I seem to read Nietzsche against the grain always. I thought he was defending Christianity. The slave morality seem so enduring. The master morality seem so flat. But I guess its the "not" that I thought Nietzsche was going after. Anti-. or Nihilistic.
"Morality, insofar as it condemns for its own sake, and not out of regard for the concerns, considerations, and contrivances of life, is a specific error with which one ought to have no pity" - Nietzche
I agree with Lev Tolstoy when he said "Nietzsche was stupid and abnormal". Of course Nietzsche wasn't literally stupid (one only has to read the brilliance of his prose) but his philosophy is stupid and pernicious.
@bayreuth79 Tolstoy also thought that Shakespeare was "...that the unquestionable glory of a great genius which Shakespeare enjoys, and which compels writers of our time to imitate him and readers and spectators to discover in him non-existent merits,—thereby distorting their esthetic and ethical understanding,—is a great evil, as is every untruth."
@ismokereefer hmm, perhaps 'el(le) vitale'? something about vitality or life-force, but in another language, i'd say. But I think it was just a fill-word
@ismokereefer "Élan vital", a french term coined by French Philosopher Henry Bergson, and it´s usually translated as "vital impetus" or "vital force."
I have read all of The Antichrist and half of On The Genealogy of Morals and he is truly incredible. Would someone please tell me if his conclusions on morality have ever been disproven?
@supermaccarenzo Christian morality relies on a god. Christianity can't be "disproven", but by all practical means it is defunct. There are many other moralites like this. On the basis of reason we can find things to be true or untrue, but we know no absolute truth.
Nietzsche was a profound a genius. He contradicted his writings, because "nihilism" means things are representations, and anything goes according to the subjects belief. There is no true world. You claiming he is contradicting, means you did not understand him. A "contradiction"( contrary indication), is an idea, that is a rule to follow to conform to a concept held together by the authorities of language, an idea within a bullshit idea, IDIOT!
@ToxicRemedyBinge So you are replying without hitting the reply so I don't get to be notified ? How cowardly.
Methinks you are not familiar with what "contradiciton" is which is certainly NOT a "contraindication". Unwantedly you have demonstrated the level of intelligence prevalent among the Nietscheanists.
Nietzsche is contradicting himself in the logical sense because he is a representative of a regression into pre-rational arbitrariness.
@ToxicRemedyBinge (contd.) And this is eactly what justifies the Nazis when they claimed him as their "philosopher": principle of explosion !
"IDIOT!"
Language magical atavism: the result of Nietzsche's regressive influence. Well as Gautama said, whatever the guest doesn't eat is left over for the host to to eat himself. There's no way people like you could know whether Nietzsche is a genius since certainly someone like you falls for any con-artists who outsmarts you in an eloquent way.
@ToxicRemedyBinge Haha there's no need to call me an idiot! Do we have to resort to childish insults emphasised with the capslock in order to finalise a point? I merely said he was contradictory and you assumed I meant it in a negative sense. Surely judging by the tone of my post you could discern that i was extolling rather than critisising? The nature of paradox is fundamentally intrinsic to man; Nietzche wrote about the need to hold to opposed ideas/judgements at once and I am in agreement.
hahaha academic dick-swinging is very unbecoming. Take Nietzsche's genius with a pinch of salt! There's no need to be, egotistical, elitist, grandiloquent etc., let's try and engender a semblance of maturity by which free-thinking people can have a friendly debate. I'm just a lowly, callow layman but personally I find his prose inspiring. It's notoriously hard to epitomise his philosophy, he was wild and contradictory; a truly great spirit! How can you honestly get riled up over 'credentials' ?
@toreman81 "academic dick-swinging is very unbecoming...How can you honestly get riled up over 'credentials' ?"
That's my point, no one of seriously philosophic mind would commit such adolescent depravity. Interestingly enough they do not even know logical centers if they are not within their nation. What does that tell us ?
"free-thinking people can have a friendly debate"
That can only happen if basic rules of clear thinking aren't substituted with an appeal to insider arrogance.
And that is all it takes for the true cognoscenti to out and out reject him as a "philosopher" and anyone like him. Clearly, once one has swallowed madness, anything goes which of course explains the behavior of the adolescents.
"principle of explosion" !!!
I alluded to the reasons in the previous commentaries and refer rhetoric questions from anyone there and to his own further studies. I am not being paid for leading seminary here.
This, BTW, is exactly what I meant with club of small penises: it is this grandiose boy club wanting to have what they are lacking. People who cannot think logically are not allowed into the real academy of philosophy. They can get drunk outside and fantasize themselves a story of academic achievements recognized by others of the almost extinguished species of con-artists of empty rhetoric. Gödel means the end of all that crap.
@ALuke9090 If my merely not mentioning my credentials is sufficient reason for you to conclude not having them, that alone would disqualify you for even reaching admission to University (at least on the continent ;).
It also, unwanted by you, demonstrates how much "credentials" mean when it comes to commanding the basics of informal logic or even just good clear thinking. Of course, it is clearly making my point that Nietzsche is exactly the kind of garbage which would appeal to such people.
@ALuke9090 "Where do you study philosophy, by the way?"
Relevance ? Drink your milk.
"You do realize that the divide between Continental and Analytic philosophy is the largest one in the Western world, yes?"
Typical of a gullible academic newbie: how naively you are using the word "is". For a true philosopher merely doxographical shorthands that serve feuilletonistic discourse to demonstrate membership in the exclusivist club of small penises are of no consequence whatsoever.
Anybody wanting to study the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche will benefit greatly by reading the works of Anthony Ludovici. He is one of those great writers which the politically correct gang have thrown down the memory hole. There is a website dedicated to his writings - anthonymludovicidotcom.
Everybody says the final solution to the RACE problem is for EVERY White country and ONLY White countries to bring in the Third World and assimilate with them.
Immigration, tolerance, and especially assimilation are being used against the White Race.
All this immigration and intermarriage is for EVERY White country and ONLY White countries.
Anti-white is called anti-racist, but it leads to the disappearance of one race and only one race, the White race.
@TheRealNickBravo How is "Marx was a belligerent foolish alcoholic" a supporting premise for your conclusion that "Nietzsche is not in anyway the same class as Marx"??
You're comparing the superficial aspects of lifestyles and they're comparing ideas - you're not even talking about the same thing. If this is not what you meant to do, I would be interested in hearing a lucid account of the contrast between N. and M.
Nietzsche would say Stern's term "underdog" is relative and to put the cart before the horse. Diogenes could be considered an underdog relative to platos followers. The problem is the decadence or ascetic sickness that underlies the goal seeking of western thought. N fleshes this out of the ancients, hegel, kant, schopenhauer, mill etc. To simply say underdog is to muddle ns social philosophy. There is alot to be said about Darwin ie that n has a process philosophy, of a chaotic sort, not telos.
On the contrary, philosophy is propaedeutic function for being able to live free from obstructing and false mental constructs. In order to accomplish that one has to follow the inherent laws of such mental constructs.
If you follow Nietzschean pre-reason, you just simply don't accomplish that task because incorrect insurrection against incorrect consctructs have no power to overthrow them.
That's why Nietzscheanism is an adolescent rebellion of the immature mind itself, supposedly in the name of freedom from it, like the bankers drafting plans for their own bail-outs !
Posing as revolutionary, Nietzscheanism is deeply regressive. The mind of Nietzsche had already been overcome by Sokrates.
@ALuke9090 (contd) To truly do what this big mouth Nietzsche only dreamed of and never accomplished is done THROUGH being reasonable where reason is due. Reason has to be supremely respected within its own sphere of validity. THAT IS the integral path beyond reason while connecting with life itself.
