/lit/ - Literature

>>11673515
All is forgiven, top notch first post

>>7089299

good god, what a load of fucking garbage itt, jesus christ.


OP ignore all prior suggestions, and just study these:

論語
墨子
孟子
老子
莊子
荀子
商君書
韓非子

>>6816807
There are varying interpretations of will to power in Nietzsche scholarship that range from limited readings that posit will to power as a psychological principle, to holistic readings that consider will to power to be an ontological principle, what the world consists of. Kaufmann's reading is in the limited tradition, and as far as I remember, it's conducive to an existentialist reading insofar as it talks about individuals who pursue 'their' individual wills to power. You should bear in mind that Kaufmann is not particularly relevant to contemporary debates, however: that torch was carried on by Maudemarie Clark, most prominently, among others.

I'm more sympathetic to the ontological reading.

>Nietzsche is considered to be the one who established the roots of existentialist thought, in his earlier works - where he suggested humans must create a meaning for themselves
I never got the impression, from what I read, that Nietzsche ever framed the problem (if there is one) of existential meaning like this. I think the closest he comes to a position like that is in BoT, where the terror of the primordial world-will has to be effaced with art. But again, I don't think that's existentialism, I think it's a Schopenhauerian pessimism that develops into what other commentators call Nietzsche's own 'Dionysian Pessimism'.

So honestly, I just don't really see existentialism in his philosophy at any point, coming from my position.

>which is more relevant - TOI, or TWTP?
It depends on what you're hoping to understand better. TOI's 'How the "True World" Finally Became Fiction' is a key passage, along with the various bits and pieces on perspectivism, that poses as one of the most important factors of Nietzsche's late philosophy.

WTP is a little trickier by its very nature. I would say that you use the different bits and pieces in it to supplement your understanding of the published works, especially paying attention to the dates of various notes in WTP. I think a fairly reasonable starting point with WTP is to take an insight you find in a published text and see if there are notes in the WTP that develop that insight.

>>6816796
>Yijing student here. Ask me anything.
What gua should I consult for getting a GF

>>6816686
>The biggest problem with Chinese philosophy is the form of argumentation their philosophers have to use. There's no Chinese equivalent for syllogistic reasoning, and Eastern logic never underwent the revolution Western logic did.

>Chinese philosophy is shit because it didn't lead to the problems of dualism and binary thinking that have plagued Western philosophy for the last 500 or so years

okay friendo. Chinese philosophers were never really interested argumentation, except for the Mohists to some extent, who happen to have some of the most tedious arguments in Chinese philosophy, and the School of Names, who were promptly BTFO Zhuangzi.

If you try to read Mengzi, the most prominent example, as a string of arguments you'll be incredibly disappointed, because he can't argue for shit.

You have to read Chinese philosophy like you would read figures like Heraclitus and Nietzsche in western philosophy.

But everyone knows that Chinese Philosophy reached its zenith with 韓非子, not some faggy ancient hexagram-based party game or a manual for political rulership for literati recluses who had nothing to do with politics anyway

>易经
>mystical

傻屄

>>6815791
joke's on you i just like to read my own writing

>people who unironically ask for the name of meme hot girl images

These are the same sort of people who feel guilty after jerking off, detest fake tits, and consider the thought of paid sex repulsive on the basis that the other person is faking it.

They literally cannot stand it if it isn't "real" enough for them. In spite of this, they inevitably ask for the name of the girl and then they inevitably, INEVITABLY, end up at a photogallery consisting mostly of the girl posing in front of a mirror with a camera, at which point the viewer inevitably thinks "hurr durr what an airheaded slut" (because, again, none of it is "real" enough for them), losing all interest and forever destroying whatever fantasy (and it is precisely with these people that the fantasy will always be more seductive for them than the real thing) was still possible with the initial image.

Don't fucking tell me it doesn't happen, don't tell me I'm just projecting because I don't have this problem. I've been here almost a decade, and I know how people's minds work on this website.

>>6815581
>I think it's widely accepted that Nietzsche was an example of early existentialism. I mean, I do agree with you, but part of expressing the will to power is creating meaning for your own life, constantly. The meaning is creating meaning, basically, what might still include a "given" aspect to one's meaning of life, but still counts as existentialism since the creation of meaning is integral to it.
I'm still not entirely convinced. Here's what I take to be a family-resemblance understanding of existentialism in general: 1) there is a recognition of some sort of nihilism or absurdism as the fundamental starting point, 2) the basis out which meaning must be created on the part of human beings.

But neither are really applicable to Nietzsche's philosophy, or at least his later work, because
1) Will to Power precludes any form of nihilism apart from a negative disposition towards the world
2) The creation of meaning on the part of the human subject or anything else is a fundamentally superfluous act when human beings, and everything else in the world, are constantly doing so by their very nature as expression of will to power. I think that for Nietzsche, given all of his denigration of consciousness and the weakness of affect he associates with it, then the contrived, self-conscious and intentional act of creating meaning is a low-point or an act of deficiency or weakness. If you are actively engaging and progressing in the process of growth and self-overcoming, then there is never a need to ask this question in the first place. Hence, to offer a rough summary: on a societal level, it was only when the metaphysical systems of western thought finally degenerated to the point that they did that it became an issue of nihilism and the "task" of creating meaning emerged.

I would guess that if there is any significant reading of existentialism in Nietzsche it would be with his philosophy of the future and the aim of producing a state of affairs from which the overman is possible. But I don't think this can really be framed as existentialism either, but I won't go into it any further for now.

