Is Nietzscheanism a religion?
His ouvre is basically a Bible.
His followers cite him as if he were a prophet.
He wrote a lot about God and other concepts that religion deals with.
He prescribed an ethical code, and his followers berate anyone who doesn't follow it.
His most devoted followers are either out living by his guidelines or employed in academia, writing exercises about his sacred texts.
Thoughts?
Is a philosophy you fucking retard
>>1283582
>hurr an atheist philosopher is just like a religion you stoopid librulz
>>>/trash/
>>1283582
Having vague similarities to a religion does not make a religion
>>1283864
Nietzsche had a philosophy, sure.
Do his followers lack a religion? This is the question I'm asking, and you haven't answered it.
>>1283872
I don't think I mentioned atheism or liberalism once in my post.
No, it makes no assertions about the divine and he discouraged following his beliefs dogmatically. There's nothing considered "sacred" about his ideals either.
>>1283873
Why not?
Judaism, Islam, Christianity, the Greek religion, the Roman religion, the Egyptian religion, Hinduism, and Shinto barely resemble each other, but they're all religions.
>>1283889
>what are implications
>>1283892
>"God is dead"
>Not an assertion about the divine
>>1283899
Not explicit, that's for sure.
I didn't mention liberalism or atheism, and I don't even know why you referred to them.
>>1283900
I don't think you understand allegory. Nietzsche was talking about the decline of religious thinking in the world, not God as a theological concept being dead.
>>1283906
So he was a theist? If he believed in God, wouldn't his theology have bled into his philosophy? This happened for pretty much every other philosopher. Why would Nietzsche be an exception?
>>1283908
Except he also explicitly didn't believe in God. The statement 'God is dead' offers no judgement on the existence of God, just on his importance to society
>>1283914
>Except he also explicitly didn't believe in God
So he had theological beliefs that bled into his philosophy?
I think that, if he makes a statement like that *and* doesn't believe in God, it makes sense to say that a claim about the divine, which has undeniable connections to his beliefs about the divine, are being made.
A claim about God can involve claims about society, and vice versa.
Is anime a religion?
Its books are long enough to be Bibles.
Its followers cite Best Girl as if she were a prophet.
It wrote a lot about Love and other concepts that religion deals with.
It prescribed a Best Girl, and his followers berate anyone who doesn't follow it.
His most devoted followers are either out living by his guidelines or employed in anime studios, writing exercises about its sacred texts.
Thoughts?
>>1283922
>are being made
is* being made
Is libertarianism a religion?
Anarchy, State, and Utopia is basically a Bible.
Nozick's followers cite him as if he were a prophet.
He wrote a lot about the state and other concepts that religion deals with.
He prescribed an ethical code, and his followers berate anyone who doesn't follow it.
His most devoted followers are either out living by his guidelines or employed in academia, writing exercises about his sacred texts.
Thoughts?
>>1283922
The difference between philosophy and religion here is a purely semantic point. If I state that God does not exist and write a book about it, have I founded a religion?
>>1283943
>The difference between philosophy and religion here is a purely semantic point
What is this supposed to mean?
>If I state that God does not exist and write a book about it, have I founded a religion?
You've made a theological claim and written it down. If thousands of people believe said claim and buy copies of said book and interpret them, acting on any ethical prescriptions you put down in that book, how is this not a religion?
>>1283953
>what is this supposed to mean
That each person defines the words 'religion' and 'philosophy' slightly differently and we're arguing over our own definitions
>how is this not a religion
How do you define a religion? If no one buys my book, is it not a religion?
Are Chavs a religion?
Ladbible is basically a Bible.
Their followers cite it as if it were a prophet.
They write a lot about Honor and Respect and other concepts that religion deals with.
They prescribed an ethical code, and their followers berate anyone who doesn't follow it.
His most devoted followers are either out living by his guidelines or employed in Nando's, writing tweets about his sacred texts.
Thoughts?
Is Christianity a religion?
Bible is basically a Bible.
Jesus followers cite him as if he were a prophet.
Apostles wrote a lot about God and other concepts that religion deals with.
Jesus prescribed an ethical code, and his followers berate anyone who doesn't follow it.
Jesus most devoted followers are either out living by his guidelines or employed in academia, writing exercises about his sacred texts.
Thoughts?
>>1283908
No, he never touches on the divine as it has no actual bearing on his philosophy. He implicitly assumes that Christianity is false, but never outright states it.
His philosophy is no more a religion than any other philosophy.
But if you are a theist, I'll point out that calling something a "religion" as a criticism is tacitly admitting that you think religion to be an inherently absurd notion.
>>1283960
>That each person defines the words 'religion' and 'philosophy' slightly differently and we're arguing over our own definitions
Neither of us has offered a definition, though. I've offered examples of religions that contain philosophical content, and philosophies that are easily incorporated (and historically have been) into religious traditions. I don't think I've offered a definition, so we can't really be squabbling over that.
>How do you define a religion?
A set of beliefs and practices which relate to each other via an institution which reinforces and transmits the beliefs of followers and allows them to incorporate the practices it advocates into their lives.
>If no one buys my book, is it a religion?
This is about Nietzsche. Many people have bought and studied his books. This is entirely beside the point, but no, I don't think it would qualify.
>>1283968
>he never touches on the concept of the divine as it has no bearing on his philosophy
Are you serious? He discusses Greek, Christian, and Jewish religion at great length throughout the book. His best-known quote is about God.
>I'll point out that calling something a "religion" as a criticism is tacitly admitting that you think religion to be an inherently absurd notion.
You're the one who thinks the word 'religion' has negative connotations, not me.
>>1283976
>we can't be squabbling over that
But we are, just not explicitly.
