/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.23340936]

So if Nietzsche thought that Victorian society was too "Apollonian" and needed to be balanced out with Dionysianism what would he make of modern society? It seems to be both too Appollonian and Dionysian. How does one make sense of this?

[Anonymous No.23340939]

What does Apollonian means in this context? Victorian society was the peak of human civilization.

[Anonymous No.23340949]

>>23340939
for reference

[Anonymous No.23340966]

Did he really think in this ridiculous binary manner? Anyway, today is "Dionysian" .Only some part of the third world is "Apollonian" but cultural imperialism will change this and they will have human rights and debates about atheism and gender

[Anonymous No.23340975]

>>23340936
If you know Iain McGilchrist, he makes the contention that society has become increasingly dominated by the left hemisphere of the brain in the last few centuries. He was influenced by Nietzsche (the title of his first book, "The Master and His Emissary", is a reference to Nietzsche) and people, including McGilchrist, have made the connection between left/right dichotomy and the Apollonian/Dionysian dichotomy -- although McGilchrist himself perhaps suggests Apollonian/Dionysian might relate better to top brain/bottom brain. Nevertheless left/right and Apollonian/Dionysian are not too far off as conceptual maps I think. Following on from this, I think that's there a very reasonable case to be made that the elements we identify as "Dionysian" in modern society (ie. apparent sexual degeneracy, loss of social norms, and other forms of chaos) are actually a consequence of the hyperrationalisation of the intellect and disembodiment -- for example, the trans movement which is arguably born out of young people's lack of connection and alienation from their bodies and sexuality, hence why it's also being produced by online communities. It's the case of what Chesterton famously described as the madman being the one who has lost everything but his reason, and also to do with the fact that any extreme pushed into one direction ends up becoming its opposite. The remedy obviously is never a pure return to either Dionysianism or dissolution or the body, it has to be in balance.

[Anonymous No.23340981]

>>23340975
*Master and His Emissary was his second book, but first where he outlines his hemisphere hypothesis

[Anonymous No.23340988]

>>23340936
If he saw modern society he would apologize to Socrates and instantly embrace the ascetic ideal.

[Anonymous No.23341023]

>>23340975
>I think that's there a very reasonable case to be made that the elements we identify as "Dionysian" in modern society (ie. apparent sexual degeneracy, loss of social norms, and other forms of chaos) are actually a consequence of the hyperrationalisation of the intellect and disembodiment -- for example, the trans movement which is arguably born out of young people's lack of connection and alienation from their bodies and sexuality, hence why it's also being produced by online communities.


Elaborate on this

[Anonymous No.23341073]

>>23340936
In BGE he makes reference to the English being an unphilosophical people. He also makes references to the English possessing a sort of slave morality but devoid of any actual reward belief structure, just doing it and being content, TotI through to GM iirc. I would even be inclined to say that there were certainly life affirming English authors and artists that were alive when Nietzsche was writing. The works of Nietzsche are littered with various criticisms of whole peoples and countries and the more people that are lumped into the criticism then the broader and more generalized the criticism is, which is something that holds true for most levying a criticism and this extends beyond Nietzsche and includes him as well, he was also prone to criticizing the Germans as well, and he had plenty of criticisms so it may not be fair to say he had a particular grudge against just the English. I would even venture that if he were alive right now he would likely be inclined to make a host of similar criticisms as well as a host of others. As to your point though, it may be worth noting that even in ancient Greek times there seemed to be a sort primary Apollonian emphasis (Marsyas dichotomy) and Nietzsche makes references in BoT to Dionysian being an almost extrication from Appolonian. The appeal to emotion associated with art was seen as Dionysian but not always in a favorable light, and the depictions of Dionysian followers being possessed by their god and tearing people and animals to pieces is implying an absence of reason. Nietzsche was also not opposed to the blending of the 2, but rather took issue with the absence of Dionysian elements. Artists and other life affirming people will be more likely to appreciate and agree with what Nietzsche had to say, and this is true regardless of nationality or whether both Appolonian and Dionysian are being represented simultaneously. I would even contend based on the Marsyas dichotomy that Nietzsche likely tended to eschew Appolonian for its haughty nature and presupposition to superiority. I would also contend that he would likely find issue with pure Dionysian as being too effeminate, so a fusion would likely be his preferred option, and given his tendencies towards random chance and anarchy balanced by his notions of eternal recurrence I am inclined to say he was likely trying to achieve a fusion himself. Only way to get random chance and anarchy, sex, drugs, and rock n roll is with Dionysian, only way to make any of that work with things like rhyme scheme, time structures, dosages, mixing up the various insertion points, and making sure you do not blow yourself up is with Appolonian. A fusion or both function at the same time would likely be approved by Nietzsche.

[Anonymous No.23341084]

>>23341023
I think consequences of the liberal and Enlightenment project and technological advances of the 19th and 20th century have resulted in mass alienation and atomisation, deracination from families, communities, nature and tradition, essentially all of the things that Deneen complains about in 'Why Liberalism Failed'. Hence it's no surprise that for example that a lot of young people, especially those living in urban areas or living online, have instability of identity in both sexuality and gender, because they feel totally alienated from their peers, communities and families -- they either embrace their alienation in the marginal identity of homosexuality or attempt to solve it through transition, both of which give them at least a new (primarily online) community to which they can claim to belong. The rise of pornography and hook-up culture too isn't really to do with Dionysianism but with technology and atomisation in the first instance and loss of social connection to a community to enforce standards of sexual behaviour in the second. I think one can make lots of arguments for technology and hyperrationalisation affecting other political issues too although sexuality seems, perhaps tellingly, to be one of the most dominating political issues of our time.

