Redpill me on this man.
Read 'thus spoke Zarathustra' then The genealogy of morality' then 'the will to power'. Draw your own conclusions.
>>72504888
>The Abyss
More fun to read than Evola, but not as well thought out. Read Thus Spake Zarathustra and then read Ride the Tiger by Julius Evola and you will be a wiser man.
>>72504888
>Lived with his Sisters
>Pretty much cucked by women
>Syphilis really fucks up your brain
Despite this, Nietzsche was an intellectual powerhouse and has had a noticeable effect on forming my views.
Best and most easily digested as an aphorist.
Not a linguist like all the scared Jews from Freud to Derriuda try to portray him as, but an Aryan ontoligist.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAuu-FuptKk
If by red pill you mean something along the lines of 'right-wing' then this is for you.
Jonathan Bowden is great.
>>72504888
>nihilism
These two books are two of the best from East and the West.
>>72505274
>thinking Nietzsche was a nihilist
Fuck you faggot, ruining the leaf flag. Nietzsche understood nihilism and gave you a path to move past it.
>>72505274
>Nietszche
>Nihilism
Have you even read him? His work is based around critizicing nihilism
>>72505368
Just curious, what is the path?
>>72505516
Once you realize that there is no inherent meaning in life, you realize you are free to create any meaning you desire purely out of an act of will.
The second layer to this understanding is realizing that even if an "objective meaning" did exist, it would be worthless, because there would still be different value systems besides the "real" one, and people would continue to find meaning in things that lack "objective meaning".
In short, values are always dependent on the evaluator and meaning means it means something to someone.
>>72505516
Nihilism is the idea that there is no purpose to life. The easiest way to explain how to move past it is to realise that there doesn't need to be a purpose to life, take the way of Master morality and make life your bitch.
>>72505516
"Having the will to do it"
So basically we can move past nihilism... because we can
Weak.
>>72504888
Described the upcoming onthology of the upcoming man perfectly. Don't think much about his le epib master morality. Europe didn't conquer the world with his version of it.
>>72504888
Genealogy of Morals is one of the most important books you will ever read.
1. Greek tragedy exhibits two complementary aesthetic principles: Apollonian and Dionysian
2. The Apollonian plot creates the illusion that the hero's will determines actions.
3. The Dionysian chorus reveals the reality that the hero is only part of a primordial universal design.
4. Apollonian: visions, physical, civilization, individualistic
5. Dionysian: intoxication, symbolic, savagery, holistic
6. The Dionysian insight into nature helps us understand the ultimate meaning of life, but it would destroy us if not tempered by the Apollonian illusion of order
7. The Dionysian is key the overcome the limits of the human condition, but we still won't be able to overcome our fate
8. We can only learn to accept and love our fate
9. Human behavior is caused by the will to power (urge to order the course of one's experiences)
10. All living beings strive for a higher order of their living condition to overcome their present state's limitations
>>72505285
>Edited by Walter Kaufmann
>mann
>>72505969
>>72504888
a lot more genius than people give him credit for
most people don't actually understand anything he wrote about, they barely understand the surface of muh ubermensch and muh nihilism and often repeat shit like god is dead without context.
sad really, he was great but I wouldn't suggest it too much to heart, read, absorb, and move on.
>>72505619
>someone needs to write a novel to explain such simple intuition everyone (hopefully) adopts once they go through puberty
>>72505969
So explain how this isn't just nihilism with what St. Paul said; "What doth it profit me, if the dead rise not again? Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we shall die."
Powerless, hopeless positive thinking in the face of the void. That's it.
>>72506087
>Almost all civilizations since the dawn of time believe in objective meaning inherent in the cosmos, that to disagree with is not only evil, its insane.
>Western civilization slowly slides into a nihilism it still hasn't reached the other side of.
>A few individuals begin manifesting vaguely the sentiment that they are their own source of value
>HURR EVERYONE KNOWS THAT.
This is like if you were to complain that "Copernicus had to write an entire novel to prove the earth went around the sun?"
