>annihilated Christianity
>annihilated morality
>annihilated equality
>annihilated feminism
>annihilated historians
>annihilated philosophers
>annihilated nihilism
>annihilated fixed ideas
Best philosopher ever general. Who here has read Daybreak or the Untimely Meditations?
>>448478
And yet, whatever Nietzsche says, the ego is still an illusion.
Does he ever reflect on that, on the idea of self? I've only read Beyond Good and Evil.
>>448488
>Does he ever reflect on that, on the idea of self?
Absolutely he does. In The Gay Science.
>>448488
Nietzsche says in Ecce Homo too that the purely selfish and the purely selfless actions are both lies, which I think summarizes his type of view perfectly.
>>448478
Hes overrated IMO.
Im not saying hes bad but the only things he really destroyed are stoicism and nihilism
>>448554
Destroyed is a big a word, we didn't listen to his advices. He saw nihilism coming and he was right, look at what we're doing as a species today, and as individuals. What are we even doing? What are we working towards?
he never said anything to help anyone
>>448478
>annihilated feminism
Sauce? I'm intrigued.
>annihilated nihilism
I think after establishing a basis for nihilism, he disliked the implications of where nihilism led and did try to spend a good deal of his life trying to argue against it, which led to the rise of existentialism... from memory.
In terms of the concept of nihilism being 'annihilated' from an absolutist perspective, I haven't found anything from him that would suggest that.
>>448554
>Hes overrated IMO.
Just the opposite, Nietzsche has so many answers to everything. Even utilitarianism, theory of forms, Kantian ethics, reason, etc..
>>448579
He has a few sections in his books. One thing I explicitly remember is he said a feminist could never grasp his philosophy.
>>448578
>he never said anything to help anyone
KEKKIN
SO
HARD
>>448578
Be strong, do not bow, be your own man, be noble. That's what he's telling you.
>>448642
>One thing I explicitly remember is he said a feminist could never grasp his philosophy.
Because women cannot into anything.
>>448674
Yup, Nietzsche basically sublates Stirner
>>448682
Hello /r9k/.
Didn't he end his life as a miserable wreck?
From a Classical Philosophy point of view, doesn't that make him a huge failure?
>>448757
>Nietzsche basically sublates Stirner
>beta orbiter manlet
>annihilated nihilism before it even existed
Best pholsopher ever.
>>448478
>annihilated Christianity
No
>annihilated morality
No
>annihilated equality
Yes, but not under the law or human/god given rights
>annihilated feminism
One of the only good things he did 'annihilate'
>annihilated historians
Bullshit
>annihilated philosophers
Also Bullshit
>annihilated nihilism
One of the good again, and how the hell could he have 'destroyed' it if he didn't in some way preserve/support Christianity, morality and historianism,philosophy, and fixed ideas
>annihilated fixed ideas
Not really
>socialist retard
>annihiliating anything
Good joke OP.
>>449727
This is not a Slovaj Zizek thread buddy.
>>449725
christian historian moralfag philosopher with fixed ideas detected
>>448478
>annihilated equality
>annihilated feminism
>annihilated historians
>annihilated philosophers
>annihilated fixed ideas
Only plebs who dont read him actually think this.
Nietzches never promotes moral relativism, he also was a good friend and ally of his contemporary feminists.
>>450053
he promotes the idea that morality is a human invention, he never said they are equal. In fact his whole criticism of Christianity and socialism is because they are a lower type of morality for lower types of humans.
Nietzsche is THE anti-egalitarian philosopher. For fuck sakes he gets banned from liberal universities.
http://www.critical-theory.com/nietzsche-club-banned/
>>448478
>opinion of a man meaning anything without science backing the claims up
top lel.
>>450123
guaranteed replies, 10/10
>>448478
> avoids Aristotle
> HURR DURR I WON PHILOSOPHY I AM UNREFUTABLE
>>449357
K E K
>The three traveled with Salomé's mother through Italy and considered where they would set up their "Winterplan" commune. Arriving in Leipzig, Germany in October, Salomé and Rée separated from Nietzsche after a falling-out between Nietzsche and Salomé, in which Salomé believed that Nietzsche was desperately in love with her.
>Salomé and Rée moved to Berlin and lived together until a few years before her celibate marriage[4] to a linguistics scholar, Friedrich Carl Andreas. Despite her opposition to marriage and her open relationships with other men, Salomé and Andreas remained married from 1887 until his death in 1930.
> Salomé would later (1894) write a study, Friedrich Nietzsche in seinen Werken, of Nietzsche's personality and philosophy
>get left behind in the mountains for being too autistic
>get cucked by another beta orbiter
>later realized how important you are in the intellectual world and capitalized on it
I love Freddy but shit is just too pathetic it's funny
>>450151
>biased views from birth can prove things more effectively than the scientific method
>>449165
he lost his mind. he had terrible digestive and head pains for much of his adult life until he collapsed. through it all though, he insisted upon amor fati. you really cannot hold his ill health against him.
>>449165
>Didn't he end his life as a miserable wreck?
The last few years of his sanity were the most productive.
And yes, he was miserable most of his life.
>From a Classical Philosophy point of view, doesn't that make him a huge failure?
Doesn't matter, his books kick ass.
>>450053
>Nietzches never promotes moral relativism, he also was a good friend and ally of his contemporary feminists.
"You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist."