[Anonymous No.23341108]

>>23340936
Modern society isn't any more dionysian than that of the victorian era. It's incredibly apollonian, in a bad and boring way. Art has been replaced with slop and most people only care about their status (that is, they buy into society's measly concept of what it means to be successful), their careers and social media. The mainstream position is to view actually artful art as pretentious. Basically art is seen only as a form of entertainment or status signaling. Everyone is incredibly cowardly and conformist and even though culture has seemingly fractured, it's all the same gray bullshit; parking lots, office buildings, shopping malls and ads. Nobody cares to explore new forms of thinking and living. And I have no desire to attempt to rectify any of this, it's probbaly always been like this to some extent. I just wish I'll one day be able to transcend it in a way.

[Anonymous No.23341128]

>>23341084
>>23341023
Also, I forgot to mention but probably a more integral part of the explanation, Iain McGilchrist describes how the current overdominance of the left hemisphere (similar to right hemisphere stroke patients) has led to a kind of condition of schizophrenic thinking and delusions in society -- schizophrenics often complain of a feeling of alienation from their body, or believe they should be a woman, as in Freud's famous Schreber case.

[Anonymous No.23341131]

>>23341084
>deracination from families, communities, nature and tradition
Idk if you consider yourself a nietzschean (you're in a Nietzsche thread btw) but I don't think Nietzsche really cared about any of that stuff. Wasn't he fundamentally anti-tradition? I mean, he thought that the most capable people should strive to overcome the limitations set by conventions and traditions, and create their own values, their own modes of thinking and living...

[Anonymous No.23341160]

>>23341131
Yes I agree. Nietzsche himself was in many ways extremely Apollonian, even, possibly, precisely to the point of madness that hyperrationalisation leads to in the end. But also much of his project can be seen as an attempted response to free himself from the rationalism and alienation of his own situation, and as people have noted his attitude towards the loss of religion is at times elegiac, and his project self-consciously tragic. I probably agree with Peterson that the attempt to create one's own values is where Nietzsche most failed, although it seems one of the most brilliant failures in philosophy.

[Anonymous No.23341501]

>>23340936
It's because contemporary society is based on maximizing oppression. Dionysian to get people addicted to consumption; Apollonian to keep them people like sheep.

Posthuman is just a word that means removing human rights.

[Anonymous No.23341744]

>>23340936
Today is going through the process of entering into a balance, and as a result indulgence must be everywhere until the balance is found. Expect nothing but the lowest Dionysianism for now.

[Anonymous No.23341799]

>>23340966
This shows Nietzsche really didn’t comprehend what was going on in Britain if it was too ‘Appollonian’. I would call the German states and later German Empire more Appollonian than Victoria’s England. Unless Nietzsche thought the average German believed and acted like a German idealist in some major faction.

[Anonymous No.23341822]

>>23341108
>And I have no desire to attempt to rectify any of this

no! Do try! The world can be made better but it won't happen by itself. /srs

[Anonymous No.23341863]

It's hard for me to reconcile Eternal Recurrence. Not just the idea itself, but the idea that one of the biggest Atheists came up with that, that we are literally TRAPPED here. Basically all religions have an eternity feature and that.. I just hope that wouldn't be the case. But I also doubt we can un-become, I feel like it's permanent in some way.

[Anonymous No.23342510]

>>23341160
>I probably agree with Peterson that the attempt to create one's own values is where Nietzsche most failed, although it seems one of the most brilliant failures in philosophy.
I'm not sure where anyone gets this idea from. Nietzsche himself never posits such an idea. Zarathustra's message is quite different — one should LIVE and DIE for one's own values, those values coming from within, as part of one's own nature. Nietzsche was a biological determinist who denied the separation of soul and body, which is a prerequisite to the liberal concept of "creating one's own values."

[Anonymous No.23342559]

>>23342510
It's the transvaluation of values. You haven't read Will to Power.
Nietzsche is the most annoying and impossible person to discuss on /lit/ for this very reason. Every anon claims to know exactly what Nietzsche said, often only using a few of his texts. I've read a lot of him in German. And Peterson doesn't say that because he's an idiot, he said it because he's not an idiot and it's a viable interpretation. In future please assume other people aren't idiots before correcting them.

[Anonymous No.23342584]

>>23342559
>You haven't read Will to Power.
I have. What I see in Peterson's interpretation is just the common liberal misreading of Nietzsche. His perspectivism is grounded in his gradualist, pluralist biology; one doesn't create new values out of thin air, but out of one's multiplicity of instincts which are in conflict with one another.

