How the fuck do you even affirm the eternal recurrence?
I mean, I get the fact that life has to involve SOME degree of suffering, but when so many millions have had virtually no say in that suffering, when so many people have lived lives that amount to nothing more than constant pain and torture, I start to think that only the Devil could possibly say "yes, I want this to repeat forever!"
Was that the point? Is this why Nietzsche claimed he was the most "evil" person who ever lived? Or was he just being edgy for the sake of attracting readers?
Because even if your life was as "fruitful" as you would have wanted it to be, I don't understand how you can arrogate something like the eternal return for EVERYONE. It makes no sense.
The point is to live your life to the fullest. Nietzsche's conception of embracing life was that you should literally embrace everything, that includes everything nice and pleasurable as well as painful and horrific.
By creating your own values and your own meaning. That makes life worth living
What doesn't kill you makes you stronger.
Don't WHINE when things are painful. USE THAT SHIT! Find the hidden truth in suffering, burn it as fuel. The Ubemench should even seek out suffering as a way to strengthen himself, he wants a challenge.
>>378252
“Why so hard!” – the kitchen coal once said to the diamond.
“Are we not close relatives?”
Why so soft?
Oh my brothers, this I ask you: for are you not – my brothers?
Become hard !
He was a fucking nutcase. His suffering caused him to believe that suffering is so commonplace. He was wrong. There are some people who are genuinely happy most of the time. He wasn't, so he rationalized his suffering into philosophy.
>>378252
>missing the point
>>379676
are some people genuinely happy all the time or are they just faking it?
he wants to reaffirm his articulation of the eternal recurrence nothing more
but my theory is when he stopped the flogging of the horse he was impotently trying to stop the return.
it's horrifying to think that we're stuck in this world of ours.
>>379748
They are high.
>>379748
Hardest question to answer for me
I used to think emo cunts were just annoying but as I get older and so many people I thought were strong personalities confide deep anxiety and fear in me
I start to think if perhaps suffering isn't truly the defining factor of one's humanity
>>379676
He was physically suffering. He was half blind when writing. Mentally he describes himself as full of health. In Ecce Homo he says the years he spent writing where some of the best moments of his life. His physical suffering was his inspiration, he describes how he could not truly understand things until he has experienced both sides of the coin and turned his sickness into a fanatical Will to Health; if he can't be physically healthy he will double his efforts to be mentally healthy.
This is the secret of how to find meaning in suffering.
>>379775
>I start to think if perhaps suffering isn't truly the defining factor of one's humanity
According to Kierkegaard you cannot truly know happiness until you know suffering, your highest high will always be the inverse opposite of your lowest lost. Nietzsche agree's on this issue as well.
>>378252
I love this theory. And by that i mean it scares the living jeepers out of me.
What, if some day or night a demon were to steal after you into your loneliest loneliness and say to you: 'This life as you now live it and have lived it, you will have to live once more and innumerable times more' ... Would you not throw yourself down and gnash your teeth and curse the demon who spoke thus? Or have you once experienced a tremendous moment when you would have answered him: 'You are a god and never have I heard anything more divine.'
First of all, i think you've gone on a little tangent. Its not so much a moral evaluation of whether life should be replicated - remember that neitzsche has no concern for morals. Nor is he (for the most part) concerned for the lives and experiences of others.
The eternal recurrence theory is a thought experiment designed to compound the experiences of our lives, and insight a greater consideration and interaction with that life. For if we knew that our brightest days would repeat forever, would we not seek more of them? and if our darkest days would also do thus, would we not also attempt to make the most of them.
Personally, i like to remember that whether the theory is accurate or not, we don't actually experiences infinite lifetimes together. Just the same one over and over again. So its basically just a reminder to live with a greater sense of purpose.
>>379676
Kind of irrelevant.
First of all, nihilism as a philosophical doctrine trivialises the experiences of pleasure and happiness as something literally meaningless. We may equate neitzsches shitty lifestyle and constant pain as a catalyst for creating his philosophy, but not a negation of its value.