It seems simple to you, only because you live in the era after the revolution in thought. To someone before Nietzsche's works, the mere idea of no inherent value would drive men mad [see: Lovecraft]
>>72506266
>he thinks nihilism is new when it was well-known to the ancients
>>72506238
He's assuming hedonism is the prime value, its not.
He's also assuming that a thing is valuable because it lasts. It isn't.
Its not powerless positive thinking, its realizing that the only value your life needs is the value you give it, and that immortality is not necessary for greatness.
>>72506087
Yet many still fall into nihilism or are not thoughtful enough to even reach or contemplate nihilism.
>>72506329
>He thinks nihilism at an individual level is the same thing as nihilism overtaking an entire civilization.
>>72505671
A nihilist is someone that considers their own valuations to have no worth so they are unable to create new values. Nietzsche pointed to people like Napoleon and Alexander the Great who tasked themself with great challenges out of purely egotistical Will. The world is shaped out by those with the Will to carve their name in it.
>>72505129
>Lived with his Sisters
After he went insane yes. He spend half his life as a professor and half his life in small cabin in the woods. He was pretty well off financially. He got a tenured position at a prestigious college at 23 years old which is unheard of in history.
>Pretty much cucked by women
Not really, he had a girlfriend that insisted on a 3way and he dumped her after that.
>Syphilis really fucks up your brain
Autopsy shows he had brain cancer. Besides literally none of his books were written when he was insane. The syphilis thing is literally Jewish propganda made during WW2 to invalidate germany. He did write some hilarious letters when he was insane, including telling the incompetent emperor of his country to go get shot.
>>72506087
The only reason you even know those words by default is because someone wrote about them in hundreds of pages and then the rich read them and spread them. You think the word system or subject actually had the common meaning they have now since forever?
Are you in puberty yourself by any chance?
>nihilism
thats some pretty emo shit right there based Existentialism is the next logical step
>>72506238
Nietzsche wouldn't consider it nihilism because nihilism to him was defeatist and not empowering .
>>72506334
The point is that if greatness is not eternal, it's not greatness at all. That which has no lasting meaning has no meaning. Of course, St. Paul was a more interesting man that Nietzsche, and he followed a man even more interesting than himself.
>>72506360
>what is the late Roman empire
As Chesterton (who was a contemporary of Nietzsche) put it, everyone knew that their gods were dead, until a bunch of weirdos started to say that their God was also dead, but on the third day he rose again.
>>72506266
>>72506420
I asked philosophical questions under the context of a greater being when I was like 8 when I could barely remember, I thought this was a normal thing that goes on in people's minds but just prefer to submit to pascal's wager
>>72506353
you're using the word nihilism as if it is explicit enough for people to understand you
>>72506498
The point is that if value judgments are purely subjective, which they are, and if value is something we put into the world rather than take out of it, than we can say anything gives something value, or is or isn't required for value.
So no, eternity is not a necessary requirement for greatness, because I choose to define it otherwise.
Also the late Roman Empire did not think its gods were dead, and never suffered a mass decline and obliteration of all conceptions of value like the modern West has, ever so slowly, been experiencing.
Fuck I hate Chesterson so fucking much. He thinks he's so clever for spouting nonsense with British wit.
>>72506633
>value judgments are purely subjective
>still believing this
>what is science and the brain
>>72506411
Again, it's a silly solution. "Because I can"
>>72506475
If you think about it, it is defeatist, but like Nietzsche, it pretends not to be by imaging that it can will itself non-defeatist. The Ubermensch in reality is the depressed NEET fapping to anime and posting tfw no gf on /r9k/.
>>72506633
If you argue qualities like greatness and value are subjective, there's no point engaging in arguments about them because there's the inevitable "well according to MY definition."
The late Roman empire did, in fact, go through nihilism. It was so great and so successful for so long, but then at one point Romans began to wonder "What now?" and by that point things weren't getting better. You can see how it progresses from here
>>72504888
He was basically a liberal SJW but then he got disappointed to everyone and turned bitter.
