And why do you consider Nietzsche a screwball?Wayne92587 wrote:The only reason to read Nietzsche is if you are curious as to why a screwball can be so famous.
Discuss Beyond Good and Evil
-
- Posts: 11
- Joined: March 16th, 2013, 11:07 am
Re: Discuss Beyond Good and Evil
-
- Posts: 1780
- Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Hermese Trismegistus
Re: Discuss Beyond Good and Evil
- Wrongnut
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 5
- Joined: April 7th, 2013, 8:28 am
Re: Discuss Beyond Good and Evil
All great philosophers must be "screwballs" to some extent. One who presents no new or unfamiliar ideas, and seeks merely to justify the status quo, would be, and is, simply a commentator.Wayne92587 wrote:The only reason to read Nietzsche is if you are curious as to why a screwball can be so famous.
In Nietzsche's case the appearance of madness may be extreme since his target is the very nature of our language and culture. His position is that our language has become saturated with Judeo-Christian "slave" morality which, motivated by jealousy and fear, has caused an inversion of values and seeks to retard the exceptional. Consequently, European man is driven towards mediocrity, most especially by the English (more accurately, Scottish) Enlightenment thinkers; all acheivement, all success, even improvement is tainted by a sense of isolation and guilt. One cannot lead, Nietzsche argues, unless one rises above herd morality, and goes...
BGE is not intended to explain, still less to instruct. As mentioned, many of Nietzsche's works do aim to describe his theories. Personally, I recommend On Truth and Falsehood in a Non-Moral Sense for his epistemology, and (of course) The Genealogy of Morals for the historical and ontological background. BGE is intended to be read by those who have already seen through the facade of morality, and have set themselves on a path toward the Will To Power. It cannot be an instructive work; he is not "preaching to the choir". The nature of that cliche itself should be enough to explain why. In writing this book Nietzsche is attempting to enter into a discussion with the "philosophers of the future", with those he refers to as "We few"/"We Immoralists"/"We free-spirits". In short, with those who belong to the Master race. For this reason, I believe that BGE is a poor choice for the discussion of Nietzsche's work.
Incidentally, isn't expressing curiousity about a person's fame itself a cause of their infamy?
-
- Posts: 1076
- Joined: October 18th, 2012, 5:30 am
Re: Discuss Beyond Good and Evil
Full article at slate.com/articles/arts/culturebox/2011 ... ingle.htmlNietzsche, oddly, has suffered a similar fate. Because of his assault on religion and rationalist metaphysics, and because of the hints of anarchy in his assorted visions of the future (e.g., "the transvaluation of all values"), he's taken as the West's über-nihilist. But he saw himself as the scourge of European nihilism, and possibly also its remedy. Nietzsche saw nihilism as a disease, which grows from, in Alexander Nehamas' words, "the assumption that if some single standard is not good for everyone and all time, then no standard is good for anyone at any time." It presents itself as mindless hedonism and flaccid spirit, but also as fanaticism.
- Barnabas
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 8
- Joined: April 8th, 2013, 12:22 pm
Re: Discuss Beyond Good and Evil
- Mishimas
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 1
- Joined: April 8th, 2013, 7:34 pm
Re: Discuss Beyond Good and Evil
-
- Posts: 1780
- Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Hermese Trismegistus
Re: Discuss Beyond Good and Evil
Yes and No!
First, what some believe to be God's Law, Moral Law, is not God's Law.
As far as God is concerned the Only Good Law is No Law, Boundlessness, Freedom, Absolute Freedom of Motion.
Moral Law is born of the sel-fish righteousness of the Pharos, the Pharaoh, the Pharisees, is an abomination, Blasphemous.
Moral Law, the purpose of which is to bring order to the chaos caused by Freedom, is not only an abomination; moral Law is a dismal failure in its l attempt to bring any order to the chaos, Moral Law flying in the Face of God’s Law of Boundlessness.
Would that I could, I would destroy Moral Law.
Being Immoral is not the answer; the answer is to be like God, Amoral; God having no knowledge of Good and Evil.
-
- Posts: 21
- Joined: April 10th, 2012, 9:39 pm
Re: Discuss Beyond Good and Evil
Regarding the Will To Power, beware this was Nietzsche’s last published work but was not published by him. His sister put it together for him while he was basically catatonic and unfortunately published it with her own agenda, she twisted some of his aphorisms to suit the neo Nazi way of thinking back then that was prominent in Germany and is probably why he didn’t receive the publicity that he would have wanted throughout the western world.
