systems of thought and his ideas. If his thoughts have changed, why? In what ways has his thought evolved? What are the specific differences between his thought in The Will to Power and his other texts? What impact does it specifically have on his views of religion? What could we learn from this, what can we apply to our modern age? Is it possible to practice this sort of religion in the modern day, or would it always feel hollow (like a LARP if you will)? Is it possible to again embody this great spirit? If it is not possible, then why? If it is possible, then how? Is he actually arguing for a polytheism, or just presenting it as a better alternative to Christianity? We can then discuss what he got right and wrong. And we can argue!

[Anonymous No.19754518]

>>19754417
Even just re-reading the paragraph! The Pagan's were a 'religious affirmation of Life, of the whole of Life, not of denied and partial Life.' A religious affirmation of Life (Life with a capital L). I think he envisions a world that is animated and magical, where life itself is ART! Here he gives an example of it being done through religion. A religious affirmation, but more importantly, is it even possible to do it without religion?

This is the problem I have on my mind now. Many of the people that I see calling themselves Nietzscheans, say that God is dead, that there is no God. They proclaim that they will create their own values. And yet, I have not see them doing so whatsoever. I have never seen an example of this occurring. But even if I could see the way in which one has changed from pursuing this, I could be convinced. I would be able to see that they are rising to something greater, simply from the personal change that has occurred in them. However, I have never seen this, not in the slightest! In fact many of them simply become egoists (In the stirner sense) and then hedonists.

But who can blame them! In a materialist world, it is difficult if not impossible to cultivate this affirmation. Materialism implies atheism, because unless your God is entirely physical, and I have never heard of such a thing, then there cannot be a God. Without a God, there is no inherent meaning, you must create it. You are an evolved animal, just a series of chemical reactions, you live for one life, and then you die forever. And so the natural conclusion that the majority come to is that you should seek as much pleasure as possible while you live. You should always act in your own self interest (egoism).

To me it seems as though 'killing God' is only bringing us closer to the last man. I do not even know why, but these thoughts consume me, I MUST answer these questions. I feel that which I am looking for in the Greeks and Romans. I see it personified. I even see it in the great epics of the past. And slowly I see it disappearing. We have less God then ever in our society. Why are we no closer to the Ubermensch? Unless what we have now is a sort of atheistic slave morality? I have heard people say that socialism came from Christianity's dead corpse, but is socialism really the evolution of slave morality? What about in countries that aren't socialist, countries that are capitalist? How could you charge them with a socialist slave morality? I live here in the west, and yet I still feel it too! Unless you try to argue that it is some sort of cultural marxism (gramscism) that has taken place as the next slave morality, but at this point, I am throwing darts with a blindfold. If it is not socialism, then what is it! What is this atheistic slave morality !?!?

[Anonymous No.19754529]

>>19754518
Again. We have less God then ever in our society. Why are we no closer to the Ubermensch? We have killed him, and yet still I cannot shake the feeling that we have instead adopted some even worse slave morality. But sadly I do not know enough to tell you what it is, or what to do about it. Maybe some smarter anons can provide some answers. Regardless I'm heading to bed

[Anonymous No.19754565]

>>19753269
It's a slog. It's repetitive. It's not well structured. Literally all of his published stuff is done better. In a very literal sense, WP is an appendix to Nietzsche's body of work, ideas which were forming or which were in the background of the other ideas. People that really like WP are, much like the people who curated it in the first place, looking for Nietzsche to affirm some ideological position or other and often read little else of him. For OP it's "paganism," but you could have read Genealogy of Morals, Beyond Good and Evil, and The Anti-Christ and gotten a more comprehensive view of his criticism of religion (and nihilism). Certainly the "paganism" of Nietzsche is unrelated to the kind of performative-reconstructionist stuff which I suspect is being sought out. For Nietzsche there is a certain barbarism to imitation, and it would be more noble for the barbarian to develop his own high culture on his own terms rather than attempt to use history as a template

[Anonymous No.19754575]

>>19754529
If you read anything at all other than WP you'll be better able to answer that. Do you even know where he gives the death of God a fuller treatment, or do you just know "Nietzsche said god is dead"?