>>72506266
>Almost all civilizations since the dawn of time believe in objective meaning inherent in the cosmos, that to disagree with is not only evil, its insane.
He actually tracks the origin of "objective meaning" and "evil". Objective meaning didn't really come around till Plato. And "evil" is a monotheistic concept, most societies operated on good/bad morality rather than good/evil morality for the vast majority of human history.
What we call nihilism is the master after-shock of removing the tumor that is Christian/Platonic thinking. There is an immense void in our bodies where that tumor used to be and we have had the thing in it for so long we forgot what it was like to have anything in there.
Plato reduced the "real world" to a shadow on a wall, and Christianity condemened it as sinful and fallen. Only the premise of an "other world" mattered, the heaven or mystical forms. Today people no longer beleive in an afterlife or forms but still swallow the pill telling them that such a life is without value.
>>72506818
>Because I can quantify a brain-state I can derive an ought from an is!
Go home Sam.
>>72506872
Precisely, which is the entire point of my argument. Value is not something that is found, it is something that is made. Morality, like politics, is a system humans create for human purposes, it has no objective reality. Saying "Virtue ethics is the objective morality" or "Utilitarianism is the objective morality" is as nonsensical a statement as "Democracy is the objective political system"
You come upon these ideas with a fundamentally wrong idea of what they are, and therefore every conclusion past that is based not in fact, but in your own sentiments. You FEEL that something that is valuable ought to last forever, and therefore say as much. I do not share that sentiment, and therefore am not bothered by it and do not reach the same conclusion.
Furthermore, understanding that I can create value, I am free to realize I am engaging in a creative endeavor, not a scientific or scholarly one, which makes the entire process much easier.
And no, that is not true of the late Roman Empire. The Roman Empire turned Christian, it never became nihilist. If anything there was a conflict of values between conservative Roman values and Christian values. There was never a period of time when large swathes of the population had no values.
>>72506499
My bad, I'm just so use to talking philosophy with others who have a baseline.
>>72506872
>Again, it's a silly solution. "Because I can"
I disagree.
>>72507034
You have a poor understanding of Christianity, which like any religion regulates morality, the idea that there were consequences after death to motivate to live a good and productive life, not for them but the next generation, if everyone lives for today they'll fuck up the world of tomorrow and someones going to have to deal with that.
>>72507034
I know that, I meant more that most of those good/bad moralities were reified and therefore viewed as objective. Most civilizations created value, but it remained a subconscious process. The idea of actively creating value is an innovation of Nietzsche.
>>72507065
>the oughts and ises are not derived from the brain
>>72507073
>being passive aggressive when you can't communicate properly
nihilism is very ambiguous
>>72506498
>The point is that if greatness is not eternal, it's not greatness at all
And nothing is eternal. Therefor according to the nihilism of Christianity nothing is great.
The temporality of all things was known nearly 3,000 years ago with Heraclitus. The one consistent thing in the universe is flux, or change.
Imagine a black void forever unchanging. That's what eternity is like. Nothing you do in it will ever matter because you cannot change anything, it's all static. There is no interaction.
>>72506872
At the end of the day those that have the will and power to change the world will imprint something on it. Those that thing egoism is a "silly reason" will fade away.
>>72506927
Nietzsche was writing against SJW in the 1800s. He was the last anti-egalitarian philosophy.
>>72506818
Science cannot produce an ought from an is. Nothing can.
-t Hume
>>72507247
You can't derive a moral imperative from a state of affairs without assuming a priori that the agent in question already cares.
It doesn't matter how beautiful and complex your moral system is, if the ultimate purpose of your system [pleasure, greatest happiness for greatest number, eudaimonia, duty] isn't desired by the person in question, you have no way to convince that person your system is better, because it rests on an axiom he has rejected.
And the human brain is plastic enough, that there is no simple objective value that is imprinted upon it.
Trying to argue for a particular morality as a psychological reality is ridiculous.