>Every drive is a kind of lust to rule; each one has its perspective that it would like to compel all the other drives to accept as a norm (WP 481)

>Do not be virtuous beyond your strength! And do not desire anything of yourselves against probability. Walk in the footprints where your fathers' virtue walked before you. How would you climb high if your fathers' will does not climb with you? [...] If your fathers consorted with women, strong wines, and wild boars, what would it be if you wanted chastity of yourself? It would be folly! (TSZ, On the Higher Man, 13)

[Anonymous No.23342659]

>>23342584
Yes well, the irony of studying Nietzsche is that there are no facts and only interpretations. As long as people recognise that what they are saying are almost always interpretations people could discuss Nietzsche more freely and with less irritation -- the problem is that both the changes in his views across his life and the difficulties of aphoristic style texts make many conflicting interpretations viable. I don't disagree with your interpretation, it's interesting, and that's the most important thing, but one could just as easily argue the opposite liberal perspective, especially from his notion that humanity is something that should be overcome in the Übermensch, which implies human nature and drives too.

[Anonymous No.23342690]

>>23342659
>Yes well, the irony of studying Nietzsche is that there are no facts and only interpretations.
This gets thrown around a lot, but it's a shitty paraphrasing of what he actually wrote. This is the full passage, which I already shared a portion of:

>In opposition to Positivism, which halts at phenomena and says “There are only facts and nothing more”, I would say: No, facts are precisely what is lacking; all that exists consists of interpretations. We cannot establish any fact “in itself”: it may even be nonsense to desire to do such a thing. “Everything is subjective”, you say; but that in itself is interpretation. The “subject” is nothing given, but something superimposed by fancy, something introduced behind. – Is it necessary to set an interpreter behind the interpretation already to hand? Even that would be fantasy, hypothesis. To the extent to which “knowledge” has any sense at all, the world is knowable; but may be interpreted differently; it has not one sense behind it, but hundreds of senses. – “Perspectivism”. It is our needs that interpret the world; our instincts and their impulses For and Against. Every instinct is a sort of thirst for power; each one has its point of view, which it would fain impose upon all the other instincts as their norm.

But here is the thing: "interpretation" for Nietzsche does not mean "whatever I want to be the case." It means "whatever my biology wants to be the case" as evident by the full passage and many, many others throughout his works. Will to power, for Nietzsche, was THE biological imperative; it is the drive that compels all other drives and the instinct that gave birth to all evolutionary developments and all forms of so-called 'knowledge." "Reality," as far as Nietzsche is concerned, is manufactured by the organism, for the express purpose of that organism's innate drive to discharge its strength. So, it is incorrect to state that Nietzsche was arguing for the liberal perspective — he absolutely wasn't.

[Anonymous No.23342752]

Nietzsche thought ‘Dionysian’ meant moorish dancing and upbeat classical music, like Carmen. He didn’t picture meth fueled midget tranny scat-blowbangs. I’m certain that if he could foresee this stuff he would have lived out his years in a trappist monastery.

[Anonymous No.23342767]

>>23340936
>current society
>Dionysian
Not a fucking chance, Apollo all the way down, we've never left the victorian mode of thought or production

[Anonymous No.23343340]

>>23342767
And we never will because if we went full Dionysian we would all be hanging from trees upside down from our tails and eating funny moldy fruit that made us trip balls and completely covered in hair.

[Anonymous No.23343456]

>>23342767
>>23343340
>the American Revolution
>the Industrial Revolution
>the Sexual Revolution
>the Internet Revolution
>the coming AI and VR revolutions
Imagine being this clueless. Once AI topples capitalism, the Platonic-Apollonian era's last gasp, then we'll finally enter the Nietzschean-Dionysian era, which will be a transhumanist creator economy.

Humanity went from animism/polytheism, to monotheism, and will become egotheist this millennium. We're already a quarter of the way there.

[Anonymous No.23343636]

>>23343340
>>23343456

It's both at the same time. Structure itself is apollonian and the world is increasingly consumed by the bureaucracy, by rules and regulations. Apollonians are slowly recrafting the world into a perfectly observable, controllable catalogue of approved experiences and interactions. The panopticon is their dream and it's never been closer to fruition.

The Dionysians have pushed their opposition to hyper-individualism and the rejection of any morals, principles, and even reason. Sexual degeneracy, nation-state vulnerability/disfunctionality, and social disunity are the results.

[Anonymous No.23343649]

>>23340966
>>23341799
Both Apollo and Dionysus can be good.
The problem with the modern world, which Nietzsche rightfully called, is that democracy has degenerated humanity. We live in the peak of democracy, ie the rule of the peasantry and the slave. Our slave societies are made by slaves, fueled by slave-values and meant to reproduce slaves. There is no rational thinking, but there's no passion either, just subservience.

[Anonymous No.23343665]

>>23343456
>and will become egotheist this millennium. We're already a quarter of the way there.
Not even close. The current zeitgeist is extremely antithetical to ego and personal freedom. "Egoist" is commonly thrown around as an insult.
Just as Stirner said, socialist kept the exact same values as the God-fearing Christians, they just replaced God with "society", "the common good" and/or "the State", and called their values "secular morality".
We are headed to increasing authoritarianism cheered by the subhuman masses because politicians tell them that it is all done for the common good.

[Anonymous No.23343684]

>>23343649
What you're talking about is socialism. We're living in the peak of socialism right now, not democracy.