[Anonymous No.19754599]

>>19754565
You didn't answer ANY of the questions I posed. Not a single one! Did you even read through the thread? I responded to your type of post here: >>19754417

[Anonymous No.19755658]

>>19752434
This one is fake and has been debunked

[Anonymous No.19755837]

>>19755658
The debunking has been debunked. The only thing that is fake in current editions is the title of the work, the arrangement of the aphorisms, and their publication. He still wrote the aphorisms.

[Anonymous No.19756086]

>>19754565
Insofar as people do look for shit in Nietzsche's works (not only the Will to Power) to reaffirm some ideological bias, people also ignore a lot from him in order to reaffirm ideological bias. You are no different from the ones you criticize. How can you take someone seriously when this person has no rigour in assessing the author in discussion? When this person ignores material because it is notes, letters, etc.? What a stupid excuse. If this was the case we would know nothing about a lot of philosopher's lives and wouldn't even have books from them (for example Husserl).

>In a very literal sense, WP is an appendix to Nietzsche's body of work, ideas which were forming or which were in the background of the other ideas.
For your information there are notes there that were literally employed in some of his books (Twilight, Anti-Christ).

You ignored the point about how there are notes that go deeper into what Nietzsche meant by some of his essential concepts.

You are not dedicated to anything but your own narcotics.

[Anonymous No.19756772]

>>19754417
>Nietzsche seems to have been greatly fond of paganism and polytheism.
To me it comes off as proto-Jungian

[Anonymous No.19756822]

>>19754529
The Last Man has to reach its peak before the Ubermensch is sprung from it. It'll either be zoomers or the next gen. Posted in another thread, Jordan Peterson's message of "stop identifying with world issues and seek inward struggle to overcome" has spread massively and its creating the same effect described by Nietzsche in the last paragraph of Book One in the Gay Science.

[Anonymous No.19756841]

>>19751592
>reading Nietzsche's sister's fan fiction

[Anonymous No.19756882]

>>19756086
I didn't say to ignore WP. I said it was an appendix. I agree portions of it are already stated in his published works. That's what makes it an appendix—WP is outtakes and notes. It's unfinished. I don't think it should be overly relied up to argue for what Nietzsche meant or didn't mean, because it was never even finalized.

[Anonymous No.19756973]

>>19756841
There's nothing in WtP anymore that you can't find in the books he published.

[Anonymous No.19757016]

>>19756882
There are people who do say to ignore it. But neither am I saying it should be taken as a whole work or to be taken in itself. Did you not read what I said about it, about how there are notes that will go further and explain more deeply some of Nietzsche's fundamental concepts?

[Anonymous No.19757045]

>>19751592
>Its mortal enemies are (1)
cringe

[Anonymous No.19757325]

>>19756822
But is the last man really going to reach it's peak in the zoomer generation, or the one after? Will the Ubermensch really come any time soon? I get the worrying feeling that we will instead continue to slowly decline for many many generations to come. I think that people do not know how bad things can actually get. To be quite honest, I get the same feeling from Christians when they tell me that any day now the end of the world is coming, or from communists when they tell me the revolution will happen any day now. People will continue to say 'One more generation must further degenerate before we reach the conditions for the ubermensch, it is imminent', and this would continue for an extraordinary amount of time.

[Anonymous No.19757349]

>>19757325
I think if something is to be done, we must start doing whatever we can as soon as possible. Sooner rather then later. What I fear most is a point of no return

[Anonymous No.19757365]

>>19757349
Did Nietzsche say anywhere that the last man must reach it's peak as a necessary condition for the Ubermensch?

[Anonymous No.19757483]

>>19756822
>>19757325
The peak was already reached and the Overman already emerged.

