Which literary characters have similar traits as the ubermensch?
>>7506403
Zarathustra.
>>7506403
Eugene Sandow
>>7506498
nope
zarathustra is flash
übermensch is thunder
>>7506403
Me. They will write stories about me. You will see. In time, you will see. - D
>>7506403
Anasûrimbor Kellhus
>>7506817
hehe
I champion butterfly
can someone explain the ubermensch to me? I'm half way through zarathustra and I'm not sure I understand it
>realises god is dead, if not literally then at least acknowledges religion is on the way out
>isn't a slave to institution, does not seek to replace the dead higher power with anything but himself
I mean, is that it? He's just agnostic, independent and a critical thinker? I was expecting something a bit more revolutionary. I'm new to literature in general, so maybe a lot of it's going over my head. I do remember in one of Zarathustra's dialogues he says that the shortest path between mountains is it's peaks, just as the shortest path to the ubermensch is through aphorisms, but you need long (mental?) legs to reach those intellectual peaks?
Is Nietzsche just pointing out to me that I'm too stupid to understand his work?
>>7506912
I think the allegory of the peaks is meant to imply that it is possible to cross from peak to peak if you train your legs(mind). I think another characteristic you forgot to mention is disciplined, as the path to ubermensch is not something that is undertaken in a short period of time, but rather a constant challenge throughout one's life. Hence the description of man's life being a tight-rope between animal and ubermensch.
>>7506403
John Galt
>>7506992
I think my issue is that I'm not fully grasping the concept of the Ubermensch, it seems like there's so little to it. He doesn't believe in god, so he designates himself in god insofar as he is the new creator or values and moral authority? Is there any other qualities to him?
Should I have started with the greeks? Zarathustra is my first ever attempt at philosophy.
>>7506403
Howard Roarke
>>7507004
I wish I could give you more of an answer to the concept of Ubermensch, but I only just started part two the other day.
I find that Zarathustra would be hard grasp as an introduction to philosophy, due to the different metaphysical symbols in it. I would recommend reading some works by Plato and Aristotle, De Offici by Cicero, and the Meditations by Marcus Aurelius to get a good ancient background.
After which I would read a few of the works by Julius Evola, especially Ride the Tiger and The Hermetic Tradition. Ride the Tiger is pretty much Evola's interpretation of the Ubermensch while The Hermetic Tradition explains a lot of the traditional symbols and metaphors that are used in Zarathustra.
When reading philosophy, there will be times when you will not be able to understand. It usually makes sense the second or third time reading it in the future.
The Übermensch is just another of Nietzsche's shows of edge. He is essentially an overambitious narcissist.
A good portion of Dostoyevski's characters share some sort of resemblance to Nietzsche's Übermensch
>>7507004
There's so little to it because you're only halfway through one of his books friendo
>>7507176
I just wanted to make sure I was grasping it correctly, I feel like if that's really all there is to part one it could have been summed up better, it's seriously lacking in brevity. He probably could have outlined the superman in an essay instead of just writing a whole book about it.
Most tragic heros in plays represent the Ubermensch. The most common fatal flaw(hubris) is simply a part of being the Ubermensch, as the Ubermensch is supposed to have replaced an idea of God or gods and replaced it with himself. However, some are not good representations, such as Macbeth who is under his wife's control.
Of course, in Nietzche's mind, there is no such thing as fate, so most tragedies would fall apart, having fate as a central theme.
>>7506403
John Galt