>>72504888
>Ubermensch is a meme
>Love his sister (degenerate)
>Edgy Philosophy (cool until you are 20)
>A total butthurt about life
At least Diogenes of Sinope Philosophy's still cool today because his life was a dank meme.
Nietzsche just
>muh dead god, we kill it
>muh heritage
>muh germoney
>muh feelings
>muh mistake quotes
>muh anecdotal experience
>muh edgy philosophy, be a total beta
You will never marry your syster.
>>72507354
True, which is where force or deception come into play.
>>72507411
It all comes back to the original statement of Nietzchean morality. Values are not found, they are created.
While it is true that human biology and psychology prevents the creation of truly novel value systems, such as say "Collect ALL the paper clips, forget food, sleep, and water", there is an astonishing variety of value-systems that dot the earth already, and even more that line the shelves of libraries and museums, dead and defeated.
>>72507193
If you have no motive to prosper in the current world and need to create an imaginery alternative world you've already fallen into the nihilism trap.
Many Christians will tell you life is completely meaningless if heaven isn't real. Niezche and many other religions were too busy thinking about the real world to need a life after death, Judaism had no after-life you were expected to conduct yourself well for the sole purpose of making the tribe prosper.
>>72507065
Similarly, you're assuming there is no order that exists independently of all of us so values can be molded and shaped to anything. Whereas if you take the natural law position, you can see there is an objective morality that can be determined independently. That which is good for human flourishing, is moral. That which allows us to realise our potential is moral. That which goes against this is immoral. Human nature is unchangeable, so morality is unchangeable.
Also Christianity was a reaction to the nihilism and social alienation felt at the time. Of course there was conversion of actual pagans, but there's a reason Christianity spread faster in cities.
>>72507034
>conflating Christianity and Platonism
Just no, Christianity takes the middle ground between Platonism and Materialism
Anyway, good night. I always enjoy these threads
>>72507499
And thus we can judge which values are worth keeping and which ones are not, which is why novel values are so dangerous.
>>72507504
Again you fail to understand, it's incentive.
A different means to the same end.
>>72507518
Christianity did not spread faster due to nihilism. Also don't talk to me about natural law, I used to be a Thomist. I know all about natural law. It doesn't solve the problem. It still assumes you desire eudaimonia in the first place.
If someone sets some other value over "flourishing" or conceives of a different concept of flourishing, the whole house of cards comes tumbling in.
Like all moral systems, it depends upon an axiom that is asserted not out of a state of affairs, but by a particular sentiment. Even C.S. Lewis admits that morality is ultimately "Muh feelings" in the Abolition of Man. The entire divide between "theoretical reason" and "practical reason" is an admission that values are axiomatic.
Even if a God existed and told us that this and that was moral, and thus and thus were not moral, it would not make it so, because the value remains subjective. Just because the world's strongest Subject says so, doesn't make value stop being a result of evaluation.
>>72507330
>>72507354
>confusing objective morality with a single morality
>not accepting that morality is objectively produced deterministically as a factor of biology and environment
>presuming I believe one size fits all
>>72507518
>conflating Christianity and Platonism
There is very good reason to link them. Incredibly influential church fathers draw heavily from Platonic philosophy such as Philo of Alexandria (basically reinterpretted the entire old testament using Hellenistic philosophy, literally the most influential Old Testament theologian in ever next to Maimonides, who was also a Platonist)
Paul himself draws heavily from Stoicism and is understood by most scholars to be a Hellenized Jew (if he was even a Jew at all) and all non-Paul writings are almost certainyly written by Gentiles who would have been given the same Hellenistic education. In other words the entire New Testament is tainted with Hellenism.
There are just too many ideas in Christianity that have no basis in Judaism and require Platonic inspired philosophy to support itself. For instance there is no immortality of the soul in Judaism, in fact there isn't even a concept of souls.
>>72507754
>Thinking you're clever for redefining "Objective morality" as "a morality that exists because of an objective cause" instead of the normal definition of "A morality that is fucking objective."
>>72507647
I would disagree to some degree. Its simply a factor of certain value-systems that they can't compete in a Darwinian sense. That doesn't make them "worse" objectively, though I will admit it influences my own choice in values.
