Sup Forums Im curious about fredrick neichze and im a bit skeptical of what biased people will write about him. IE crazy atheists going "herereere god is dead fuck religion"
Can you guys inform me on his philosophies? If there relevant or not? is there some truth behind them?
I dont know much about him. Currently begining my research on him. But i know Sup Forums seems to bring him up a lot.
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtube.com
en.wikipedia.org
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
SHILLTHREAD
WE HAD THIS THREAD 3 HOURS AGO WITH SAME PIC
NOBODY REPLY
time for your pills, friend
wtf?????
how is this a shill thread im honestly curious about him? I just figured id ask Sup Forums about it?
Seriously baffled by this one.
Nietzsche WAS an atheist philosopher, he wrote a book called The Anti Christ ffs you can't separate Nietzsche from that, anyway...
Master-Slave Morality - two types of morality for two different sets of ppl, the masters and the slaves/followers. Masters need not justify their goals, the pursuit of their great ambitions are justification in of itself, and they may do "immoral" things to achieve those ends but not perceiving those actions as immoral because the greatest moral achievement, to them, is the achievement of their goals.
Slaves resent the masters and use them as a way to reflect their own moral goodness. They are good because they are not masters (according to them) and masters should be done away with all together because they're immoral. Ya see the relevance here? They don't want to become Masters themselves, they want the Masters to become Slaves.
Nietzsche saw this slave morality as being rooted heavily with Judaism, and then Christianity and then Islam, when Masters are done away with, the Books will be our Master type thing.
okay that makes sense and I can understand that. Thank you
Nietzsche realized that atheism and "science" would become the main "belief" of the masses and throw everyone into hedonistic nihilistic lives. Without god you have low morality and will.
He wrote himself into madness trying to come up with a system to give people motivation a will to live without the need for religion or science. It didn't catch on but I personally follow his teachings along with a mix of Camus.
UBERMENSH: MAN NO LONGER BOUND BY JUDEO-CHRISTIAN MORALITY. MAN WHO HAS CREATED HIS OWN MORALITY, WITHOUT GOD.
Nietzsche saw how society was becoming secular and declared "God is dead and we have killed him." What he meant was that man was no longer relying on books of faith to codify their behaviors. This is the first step of the Ubermensch. Nietzsche theorized that man must REEVALUATE ALL MORALS WHICH HAVE RELIGIOUS JUSTIFICATION because we can no longer rely on religous text at all. He didn't say that this religious idea or that religious tenant is bad and should never be practiced, he was just saying we needed to reevaluate WHY those actions are moral actions in a secular manner.
Thank you! I'm finding this man quite interesting. I appreciate your input.
The guy wasn't nihilistic as some may say. He said that God is dead as a way of reflecting Western societies who were laicized and thus predicted a "new God" along with Dostojewski. They were right and soon ideologies poped up and the XX century is a mess.
Hardly. He had a terrible case of syphilis and went catatonic. One doesn't brood themselves into a catatonic state.
And your partially right. He recognized relgion as a core tool in the fight against nihilism, but as a simple, outdated tool whose time has come to pass and that great men will make their own morality and these men will rule the earth no matter what Government system is in place.
Did you read his works?
sage
>sage
>posts a picture
retarded newfag detected
Two or three of his books I haven't read, the rest I've read multiple times. Most I own are in poor shape and are marked and highlighted into oblivion. I'm border line obsessed with Nietzsche and philosophy, but I am by no means an expert nor authority and recommend dialogue and personal reading and research for ppl to get an understanding of Nietzsche.
Any questions? I can go on and on lol
I wanted to ask somebody who read his works. What book would you recommend for someone who wants to start their journey with Nietzsches philosophy?
I've never read a philophical book apart from Dostojewski and I'm curious about the way they're written and obviously the content.
>What book would you recommend for someone who wants to start their journey with Nietzsches philosophy?