Nietzsche wrote in favor of democracy in Human, All Too Human:

>Disregard for and the decline and death of the state, the liberation of the private person (I take care not to say: of the individual), is the consequence of the democratic conception of the state; it is in this that its mission lies. When it has performed its task — which like everything human bears much rationality and irrationality in its womb — when every relapse into the old sickness has been overcome, a new page will be turned in the storybook of humanity in which there will be many strange tales to read and perhaps some of them good ones. — To repeat in brief what has just been said: the interests of tutelary government and the interests of religion go hand in hand together, so that when the latter begins to die out the foundations of the state too are undermined.

>The democratization of Europe is, it seems, a link in the chain of those tremendous prophylactic measures which are the conception of modern times and through which we separate ourselves from the Middle Ages.

He also prescribed a step in the democratic formula that I haven't seen employed:

>Democracy wants to create and guarantee as much independence as possible: independence of opinion, of mode of life and of employment. To that end it needs to deprive of the right to vote both those who possess no property and the genuinely rich: for these are the two impermissible classes of men at whose abolition it must work continually, since they continually call its task into question.

The Greeks held the same rule for the Olympic contests, by the way.

Democracy is independence for all; socialism is independence for the majority. What we have right now is a tyranny of the majority. We don't have the democracy Nietzsche envisioned.

[Anonymous No.23343686]

>>23340936
Bely's Petersburg is a pretty interesting dramatization of Apollo/Dionysus dichotomy, among other things.

[Anonymous No.23343688]

>>23343665
>The current zeitgeist is extremely antithetical to ego and personal freedom.
It really isn't. What is the most popular form of art among younger generations right now? Video games, and these teach young minds to be egoists better than any other form.

This shit is just starting. Younger generations are far bigger egoists than the older ones currently alive. Egoism will only continue to increase as this millennium unfolds.

[Anonymous No.23343697]

>>23343688
>Video games, and these teach young minds to be egoists better than any other form.
?
>Younger generations are far bigger egoists than the older ones currently alive.
In what way? Where?
Younger generations and specially young women in America and Western Europe overwhelmingly support socialism.
Both old conservatives and young socialists want the same thing, a powerful State that will "protect" you from evil. They just disagree on what that "evil" is. And they both evenly expect you to be thankful to the State.

[Anonymous No.23343706]

Centuries ago, in the obscurantist past, so-called Christians got mad if you dared to question the divinity of Jesus and they thought that you were irredeemably evil if you didn't believe that God created the Earth.
Nowadays, in our enlightened present, so-called Progressives got mad if you dared to question the innocence of George Floyd and say that you are irredeemably evil if you don't believe that trans women are women.
Everything comes back, some things seem to never leave us.

[Anonymous No.23343716]

>>23343697
>?
What are you confused about? Video games are the least passive form of art. Even the shittiest games (cinematic snoozefests and battle royales with lootbox systems) are less passive than other forms.
(Passive in the sense that the outcome of the experience is directly in the hands of the one experiencing it.)

>Younger generations and specially young women in America and Western Europe overwhelmingly support socialism.
Socialism doesn't contradict egoism. It's just an extremely degenerate expression of it.

The younger generations are getting married less, having less kids, and are less interested in these things. They're more democratic and more interested in social justice overall, specifically because they don't believe in state government. They're (unsurprisingly) also less religious.

[Anonymous No.23343728]

>>23342690
>He didn’t picture meth fueled midget tranny scat-blowbangs.
He probably did. If I have a 1/100 chance to accomplish something it may seem hopeless but if there are 100 of us one will likely do it. However if we're all doing the exact same thing we might as well be one person, the odds don't change unless there's some variation.
If eating shit aesthetically appeals to you enough you should explore that and see where it leads you.
Only one in a trillion succeeds in reshaping the world and that's enough. I doubt shiteaters will accomplish anything but sperging about them definitely won't.

Nietzsche points his words at those who roughly share his aesthetic sense, he's an orphan calling for his family which he can't find among the Germans.
In the conservative versus progressive dichotomy he's an extreme progressive, a hunter/explorer not a builder of farms. Conservatives in that sense should fear him and want to wall him off from their precious stagnant non-shiteating civilizations. His family are wolves, they serve a role similar to wolves and actively identify with them in their aesthetics through history. Wolves founded Rome but when the city was built they had to be kept outside the walls until the walls were sold by corrupt bureaucrats and wolves ate it all, as Roman prophesy from the start said they would.

[Anonymous No.23343733]

>>23343716
>Video games are the least passive form of art
And? That has nothing to do with the message that a given game pushes for.
>Socialism doesn't contradict egoism
Yes it does.
Socialism is the political expression of collectivistic ethos. To support socialism requires you to believe that the individual is naught but a part of a larger whole, to be found in society.
>The younger generations are getting married less, having less kids, and are less interested in these things.
So what? That has nothing to do with egoism.
>They're more democratic
Democracy can be just as authoritarian as any other decision-making process.
>and more interested in social justice overall
"social-justice" is codeword for more government control over society.
>specifically because they don't believe in state government.
??????????????????????????????
I don't see the youth of America and Western Europe calling for less government. In the UK at least the youth are overwhelmingly calling for more government funding to the NHS, more government-mandated diversity quotas, more government censorship of speech deemed problematic, etc...
>They're (unsurprisingly) also less religious.
They are just as religious as any can be.
They have a set abstract dogma that they follow blindly. It is just that their god isn't the bearded man on the sky, but rather their conception of the "common good" or the aforementioned "social-justice". It is a god at whose altar they wish to sacrifice personal freedom, both theirs and mine.