[Anonymous No.19757510]

>>19757016
>there are notes that will go further and explain more deeply some of Nietzsche's fundamental concepts
They are not definitive explanations of those concepts but appendix material. They are the thoughts around them, gestative, incomplete, unfinished. A rich source of context, but the published works ought to be more weighted

[Anonymous No.19757518]

>>19757325
The overman is not your messiah. He will appear to you as a devil

[Anonymous No.19757605]

>>19757510
It is not that simple. They are not useless because they are not complete or because they stand by themselves, so much so that they were employed in the published works. You are too dismissive toward such an important material that is the Will to Power, where, as I said, there are explanations not given with a depth they are in these notes.

See how you have no point, you'll just keep with the same assertions ad nauseam, while I'm showing the pertinence of some of the notes that explain essential concepts of Nietzsche's philosohy (the Will to Power, Nietzsche and his correction of Darwinism, etc.).

[Anonymous No.19757651]

>>19757365
>>19757349
He said the last man "lives the longest", so it is probably so. In the passage from Zarathustra called Tarantulas he says "what was silent in the father speaks in the son". We have to reach the ultimate Last Man before the values invert and the higher type becomes manifest in a rebellion.

[Anonymous No.19757678]

>>19757605
"The will to power" and "the correction of darwinism" are central to WP. They are not essential to much of his other works. If I had to pick a central work it would be The Gay Science, because elements of it are found in Genealogy, Beyond Good and Evil, Zarathustra, Anti-Christ, etc. And he wrote, finalized, and published it in his lifetime. This is not true for WP, and I did not say it was useless to read WP. What I am being consistent on is that WP is not central to Nietzsche. It is an appendix.

[Anonymous No.19757731]

>>19757678
I already told you I'm not taking the WP in itself you braindead retard, but some of the notes that constitute it. Why? Precisely because of what I already said as well: because they align with and go further into what Nietzsche said in his published works.
>"The will to power" and "the correction of darwinism" are central to WP. They are not essential to much of his other works
The concept of will to power is not essential to his other works? He says nothing about Darwinism in his other works?
Answer me, if there are notes that are coherent with what he said in the published works and present a different, more in depth understanding of it, should these notes be ignored? Or should they be taken as seriously as what was published?

At last, as I also explained, these notes 1) were materials used in some of the published works; 2) were meant to be organized into a coherent whole.
Therefore they have significant value. Nobody cares about your retarded opinions.

[Anonymous No.19757758]

>>19757731
What about ressentiment? Nihilism? Religion? Evaluation? Morality? The eternal return? Your emphasis on the will to power and darwin is not as broadly concerned as these topics are in the published works of Nietzsche.

[Anonymous No.19757799]

>>19757758
Holy fucking shit, are you retarded? At least read the book before trying to talk about it. Those were only two examples (and the concept of will to power is not a mere common example, it is an essential concept pervading all his works).

[Anonymous No.19757813]

>>19757678
>They are not essential to much of his other works.
This is very wrong. Will to power is as central a concept as the overman, eternal recurrence, and amor fati are. In fact, you can't understand any of these without understanding all of them and how they are connected.

[Anonymous No.19757954]

>>19751834
He said islam was based in one of the appendices to a book. He basically said Hinduism (law of manu shit), early Old Testament, and islam were based

Evola refuted him on Buddhism tho

[Anonymous No.19757973]

>>19757954
>he said this was based
>he was refuteed about this thing here
We'll start taking you seriously when you start reading books.

[Anonymous No.19759043]

?

[Anonymous No.19759050]

>>19759043
??

[Anonymous No.19759066]

>>19759043
>>19759050
I guess in the wake of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth that heritage carried more prestige than it does currently, idk.

[Anonymous No.19759089]

>>19759050
???

[Anonymous No.19759093]

>>19759089
????

[Anonymous No.19759096]

>>19759093
?????

[Anonymous No.19759102]

>>19759096
It seems that Nietzsche was Polish, if not in blood, then certainly in the soul, where it truly matters. As a member of the Polish community, I accept Nietzsche as a true brother in spirit!

[Anonymous No.19759132]

>>19757954
>another thread for people who haven't read N to debate people who didn't understand him about whether it is based and redpilled to agree with him or not
>>19757973
basado