Mein Kampf
Doesn't sound like Nietsche to me.
If I wanted to read something pseudo-intellectual I'd read exactly that and then the Turner Diaries.
none really haha, its just the more i find out about him the more Nationalism and especially hitlers national socialism clicks more. It was kind of what Nietzsche was trying to get at. How to abandon this attachment to god while preserving some form of hierarchy the would be good for mankind to adhere too.
>living to serve your own people
watch jordan peterson videos.
from what i understand, he wrote for example about the death of god, and that humans without this moral foundation, will go from nihilism to totalitarian ideologies. With science most people would just not belive enough in the mythological ideas of religion. (even if they claim to follow it) that its gone forever.
He then started to figure out how to deal with this problem. and one idea was ubermench/superhuman that would be the ideal to strive for. this is a man that can somehow create his own values. This was later exploited by hitler and used as nazi propaganda.
That doesn't make sense, Nietsche warned about ideologies and Nazism is one of them, he warned they'd take the place of God.
>>living to serve your own people
I'm sorry to say this but thats being a cuck. Todays world has nothing to with nationalism and wider society will crush you.
Here:youtube.com
Get yourself into MGTOW and understand why being a reflection of a German man of the XX century in todays world would get you trashed.
Well friend that's a tough one. When I started reading Nietzsche, as a non-college educated guy with no formal familiarity with Philosophy or it's vast history and lexicon, it was VERY tough to comprehend what I was reading, especially the English translation of a 19th century high German prose written by a master of language.
And, Nietzsche's books were written specifically to be troublesome to the common man. He expected one to be well versed in the history of thinking in order to keep up with his frantic pace.
I struggled, but I persevered because the little bits I would pick up were heavy, and they lead you on a quest for more. And I used lectures on YouTube as an aide to enrich my understanding. And I recommend that with caution because it does one no service to adopt anothers specifics ideas about Nietzsche rather than come to their own conclusion.
As far as recommending where to start reading, gimmie a min I'll think of the best one.
But without some sort of hierarchy do you think its best for mankind to just go astray?
>And I recommend that with caution because it does one no service to adopt anothers specifics ideas about Nietzsche rather than come to their own conclusion.
That's exactly why I want to read his works, I'm really interested about the concepts of Master and Slave morality and the origins of good and evil.
Once I found out the way he labels things into desirable and undesirable I started changing.It got me thinking simply.
You have to be egoistic in todays world. Focus on self-improvement. You are the most important person in this world. The rest doesn't bother you as if things go wrong you will be the frustrated one.
Mankind isn't doomed but the Western world is, there is nothing one can do and if you sacrifice yourself, you'll be the loser.
MGTOW are whiny weasel faggots. Literally the reaction to SJWs and all the same.
Easy to throw off the 'chains' of responsibility when no one would trust you with them in the first place.
He was a nihilist. He wanted to you to give up and just be resentful to everyone and everything.
> Western world is
t. not from the western world
if we let western world die. it might never come back again. i bet a system like we have, that works so well its kind a miracle that happens once every 100 000 years. the world will be dead before next time. So yea we better take some responsibility to keep it that way
Why so? I got myself into their community and despite seeing things I don't agree with I also see that they're correct on some.
Would you get married?I wouldn't.I'm a rich man and I know that in todays world the odds are stacked against me. A woman could destroy me, I'm running away from responsobility that isn't mine. Is that wrong?
How do you save it?
Based, but nu/pol/ will hate him.
This mans ideas saved western philosophy and reinvigorated the European spirit after hundreds of years of Christian slavery
>You have to be egoistic in today's world.
Right I understand that and that is true the western world has defiantly shifted into a culture of full-time egotistic materialistic seeking individuals.
This is true I do not doubt that
But might I ask and dont take this as an attack on you, Im merely just trying to pic your brain.