You have to pay the piper in some way, "Saturn" in this case. The world certainly had enough of such would be heroics as Nietzsche, the most overvalued prose poet acting as philosopher in history.
I am not interested in movements either positively or negatively), I am interested in reasonable speech as far as it goes. Nietzsche simply wants the right to be irresponsible and not to make sense. And the Nazis therefore had every right to claim him as their philosopher.
Basically, Nietzsche - for rather adolescent reasons - fell for a kind of pre-trans-fallacy: he rightly intuited that LIFE is "beyond reason", but commited the atrocious mistake to be anti-rational.
@ICaptainMidnightI Hi Captain, I have written too much here already, perhaps look to section 5 if you can find your answer there. Generally, I draw it from Nietzsche's own reported propositions. Anyone who is selectively rational where it suits him and not where it would be counter to his interests is anti-rational, an immature, selfish con-artist, to be fully and utterly rejected.
@LooksAeterna Oooh, ad hominem. Shame thats a fallacy.
Rationality is a tool, used to fulfil non-rational desires. Using it where it suits you is the only way to use it. Rationality in-itself only leads to skepticism, leading to infinite doubt.
Enjoy your intellectual masturbation, it's an infinite regress yielding nothing but further doubts. Not my idea of the 'good life', even if that does make one anti-rational, immature, or a selfish con-artist.
@ALuke9090 Nietzsche is clearly no basis for anything to stand on, not even his own hogwash.
Nobody in his right mind would even use such an unphilosophical distinction as "continentalism" versus "anglo-saxon" (I am from the continent BTW - and so was Wittgenstein).
I have often wondered what it is that people finde ingteresting about Nietzsche because from a strictly philosophical (that is analytical in particular) sense you can simply drop Nietzsche from history and NOTHING is lost. I see him as a sociologically influential prose poet and a adolescent braggart rather than a philosopher.
I think I have the answer now: he must have been pushed by the banksters, social Darwinists and assholes to generate an ideological support for their rampant selfishness.
if you want to be famous be as obscure as possible and intellectuals will think of you deep...good luck on your life of fame and maybe even riches if you know how to play the game...
They don't do the best job of telling the audience what Nietzche's views where, and they seem to miss the mark of what Nietzche said. It seems they know Nietzche from second-hand accounts.
Because God himself commands and demands things of his people that would make Mao, Hitler, Torquemada, Stalin, Saddam Hussein, Nero, Mussolini, and every other great killer of history COMBINED blush and pale in comparison.
Trust me it's hard to outdo the bible, or even God in terms of evil.
I like their ties. They match the couch! Ya know I coulda been a Philosophizer, but it's all political and who ya know. I gots a lot of stuff to say. Like that line about their ties. Not bad huh? My ex-wife held me back too. I told my ex-wife I wanted to be like Neitzsche, but she's a real Kant.
aphrodites says the mind is but laquer the body perminant and desires death the mind is nowhere and must reamin only the body lives and dies..thats all.
I just finished Zarathustra, and let me say: "Holy Shit". Every page is a mind blowing account of the human species' phycological state. I cannot recommend it enough.
I dare say the only reason it not be more popular is akin to the image of a sword that can cut through anything, but too heavy a sword to carry for the comfort-loving masses who'd rather remain light.
Many look at it on the face and see it to be some twist like Schopenhauer, teaching to accept the struggle. A Nietzschean rather revels in the possession of the sword, laughing as he decapitates the puny comfort monsters everyone else fears.
@Baseliner And does it make you feel more 'comfortable' when you insult the 'masses'? Could it be that you are also in the same position as the 'masses'? Besides, wouldn't the 'masses' need an extensive study of the philosophical tradition before reading Nietzsche?
@FaaarLeft I read Zarathustra at least once a year. It is the top of my favorite non fiction books. All his books are worth reading and rereading. Every time I read Zarathustra, Antichrist, Beyond Good and Evil, etc. I always see omething new. I am no scholar so I do not pretend to understand everything, but I think that what brings me back to the books again and again and they yield more wisdom each time. Nietzsche should be taught in school.
I read the book for the 5th time these days and must say that it won't be the last time, because I noticed that I missed a lot the times before. It is impossible to get all out of the book in one of two reads. It is so extremely dense and full of ideas and pictures, that it is lecture for years, if not for a whole life. All of Nietzsche's books are "holy shit" and mind blowing, in particular, if I read them the 2nd etc. time(s). I plan to buy an edition of this letters...
Is it just me or is it terribly rude how Stern won't stop saying yes or attempting to start a point whenever Magee is talking. I mean, Magee very likely knows far more on the subject, yet Stern butts in as if Magee was wrong, or leaving out something essential. More than being rude, it sort of makes this annoying to watch as at times I miss what Magee is saying or get distracted. Oh well.
I think that the only solution i see for USA is The Ubermensch (The Overman), you can find out more about these types of human beings who are superior in power to the average slaves in the book "Thus Spoke Zarathustra" and "The Will to Power".
Man have always tried to create his own philosophy about life creating evil ways and principles. By fallowing their own heart and understanding they only give proof that they are fools trying to invent a path that will ultimately lead them to deny God, and by that showing how ignorant and wicked man is.
Aristophanes was awesome, he figured out the world was round. Does Nietzsche acknowledge the value of this? Or is even the roundness of the world too suspect claim because it is only round from a certain perspective?
Nietzsche works are penetrating & aggressive; filled with energy. Whenever i felt bored i will read Nietzsche and the next thing i know is a silent passion in my heart making efforts to breakthrough. Amazing philosopher.
@AnonymousWhitePerson - I fully agree with you. However, we must all admit that the christian morality constitutes the foundation of the Western Civilization. Without the intolerance of Catholicism and the Crusaders, we would have been incapable to survive the invasions. We also must recognize the excessive abuse of power and put an end to it.
@LauraArendt However, as true as that might be, it's irrelevant as the only thing that counts is the present and the future. Our Christian foundations might have helped us on the way (despite what many agressive hobby-revolutionaries want to profess), but Judeo-Christianity had played out its role as a philosophical tool even long before Mr Nietzsche grabbed his first pen. Many of his brilliant ideas have still not been utilized in practice, and it's time we start trying them out!
and of course you "Super" Alexrios know something that the rest of the world doesn't? And please do not reply as I am sure you already deduced it was a rhetoric question.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
i have the life experience that make me more than u and those two in the video there are idiots that are happy reading every fucking book out there and dont have the balls to prove it
nietzche is life itself full of action people like those to find pleasure just in khowledge, they are a desease nothing tha they khow is applied in their life therefore they dont have authority to disscuss anybody s ideas their khowledge is limited
I would like to ask whether anybody knows the reference or the name of the show that the video 'J.P. Stern on Nietzsche:...' is based on. I would also like to know where it was aired and the year too? the information would be very much appreciated!
So Neothomist, Are you one of those individuals that truly regard Nietzsche as a fundamentally adhering theist, who regards the jargon attached to most metaphysicians, attributing his existence, in the final days to a figure of reproachful gestures balanced under a sum of laudable acts, or do you regard the infamous figure, academically canonized as the "Anti-Christ," as a more sinister functioning fellow, who failed to meet a quota of consensus-holding support, advancing his main core thought
Brits discussing Nietzsche over some tea. It's comedic. But their discussion of N isn't too bad. A lot of the claims are not in vogue anymore, though.
@voidforpurpose There's nothing in your comment but showy references. I would be interested in hearing how this video is "anti-Nietzschean" but you have to give reasons and not just poetic ad hominems.
Well, what would you rather have them do? Jump up and down in Kiss make-up? Fling dung at each other?
It's just scholars talking about a philosopher.