He would argue that unless those 'happy' people can defend their pleasure in the limelight of nihilism, they are merely sheep engaging in utilitarian pleasure - a pig with enough filth to roll around in.
>>379845
>He would argue that unless those 'happy' people can defend their pleasure in the limelight of nihilism, they are merely sheep engaging in utilitarian pleasure - a pig with enough filth to roll around in.
Exactly.
>>379836
>please
>pic related
Also science related, delayed choice quantum eraser.
He can fuck himself or he can fuck himself.
>>379748
Kierkegaard says yes.
Kierkegaard also did "You can only enjoy life by embracing your suffering" so much better.
>commit suicide to escape shitty
>immediately reborn into the same shitty life and have to experience it forever
What is this if not Hell?
>>381448
Hello Schopenhauer
first of all it's necessary to view nietzsche in context of the worldviews he opposed:
anaximander/schopenhauer ("this is a bad place")
or the more toxic christianity ("this is a bad place because we are all sinners") which he also called platonism for plebs.
socialism is a subform of christianity because of it's dialectics (this will remain a bad place until "sinners" get a new consciousness).
according to nietzsche's analysis the final result of all these worldviews and their variations is full blown nihilism, which he wants to prevent.
the total opposite of these worldviews is not:"this place is good and we are all good", which is where OP made his mistake and why plebs assume that nietzsche was some kind of super-villain (anticipating this common reaction is why nietzsche ironically played with it)
but affirmation means beyond good and evil: "this place is neither good nor bad and there is no such thing as sin". the eternal recurrence is necessary because then you cant even blame random events or wait for better circumstances like a reasonable, dialectic slave would do.
The ER is not a literal metaphysical belief, it means that you should live your life so that you wouldn't feel regret if you were to live it like that again and again. Asserting your will and shit.
>>379942
but he was a dumb ass Christian.
>>379751
That horse thing apparently never happened. The first instance of it being talked about is in some newspaper like 10 years after Nietzsche died. It was just a folk tale.
>>379751
You might want to check out Schopenhauer. He's like Nietzsche but without the affirmation of life.
For Schopenhauer not only is pain not good, it's something to escape from. Schopenhauer advocated removing one's self from life by seeking escape in the arts, such as music while calmly awaiting one's death. Nietzsche ultimately represents the answer to Schopenhauer's pessimism.
>>384974
And which one is right? Neither and both. It all comes down to one's opinion. What a profound thought.
Pain chemically and biologically feels horrible to the nervous system, but one can interpret that in any way one wants. One can embrace and love it, or hate and reject it.
>>385334
Neither is "right" with these shorts of things there are no truths, only perspectives. Nietzsche himself said that people who are overly sensitive to pain are going to be more likely to adopt philosophers that put pain-avoidance as the number one thing. We have a choice between being the Last Man and the Overman. It ultimately depends on what type of person you are. Or if you have a lot of will power, what type of person you want to be.
Personally I've spent most of life going down the path of the Last Man and I want to get away from that. It's why I've let so much pass me be. I can only affirm the Eternal Recurrence if I can say that I'll overcome that part of me.
Lurker's bump
It makes a lot more sense when you break out of the Unitarian mind-set that's so common. You can't min-max your happiness, if you want to be happy you have to also be hurt. To use an analogy with video games: a game being harder makes it more painful which in turn makes it more fun, incontrast God mode makes it less painful and very boring.
There's a certain union of opposites. A mountain can only be tall if the land below is short. So if you want a taller mountain you need a lower value.
Between the two Schopenhauer takes the path of minimizing pain with a flat landscape and Nietzsche takes the path of maximizing pleasure with rolling hills. Take whichever path you want.
>>381930
>according to nietzsche's analysis the final result of all these worldviews and their variations is full blown nihilism
I don't understand what you mean. How do those things end up at nihilism?
I thought nihlism wasn't necessarily wasn't a view of whether things are good or bad but that life is just pointless.