Do you think this is the right path for the western world and is it possible for this behavior pattern to shift again? if so what could cause this?
gotta think about the future and figure out the right path forward and analyse the values that made it good in the past. and form strong arugments so you can communicate these things to other people. you are six friends away from the president of any country. Speak what you belvie is the truth, never lie. Then vote for the political party that are closest to those values. Also get a job or invent something new. You can start by fixing the problems near you too. like tidy your room. makes the world a little less chaotic
The the exact opposite of what he said, you complete retard.
>This mans ideas saved western philosophy and reinvigorated the European spirit
Please elaborate on this. Tell me how and how he reinvigorated the european spirit because it seems to me europe is burning to the ground right now?
Not trying to insult you just trying to get a further explanation from you btw
NEITZSCHE AND THE NAZIS
youtube.com
That's the audiobook, there's a one hour documentary with visuals by the same guy but I can't find it on YouTube.
TL;DR: Many of the works of Nietzsche were tied to the Nazis, and for good reason, because they were the ideological basis for the master race.
However, Hitler had a very poor understanding of the nuances of Nietzsches work, partially because Nietzsche's sister, who was a hardline antisemite, Nazi affiliate and Nietzsche's caretaker once he became sick, edited his works to give a false impression.
It's really not that hard, everyone simply has to find their own meaning and purpose in life on an individual level. No one meaning applies to everyone.
The pattern can be shifted and will be shifted after a collapse of some sort. This happened in nazi Germany for example where the people democratically elected a dictator. An economic collapse will cause this.
I don't think it's right for such a way for the western world but it is a symptom. Nietsche said that God is dead and he is still dead. Now people believe in money and that's observed everywhere.Economic stability and societal changes cause this. It happened to Rome aswell.You should read about it's society prior to it's fall and you'll notice similarities.
I understand that changes need to start from within and myself, but how does one change the world without a chance? I'll change but will my neighbour?
Western values were hijacked and are now dead. You can talk all you wanted about them. Your daughters friend will still show her tits on TV for a bit of fame and money.
Nietzsche isn't someone you can really summarize. He never formulated any overarching theory of everything-- he actually disliked people who tried to do that. What you wrote is a vast oversimplification.
He definitely wasn't some sociopathic "might makes right" apologist for tyranny like what you wrote makes it seem. The parts you're paraphrasing were actually a critique of BOTH forms of morality. Master morality is simply immoral, while slave morality was built to glorify what the slave-type people would have done anyway.
What Nietzsche said is that people needed to advance to a point, through meditation and learning, where they could formulate their own morality, to discern their own reasons for doing things and their own motivations. Society, with the industrial revolution brought about by the scientific method basically put an end to the ability of even slightly higher-than-average intellects to derive any kind of meaning from the old stories. Basically, people needed to advance to the point where they could see God on their own.
The ubermensch wasn't a sociopath who did what he wanted. The ubermensch was someone who was good because they had learned enough to realize why they SHOULD be good.
Now there's an unbiased opinion. Holy fuck.
Your summary of master and slave morality was pretty good but I think I have to argue against your statement that NEETzsche was an atheist. From my recollection, he was an agnostic-atheist and not a militant one, from what I recall.
>agnostic-atheist
These things cancel out.
Lurk more, friendo.
I learned something new today, thanks.
How? I'm suspecting you are another christian retarded about what atheism means.
Not necessarily, but that's mainly semantics (it's possible to be atheist if you claim your agnosticism to be a mere philosophical stance):
I doubt God will check His dictionnary before sending both in Hell.
GOOD AND EVIL
What is good, and what is bad, and evil, have evolved over time. Good, used to mean reciprocation. I give you a gift, you give me back an equal gift, reciprocation, and that is good. I beat you up, you beat me up, reciprocation, and that is good. So what is bad? One who cannot reciprocate is one who is deemed bad. The individual action was not viewed as good, or moral or immoral, it was ones ability to reciprocate.