>>6815209
>Nietzsche's *doctrinal starting point is basically nihilism
It's certainly the character of his early works, BoT and OTL both strongly carry over a nihilistic strand from Schopenhauer. The early-mid works like HAH and Dawn are cases of critical nihilism, where N. attacks the metaphysical foundations of preceding western philosophy, without really positing anything in their place besides naturalism and a resurging faith in the sciences. You could say that around this period your claim that
>he turns down most of society's views and values as arbitrary, or utilitarian at most
is most accurate. But he doesn't use that framework in his later works, and certainly not by BGE. By BGE his philosophy is thoroughly non-nihilistic, having essentially critiqued the conditions under which nihilism as anything other than a life-negating disposition (by positing will to power and perspectivism) can be thought.

In any case, On the Genealogy of Morals is the primary text that people go to when talking about Nietzsche and morality, and all of this
>different moral systems (which he attributes to different social classes: slaves and masters) and explains the true motifs behind their existence.
is more prominently dealt with there rather than BGE, although BGE precedes OGM and already has those ideas in aphoristic form. OGM is sort of the 'idiot's guide' to aspects of BGE. Probably why Analytics have flocked to that text in particular. (BGE is the idiot's guide to TSZ).

>We are controlled by our will to stay alive
"The Will was a mistake" - Nietzsche
And not just to stay alive, which is the minimal aspect of the "will" for Nietzsche, but to tend towards superabundance, growth, overcoming, and any other number of similarly edgy badass-sounding nouns.

>but certain situations can being a human to act against this will
I don't think so, because all there ever is constitutes will to power (if one takes the ontological reading): hence why he thinks that nihilists would rather will nothing than to not will at all.

>This lead him to his later thought, based upon the will to power, his existentialism
This meme needs to die, Nietzsche is not an existentialist. Existentialists call for the creation of meaning, whereas for Nietzsche meaning is inherent in the will power; everyone is expressing their will to power, and therefore everyone is already expressing meaning.

etc

>progressing well academically
>surrounded by beautiful and smart people
>love my work, love teaching people
>move in and out of relationships casually

no, tbh

>>6815087
i'm a bodhisattva anon, I have to stay on the board until everyone else achieves enlightenment and is liberated from the great wheel of shitposting

>You will never live to see an era in Human history where sex is an extremely free and casual act between individuals

Why live?

also, his idea for the aliens was fucking stupid as hell. I literally stopped reading when I realized pic related was what I was supposed to be imagining throughout the book.

>>6812886
>Recent developments in popular culture were arguably predicted by the French philosopher and cultural theorist, Jean Baudrillard in his book, ‘America’, in which he talks about the infantilzation of society. Put simply, this is the idea that as a society, we are kept in a state of arrested development by dominant forces in order to keep us more pliant.

i read America not more than 5-6 months ago and i don't remember a word of that stuff being in it. he spends like a third of the book jerking off about the desert for christs sake, and how the americans are so miserable now that they've got it so good, how exercise is awful etc, etc. baudrillard was tsundere for america

>We are made passionate about the things that occupied us as children as a means of drawing our attentions away from the things we really should be invested in, inequality, corruption, economic injustice etc.

> things we really should be invested in, inequality, corruption, economic injustice etc.
that's....not baudrillard

>They fuck you up, your mum and dad.
>They may not mean to, but they do.
>They fill you with the faults they had
>And add some extra, just for you.

>But they were fucked up in their turn
>By fools in old-style hats and coats,
>Who half the time were soppy-stern
>And half at one another’s throats.

>Man hands on misery to man.
>It deepens like a coastal shelf.
>Get out as early as you can,
>And don’t have any kids yourself.

literally just a well-developed equivalent of 'that one guy who starts a thread on /lit/ thinking he has an entirely original philosophical idea that has actually been around for 200+ years'

>>6781868
>what is ethics?
An analytic pyramid scheme based on contingent Enlightenment ideals mostly irrelevant to the actual functioning of a state and to the particulars of social life.

(Virtue ethics isn't too bad, but by its nature virtue ethics is effective only for individuals)

>thought experiments

hey guys let's argue over this dumbshit fictional predicament totally divorced from social reality that is literally only possible by positing an impossible god's eye perspective

>>6781515
I suspect Chinese philosophy or politics will be the hot little new meme on the board within the next year or two.

something like 'New Confucianism is literally the only relevant sociopolitical theory of contemporary times, western society and philosophy is fucked'

or 'The CPC/Mao/the Legalists did nothing wrong :^)'

probably something like that. Someone will inevitably spam Badiou.

>I feel like the weight of all the experiences I should be having is crushing me. Even now the fireworks are popping outside reminding me I'm alone in my room for the millionth time in a row for like three years. Shit it's been that long. I need to change but I don't know if I can. My birthday is fast approaching reminding me how old I am with nothing accomplished and nothing to show for it. Christ. I guess I'm never gonna be an author or a rockstar or an artist. Am I doomed to be a service industry faggot until I die? What the fuck do I do /lit/.

Do it, just do it! Don’t let your dreams be dreams. Yesterday you said tomorrow. So just do it! Make your dreams come true. Just do it. Some people dream of success, while you’re going to wake up and work hard at it. Nothing is impossible… you should get to the point where anyone else would quit and you’re not going to stop there. NO! What are you waiting for?! DO IT! JUST DO IT! YES YOU CAN! JUST DO IT! If you’re tired of starting over, stop giving up. fuck do I do /lit/.

>>6769142
>how do I into politics
Control!
It's all about control.
Every dictatorship has one obsession. And that's it. So in ancient Rome... They gave the people bread and circuses. They kept the populace busy with entertainment. But other dictatorships use other, other strategies... to control ideas, knowledge. How do they do that?

Lower education... they limit culture... censor information... they censor any means of individual expression.

And it's important to remember this, that... this is a pattern... that repeats itself throughout history.

Okay. See you next week.

Great reading material alongside le rorty man for chickenshit self-hating analytic philosophers who want to read continental philosophy but also want a job in an anglo-american university.