I think it's really interesting to witness a philosophy discussion (on TV, for crying out loud! imagine that - but this was another era) that doesn't involve crude populisms and takes a calm, matter-of-fact approach instead.
the one thing i really like about nietzsche is the concept of learning and growing from your suffering. also, although this video states that he went insane in his later years, it fails to mention that when he collapsed into insanity, it was immediately after witnessing a man being extrememly cruel to a horse. it was the straw that broke the camels back for him i suppose. I certainly find the abuse of innocent beings to be supremely disturbing, and in an exclusive class of evil.
I can't help but feel that Nietzsche's Philosophy, or Anti-Philosophy, Is largely unfinished. Insanity robbed him of really attaining the goals he had set for himself. It's a pity too because nearly everything NIetzsche predicted about western society has come to pass, namely widespread Nihilism and decadence. Ten more sane years and he could have expressed so much more.
Currently i find more wisdom in Schopenhaur and recommend Mr. Magees excellent book on the subject.
"Nietzsche in his youth was a professor of Greek literature: one would have expected his superman to be a sort of Greek hero. But on the whole it is remarkable how little he learned from the Greeks, no modesty or reverence, no joy in order and in loveliness, no sense for friendship, none for the sanctity of places and institutions." -- George Santayana
It is "remarkable" how anyone can see nothing Greek in the tragic figure of Zarathustra, who Nietzsche has announce the "superman". It is "remarkable" if anyone can read him with their eyes open and see nothing there of "modesty", "reverence", "joy in order", etc., amongst a host of other Greek qualities, including those less dainty, that Thucydides, for instance, recounts. Santayana is beyond mistaken. He is lying, if not deluded.
However, it is not remarkable that a "neo-thomist", i.e., a believer in Aquinas' Catholic crap, would peddle this Nietzsche hating nonsense about. Lest we forget St Thom's lovely, joyous claim that "The blessed in the kingdom of heaven will see the punishments of the damned, in order that their bliss be more delightful for them"(GM I:15). How Evangelic! And they called this morality? Fortunately many in the West did not stay so epistemically retarded for very long. Now that would be depressing!
Shall we talk of how Protestant theistic determinism degenerated into all this transcendentalist blather about "getting beyond ourselves"? Or how Protestant moralism, helpless to tame Nature, capitulated in a full Romantic embrace of Nature? Of this, Nietzsche hadn't an inkling -- quite unphilosophical.
Poor Friedrich, he would have been so content as minister of a 17th century rural parish.
Santayana would have agreed with Nietzsche on the "shocking degradation [that] modern society has condemned the spirit" with its drive to make us "into any sort of worm by the will of the majority." (Dominations and Powers, 1951)
But negative propositions come first and it is the disproportionate Dionysian emphasis that Santayana criticizes here (cont'd):
(cont'd) "There is nothing exceptional in being alive and impulsive; any savage can run wild and be frenzied and enact histrionic passions: the virtue of the Greeks lay in the exquisite firmness with which they banked their fires without extinguishing them." (Egotism in German Philosophy, 1915)
No interest in sectarian squabbles between Catholics and Protestants; all equally infected with the God delusion, prone to substituting a "retarded puberty" in place of all properly epistemic modes of enquiry.
If serious about your Nietzsche studies, read his 'What I owe to the Ancients' section in "Twilight of the Idols" (1888) - a direct contestation of all the milk-sop views of Greek culture: 'Look, the Greeks were meek and moral just like us little lambs and alter boys!' - yeah right!.
As Nietzsche says in it, all you windy metaphysical Platonists and religious "theosophical" idealists, who lack courage before reality and cannot face it as it is: -- read Thucydides!
Then try some Aeshcylus, some Sophocles, and have a bit of a think about what kind of God and what kind of festival these plays were made as offerings to.. it wasn't the god of nerdly chastity!
I was immersed in Nietzsche in my youthful antinomian phase and his "Contra Wagner" still enters my thoughts some twenty years later.
Nietzsche found no value in the development of post-Socratic philosophical anthropology, even when not buttressed by metaphysics, because it moralizes the cosmos. Very well.
Yet he never managed to rid himself of that other Socratic germ: the supremacy of intention and earnestness.
I enjoy reading N. May I advise one also read a biography of N. It turns out that the man was depressed, perhaps manic-depressed, and depression changes one's perspectives towards the negative. Persons mired in depression have difficulty separating their depressed views from those they would have if not depressed. To his credit, at least he did recommend a positive outlook, though he never acheived that to any significant degree in his own life. Western Atheism often accompanies depression.
Depression is now known to be caused either by a mishapen neurostransmitter profile, which may be genetic or due to poisoning, or else it is caused by internalized resentment which then causes florid rumination. Either way, the resultant mishapen neurotransmitter profile causes a shift in worldview that is usually unrecognizable to the person him/herself, which is why Cognitive Behavioral Therapy is now the therapy du jour, with or without anti-depressants.
Stern was a comparative literature specialist. That Magee had not gotten a hold of R J Hollingdale in this literateur-ass' stead is unforgivable: this discussion is rife with half-misunderstandings and 'bad philology'.
Ironically, Nietzsche despised the 'weak' and their apparent moral law making but in a physical tussle with the great metaphysical thinker, wrestler and moral corner-stone that is Plato, he would have found himself in a head lock at the hands of the Greek, in no time.
"The best and worst we can do is try to understand what IS"
And you are able to say that sentence because you understand what IS... So how can you be so sure that "The best and worst we can do is ..."? How can you ever know what is the best we can do?
Are you claiming knowledge or aren't you? Make up your mind.
There is no free will; Hobbes thoroughly does away with that notion. Just because the process by which the chemical computer in one's skull calculates decisions is extremely complex and riddled with variables does not mean that the process itself is not governed by physics, chemistry, and the like; ergo, no (truly) free will.
...to prevent dna development ineficiency. members of the family have been the most accesible but the less coherente option. human rights corelate the same way. the beter the state of all other dna posibility to exchange the more frictiferous the developement of the race. in general i see that the moral values. not religious but the ones that come from reazon are simply the way that nature show us to be the coherent way to develope. we romantizise morals but they make sence as science does
hou can u think values r created by man when man finds himself working 2 understand the rules of the whole (phisics biology neurology and upcoming fields andso on) science hopes 2 unveal the nxt strata of subtelty in d understanding of d whole. morality is d defining mode of evolution & is d product of our understanding of d whole. morality comes from d understanding of d whole & is our subsequent coherent responce defined by d coherence of that understanding. WE FIND AND EVOLVE OUR VALUES
dude, no, science and the persuit of it is man trying in vain to find an objectivity, the thing in itself, which if you are a human does not exist, the only values that exist are the ones we create for ourselves
thanks, you open my ayes to say something but is somehow complicated. i have to give examples to get the point across. we first find the unswer throug insight and then refine it through science. though in the way we wave around the line. moral brings human rights and brings order to reproduction and de efective way to pass dna. science questions it and then undestands it. we first "believe" then we know.sex within the family become prohibited without understanding why was not good?.
one, that does not explain why different people had different morals, two, i can't explain tottally, but what you are describing is what Nietzsche talked about in his "the geneology of morality", he called it the will to nothingness, and what you described is also a kind of geneticist's fallacy, alot of what evolutionary psychologists describe as results of evolution are completely (and more rationally) explained by cognitive theory
Nietzsche is a fun guy to read... but too many layman read him and then assume they know everything about philosophy. =/
I would suggest people to have at least a solid understanding of formal logic and read some philosophers (plato, aristotle, descartes, berkeley, locke, hume, kant, schopenhaur) before going into nietzsche to avoid misunderstanding him.
I think you may be slightly confusing the concept of "superman", so I will explain it here.