>>72507728
If God says so it is so, subjectivity means nothing in the face of authority.
>>72507647
>>72507518
>conflating Christianity and Platonism
There is very good reason to link them. Incredibly influential church fathers draw heavily from Platonic philosophy such as Philo of Alexandria (basically reinterpretted the entire old testament using Hellenistic philosophy, literally the most influential Old Testament theologian in ever next to Maimonides, who was also a Platonist)
Paul himself draws heavily from Stoicism and is understood by most scholars to be a Hellenized Jew (if he was even a Jew at all) and all non-Paul writings are almost certainyly written by Gentiles who would have been given the same Hellenistic education. In other words the entire New Testament is tainted with Hellenism.
There are just too many ideas in Christianity that have no basis in Judaism and require Platonic inspired philosophy to support itself. For instance there is no immortality of the soul in Judaism, in fact there isn't even a concept of souls.
>>72507754
The only thing you can really say is that morality is a response to the environment which Nietzsche would agree with. Each society would come up with a different moral code and subjective valuation can lead to radically different outcomes: there actually exist moral systems in which suicide is seen as not only good but the one of the highest goods of all...if you happen to take out a couple of infidels when the bomb goes off.
What Nietzsche is saying is that rather than appeal to the culturally established morality people need to start thinking for them-self and ask why they value what they value.
>>72505368
Nietzsche also said that the goal was impossible to obtain. Thus, if you can't get past nihilism, all you're left with is nihilism but should never embrace it.
>>72507851
Once again, proving my point. If God's only argument for why his morality is best is a bundle of thunderbolts, that isn't exactly a very convincing argument.
You could make the argument that because he's the strongest, the morality HE made up is the superior one, or appeal to pragmatism and say that because he's omnipotent everyone has to follow his rules.
But that requires throwing out moral realism in favor of a Nietzchean-esq morality, which effectively concedes the argument to me.
Divine Command Theory is just Nietzchean morality but lazier.
>>72507818
If one set of values is used by a civilization and another civilization used a different set of values but died out then clearly one is superior to the other, objectivity has nothing to do with it.
People say hes not a real philosopher more of an opinion orator
>>72507851
God has no real measurable authority though. The only thing he has going for him is the threat of hell which many people think isn't even real.
A dictator with his secret police, prison, and threats of violence has far, far more authority but no one would argue what he says is an absolute morality.
>>72507940
"Superior" is itself an evaluation. Don't fall into the trap of saying you create values but still talking like values are something you discover.
https://youtu.be/H1vxHbgddNI?t=207
>>72507960
like steven molino?
>>72507922
I disagree, killing the opposition is a very convincing argument as it leaves them un-able to oppose.
Again, it's appealing to authority, call it lazy, call it cowardly, that doesn't change the position as it doesn't make you any less conductive.
>>72507922
God's morality was already debunked by plato so many years ago with his paradox, who's name escapes me because I'm too tired to remember.
Do we listen to god because he's always correct or because we fear him. Or something like that.
>>72507818
>not conceiving that presupposing that morality is deterministically produced as a result of biology and environment necessitates that you believe there exists some set of ethics which all humans share as part of their similar DNA thus inducing the opportunity for objective morality to exist for humanity
Neitzsche made a lot more sense after I read Spengler.
>>72508059
I don't believe in moral realism, I believe in moral relativism. If you're saying "Moral realism is real because a really strong guy will beat you up if you say otherwise" that is a really, really, really shitty argument.
If you're saying "Moral relativism is real, AND there exists a God who will fuck you up if you don't play by his rules" I really have no objections to that argument other than that I do not think such a God exists.
>>72508011
Yes it's an evaluation, does that make it an incorrect evaluation?
Discovery and creation can be one in the same.
>>72508089
>not realizing that shared biology and psychology only creates shared incentives that must be incorporated into every possible value set, but still leaves such a wide variation of possible values that a "one true morality" is a pipe dream
>not reality that even if human biology and psychology had a perfectly shared network of incentives and values that conflict of interests would still add layers of complexity to morality and create competing value systems.