See pic for an introduction to what actual egoism is.

[Anonymous No.23343758]

>>23343733
>And? That has nothing to do with the message that a given game pushes for.
The act of playing a video game is more important than the "message" of the game. The act of playing has a more significant imprint on the player's brain in the end, because it involves far more chemicals, due to the interactive (non-passive) element.

>To support socialism requires you to believe that the individual is naught but a part of a larger whole, to be found in society.
This doesn't accurately represent the socialism of younger generations, who are more likely to believe in the sovereignty of the individual and disbelieve in the sovereignty of the state.

>So what? That has nothing to do with egoism.
These things are occurring because younger generations place far less emphasis on self-sacrifice. They're more concerned with their own welfare and see marriage and children as net negatives.

>I don't see the youth of America and Western Europe calling for less government.
Then you're not really paying attention. Younger generations hate the education system, big pharma, federal government, and corporate America, and they lump all of these into what they consider to be an outdated religious sentiment (which they are) about how society should work. Younger generations are also more likely to be going to therapy, which is in big part due to their underlying belief that their own welfare is above all what's most important (egoism).

[Anonymous No.23343779]

>>23343733
>>23343758
Two other things:

Younger generations are more supportive of LGBT. This is because of their latent egoism, which extends into their belief that everyone ought to be able to satisfy their own desires.

Younger generations are also more supportive of poly relationships. This is because of the reason above, and also because they see monogamy as unnecessarily restrictive / incompatible with our biology.

On nearly all fronts, younger generations seek to liberate the individual from institutions in order to satiate their desires. This accounts for a massive portion of their involvement in social justice movements.

[Anonymous No.23343785]

>>23343758
>Younger generations hate the education system, big pharma, federal government
Younger people in America are voting for the Democrat party, glorifying dictators like FDR, and demanding universal healthcare and public college for all. They are also constantly throwing moralistic buzzwords against those they deem "nazi, fascist, racist, transphobic" etc...
I think you are really confusing a refusal for Christian dogma and Christian conceptions of faith for a refusal of all dogma in its entirety. A typical millenial from San Francisco doesn't see anything wrong with having casual sex with men and women, but will become furious if you call a black person a nigger. There is a change in the content of "evil" but the concept of "evil" itself is not being questioned.

[Anonymous No.23343794]

>>23343785
>Younger people in America are voting for the Democrat party, glorifying dictators like FDR, and demanding universal healthcare and public college for all.
They do these things because they're hoping to destroy the institutional powers at be. If you didn't realize this, it's because you've been viewing their behavior from an outsider's perspective.

>They are also constantly throwing moralistic buzzwords against those they deem "nazi, fascist, racist, transphobic" etc...
Yes, because they see religion, morality, etc. as intertwined with the institutional powers they want to tear down. In order to break down these institutions their ontological roots have to also be broken down.

[Anonymous No.23343799]

>>23343779
>which extends into their belief that everyone ought to be able to satisfy their own desires.
They don't believe in this. They will instantly change their tune if satisfying your desires involves an activity which they deem heretical.
A typical man 100 years ago had no issues if you wanted to call a homosexual a faggot but would get mad if you wanted to fuck another man.
A typical man today has no issues if you want to fuck another man but will get mad if you want to call a homosexual a faggot.
It is the same thing. It is not like one wishes to repress people while the other advocates for freedom. Both advocate for control and repression, just of different things.

[Anonymous No.23343801]

>>23343758
This is just hedonistic consumerism, there's nothing positive or independent going on there, even games themselves are stagnating. The mild exceptions in tech where something new happens tend to be based on collectivist projects like open source.
A perfect "egoist" would be perfectly moral because our sense of morality adapted to the rules of reality for selfish reasons. Being perfectly moral would mean knowing exactly when a certain moral principle is applicable or not but humans need to rely on rules of thumb and usually err on the side of caution.

[Anonymous No.23343805]

>>23343794
So-called progressive people are religious too.
Anybody who thinks in terms of "right and wrong" is religious.
It is a war of a ser of values against a different set of values. Neither side questions the idea of having values in the first place.

I honestly think you don't understand what egoism is.

[Anonymous No.23343816]

>>23343801
>A perfect "egoist" would be perfectly moral because our sense of morality adapted to the rules of reality for selfish reasons
No. An egoist has no care for the concept of morality.
An egoist would act according to his will with no regards for any abstract concept.

[Anonymous No.23343826]

>>23343799
>They don't believe in this
Yes they do lol.

>They will instantly change their tune if satisfying your desires involves an activity which they deem heretical.
You mean if your desire is to prevent them from satisfying theirs? Yeah, no fucking shit they won't support that. This isn't hypocrisy and it doesn't mean they don't believe in liberating the individual. It just means the other person doesn't and obviously that person can't be supported along the way towards their fundamentally egoistic goals.

>>23343805
>It is a war of a ser of values against a different set of values.
Yes, I'm aware of that. I don't know why you think I'm not.

[Anonymous No.23343829]

>>23343826
>Yes, I'm aware of that.
Then why are you arguing that one side is egoist?
Again, do you even understand what egoism is? Clearly you don't.