The "superman" was his concept for the man (woman) who made up his/her own values in place of the default values descended from the Judeochristian or other religion, and then took those values seriously and enriched him/herself in that self-defined value.
And, btw, what does it mean ´ to be yourself ´? Aren´t you just a ´product´ or kind of ´reflection´ of your parents characters´ (genes) and of different thoughts and experiences you absorbed and come across over time. Haven´t you raher found yourself as an ever-changing entity with no solid state that you could possibly define as ´ being oneself ´ ?
Whe are born with certain talents for music, languages and so on. We are free to develop our virtues but we can not choose them. To become yourself is to have courage and determination to cultivate yourself to the maximum.
I seem to read Nietzsche against the grain always. I thought he was defending Christianity. The slave morality seem so enduring. The master morality seem so flat. But I guess its the "not" that I thought Nietzsche was going after. Anti-. or Nihilistic.
Israe5l 1 week ago
This is a very "yummy" video. =p
dailypinoyshowbiz 1 week ago
"Morality, insofar as it condemns for its own sake, and not out of regard for the concerns, considerations, and contrivances of life, is a specific error with which one ought to have no pity" - Nietzche
CommunistWarrior1917 2 months ago
I agree with Lev Tolstoy when he said "Nietzsche was stupid and abnormal". Of course Nietzsche wasn't literally stupid (one only has to read the brilliance of his prose) but his philosophy is stupid and pernicious.
bayreuth79 3 months ago in playlist J.P. Stern on Nietzsche
@bayreuth79 Tolstoy also thought that Shakespeare was "...that the unquestionable glory of a great genius which Shakespeare enjoys, and which compels writers of our time to imitate him and readers and spectators to discover in him non-existent merits,—thereby distorting their esthetic and ethical understanding,—is a great evil, as is every untruth."
andmaketherain 1 month ago in playlist J.P. Stern on Nietzsche
WOW, COOL, THE PHILOSOPHER OF THE SUPERMAN !! WE NEED A SUPERMAN TO SAVE USA !!
maxistsocialist 4 months ago
2:07 i love that Magee hasn't got any shoes on - just chilling in the sofa
FredeGF 5 months ago 4
8 people who watched this video say: "make us into these Last Men!" and they blink. . . . . .
alifeofreason 5 months ago in playlist J.P. Stern on Nietzsche
"His fundamental appeal is to authenticity, to self-hood, to the ____________, to the life within the person lived to the full."
Forgive me but what does he say in the blank?
ismokereefer 5 months ago
@ismokereefer hmm, perhaps 'el(le) vitale'? something about vitality or life-force, but in another language, i'd say. But I think it was just a fill-word
FredeGF 5 months ago
@ismokereefer "Élan vital", a french term coined by French Philosopher Henry Bergson, and it´s usually translated as "vital impetus" or "vital force."
IntoTheHeartOfMusic 5 months ago
this is my grandfather
AwesomeBubbleT 6 months ago
beige, begie, begie, begie, begie
IDontLiveTodayJH 6 months ago
I have read all of The Antichrist and half of On The Genealogy of Morals and he is truly incredible. Would someone please tell me if his conclusions on morality have ever been disproven?
TheDavid2222 8 months ago
@TheDavid2222
No critique of morality has ever been proven or disproven.
supermaccarenzo 7 months ago
@supermaccarenzo Christian morality relies on a god. Christianity can't be "disproven", but by all practical means it is defunct. There are many other moralites like this. On the basis of reason we can find things to be true or untrue, but we know no absolute truth.
TheDavid2222 7 months ago
Talking " about" Nietzsche is boring. These academics never experiences something similar what Nietzsche was suffering: utter solitude.
ruzickaw 10 months ago
Nietzsche was a profound a genius. He contradicted his writings, because "nihilism" means things are representations, and anything goes according to the subjects belief. There is no true world. You claiming he is contradicting, means you did not understand him. A "contradiction"( contrary indication), is an idea, that is a rule to follow to conform to a concept held together by the authorities of language, an idea within a bullshit idea, IDIOT!
ToxicRemedyBinge 1 year ago
@ToxicRemedyBinge So you are replying without hitting the reply so I don't get to be notified ? How cowardly.
Methinks you are not familiar with what "contradiciton" is which is certainly NOT a "contraindication". Unwantedly you have demonstrated the level of intelligence prevalent among the Nietscheanists.
Nietzsche is contradicting himself in the logical sense because he is a representative of a regression into pre-rational arbitrariness.
LooksAeterna 1 year ago
@ToxicRemedyBinge (contd.) And this is eactly what justifies the Nazis when they claimed him as their "philosopher": principle of explosion !
"IDIOT!"
Language magical atavism: the result of Nietzsche's regressive influence. Well as Gautama said, whatever the guest doesn't eat is left over for the host to to eat himself. There's no way people like you could know whether Nietzsche is a genius since certainly someone like you falls for any con-artists who outsmarts you in an eloquent way.
LooksAeterna 1 year ago
Comment removed
ToxicRemedyBinge 1 year ago
@ToxicRemedyBinge Haha there's no need to call me an idiot! Do we have to resort to childish insults emphasised with the capslock in order to finalise a point? I merely said he was contradictory and you assumed I meant it in a negative sense. Surely judging by the tone of my post you could discern that i was extolling rather than critisising? The nature of paradox is fundamentally intrinsic to man; Nietzche wrote about the need to hold to opposed ideas/judgements at once and I am in agreement.
toreman81 1 year ago
Comment removed
ToxicRemedyBinge 1 year ago
@toreman81 hehe !
ToxicRemedyBinge says: "You lack the intelligence needed ...go read a charlatans self help book and piss off...your idiocy"
He doesn't even realize what you say, not even that you are not me !!!
You see, what's the difference between the advanced stages of Nietzscheism and a cholerical alcoholic ? Please tell me =:))
LooksAeterna 1 year ago
@ALuke9090 This must be the Nietzschesque proof by repetition and name calling. You'll find a virgin or two to impress with this kind of depravity.
Nietzsche was justly used by the Nazis as their philosopher. Why ?
"Principle of explosion" !
LooksAeterna 1 year ago
hahaha academic dick-swinging is very unbecoming. Take Nietzsche's genius with a pinch of salt! There's no need to be, egotistical, elitist, grandiloquent etc., let's try and engender a semblance of maturity by which free-thinking people can have a friendly debate. I'm just a lowly, callow layman but personally I find his prose inspiring. It's notoriously hard to epitomise his philosophy, he was wild and contradictory; a truly great spirit! How can you honestly get riled up over 'credentials' ?
toreman81 1 year ago
@toreman81 "academic dick-swinging is very unbecoming...How can you honestly get riled up over 'credentials' ?"
That's my point, no one of seriously philosophic mind would commit such adolescent depravity. Interestingly enough they do not even know logical centers if they are not within their nation. What does that tell us ?
"free-thinking people can have a friendly debate"
That can only happen if basic rules of clear thinking aren't substituted with an appeal to insider arrogance.
LooksAeterna 1 year ago
@LooksAeterna agreed
toreman81 1 year ago
@toreman81 "[Nietzsche] was ... contradictory"
And that is all it takes for the true cognoscenti to out and out reject him as a "philosopher" and anyone like him. Clearly, once one has swallowed madness, anything goes which of course explains the behavior of the adolescents.
"principle of explosion" !!!
I alluded to the reasons in the previous commentaries and refer rhetoric questions from anyone there and to his own further studies. I am not being paid for leading seminary here.
Bye.
LooksAeterna 1 year ago
@ALuke9090 (contd.)