>>72508084
Exactly. Most Christian theologians took the first option, saying "Goodness is identical to some facet of Nature, or of God's Nature" making the whole "Because I say so" argument null and void.
Unfortunately like all "objective moralities" its axiomatic, meaning its worthless.
>>72508084
The dialogue is Crito.
>>72507330
>The point is that if greatness is not eternal, it's not greatness at all
>And nothing is eternal.
"Genius" is eternal and universal imo
The combination of notes in a Beethoven Song will always be universally accepted as aestetically pleasing. You don't need to care about classical music to accept that.
Just like the lines and colours by Picasso will always be universally accepted as beautifull.
>>72508143
There's no such thing as a "correct" evaluation. That is the entire point of moral relativism.
>>72504888
He's one of the main reasons Europe has gone to shit. He misread Dostoevsky, and most of his ideas are reflective of an edgy teenager, angry at the world.
Nietzsche is shit and everything about him is shit
>>72508124
Call it what you want, it's effective. However I am phrasing it poorly, it comes down to enforcement, like laws ideas mean nothing if they aren't enforced, they stay obscure thoughts at best, but throw in police officers and judges and they become tangible and real, so by enforcing morals in some manor they become just as real, but mind you that enforcement isn't always going to knock on your door.
Think whatever you want, so long as you play by the rules I don't care.
>>72508234
This theological idea is just rehasing Plato's own solution to the argument "Mai Forms"
Plato: "Dude the authentic version of everything is the Forms. Morality should be based on the Form of Good, which is contained in The One who is the best form ever"
Christians "What if God was The One"
>>72508278
I disagree, some things work, some do not, it's not objective it's evident.
>>72508368
True, but what I'm saying is that truly understanding Nietzche's point means realizing that just because something "works" doesn't make it inherently valuable.
Its valuable because you think thing that "work" are important.
>>72508352
Exactly. Its shit.
>>72508333
You're closer to Nietzsche than you realize.
>>72508325
>Europe is in any way, shape, or form Nietzschean
Oh fuck me my sides.
>>72508234
>saying "Goodness is identical to some facet of Nature, or of God's Nature" making the whole "Because I say so" argument null and void.
Pretty much. What they failed to realize is that God *is* nature itself. But, more focused, is that God is causality itself. Everything involving God or Gods or even Karma revolves around causality being manipulated by an entity, hence what we call miracles.
Personally, I just find the entire theology on God to be boring after I've reduced to simply interchanging god for causality.
>>72508249
Whatever. The point is still that fuck god.
>>72508084
Euthyphro Dilemma
"Is the holy loved by the gods because it is holy? Or is it holy because it is loved by the gods?"
Basically: if God determines what is good from a position or means other than the good (he establishes it through power) then he does so arbitrarily. If whatever is good cannot be changed even by God, then God has nothing whatsoever to do with what is good.
>>72508258
Beethoven's song did not always exist. Therefor it's not eternal. It is the very fact that it could be created that gives it values according to Nietzsche. Only be being able to change things can you produce anything.
It is also the constant striving and struggle that gives further validation. The aspiration of a musician is to be BETTER than Beethoven, if we just concede that nothing can ever top the song than there's nothing to strive fro.
Christianity seeks to have an uncreated, perfect, unlimited reality that can never be topped: God, heaven, etc. Which makes the finite earthly struggle meaningless.
A far healthier type of after-life would be something like reincarnation, which is a metaphysics of always trying to do better than you did last time with no end insight.
>>72504888
Was he the first fedora?
>>72508325
Did he? Because I'm pretty sure that Nietzsche only said that Dostov was a good writer and nothing else. Hell, Dos kept bitching that without God, everything would go and that was shit. Nietzsche just basically went ''fuck God, anything goes but at least we'll will it wherever we go''. Though I guess that's why people see him as a nihilist.