- Barnabas
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 8
- Joined: April 8th, 2013, 12:22 pm
Re: Discuss Beyond Good and Evil
Dogmatic? Metaphysical? No offense intended, but I think you are a perfect candidate for the criticisms that Nietzsche had subjected philosophers to!(Nested quote removed.)
First of all the Christ was not sent to abolish the Jewish law but fulfill it (Math 5:17).
(Nested quote removed.)
1. First prove God's existence. 2. Prove that morality is not God's law, morality has been instrumental in generating social cohesion which is an adaptive in the survival of the fittest.
(Nested quote removed.)
What of fatalism, the subconscious, coercion, environmental constraints, genetics etc?
(Nested quote removed.)
As long as culture exists morality exists as well according to the practices of a particular culture how can you then attribute the origins of morality to the Pharos? Modern day Freemasonry perhaps?
(Nested quote removed.)
In the absence of social standards, there is no meaning, no meaning no emotional gratification, no emotional gratification NIHILISM
(Nested quote removed.)
Then destroy humanity as well!
(Nested quote removed.)
-
- Posts: 131
- Joined: August 22nd, 2012, 7:31 am
Re: Discuss Beyond Good and Evil
The 4 defendents testified someone else had already been executed for their crimes (therefore conviction would itself be a contempt of that court).
Of course they followed the whole pack of inevitably inconsistent "accordings" up and the alleged grave was empty so effectively that was it.
- Scribbling2much
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 7
- Joined: April 21st, 2013, 11:24 am
Re: Discuss Beyond Good and Evil
-- Updated April 21st, 2013, 12:03 pm to add the following --
I would like to suggest that Nietsche sees "society" as a false morality, an easy way to call oneself moral. Without ever being willing to see ourselves as we are, seeing all the ways that we rescue ourselves from our sense of inadequacy, we cannot be moral beings. Religion simplifies morality, tries to make it easier than it really is. It works for most people, and allows for a semblance of order in society, yet the human breaks through, and destruction ensues. It is the consequence of the limitations we place on ourselves, and of all types of false morality. To be moral we must see beyond formulas for morality. Constructs cannot achieve morality, nor can seeing humanity in part. We must be honest about the inadequacy of everything we have done thus far to attempt to create a moral society, religion and philosophy included. None of it has made us wholly moral as individuals, or as societies. We are terrified to live without these false structures, for good reason. But we can never be whole, moral beings until we shed them.
- Rayliikanen
- Posts: 136
- Joined: May 22nd, 2013, 10:31 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Socrates
- Location: British Columbia
- Contact:
Re: Discuss Beyond Good and Evil
- Hereandnow
- Posts: 2839
- Joined: July 11th, 2012, 9:16 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: the moon and the stars
Re: Discuss Beyond Good and Evil
You realize you're talking about the man who is at the very foundation of postmodern thought. You simply cannot diss Nietzsche so blithely. He is great because he took the rationalists and the Christians to task. You should read Geneology of Morals or Twilght of the Idols and The AntiChrist. N is without mercy; the master of suspicion, as they say. I am not a follower, but I am a fan. Truth? What if truth were a woman? Not very kind to women, but what if truth were not this steady dependable compass of the Real as rationalists thought. What if it were just a tool for constructing a life--irrational, fickled, unsure. what if truth were a mere part of human values and not its centerpiece? What if style ruled, and those who were special were extaordinary, the aristocratic few, the ubermensch? N hated Socrates, didn't he? It was because Socrates was all about containing, circumscribing and devaluing this world! Ugh!--Christianity and its Platonism!The only reason to read Nietzsche is if you are curious as to why a screwball can be so famous.
- Rayliikanen
- Posts: 136
- Joined: May 22nd, 2013, 10:31 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Socrates
- Location: British Columbia
- Contact:
Re: Discuss Beyond Good and Evil
I'll visit my favorite bookstore and see if I can pick up those works you mentioned by Neitzsche. I'm a Christian, but not a Platonist, certainly not a Creationist, and I'm not a member of any organized religion. I force myself to try and keep an open mind. Maybe I'm not forcing myself to appreciate Neitzsche enough and I'm letting my preconceptions warp my reading of him. I've forced myself to appreciate Kant, so anything is possible.
- Hereandnow
- Posts: 2839
- Joined: July 11th, 2012, 9:16 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: the moon and the stars
Re: Discuss Beyond Good and Evil
2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
2023 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023