This, BTW, is exactly what I meant with club of small penises: it is this grandiose boy club wanting to have what they are lacking. People who cannot think logically are not allowed into the real academy of philosophy. They can get drunk outside and fantasize themselves a story of academic achievements recognized by others of the almost extinguished species of con-artists of empty rhetoric. Gödel means the end of all that crap.
Now you got it.
"principle of explosion" !
LooksAeterna 1 year ago
@ALuke9090 If my merely not mentioning my credentials is sufficient reason for you to conclude not having them, that alone would disqualify you for even reaching admission to University (at least on the continent ;).
It also, unwanted by you, demonstrates how much "credentials" mean when it comes to commanding the basics of informal logic or even just good clear thinking. Of course, it is clearly making my point that Nietzsche is exactly the kind of garbage which would appeal to such people.
LooksAeterna 1 year ago
@ALuke9090 (contd.) but if you want to learn something that matters, drop this con-artistry and take a look at the "principle of explosion".
LooksAeterna 1 year ago
@ALuke9090 "Where do you study philosophy, by the way?"
Relevance ? Drink your milk.
"You do realize that the divide between Continental and Analytic philosophy is the largest one in the Western world, yes?"
Typical of a gullible academic newbie: how naively you are using the word "is". For a true philosopher merely doxographical shorthands that serve feuilletonistic discourse to demonstrate membership in the exclusivist club of small penises are of no consequence whatsoever.
LooksAeterna 1 year ago
Anybody wanting to study the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche will benefit greatly by reading the works of Anthony Ludovici. He is one of those great writers which the politically correct gang have thrown down the memory hole. There is a website dedicated to his writings - anthonymludovicidotcom.
NIETZSCHEAN14 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Everybody says the final solution to the RACE problem is for EVERY White country and ONLY White countries to bring in the Third World and assimilate with them.
Immigration, tolerance, and especially assimilation are being used against the White Race.
All this immigration and intermarriage is for EVERY White country and ONLY White countries.
Anti-white is called anti-racist, but it leads to the disappearance of one race and only one race, the White race.
It is genocide.
STOPWHITEGENOCIDE 1 year ago
they say syphilis made him crazy but I say Nietzsche was to intelligent for his sanity
BigBoyKaveman 1 year ago
Nietzsche was wrong about God but was right about supermen and the morality of slaves and masters
EvzoniBBBB 1 year ago
Nietzsche is NOT in any way in the same class as Marx. Marx was a belligerent, foolish alcoholic. This vid series is unwatchable.
TheRealNickBravo 1 year ago
@TheRealNickBravo How is "Marx was a belligerent foolish alcoholic" a supporting premise for your conclusion that "Nietzsche is not in anyway the same class as Marx"??
You're comparing the superficial aspects of lifestyles and they're comparing ideas - you're not even talking about the same thing. If this is not what you meant to do, I would be interested in hearing a lucid account of the contrast between N. and M.
xORIGINx 1 year ago
@xORIGINx marx considered man to be a means to an end, whilst Nietzsche considered man to be an end in of him or herself.
TheRealNickBravo 1 year ago
Nietzsche would say Stern's term "underdog" is relative and to put the cart before the horse. Diogenes could be considered an underdog relative to platos followers. The problem is the decadence or ascetic sickness that underlies the goal seeking of western thought. N fleshes this out of the ancients, hegel, kant, schopenhauer, mill etc. To simply say underdog is to muddle ns social philosophy. There is alot to be said about Darwin ie that n has a process philosophy, of a chaotic sort, not telos.
Urdoxa 1 year ago
On the contrary, philosophy is propaedeutic function for being able to live free from obstructing and false mental constructs. In order to accomplish that one has to follow the inherent laws of such mental constructs.
If you follow Nietzschean pre-reason, you just simply don't accomplish that task because incorrect insurrection against incorrect consctructs have no power to overthrow them.
LooksAeterna 1 year ago
(contd)
That's why Nietzscheanism is an adolescent rebellion of the immature mind itself, supposedly in the name of freedom from it, like the bankers drafting plans for their own bail-outs !
Posing as revolutionary, Nietzscheanism is deeply regressive. The mind of Nietzsche had already been overcome by Sokrates.
It's a pre-trans-fallacy.
LooksAeterna 1 year ago
La philosophie pour le saké de philosophie...
They can't help it.
FaaarLeft 1 year ago
@ALuke9090 (contd) To truly do what this big mouth Nietzsche only dreamed of and never accomplished is done THROUGH being reasonable where reason is due. Reason has to be supremely respected within its own sphere of validity. THAT IS the integral path beyond reason while connecting with life itself.
You have to pay the piper in some way, "Saturn" in this case. The world certainly had enough of such would be heroics as Nietzsche, the most overvalued prose poet acting as philosopher in history.
LooksAeterna 1 year ago
@ALuke9090
I am not interested in movements either positively or negatively), I am interested in reasonable speech as far as it goes. Nietzsche simply wants the right to be irresponsible and not to make sense. And the Nazis therefore had every right to claim him as their philosopher.
Basically, Nietzsche - for rather adolescent reasons - fell for a kind of pre-trans-fallacy: he rightly intuited that LIFE is "beyond reason", but commited the atrocious mistake to be anti-rational.
LooksAeterna 1 year ago
@LooksAeterna
From where do you draw the conclusion that Nietzsche was 'anti-rational'?
ICaptainMidnightI 1 year ago
@ICaptainMidnightI Hi Captain, I have written too much here already, perhaps look to section 5 if you can find your answer there. Generally, I draw it from Nietzsche's own reported propositions. Anyone who is selectively rational where it suits him and not where it would be counter to his interests is anti-rational, an immature, selfish con-artist, to be fully and utterly rejected.
LooksAeterna 1 year ago
@LooksAeterna Oooh, ad hominem. Shame thats a fallacy.
Rationality is a tool, used to fulfil non-rational desires. Using it where it suits you is the only way to use it. Rationality in-itself only leads to skepticism, leading to infinite doubt.
Enjoy your intellectual masturbation, it's an infinite regress yielding nothing but further doubts. Not my idea of the 'good life', even if that does make one anti-rational, immature, or a selfish con-artist.
ICaptainMidnightI 1 year ago
@ALuke9090 Nietzsche is clearly no basis for anything to stand on, not even his own hogwash.
Nobody in his right mind would even use such an unphilosophical distinction as "continentalism" versus "anglo-saxon" (I am from the continent BTW - and so was Wittgenstein).
LooksAeterna 1 year ago
I have often wondered what it is that people finde ingteresting about Nietzsche because from a strictly philosophical (that is analytical in particular) sense you can simply drop Nietzsche from history and NOTHING is lost. I see him as a sociologically influential prose poet and a adolescent braggart rather than a philosopher.
I think I have the answer now: he must have been pushed by the banksters, social Darwinists and assholes to generate an ideological support for their rampant selfishness.
LooksAeterna 1 year ago
if you want to be famous be as obscure as possible and intellectuals will think of you deep...good luck on your life of fame and maybe even riches if you know how to play the game...
cirosuperiore 1 year ago
This guy is yet another good reason why people should read Nietzsche and figure his work out for themselves.
1982CFD 1 year ago
Both Nietzsche and Schopenhauer were against how acadimics treat philosophy. It isn't something to be entertained by. It's a way of life!
danieljliversLXXXIX 1 year ago 3
They don't do the best job of telling the audience what Nietzche's views where, and they seem to miss the mark of what Nietzche said. It seems they know Nietzche from second-hand accounts.
Ebuverthebicepcurler 1 year ago
@jesusb71
"showing how ignorant and wicked man is."
I'm guessing you haven't read the bible...
Because God himself commands and demands things of his people that would make Mao, Hitler, Torquemada, Stalin, Saddam Hussein, Nero, Mussolini, and every other great killer of history COMBINED blush and pale in comparison.