>>72508234
>not envisioning that reducing these shared values to a core set of unwavering values is plausible once we obtain complete knowledge of evolutionary psychology which conditions morality and therefore can move towards the path of scientifically ascertaining a core objective morality
>>72508605
>not realizing you're just playing word games at this point
>not realizing your "objective morality of science" is neither objective, moral, nor scientific.
You may as well be speaking of an objective language, or an objective political system. Its a human construct that we can make into whatever we want to fit our purposes, get over it.
>>72508452
So, if worth is subjective, then if I assign things that work as being valuable, then are they not inherently valuable to me? I could go further with this but I have work.
>You're closer to Nietzsche than you realize.
I don't like it but you're right.
>>72508452
>Europe is in any way, shape, or form Nietzschean
>Europe has largely rejected Christian morals in favor of flimsy, secular morals based upon the suposed infallibility of man's reason
Sounds like a dream if you're a fan of the
syphilitic jew.
>>72508605
Evolutionary forces are not able to fucking predict the future. You can't look at someone's genes and use it to figure what the best political decision is. It's not a fucking crystal ball.
You still cannot get an is from an ought no matter how much data you get.
>>72508501
>Beethoven's song did not always exist. Therefor it's not eternal.
The Song did not exist but It was already a truth that the combination of these notes are beautiful. It was a universal truth that just had not bean expressed yet.
>It is also the constant striving and struggle that gives further validation. The aspiration of a musician is to be BETTER than Beethoven, if we just concede that nothing can ever top the song than there's nothing to strive fro.
You have to differentiate between "very talented" and "genius".
The aspiraton of a genius is not to make a better song than beethoven but to find a tool to express the universally truth he is carrying inside him. And nce it was expressed it will be accepted forever.
>Christianity seeks to have an uncreated, perfect, unlimited reality that can never be topped: God, heaven, etc. Which makes the finite earthly struggle meaningless.
The eternal aspect of christianity on earth is it's morality. As morality is the basis of all geniuses.
I highly recommed "Sex and Character" by Otto Weininger.
He explains it much better than I ever could.
>>72508705
Europe is basically secular Christians. They don't believe in God but they still believe in the equality of all people, privilege has become the new original sin, the dindunuffins have become the new martyrs.
Read Nietzche's book anti-Christ. It's an attack on Christian philosophy and it's origin but it really reads more like an attack on Proggressivism. There's literally a chapter where he discusses early Christians "war on privilege"
>>72508566
The idea of Ubermensche is strikingly similar to the ideas found within Crime and Punishment. Except that Dostoevsky was against the idea of man being the measure of morality, and Nietzsch didn't seem to get the memo. According to him Dostoevsky was the only writer he had ever learned from. Which was not much.
>>72504888
Self-hating Polack who wanted jews to rule over Europeans.
>>72508898
Thats the issue. Europe has moved away from The Church, while still holding onto its ideals. In doing so Europe has removed essential parts from Christian doctrine, and replaced them with new secular sensibilities.
Nietzsche was part of a larger secular movement in Europe. A movement which has gotten Europe to where it is today.
>>72504888
Im starting to think he was a meme who only got attention because the jews made him popular as he opposed christianity and encouraged everyone to do what they want regardless of anything
>>72508773
>thinking humans are anything more than systems conditioned by the environment, fundamentally described as input and output
>supposing 'is' is anything more than flawed morality computed from primitive minds who were crucially designed to survive and reproduce
>not conceiving that although we can't compute ourselves, we can design machines to compute us and give us our set of maxims, our 'ought', prisoner.
>>72509108
The mistakes europe does are the one's idictative of Chrsitian morality. In Jesus's Sermon on the mount, he basically gives the guide to being a SJW. The poor and oppressed are blessed. In Paul's letters we get all sorts of nonsense like "there is no Jew or Gentile, Man or Woman". There is the type of philosophy that destroys a nation and national identity.
The idea of everyone being spiritually equally before God is basically proton-egalerianism.
