Sup Forums, how do you feel about this man?

Sup Forums, how do you feel about this man?

He is an übermensch

Interesting read.

I feel like it was good like poetry when I was 15.
After, if you are still into it, it means you are immature as fuck.

And don't tell me "he didn't get it" you faggot.

misunderstood

I don't necessarily agree with you. At 15, I think you're still far too inexperienced in worldly matters to have means to associate with his work. His work, like many authors, should be revisted frequently.

So then what is beyond Nietzsche? To me he seems to be the most enlightened dude who ever existed? What do you read now?

edgy

Check out Schoepenhauer. Also, the Socratic/Platonic dialogues are worth reading.

defective lips?

"I am a herald of the lightning, and a heavy drop out of the cloud: the lightning, however, is the Übermensch!"

I don't think Nietzsche saw himself as an Übermensch, but rather a key player in the bringing about of his existance.

He's not bad, though he goes to hard with the colourful writing style.

Correct. He didn't see himself as an Ubermensch, just the pathfinder/guide on how to recognize one.

I read Schopenhauer befor nietzsche. To me, Schopenhauer was on a good track, but Nietzsche went beyond him and made his pessimistic worldview more life affirming.

He was a bloody genius if you get beyond fedora level understanding

But what you generally need to know is pic related


eeeh, you'll find the definition of Übermensch isn't so extreme after all, he saw himself as striving to be, which basically already is it.

OK. How about the Socratic/Platonic dialogues?

Makes pretty good oatmeal

Um. I never said it was an extreme definition. Also, striving to be something, and being that thing you strive to be, are not the same thing.

I haven't delved to deep into the ancient Greeks. Definitely planning on it. I started with the 16th century philosophers and worked my way to the modern day. I need to go back to the basics to get a better foundation though. Do you have any specific recommendations?

I'd start with the works I've twice mentioned and let your interests dictate what you read next.

>Schopenhauer was on a good track

>literally Schopenhauer
>life is an accident generating sorrow that just should not have happened
>the best option is to create no more life

Do tell how Schopenhauer was on a good track. How is the negation of life any way forward? Schopenhauer on his outlook to life is a dead end. We must not shun him though, even Nietzsche understood. Schopenhauer is right, Life is suffering. Nietzsche saw that not as something to give in to, but as a challenge. If you shall be, then identify with that which transcends the suffering of the world.

>I think you're still far too inexperienced in worldly matters to have means to associate with his work

Pretty much the contrary.
His life was a joke. First of all.
Migraines, no sexuality, almost blind.
There's something more pathetic than tragic.
He's one of the best German stylish though.
The lack of system is also problematic.
It's beautiful, but that's all.

I meant that most believe the Übermensch to be something extreme in it concept, when it really isn't.


Second part: yes, for Nietzsches Übermensch it is.

big fan, though his philosophy is incomplete

My god, when did Sup Forums start turning into /lit/?

Keep doing God's work anons.

If you are striving for something, that means you recognize that you are inherently not that thing you strive for. No, they are not the same.

If you say so, user.

the Vedas for white people

well, thanks for the contradiction that never came mate.

No problem, o' exalted and prodigious genius. Oops. That was Nietzsche.

I think people put too much faith in figures

I think he added to the human meta spirit and culture, most philosopher do that anyway, but most philosophies thought up never pan out perfectly.

Our world will never be perfect or have total sense or control, humans are both rational and irrational. We can do great things together or we do very terrible things, and it's goes back and forth with no patern.

Philosophers I think really want the world to have set meta motions to see continuos logical growth with no breakdown, and that is impossible.

But philosophy will go on as we continue to exist, some person will always think they know the answer or the patern to live in harmony.