Those who can reciprocate became the masters, those that can't, the slaves. And from there, the idea of "goodness" and "badness" started to evolve differently for those two different sets of folk ultimately becoming what Nietzsche coined as The Slave-Master Moralities.
So right away we can see that the idea of good and evil is subjective as it is different for two different kinds of ppl.
With Judiasm, the crutch of the masses, the book that says the slave is good, a certain morality has become commonplace in our society. The master morality will always exist, they will always rule the world, but these days they must justify their actions in a world that is defined by JudeoChristian slave morality.
Neitzsche was able to put certain traits into the slave and master moralities.
MASTER: Focused on strength, power, ambition, growth, excellence and its pursuit.
SLAVE: Focused on the weak, sick, poor, disavows power, calls it immoral, concerned with fairness and equality.
Nietzsche thought that the Christian world view was that of the slave and the slave morality will always only be good long as they have the masters to compare themselves to but at the same time they want to do away with the masters, an inherent irony and conflict, which is why they don't thrive in life.
Things are only evil in the Christian world view because they're qualities the slave lacks and the master has.
So Christianity is the codfied philosophy of the slave. This was Nietzsche's issue with western religion. He felt to truly affirm life, man must affirm ALL LIFE
What I was taught is that agnosticism is a way which denies the possibility of proving and disporving the existence of God and that atheism is the belief that God doesn't exist.
Hence I made a mistake.
Don't call me retarded I simply made a mistake.
I jumped the gun a little bit, been on Sup Forums too long today.
Because we didn't listen, we have been simply more complacent and we strayed farther away from the superman. He was essentially the last breath and our last chance at striving to free ourselves from a slave like morality that denies our own human nature.
so you will just give up? it should be much worse before people are going to give up. your daughters friend tits is not enough. also if you give up where do you flee? , if you accepted by preposition then the human race would go extinct. Also its a good thing that you are not overpowed and get more power than others. since your view of the future might be really wrong. but on average you get something pretty good, if everyone at least tried
Nietzsche was fucking based. By far my favourite philosopher
According to Nietzsche we, in Western society, live by Slave Morality This has been inculcated in our collective psyche by Christianity. Christianity, out of power in Roman times, in order to save face, tried to fit a morality which fit their circumstances. Enslaved by the Rome, they said to be moral was to be submissive, to be lacking power. Because they had nothing, they said morality was to shun material goods and greed. Because they had to be nice to their guards or get their asses kicked, they said to be moral was to be altruistic. It was a morality of convenience, like when a fat chick says 'no....guys actually like thicc gurls!'
Nietzsche advocates going back to Master morality of the Romans, valuing courage, strength, ascension, power of will, and domination.
Now, how does this Master morality play into our everyday lives? We need to apply the Master morality into becoming an Ubermensch, or Superman.
According to Nietzsche, Slave Morality has stunted human progression. To attain greatness, and achieve the next level of humanity, you must struggle. Only through endurance, fighting, personal sacrifice and willfulness can you raise yourself up. But Slave Morality holds everyone down. Think the welfare state and gibs taking away the working man's money via income tax. This doesn't mean to be unkind....Nietzsche said his ubermensch would be kind, someone to be looked up to by everyone in the community. But NO CODDLING ALLOWED
The final measure of the good ubermensch life is this: If you are truly bettering yourself everyday...if you are truly fighting the good fight and attaining greatest, you will have no problem with Eternal Recurrence. If your life was an infinite loop and you lived every moment infinite times (including reading this), if you were living the ubermensch way you would have absolutely no problem living it infinity times. Would it be heaven or hell?
There are also agnostic-theists :)
I forgot to add to this that you should have emphasized that the characteristic of master morality is more AMORAL. It was immoral to those of slave morality. I know your text alluded to that but I write this for the sake of clarification.