>...via an institution
There is no church of nietzscheanism so, by your definition, it's not a religion
>>1283976
>Are you serious? He discusses Greek, Christian, and Jewish religion at great length throughout the book. His best-known quote is about God.
Yes, I'm serious. His criticism of those faiths in geneology of morals has little bearing on his existentialism, and no one "follows" works like The Birth of Tragedy, so the only part you'd be criticizing here would be his existentialism outlined in Thus Spoke Zarathustra (in which "God is Dead" is a reference to the decline of religion itself, not the death of God), Beyond Good and Evil, or The Will to Power.
>You're the one who thinks the word 'religion' has negative connotations, not me.
The fact you're using it as an attempt to discredit the merit of a philosophy shows it to be the other way around. Personally, I think the division between religion and philosophy is inane; Plato and Aristotle both touch upon inherently theological concepts, yet both are considered to be primarily philosophers rather than theologians; the distinction is absolute idiocy.
>>1283982
>ust not explicitly.
It seems explicit now. I was actually giving you examples of things which are, uncontestedly, religions. This is different from offering a definition.
>There is no church of nietzscheanism
There's no church of Judaism, either. The institution that sustains Judaism is Jewish identity. How can there be no institution perpetuating Nietzscheanism when we're still talking about him so long after his death? Is academia not an institution, now?
>>1283989
>His criticism of those faiths
So he does touch on it. There you go.
>no one follows
[citation needed]
>you're using it as an attempt to discredit the merit of a philosophy
But that's not even what I'm trying to do, I'm just trying to have a discussion here.
>Personally, I think the division between religion and philosophy is inane
So Nietzsche's philosophy may as well be a religion, as far as you're concerned. I don't understand what your problem is.
>>1283996
>there is no church of Judaism
But there are synagogues specifically devoted to the continuation of Judaism. Nietzsche's ideas have survived in academia but academia was not created to perpetuate them anymore than me discussing it with my coworkers
>>1283967
Nice one m8
>>1284012
>But there are synagogues specifically devoted to the continuation of Judaism.
Synagogues haven't always defined Judaism, though. And a church isn't a building, a church is a community of believers.
>Nietzsche's ideas have survived in academia but academia was not created to perpetuate them
Who cares what it was created for? There are philosophy departments with experts in existentialism, and people who have specialized in Nietzsche's philosophy. There have been conventions for the purpose of studying his philosophy. Maybe Nietzscheanism is a sect of another religion, but does that deprive it of religious qualities? Are Shi'ites less religious than Muslims? No; they're just sectarians. The concept doesn't even make sense, since Shi'ites *are* Muslims, as are Sunnis.
Your discussing his philosophy with your coworkers is certainly perpetuating his ideas.
>>1284026
>synagogues haven't always defined Judaism
But they do now, and they fulfill your idea about institutions. Unorganized communities aren't institutions
>academia
Huge swaths of academia are not devoted to Nietzsche, so you can't say it's an institution that perpetuates it.
>>1284041
>But they do now
Is this meant to poke holes in my definition of religion? I don't see how it does.
>Unorganized communities aren't institutions
And a community of believers is not an unorganized community. At no point in the history of Christianity has there been a denomination that completely lacked organization.
>Huge swaths of academia are not devoted to Nietzsche, so you can't say it's an institution that perpetuates it.
Is Sunni Islam less of a religion than Shi'a Islam?
>>1284049
>that completely lacked organization
And people who agree with Nietzsche do; I don't get invited to a service on the wisdom of Nietzsche and there isn't a pope or patriarch of his writings.
>Sunni and Shia
Those are sects, not independent religions
>>1284062
>there isn't one in sunni Islam
But there are thousands of mosques with imams and ayatollahs and all that fun stuff (I know relatively little about the actual structure of Islam). There is absolutely no analogous structure in people who've read and agreed with Nietzsche.
>less of a religion
Both Shia and Sunni Islam have their own structures and institutions supporting them. You've shown no evidence for something similar in Nietzscheanism
>>1283582
yes it is
>>1284070
>But there are thousands of mosques with imams and ayatollahs and all that fun stuff
There are thousands of universities with philosophy departments. There are philosophy departments specializing in existentialism and philosophers who specialize in Nietzsche and who teach people about his philosophy. How is that not an analagous structure?
>You've shown no evidence for something similar in Nietzscheanism
How is academia not an institution?
>>1284080
>how is that not analogous
Because he doesn't claim to be divine? Was it a religious service when my teacher taught me about Gauss?
>how is academia not an institution
It's an institution, but not his institution
>>1284083
>Because he doesn't claim to be divine?
What does this have to do with anything?
>Was it a religious service when my teacher taught me about Gauss?
It very well may have been.
>It's an institution, but not his institution
I don't think I said that an institution has to be dedicated to a particular figure in order to perpetuate his teachings. Many people say that Pauline Christianity is actually a heresy perpetuating St. Paul's teachings, rather than Jesus'. Are Pauline Christians not religious, if this is the case?
>>1284096
>it very well may have been
For fucks sake im done with you at least now I realize you're not being serious
>>1284098
What makes you think I'm not being serious? Learning about Gauss and doing practical scientific research based on his theories are very different things.
>>1284098
>>1284108
Oh, I forgot my pic.
>>1283582
I always love when christian theology tries to argue with beliefs it rarely had contact with, philosophical or religious.
Like they're so used to argue with other monotheist religions that they're hopeless when facing a Hindu with their very elastic belief system or the Chinese who are religious but actually aren't but at the same they are.
It usually boils down to drawing very shitty analogies to make the belief they're arguing with to remind some monotheistic religion, otherwise they are just clueless when it comes to "what the hell should I do".
You can often see it when they're talking about polytheism, often thinking that for instance every Greek worshipped whole pantheon of their gods.