[Anonymous No.23343832]

>>23343829
>Then why are you arguing that one side is egoist?
Because they're conscious of their egoism. More conscious than the other side, at any rate. They have no problem admitting that they would like to be able to pursue their own interests and that they are politically and socially motivated to bring about this desired paradise.

[Anonymous No.23343873]

>>23343816
>An egoist would act according to his will with no regards for any abstract concept.
You're describing a feral child. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt but obviously I shouldn't expect a hint of coherent thought from someone identifying as an "egoist".

[Anonymous No.23343877]

>>23343873
That wasn't me. I didn't reply to >>23343801 because it was retarded word salad.

[Anonymous No.23343898]

>>23343340
No it still will and just because someone with >>23343456
>transhumanist creator
in their twitter bio and whatever other descriptors is never going to get back in a fucking tree doesn't mean people will stop climbing

[Anonymous No.23343899]

>>23343877
>the mighty super-egoist who spends his time shitting on morality doesn't understand morality on any level and can't read
I'm sure videogames will solve this.

[Anonymous No.23343904]

>>23341108
>[Society is] incredibly apollonian
...
>Art has been replaced with slop [...] The mainstream position is to view actually artful art as pretentious
>Everyone is incredibly cowardly and conformist
>it's all the same gray bullshit;
These three things, especially the last, are textbook Dionysian. Apollonianism = more definition. Dionysianism = more murkiness.
It is hard to comment on the first because you say art is slop and then say people think art is pretentious, but I assume you mean that modern art is shit. Modern art literally eschews definition as it has completely embroiled itself in Dionysian ichor.
Conformist behavior is a smoothing out of individuals.
Gray is literally the loss of color, or definition.
>>23343636
this is a good point, but the structure itself is opaque and bureaucracy is a total relinquishment of responsibility or the ability to attribute fault
>>23343684
That passage is only supporting democracy insofar as its demise leads to something better. He would also be in support of modern degeneracy in this way. Also, restricting many people from voting based on financial status, while obviously a good idea, is anti-democratic.
>>23343826
>>23343832
The modern young person is a sexless prude. They only support "satisfying their desires" insofar as it goes against the white Christian boogeyman of the 1800s. They recoil at the thought of personal expression, which takes shape in any sort of genuine sexual attraction -- they rage at any genuine male sexuality towards young women (see recent rage about Dicaprio dating a 22 year old) and faux-satiate their libido into fake displays of attraction towards ugly, nonthreatening women such as Zendaya or that 8 ft tall woman from Resident Evil.

[Anonymous No.23344001]

>>23343899
>who spends his time shitting on morality
I only shit on the morality of solipsists.

[Anonymous No.23344038]

>>23343904
>they rage at any genuine male sexuality towards young women
You misunderstand what their rage is directed towards. It's not towards male sexuality, but towards the use of male sexuality in specific contexts in order to further the oppression that keeps the institutional powers at be in charge.

Younger generations of men and women are very accepting of nearly all kinds of sexuality. What they're not accepting of is any attempt to enforce some kind of norm on the public, be it sexual, political, or whatever, because this is tyrannical and oppressive at its core.

You can fuck who you want, how you want, so long as the other person consents, but you can't dictate to the public that this is the best way to fuck, the right way to fuck, or the ideal way to fuck, because, quite simply, you're not God, motherfucker.

[Anonymous No.23344383]

>>23340966
Postmodern society is not Dionysian in the slightest, Dionysian means complete surrendering of one life to the senses something postmodern society think it is but is afraid to actually practice. In liberals societies the ideal man is the rational man, the man who only knows to live through his intellect but will never let him feel real joy

[Anonymous No.23344996]

>>23342690
The final lines in German, which you're hinging your argument on:
>Unsere Bedürfnisse sind es, die die Welt auslegen; unsere Triebe und deren Für und Wider. Jeder Trieb ist eine Art Herrschsucht, jeder hat seine Perspektive, welche er als Norm allen übrigen Trieben aufzwingen möchte.
You're going with the translation of "Bedürfnisse" as "instincts", which from your interpretation have to be "biological" instincts. But it could also mean something more like "wish/requirement", just as you are choosing to interpret "Trieb" biologically when it may also mean merely desire. And because you are not a liberal, you "wish" for this to mean biological instincts, thereby proving Nietzsche's point that whatever we want to be the case becomes true for us.

[Anonymous No.23345118]

>>23343456
>AI and VR revolutions

[Anonymous No.23345130]

>>23343684
>We're living in the peak of socialism right now
why does no one ever talk about this? not even marxists talk about it. technically speaking, we are already living in socialism if you look at what marx said.

[Anonymous No.23345143]

>>23340939
>Victorian society was the peak of human civilization.
Bourgeois are the lowest of the low

[Anonymous No.23345144]

>>23340975
>>If you know Iain McGilchrist, he makes the contention that society has become increasingly dominated by the left hemisphere of the brain in the last few centuries. He was influenced by Nietzsche (the title of his first book, "The Master and His Emissary", is a reference to Nietzsche) and people, including McGilchrist, have made the connection between left/right dichotomy and the Apollonian/Dionysian dichotomy -- although McGilchrist himself perhaps suggests Apollonian/Dionysian might relate better to top brain/bottom brain.
atheists are so cringe when the link material brain to their shitty deified democratic republics

>>23340975
>are actually a consequence of the hyperrationalisation of the intellect and disembodiment -- for example, the trans movement which is arguably born out of young people's lack of connection and alienation from their bodies and sexuality, hence why it's also being produced by online communities. It's the case of what Chesterton famously described as the madman being the one who has lost everything but his reason, and also to do with the fact that any extreme pushed into one direction ends up becoming its opposite. The remedy obviously is never a pure return to either Dionysianism or dissolution or the body, it has to be in balance.
No, bourgeois are just bisexual freaks. They were even before their revolutions.