Also, OP, if you are still around, I suggest you start with secondary sources since they give you a very good idea of what his general concepts are. You want to make sure you find people who, let's say, aren't retarded for lack of better words. I would suggest "The Partially Examined Life" podcast. They do a lot of heavy philosophical stuff and discuss it in a circle with various people to provide a more well-rounded perspective on the works. Most of the college lectures I have found online on Nietzsche have been pretty dull and lacking in substance. Jonathan Bowden, a self-described Nietzschian, also has at least one good talk on the subject.
I have a passive stance of things, I self improve- gather resources such as money and real estate, go to the gym, read quite a bit.
I'm not immune to my surroundings and I do help and back things that I regard as good or desirable but I do not worry about the collapse. It's easier that way.
I haven't given up, but understanding that there are things too big for a single person changes your stance.
The analogy of your daughters friends tits on TV- don't care about it, make sure your daughter isn't there and be the example in every sense. That's my view how to change things.
Good thread lads.
I also forgot to add this since it's pretty relevant due to where I am posting.
If you're going to write anything for class and don't have time to read all his shit, but still want to be unique, then write about the dwarf. Okay? Make that your focus. Seriously no lie, it's got a fucking dwarf in it.
To me Nietzsche almost feels like a motivational speaker a la Tony Robbins.
His whole deal is that your main goal in life is setting goals and trying to attain those goals
haha. yeah, I know. It is the winning hand in democracy, though.
Master morality - Consequentialism.
imo at least don't tell people to give up on western world and just focus on themselves. Since then lying for your own gains. and all other bad stuff (that will for sure get the western world down) will emerge. you might have more power than you think. So you don't want to be the one that actually help the collapse. At least avoid that
Tony read all of Nietzsche's work as well as the work of those that were subsequently influenced by him like Freud and Albert Ellis.
So yeah, Tony is kinda like the great grand kid of Nietzsche in that respect.
idiot
jeesu christ. some scam motivational speaker does not deserve that comparison. fucking leafs
please kill yourself
Love this post.
However, I'm not sold on the "advocating" of the Master morality.
IMO the Slave-Master morality is an observation, not a judgement.
I think Nietzsche was advocating that more master and less slave would be great for society because it would allow for great men to realize their gifts, but I don't think I've read anything that suggests strongly for the abolishment of the slave morality. In fact, he often holds it in reverence.
read nietsche you fucking monkey
Hey great men have plenty of great grand kids, dozens even, at least one of them could be a Tony Robbins level fag lol
Irony now is that generally leftists have the slave morality and are very often atheist. At Least that is what they virtue signal.
nietzsche is a good jumping off point for philosophy but I would recommend in a sting diversification of philosophical writings. Kierkegaard is one of my absolute favorites.
COMMON LETS ELECT LE PEN
I believe it was Schopenhauer who thought this way, not Nietzsche.
>le god is dead!
quote:
>“God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves?"
can we have a Camus thread now...
he's a moral relativist, he and all of his material is trash.
wrong he is anti that
Schopenhauer was a pessimist in that he thought that life was suffering. Underlying everything is the will to life -- thus we have desires and from these desires come suffering. Idk I wouldnt really call him a nihilist. He didn't have a moral problem with "giving up" and killing yourself, but he didn't advocate it.
So what were religions with a master mentality? Viking paganism and roman culture?
>moral absolutism isn't shit tier
It seems that way until you start to consider Social Justice as a replacement for religion.
They still have the same judaism-Christian slave morality.
He's a little recap from (((wikipedia))) I think hits the nail on the head about the Übermensch and nihilists.
Zarathustra ties the Übermensch to the death of God. While this God was the ultimate expression of other-worldly values and the instincts that gave birth to those values, belief in that God nevertheless did give meaning to life for a time. 'God is dead' means that the idea of God can no longer provide values. With the sole source of values no longer capable of providing those values, there is a real chance of nihilism prevailing.