Nietzsche concluded that the only decent part's of the New Testament are the parts with Pilate. Everything of value in Christianity is in the Old Testament, which celebrates war, conflict, conquest, spiritual-equality is rejected: some races are better than others and some members in that race are better than others.
>>72508325
He's the hope for Europe desu
>>72509237
So your big plan to get objective morality is to build a Computer God and listen to whatever it tells you?
This is just starting to sound like a cheesy scifi movie.
>>72509364
Except that's not the worst consequence if taking apart Christian philosophy and morality. The consiqunce is, is that it leaves a vacuum, in which moral subjectivity replaces objectivity.
Regardless to say that the Sermon on the Mount can by no means be conflated with modern SJW ideas. In stating that men are equal before God, is simply a statment saying that no man is above the laws of God and that all men are equal before God in sin. This has nothing to do with today's ideas of equality.
Things like this really make me wish retards would stop taking the Bible at face value.
Are you the same guy who wouldnt reply to me when I revealed this ubermensch was the worlds biggest cuck. Google Lou Salome and laugh....
The concept of an übermensch could save Europe.
>>72504888
A polish philosopher, but unfortunately quite nihilistic and wrote a lot of trash and bullshit
>>72509927
There never was an "objective morality" of Christianity, scirpture and theology was always being reinterpreted.
No magical utopia happened when everyone was Christian, you still had all sorts of terrible shit happen, many by the very leaders of the church.
The black hole of subjectivity is something that Nietzche predicted would happen over a centuary ago with the "Death of God". What people do not read Nietzche misunderstand about this quote is he never claimed to have been the one to have "killed God" it's all humanity that did it, and it's not even a good thing but a trajedy. A naturalistic understanding of the world created a reality in which God was no longer believable.
There is no way to return back to the religious way: geography and germ theory has killed the idea that God punishes the wicked with earthquakes and sickness, historical critical research has shown the bible to contain massive revionism and outright forgeries, evolution has made us have the same relationship to God as monkies and dolphins, cosmology has turned God into at best a glorified watch-maker.
This sets the stage for Nietzche's challenge for future generations to save themself from the wasteland of nihilism, he gave us a template for how to do it and we are paying dearly for failing to rise to the challenge. I recall he said if the West fails to create proper new meanings than the Arabs and Chinese will take our place. We will simply have no will to fight. A prediction which is on the verge of happening.
Can someone tell me why he is so famous? What was groundbreaking and new about his work? Or is it just because he's a Jew?
>>72510430
He wasn't a Jew, but he envied the masculinity of the Jewish man. I'm not sure why people assume he was a nihilist, either. He was against it. For nihilist writers, see: Ayn Rand.
>>72504888
Hated Germany and Germans, considered himself Polish.
>>72505969
>Birth of Tragedy
Doesn't get as much press as his other stuff, but its my goto for Nietzsche.
>>72510430
>What was groundbreaking and new about his work?
Destroyed the foundation beliefs of most philosophy between the years of Socrates and Kant in Twilight of the Idols.
Completely changed how morality was viewed in Genology of Morality
Changed epistmology forever with perspectivism.
Moved us away from metaphysics.
Revitalized interest in Pre-Socratic philosophy, particularly Heraclitus. BTFO Platonists.
Bithch slapped Kant.
Destroyed rationalism and half of all Enlightenment philosophy.
Theories on Will layed the foundation for early psychology, basic ideas about the subconscious's power over the conscious are based on his theories. Jung and Freud owe half of what they say to him.
Genealogical method and perspective serve as the foundation for the modern "deconstruction of idealogy"
Made Christianity shit it's pants with the Anti-Christ and basically the entire religion reinvented itself inresponse. Wrote several theories on the historical figures of Christianity and Judaism which was confirmed true decades later by historical critical method.
Entire analytic movement was just one big reaction to his theories about truth.
He is literally the most influential philosopher of the 20th and 21st century: existentialism, post-modernism, literally any movement you can think of used his theories for good or evil.
ate 7 pounds of fruit a day
>he's a Jew
Not a Jew, he's a German who was a Greek-aboo.