Trust me it's hard to outdo the bible, or even God in terms of evil.
tskasa1 1 year ago
@tskasa1 I think the koran manages to outdo it tbh
IsMyNameYourName 1 year ago
@IsMyNameYourName
They are both equally horrible, me thinks
tskasa1 1 year ago
I like their ties. They match the couch! Ya know I coulda been a Philosophizer, but it's all political and who ya know. I gots a lot of stuff to say. Like that line about their ties. Not bad huh? My ex-wife held me back too. I told my ex-wife I wanted to be like Neitzsche, but she's a real Kant.
tomblack2112 1 year ago 39
@tomblack2112 Tommy Boy, you are an ass,
a very unfunny ass!
"Now go home and get your fuckin' shine box!"
fntime 1 year ago
@tomblack2112 Hilarious.
MrBasilGanglia 10 months ago
aphrodites says the mind is but laquer the body perminant and desires death the mind is nowhere and must reamin only the body lives and dies..thats all.
TheFriedLiverAttack 1 year ago
I just finished Zarathustra, and let me say: "Holy Shit". Every page is a mind blowing account of the human species' phycological state. I cannot recommend it enough.
FaaarLeft 1 year ago 32
@FaaarLeft
A most-empowering book Zarathustra is.
I dare say the only reason it not be more popular is akin to the image of a sword that can cut through anything, but too heavy a sword to carry for the comfort-loving masses who'd rather remain light.
Many look at it on the face and see it to be some twist like Schopenhauer, teaching to accept the struggle. A Nietzschean rather revels in the possession of the sword, laughing as he decapitates the puny comfort monsters everyone else fears.
Baseliner 9 months ago
@Baseliner And does it make you feel more 'comfortable' when you insult the 'masses'? Could it be that you are also in the same position as the 'masses'? Besides, wouldn't the 'masses' need an extensive study of the philosophical tradition before reading Nietzsche?
Piccolo7126 6 months ago
@FaaarLeft I read Zarathustra at least once a year. It is the top of my favorite non fiction books. All his books are worth reading and rereading. Every time I read Zarathustra, Antichrist, Beyond Good and Evil, etc. I always see omething new. I am no scholar so I do not pretend to understand everything, but I think that what brings me back to the books again and again and they yield more wisdom each time. Nietzsche should be taught in school.
madahad9 1 month ago in playlist J.P. Stern on Nietzsche
@FaaarLeft
I read the book for the 5th time these days and must say that it won't be the last time, because I noticed that I missed a lot the times before. It is impossible to get all out of the book in one of two reads. It is so extremely dense and full of ideas and pictures, that it is lecture for years, if not for a whole life. All of Nietzsche's books are "holy shit" and mind blowing, in particular, if I read them the 2nd etc. time(s). I plan to buy an edition of this letters...
HimmelsscheibeNebra 1 week ago
good shit thanks
alien3445 1 year ago
Is it just me or is it terribly rude how Stern won't stop saying yes or attempting to start a point whenever Magee is talking. I mean, Magee very likely knows far more on the subject, yet Stern butts in as if Magee was wrong, or leaving out something essential. More than being rude, it sort of makes this annoying to watch as at times I miss what Magee is saying or get distracted. Oh well.
Nonoyawns 1 year ago
I think that the only solution i see for USA is The Ubermensch (The Overman), you can find out more about these types of human beings who are superior in power to the average slaves in the book "Thus Spoke Zarathustra" and "The Will to Power".
maxistsocialist 1 year ago
Nietzsche's Werke.
AnonymousWhitePerson 1 year ago
Man have always tried to create his own philosophy about life creating evil ways and principles. By fallowing their own heart and understanding they only give proof that they are fools trying to invent a path that will ultimately lead them to deny God, and by that showing how ignorant and wicked man is.
jesusb71 1 year ago
Aristophanes was awesome, he figured out the world was round. Does Nietzsche acknowledge the value of this? Or is even the roundness of the world too suspect claim because it is only round from a certain perspective?
GorterPoss 1 year ago
Nietzsche works are penetrating & aggressive; filled with energy. Whenever i felt bored i will read Nietzsche and the next thing i know is a silent passion in my heart making efforts to breakthrough. Amazing philosopher.
lolzerlolzer 1 year ago
The Bible is an encyclopaedia of Prehistoric Cults".
- Friedrich Nietzsche
AnonymousWhitePerson 1 year ago 7
@AnonymousWhitePerson - I fully agree with you. However, we must all admit that the christian morality constitutes the foundation of the Western Civilization. Without the intolerance of Catholicism and the Crusaders, we would have been incapable to survive the invasions. We also must recognize the excessive abuse of power and put an end to it.
LauraArendt 1 year ago
@LauraArendt However, as true as that might be, it's irrelevant as the only thing that counts is the present and the future. Our Christian foundations might have helped us on the way (despite what many agressive hobby-revolutionaries want to profess), but Judeo-Christianity had played out its role as a philosophical tool even long before Mr Nietzsche grabbed his first pen. Many of his brilliant ideas have still not been utilized in practice, and it's time we start trying them out!
vertgg 1 year ago
SuperAlexrios...another victim of american public schools
whimppy 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nietzsche should be considered a founding father of nazism.
liberalcomrade 2 years ago
lol and jesus the founding father of the klu klux klan
YEMK 2 years ago 5
Comment removed
liberalcomrade 2 years ago
Nietzsche detested antisemitism and the idea that there could be a "master race"...
MrJazzyjeff510 2 years ago 5
ur completly right.
xARMINIUSx 1 year ago
these two assholes are the type of people nietztche used to hate.Intelectuals he call them "rats of libraries"
SuperAlexrios 2 years ago
Why do you say that?
iamnotapie 2 years ago
they dont have shit to offer,they think they khow but they dont khow shit
SuperAlexrios 2 years ago
and of course you "Super" Alexrios know something that the rest of the world doesn't? And please do not reply as I am sure you already deduced it was a rhetoric question.
AlsatianCousin 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
i have the life experience that make me more than u and those two in the video there are idiots that are happy reading every fucking book out there and dont have the balls to prove it
SuperAlexrios 1 year ago
I guess these people have their own opinions, but here they are dicussing Nietzsche's opinions .. which is perfectly okay
racoofield 2 years ago
nietzche is life itself full of action people like those to find pleasure just in khowledge, they are a desease nothing tha they khow is applied in their life therefore they dont have authority to disscuss anybody s ideas their khowledge is limited
SuperAlexrios 2 years ago
from your grammer, you haven't been balanced, focusing on book knowledge as well as experiential knowledge
360johny 1 year ago
So you're a computer rat. Nietzsche would have hated you too.
MrPontiusPilate 2 years ago
You're an Internet rat.
MrPontiusPilate 1 year ago
Every phylosopher is right because mind creates our reallity. But what if mind just disapear?
marijan1808 2 years ago
wonder that napolean would say about him? lol
Rico8458 2 years ago
socretes? plato or aristotle? kant versus st. thomas summa theologia?
Rico8458 2 years ago
marx also said man created god.
Rico8458 2 years ago
i never knew he was a saxon. no wonder, anglo-saxons understand him well.
Rico8458 2 years ago
@Mujahida09
Great Philosophers, Bryan Magee, BBC, mid-1980s - available as book or tape (just Google)
llezsoeg 2 years ago
Thank you llezsoeg,
gr8 help, cheerz!
Mujahida09 2 years ago
I would like to ask whether anybody knows the reference or the name of the show that the video 'J.P. Stern on Nietzsche:...' is based on. I would also like to know where it was aired and the year too? the information would be very much appreciated!