Looks like you haven't read enough, my goodly friendly tipper.
>>450153
How does Aristotle refute Nietzsche?
>>450347
Nietzsche here is referring to things working within the frame of morality. But the real understanding is beyond good and evil.
If you actually read his books this would be incredibly obvious. The answer is literally in one of the titles.
>>449725
Great job backing up your points.
>>450392
No, he's not.
You've only read one of his books. I read BG&E, Twilight of the Idols, Genealogy of Morals two times, The Gay Science, and Ecce Homo.
He clearly believes that different things suit different people and that's okay. He's not a moral relativist in the contemporary sense, though, he believe conflict between different moralities is good.
>>451100
>>451904
>>448478
>Lou Andreas-Salomé, who knew Nietzsche very well, and claimed that he had proposed to her (according to her, she refused him) claimed there was something feminine in Nietzsche's "spiritual nature", and that he had considered genius to be a feminine genius
>>450271
Philosophy often ponders things which could be (if stretched) seen as "psychological"
And psychology is the biggest speudo science that is called a science.
>>454379
pseudo*
>>448478
>annihilated historians
how? didn't he invented the genealogical method? this is literally acting like a historian, i think
>>448488
>the ego is still an illusion.
How so?
>philosophy
>>449534
Wasn't Stirner a nihilist?
>>454379
So you don't believe in a subconscious? Or that early childhood events can have a profound effect on one's adult life? That's all just pseudo-science.
>>454501
His genological method is now the go to historical method. Before him the historical method was to try to view all events through the lens of modern culture.
Historical ideas that were 'false' were not even discussed, Nietzsche made us care about asking why people believe what they believe rather than just saying what they believed.
>>454543
The self is an illusion in the sense that a unified 'whole' self exists. The self is actually a collective of many conflicting wills. An idea that psychology would later say is correct. That's why Freud is so revolutionary because of his theory of the subconscious wills.
The idea of the self as a whole united thing with 'free will' is a religious idea that was made up in order to allow people to be wholly guilty.
>>450409
but the OP didn't back up any of his points. Why should any kind of counter argument require backing?
>>452180
woman trying to hype woman
>>448495
>The Gay Science
Hehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehe.
>>456044
Because general opinion is that you're a faggot.
>>456326
lolololololol
>>456326
>skepticism applies to everybody's claims but mine teheee XDDDD
The brightest of them all, clearly.
>>448478
All those things still exist.
>>448478
Nietzsche never practiced philosophy desu, he's more like a self-help author.
>>448570
>saw nihilism coming
It had already come, he was reacting. Nichy was exactly the type of guy who would become a depressed nihilist- what with the chronic weakness n' all that, and most of his philosophy is about trying to overcome nihilism.
>>456044
These are Nietzsche's points and all pointed out in his books.
>>456867
Where does he say this?
>>457649
>>456867
He doesn't say this.
During the end of the first book of Zarathustra, Zarathustra tells all of his philosophers to become skepetics and question everything and assume that he himself has been deceiving you. He even says you can never learn him dogmatically, only skeptically "Only after you have denied me will I return to you"
https://books.google.com/books?id=wQpkr9P_K18C&pg=PA281&lpg=PA281&dq=%22perhaps+zarathustra+has+deceived+you%22&source=bl&ots=5N2o5n33GR&sig=iDLEDd21j5JRCZvVdDGfjV_RJ1Q&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi4_IbA7_TJAhUJ5WMKHWSHA40Q6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q=%22perhaps%20zarathustra%20has%20deceived%20you%22&f=false
>>457688
>never dogmatically
>"I will return to you"
>"I will"
Do you have to hold your breath when you type?
>>455832
>The self is an illusion in the sense that a unified 'whole' self exists. The self is actually a collective of many conflicting wills. An idea that psychology would later say is correct. That's why Freud is so revolutionary because of his theory of the subconscious wills.
>The idea of the self as a whole united thing with 'free will' is a religious idea that was made up in order to allow people to be wholly guilty.
Ok, but I'm not seeing how this applies to egoistic philosophers such as Nietzsche or Stirner. Whether the self is one thing, or many things, it's still pretty distinctly something.
Also the question of whether we have free will only really matters with religious systems.
>>458067
The point about a person's identity being multiple separate things has profound implications. A body is just a collection of multiple wills and many of these wills can exist after the body dies, some existed before the body lived. The exact number of Wills and their hiearchy is always changing. Old ones die when they are of no use to the other wills even as a slave. New ones may be created by people.
The real question is why must be axiomatically assume there is a self? We've grown up in a Christianized culture that had a theological need for the term to exist, sort of how like we just assume there must be 'free will' because we came out of a culture where the religion would struggle to function without it.
>Also the question of whether we have free will only really matters with religious systems.
This is true, Nietzsche discusses this in one part of Genealogy. One must be a complete whole 'self' and their will be totally 'free' in order for them to guilty. So you are free from your sins because you were not 'free to choose' and your soul will not be punished because your 'self' is collection of thousands of Wills. Your actions are the result of a complex hiearchy of conflicting needs and urges with no single one being a 'self'. But he isn't a determinist either.
There must be free will and there must a united whole 'self' in order to have the concept of guilt. Nietzsche rejects both free and determinism. No individual will is free, they are constantly battle for supremacy and it may be controlled by one will while also controlling a 3rd will.