Zarathustra presents the Übermensch as the creator of new values. In this way, it appears as a solution to the problem of the death of God and nihilism. If the Übermensch acts to create new values within the moral vacuum of nihilism, there is nothing that this creative act would not justify. Alternatively, in the absence of this creation, there are no grounds upon which to criticize or justify any action, including the particular values created and the means by which they are promulgated.
In order to avoid a relapse into Platonic idealism or asceticism, the creation of these new values cannot be motivated by the same instincts that gave birth to those tables of values. Instead, they must be motivated by a love of this world and of life. Whereas Nietzsche diagnosed the Christian value system as a reaction against life and hence destructive in a sense, the new values which the Übermensch will be responsible for will be life-affirming and creative.
OP, quit being a lazy faggot and read his books or Google it or get cliff notes.
No. There is no religion for masters, However, the pagan belief systems were not made as a reflection of moral goodness compared to your masters/slave owners/oppresors like Judaism is. So, while the pagan belief system didn't encourage master morality it also didn't discourage it, like Judeo-Christian morals do.
So with a belief system that didn't inhibit the masters to be guilty for how they acted, naturally, there was more of them. So Nietzsche seems to have prefered man when he was in that state, specifically the Greeks.
Make sense?
I guess, but I don't see how a religion based on master morality couldn't exist.
I'm not exactly sure why you wouldn't consider those pagan religions master morally in nature due to their reverence of strong characters which achieved great things and tried to emulate that (rather than Christianity for example which revered the likes of Jesus)
It couldn't exist because Master-Slave Morality wasn't a thing anyone noticed until Nietzsche noticed it and shared his observations with the world. He basically unmasked the psychology of religion before psychology was an actual field of study. So there cannot be a formal religion for masters unless we decide to invent one.
Also, you have to appreciate how rare a true master is, an Alexander The Great, Genghis Kahn or even most Popes(in Nietzsches opinion) so the idea that there would be enough of them in a tribe or even city and cooperating rather than competing long enough to form a religion based on how they thought, is kinda weak.
Could some religious belief systems be better than others for allowing masters to flourish? I would say so. You could definately make the case for some relating better to the master qualities, as you did.
But, and this is my opinion, it's just as I stated before, masters can be allowed to flourish rather than made. You can beat a master into a slave but you can never make a slave into a master, ya get me?
Also, its worth noting, that masters are more concerned with life, with living, with growing, rather than with dying and heaven. So masters, being affirmed in life, don't feel the pull of religion in the same way a slave does. Thus again preventing any kind of religion from forming,
Who /Nietzsche/ here? Gentle reminder that this guy BTFO'd Christcuckery, inspired the religion of Thelema, was the main inspiration of Evola and also the root of all postmodern philosophy, including feminist theory.
He inspired both Anarchists like Emma Goldman and Fascists like Benito Mussolini, reactionaries like Evola and progressives like Foucalt. He was a protean figure without comparison in histo
As a Christian, I personally see Nietzsche as one of the few atheists who should be well respected in the intellectual community. He actually bothered to wrestle with the philosophical problems that arise with morality when God is taken out of the picture. He understood that in order for atheism to be a coherent and consistent world view that atheists would have to find an objective standard (ontic referent) for morality in the natural world.
Yeah, what did he actually teach? Did he give prescriptions on how to live your life?
>the root of all postmodern philosophy, including feminist theory
I wish this meme would die.
Yes, but they're all metaphorical.
That's actually a deep question. Unlike a lot of other I don't think of Nietzsche so much so like a teacher as opposed to a great observer and commentor. He was different than most other philosophers in that respect.
He said his philosophy was "For None and All." A Paradox. Everyone should strive but strife is only for the few.
Should I read his books in a particular order?
Also, is there a particular translation recommended? or whatever is published in gutenberg is okay?
stop being weak
His thought has a particular evolution to it so start to finish may be the best route.
Not sure on that one mate.
Alright lad, you did enough for everyone.
Cheers.