Thanks.. (eagerly awaiting a response)
Mujahida09 2 years ago
@Thresholds
Stern was a Prager Jude; ie Czech not Brit. Served in the RAF though.
llezsoeg 2 years ago
So Neothomist, Are you one of those individuals that truly regard Nietzsche as a fundamentally adhering theist, who regards the jargon attached to most metaphysicians, attributing his existence, in the final days to a figure of reproachful gestures balanced under a sum of laudable acts, or do you regard the infamous figure, academically canonized as the "Anti-Christ," as a more sinister functioning fellow, who failed to meet a quota of consensus-holding support, advancing his main core thought
AudyoSound 2 years ago
urgeist [dot] org
Wahn666 2 years ago
nietzsches ideas are eternal recurrence,will to power,the overman,they are the big ideas.
lee88614 2 years ago
love the ties!
njmsilva 2 years ago
Brits discussing Nietzsche over some tea. It's comedic. But their discussion of N isn't too bad. A lot of the claims are not in vogue anymore, though.
Thresholds 2 years ago 2
@Thresholds I don't see why Nietzche would disaprove of this kind of conversation
soursourapples 2 years ago
Monty Python has nothing on these guys.
I think Nietzsche would have prefered "The Comfy Chair" to this staid montone.
Zarathustra would have simply flipped the loveseat over and goosed these fellows off the stage.
This is like a Shakespeare love poem being read by a robot.
"Shall I compare there to a toggle bolt?"
Anti-Nietzschean to the hilt, and the tang and beyond.
voidforpurpose 2 years ago 15
@voidforpurpose Nietzsche's obsolete.
SAK47RAMENTO 1 year ago
@voidforpurpose except jp stern knows way more about nietzche than you
soursourapples 1 year ago
@voidforpurpose There's nothing in your comment but showy references. I would be interested in hearing how this video is "anti-Nietzschean" but you have to give reasons and not just poetic ad hominems.
xORIGINx 1 year ago 3
studying Nietzsche is always gonna be anti Nietzsche, give the professors some slack they were only following orders!
240soundwave 1 year ago
@voidforpurpose
Well, what would you rather have them do? Jump up and down in Kiss make-up? Fling dung at each other?
It's just scholars talking about a philosopher.
I think it's really interesting to witness a philosophy discussion (on TV, for crying out loud! imagine that - but this was another era) that doesn't involve crude populisms and takes a calm, matter-of-fact approach instead.
brigidcamillesusan 1 year ago
I've only got one thing to say about this clip and that is:
BEIGE
cockfightcoordinator 2 years ago 39
@cockfightcoordinator
The '70's may have been an ugly decade, but it had much better TV and music than today.
IDontLiveTodayJH 1 year ago
the one thing i really like about nietzsche is the concept of learning and growing from your suffering. also, although this video states that he went insane in his later years, it fails to mention that when he collapsed into insanity, it was immediately after witnessing a man being extrememly cruel to a horse. it was the straw that broke the camels back for him i suppose. I certainly find the abuse of innocent beings to be supremely disturbing, and in an exclusive class of evil.
citizencrack1986 2 years ago 4
His psychotic breakdown was a result of the siphilis he contracted in a brothel as a student.
chaoticfutility 2 years ago
that's one of a few theories. none can really be substantiated.
infectingthecrypts 2 years ago
Well, you take the good with the bad.
Raford146 1 year ago
I can't help but feel that Nietzsche's Philosophy, or Anti-Philosophy, Is largely unfinished. Insanity robbed him of really attaining the goals he had set for himself. It's a pity too because nearly everything NIetzsche predicted about western society has come to pass, namely widespread Nihilism and decadence. Ten more sane years and he could have expressed so much more.
Currently i find more wisdom in Schopenhaur and recommend Mr. Magees excellent book on the subject.
Great post Flame0430.
clusterherpes 2 years ago
Schopenhauer is the best. no doubt about it!
alukkkard 2 years ago
... it got over you!
TimThemi 2 years ago
"Nietzsche in his youth was a professor of Greek literature: one would have expected his superman to be a sort of Greek hero. But on the whole it is remarkable how little he learned from the Greeks, no modesty or reverence, no joy in order and in loveliness, no sense for friendship, none for the sanctity of places and institutions." -- George Santayana
neothomist1275 2 years ago
It is "remarkable" how anyone can see nothing Greek in the tragic figure of Zarathustra, who Nietzsche has announce the "superman". It is "remarkable" if anyone can read him with their eyes open and see nothing there of "modesty", "reverence", "joy in order", etc., amongst a host of other Greek qualities, including those less dainty, that Thucydides, for instance, recounts. Santayana is beyond mistaken. He is lying, if not deluded.
TimThemi 2 years ago 3
However, it is not remarkable that a "neo-thomist", i.e., a believer in Aquinas' Catholic crap, would peddle this Nietzsche hating nonsense about. Lest we forget St Thom's lovely, joyous claim that "The blessed in the kingdom of heaven will see the punishments of the damned, in order that their bliss be more delightful for them"(GM I:15). How Evangelic! And they called this morality? Fortunately many in the West did not stay so epistemically retarded for very long. Now that would be depressing!
TimThemi 2 years ago 2
Shall we talk of how Protestant theistic determinism degenerated into all this transcendentalist blather about "getting beyond ourselves"? Or how Protestant moralism, helpless to tame Nature, capitulated in a full Romantic embrace of Nature? Of this, Nietzsche hadn't an inkling -- quite unphilosophical.
Poor Friedrich, he would have been so content as minister of a 17th century rural parish.
neothomist1275 2 years ago
Santayana would have agreed with Nietzsche on the "shocking degradation [that] modern society has condemned the spirit" with its drive to make us "into any sort of worm by the will of the majority." (Dominations and Powers, 1951)
But negative propositions come first and it is the disproportionate Dionysian emphasis that Santayana criticizes here (cont'd):
neothomist1275 2 years ago
(cont'd) "There is nothing exceptional in being alive and impulsive; any savage can run wild and be frenzied and enact histrionic passions: the virtue of the Greeks lay in the exquisite firmness with which they banked their fires without extinguishing them." (Egotism in German Philosophy, 1915)
neothomist1275 2 years ago
No interest in sectarian squabbles between Catholics and Protestants; all equally infected with the God delusion, prone to substituting a "retarded puberty" in place of all properly epistemic modes of enquiry.
If serious about your Nietzsche studies, read his 'What I owe to the Ancients' section in "Twilight of the Idols" (1888) - a direct contestation of all the milk-sop views of Greek culture: 'Look, the Greeks were meek and moral just like us little lambs and alter boys!' - yeah right!.
TimThemi 2 years ago
As Nietzsche says in it, all you windy metaphysical Platonists and religious "theosophical" idealists, who lack courage before reality and cannot face it as it is: -- read Thucydides!
Then try some Aeshcylus, some Sophocles, and have a bit of a think about what kind of God and what kind of festival these plays were made as offerings to.. it wasn't the god of nerdly chastity!
Kind Regards,
Tim
TimThemi 2 years ago
I was immersed in Nietzsche in my youthful antinomian phase and his "Contra Wagner" still enters my thoughts some twenty years later.
Nietzsche found no value in the development of post-Socratic philosophical anthropology, even when not buttressed by metaphysics, because it moralizes the cosmos. Very well.
Yet he never managed to rid himself of that other Socratic germ: the supremacy of intention and earnestness.
neothomist1275 2 years ago
I enjoy reading N. May I advise one also read a biography of N. It turns out that the man was depressed, perhaps manic-depressed, and depression changes one's perspectives towards the negative. Persons mired in depression have difficulty separating their depressed views from those they would have if not depressed. To his credit, at least he did recommend a positive outlook, though he never acheived that to any significant degree in his own life. Western Atheism often accompanies depression.
rh001YT 2 years ago
He was depressed to the limits because he saw the stupidity of the mob.