[Anonymous No.23345147]

>>23344383
>the man who only knows to live through his intellect but will never let him feel real joy
There's no real joy for a Dionysian life because Dionysian life means just hedonism and the democracies are indeed hedonistic.

[Anonymous No.23345149]

>>23344038
>You can fuck who you want, how you want, so long as the other person consents, but you can't dictate to the public that this is the best way to fuck, the right way to fuck, or the ideal way to fuck, because, quite simply, you're not God, motherfucker.
a/ consent is a social construct

b/ ''You can fuck who you want, how you want, so long as the other person consents,'' is dogma created and imposed by the ruling class on the population already

so the women and little shithead NPCs who sperg blaming tyranny are the biggest morons

[Anonymous No.23345170]

>>23345144
McGilchrist is not an atheist or a materialist.

[Anonymous No.23345192]

>>23343716
>Video games are the least passive form of art. Even the shittiest games (cinematic snoozefests and battle royales with lootbox systems) are less passive than other forms.
There is no art in democracy because democracy is a tool to base society on commerce. A video game is a mercantile product by a merchants from the mercantile entertainment industry. it has nothing to do with art.

[Anonymous No.23345195]

>>23343649
>>The problem with the modern world, which Nietzsche rightfully called, is that democracy has degenerated humanity. We live in the peak of democracy, ie the rule of the peasantry and the slave. Our slave societies are made by slaves, fueled by slave-values and meant to reproduce slaves.
We live exactly in the wet dream for Nietzsche. Peasants who create their own values and they are life-affirming, ie pro-hedonism.

[Anonymous No.23345196]

>>23343904
Young people are absolutely supportive of public expressions of sexuality. Only for faggots and trannies, however. Straight people are seen as antiquated and cringe.

[Anonymous No.23345368]

>>23344996
I don't just "wish." This is Nietzsche we're talking about, the philosopher who declared that body is all that the self is and who defined the soul as an aspect of the body in TSZ.

>>23345149
Did you think this was a "gotcha" when you wrote it? Because both things you pointed out are already assumed. For democracy to work, some values must be held sacred over others; it is not a problem with democracy that this be the case.

>>23345192
You confuse democracy with capitalism here, and you assume that everyone living in a capitalist society holds capitalist values.

[Anonymous No.23345822]

>>23340936
>So if Nietzsche thought that Victorian society was too "Apollonian" and needed to be balanced out with Dionysianism what would he make of modern society?
If I was Nietzche I would probably say that modern society is too Apollonian (Too rational, focused on positivism, materialism, definitions, "Science" etc.") And that the individual is unrestrained Dionysian (Too irrational, hedonists, basically glorified animals longing for sex and money)
He glorified the greeks for achieving a state where the forces are working together in unison, the irrational tempered by the rational. Basically he wanted to foster a state of intellectual intuition (my words not his)

The Dionysiac World View
>It was the Apolline people who laid the
chains of beauty on over-mighty instinct, who yoked and harnessed
nature's most dangerous elements, her wildest beasts. The idealistic power
of the Hellenic character is seen at its most admirable when one compares
its spiritualization of the festival ofDionysos with what emerged from the
same origin amongst other peoples. Similar festivals are very ancient and
their existence is demonstrable everywhere, most notably in Babylon where
they are known as the sacaea. Here, during five-day-long festivals, every
political and social bond was torn apart; but the centre of the cult lay in the
absence of all sexual discipline, in the destruction of all family life by unrestrained
hetaerism. The very antithesis of this is to be found in the image
of the Greek festivals of Dionysos, as drawn by Euripides in his Bacchae...

[Anonymous No.23345868]

Dionysianism is the result of modern day America. Too much hedonistic sexual freedom and inexistent self discipline leads to a chaotic society.

Nietzsche was just a Contrarian he even ridiculed whoever agreed with him, His critic on the Victorian age was just a form of revolt against the society.

[Anonymous No.23345910]

>>23341108
I'll explain the problem here.
>Art is slop
>People must see art as a form of contemporary work
>Nobody cares to explore new forms of thinking and living

I don't know but the problem here is that people tend to overlook what others try to do, Everyone is up to the main dish that society provides, Whether it be a marginalized society or a mainstream society, People are constantly trying to create new ways but it's not reaching the surface of society, Even if it reaches the surface it will be heavily criticized and it'll be just another false idea because you must know that our Society now is backwards and is leaning into a more nostalgia-driven outlook.
We're not an Appolonian society, Nay, We're far from it. An Appolonian society requires an actual base core to drive it into an original system, And what is our society is based on primarly but an actual old idea that's getting recirculated to keep it alive. Our society is a Dionysian one because it's driven primarly on emotion, Nostalgia. No one can accept a new idea only if it seems to resonate with their beliefs (old ideas). Nothing is original as you said but in a parallel, originality is the opposite of Dionysian society, As much as Appolonianism is what you refered to is right but still in reality it's a Dionysianistic society that fear Appolonianism

[Anonymous No.23346020]

Nietschze was an excellent writer and equally terrible philosopher. Pale shadow of Schopenhauer, whom he admired; an "admiration" of Nietsczhe is a surest sign of midwit.