IVomitOnYourGod 2 years ago 4
Depression is now known to be caused either by a mishapen neurostransmitter profile, which may be genetic or due to poisoning, or else it is caused by internalized resentment which then causes florid rumination. Either way, the resultant mishapen neurotransmitter profile causes a shift in worldview that is usually unrecognizable to the person him/herself, which is why Cognitive Behavioral Therapy is now the therapy du jour, with or without anti-depressants.
rh001YT 2 years ago
Nietzsche is up to you.
...at most... (-:-)
Aristoteles83 2 years ago
Stern was a comparative literature specialist. That Magee had not gotten a hold of R J Hollingdale in this literateur-ass' stead is unforgivable: this discussion is rife with half-misunderstandings and 'bad philology'.
barrywinehousexp 2 years ago
Ironically, Nietzsche despised the 'weak' and their apparent moral law making but in a physical tussle with the great metaphysical thinker, wrestler and moral corner-stone that is Plato, he would have found himself in a head lock at the hands of the Greek, in no time.
TripolarProductions 2 years ago
Check out the video on titled "Nietzsche Pops".
It'd be a better fight than you'd imagine..
Adrian101882 2 years ago
With overpopulation , freewill becomes the perfect storm.
Because i know nothing , i know that attempting to understand anything Nietzsche ever wrote will wrong me.
Did he try to understand those he never met?
The best and worst we can do is try to understand what IS.
Everything else is theory and bedtime stories.
sobertzar 2 years ago
What do you mean by the perfect storm?
thesethreekings 2 years ago
The perfect storm will encompass the earth before it gets banned :)
sobertzar 2 years ago
"The best and worst we can do is try to understand what IS"
And you are able to say that sentence because you understand what IS... So how can you be so sure that "The best and worst we can do is ..."? How can you ever know what is the best we can do?
Are you claiming knowledge or aren't you? Make up your mind.
MrCropper 2 years ago 5
Nah, I don`t like the best, the worst, or making decisions Mr Cropp :)
IS is what we learn everyday.
Certainty is subject to change.
Embrace it, for FUN FUN FUN!!!
sobertzar 2 years ago
"Certainty is subject to change."
Are you certain of that?
Moron.
MrCropper 2 years ago
Erm, Yeah i`m happy with changing my opinion as my knowledge grows
You must be a Simpleton Ballsuck.
Be a normal child and bore someone else - this one has no interest in you.
sobertzar 2 years ago
I used to be certain of God. Now I'm not. That's a certainty change :)
thesethreekings 2 years ago 2
It's badly worded, but the idea is rooted in the pre-Socratic idea of 'everything being in constant flux'.
It's not as contradictory as it sounds.
manwaring 2 years ago
"Well that depends on what your definition of 'is' IS..." - Bill Clinton
mbrat1210 2 years ago
was this aired on ITV or the BBC?
BsstBlau 2 years ago
the Beeb, I think in the mid-1980s. (No commercials see!)
barrymarshall 2 years ago
There is no free will; Hobbes thoroughly does away with that notion. Just because the process by which the chemical computer in one's skull calculates decisions is extremely complex and riddled with variables does not mean that the process itself is not governed by physics, chemistry, and the like; ergo, no (truly) free will.
Vandal556 2 years ago
excuse my spelling this is not my native lenguage
martinsamuelian 2 years ago
...to prevent dna development ineficiency. members of the family have been the most accesible but the less coherente option. human rights corelate the same way. the beter the state of all other dna posibility to exchange the more frictiferous the developement of the race. in general i see that the moral values. not religious but the ones that come from reazon are simply the way that nature show us to be the coherent way to develope. we romantizise morals but they make sence as science does
martinsamuelian 2 years ago
hou can u think values r created by man when man finds himself working 2 understand the rules of the whole (phisics biology neurology and upcoming fields andso on) science hopes 2 unveal the nxt strata of subtelty in d understanding of d whole. morality is d defining mode of evolution & is d product of our understanding of d whole. morality comes from d understanding of d whole & is our subsequent coherent responce defined by d coherence of that understanding. WE FIND AND EVOLVE OUR VALUES
martinsamuelian 2 years ago
dude, no, science and the persuit of it is man trying in vain to find an objectivity, the thing in itself, which if you are a human does not exist, the only values that exist are the ones we create for ourselves
netcyrus 2 years ago
thanks, you open my ayes to say something but is somehow complicated. i have to give examples to get the point across. we first find the unswer throug insight and then refine it through science. though in the way we wave around the line. moral brings human rights and brings order to reproduction and de efective way to pass dna. science questions it and then undestands it. we first "believe" then we know.sex within the family become prohibited without understanding why was not good?.
martinsamuelian 2 years ago
one, that does not explain why different people had different morals, two, i can't explain tottally, but what you are describing is what Nietzsche talked about in his "the geneology of morality", he called it the will to nothingness, and what you described is also a kind of geneticist's fallacy, alot of what evolutionary psychologists describe as results of evolution are completely (and more rationally) explained by cognitive theory
netcyrus 2 years ago
Nietzsche is a fun guy to read... but too many layman read him and then assume they know everything about philosophy. =/
I would suggest people to have at least a solid understanding of formal logic and read some philosophers (plato, aristotle, descartes, berkeley, locke, hume, kant, schopenhaur) before going into nietzsche to avoid misunderstanding him.
mirabileamavi 2 years ago 2
what happened to all the comments that have been thumbed down too many times?
they automatically dissapear? i want to read them! cos at the mo its just half a conversation/slanging match. :(
tommysize2 2 years ago
Please view & propagate my new video on Nietzsche's Anti-Christ.
Ontologistics 2 years ago
It's a shame to know that no one cares about real philosophy anymore.
abxurd 2 years ago 4
How do you mean?
Spishak48 2 years ago 2
Evidently at least 15,113 people do.
jameshighmore 2 years ago 3
i clicked the wrong link and just ended up here.
watched the video tho.
so this guy wanted to be ruled by some superman?
or he thought of himself as a superman and felt like he couldn't do what he wanted because of laws based on christianity. or both?
tommysize2 2 years ago
I think you may be slightly confusing the concept of "superman", so I will explain it here.
The "superman" was his concept for the man (woman) who made up his/her own values in place of the default values descended from the Judeochristian or other religion, and then took those values seriously and enriched him/herself in that self-defined value.
textovervisual 2 years ago
sounds like a recipe for disaster.
sounds like most gangsters.
as in: money is my value. fuck the law!
tommysize2 2 years ago
It is overman, overcoming something. Superman is a wrong translation.
SROBERT123 2 years ago 3
damn straight...im crawling through the thomas common translation of it at d mo and the middle english, superman etc. is pissing me off so much lol
fleisch08 2 years ago
Not overcoming but having the strength to be yourself and living without resentment.
Timurito1 2 years ago
you mean stoicism ?
And, btw, what does it mean ´ to be yourself ´? Aren´t you just a ´product´ or kind of ´reflection´ of your parents characters´ (genes) and of different thoughts and experiences you absorbed and come across over time. Haven´t you raher found yourself as an ever-changing entity with no solid state that you could possibly define as ´ being oneself ´ ?
Babalaya 2 years ago
Whe are born with certain talents for music, languages and so on. We are free to develop our virtues but we can not choose them. To become yourself is to have courage and determination to cultivate yourself to the maximum.
Timurito1 2 years ago
fair enough...
Iportant is to discover what talents you were born with and this maybe takes talent too :D
Babalaya 2 years ago