[Anonymous No.23346039]

This board doesn’t read Nietzsche and thinks Apollinian (his spelling) and Dionysian just mean cerebral and introverted versus partying and extroverted. They have a woman’s understanding of Nietzsche

[Anonymous No.23346047]

Nietzsche anons does it make sense to start with genealogy of morals? Never read Nietzsche but I generally understand his ideas and how he fits into the history of philosophy.

[Anonymous No.23346056]

>>23346047
Personally I would say just read the book that sounds most interesting to you. I started with Thus Spoke Zarathustra and still felt I got plenty out of it.

[Anonymous No.23346312]

>>23346039
If you truly read Nietzsche you'll know that he himself tells us that everything wrong seems to be right in another perspective.

Grow up

[Anonymous No.23347860]

>>23344038
>the use of male sexuality in specific contexts in order to further the oppression that keeps the institutional powers at be in charge.
Since straight men are assumed to be one of the institutional powers, all heterosexual male sexuality is demonized. We agree.
>What they're not accepting of is any attempt to enforce some kind of norm on the public
They have no problem with gays teaching children about gay sex
>so long as the other person consents,
You are correct that consent is a major part of their ethos. This is another element of the great smoothing of modern man; any bargain whose upholding would cause negative effects to one person can never be allowed. Ideals are intolerable. This is why there is an obsession with cutting out "toxic" people and redefining marriage in terms of its being a "healthy relationship," rather than a spiritual bond. Risk can scare be accepted. Virginity is on the rise (in both sexes) because of this.

[Anonymous No.23348199]

Hollingdale or Kauffman
Its hard to even tell which version is who when these publishers dont print the name on the cover and goddamn amazon and thirftbooks doesnt list it in their details

[Elliot's Husband !!UeLxjR8BrJ6 No.23348276]

>>23340936
Modern society is deffinition if Appolonian and reason why it is so shit.

[Anonymous No.23348335]

>>23347860
>all heterosexual male sexuality is demonized
Not really. It's okay when they're skinny guys like Bieber or Chalemet.

>They have no problem with gays teaching children about sexual diversity for the purpose of a more inclusive and holistic future
Fixed that for you.

>Virginity is on the rise (in both sexes) because of this.
Justify this claim, because I'm not seeing it.

[Anonymous No.23348484]

>>23340936
Nyx's role via Hypnos in the Trojan War

Apollo sent Hercules to save Prometheus, not being able to do so himself (nor Artemis) despite interceding on his behalf to Zeus. After Dionysus' First Death he takes the ashes to Delphi, and after his return/resurrection they swap places in the winter while Apollo goes to Hyperborea to oversee the (re)birth of the new wolf brood ... Zeus' first wife Metis ('cunning'/of Reason) was swallowed by Zeus to prevent the Prophecy of a son overthrowing him, as he did to Kronos ... with child with Athena who later springs from his forehead (like Thoth) ... Themis (divine order) births the Fates & Seasons ...

Thrice Born Athena and Twice Born Dionysus together with Man fulfill the prophecy of overturning the tyranny of Zeus. Triumphant Dionysus with fennel stalk thyrsus covered in Honey i.e. Orphic taurocteny & rebirth, the convention of bees & hives appearing in the hollowed carcasses of cattle - the same fennel stalk Prometheus stole the Olympian fire with - signifies theurgy/recollection/philosophy and surmounting the lower animal nature (leopard skin).

Apollo guards roads and waterways (sea lanes, dolphins as seawolves; initiatic wolf rites as in Rome); Artemis guards Mountains/springs/rivers (bear cult, reincarnation); Athena is the Luminous, with her astral/stellar aegis (from either Ouranous' ballsack or Titan Pallas/Astreus' hide as a cloak) -- as such the Alethic in entasy, self-coherence; Dionysus is the pre-horizonal Numinous, ekstasic expurgative theurgy/apophasis, via negativa, non-representational.

In the low resolution sense per OP, the 'apollonian' in question is excessively disassociative, self-alienating from the immediacy and actualty of embodied presence. In hindsight, Nietzsche would appreciate that only the British have any semblance of retaining Old Europe aristocracy, and all the kinky debauchery behind closed doors that de Sade's like would've approved of. And the 'dionysiac' of the contemporary modern as an even more regressive Procrustean s_yface Last Man than even he thought possible, Frankenstein homunculuses of Totalizing Surveillance & Enframement technology/'consumerism'.

>>23341073
>In BGE he makes reference to the English being an unphilosophical people. He also makes references to the English possessing a sort of slave morality but devoid of any actual reward belief structure, just doing it and being content,

"Nation of shopkeeps" from Napoleon characterizes the national character only of the British-Herd. Its aristocracy built and enforced the social/class discipline to administrate and expand the only proper globe spanning European Empire of consequence before America post-WW2. It's a bit of rhetorical speaking out of the side of his mouth.