Ecurb wrote: ↑February 28th, 2021, 11:26 am
Scott wrote: ↑February 27th, 2021, 9:19 pm
interesting example. Are you physically incapable of owning a gun? In other words, if you suddenly decided you really very much wanted to own a gun, could you make that happen?
Of course I could buy a gun. I live in the land of the 2nd Amendment.
In this case, by
choosing to
not exercise your power to get a gun (and shoot people), you are more like the creature with claws (the power to get a gun and shoot people), and unlike the "weakling" without claws (i.e. one who lacks the ability to even get a gun).
Indeed, I think you deserve more credit for not shooting people with guns than someone who physically cannot get a gun. Don't you?
Ecurb wrote: ↑February 28th, 2021, 11:26 am Let's posit two mothers. One is a bear, the other a rabbit. Enter Mr. Fox, sniffing at the den and threatening to devour the babies. The bear, possessing size and great curved claws, charges at the fox and drives him away. The rabbit, having no claws with which to defend herself, also charges at the fox, kicking it with her powerful hind legs, and then racing away to get it to chase her. Who is the more noble? Is anyone (even Nietzsche) laughing at the rabbit?
If the rabbit had claws, her nobility would be less, not more.
Great point. Indeed, in addition to the self-restraint Nietzsche spoke of, I also admire and find beauty in bravery.
It is also interesting that the amount of kind self-restraint exercised is generally correlated with the level of relative power while bravery seems to be more often inversely correlated with the level power.
Your wise point can perhaps lead us to this realization: No matter the power dynamics of a situation, one can always exercise graceful beautiful admirable spiritual freedom (a.k.a. self-discipline). When one is the underdog, one can be brave and do the loving thing despite the danger and higher cost. When one is the overdog, one can exercise loving self-restraint rather than viciously dominating others (e.g. the bear not eating the babies himself) despite the ease with which they could dominate and victimize. While the fox has to worry about being harassed by a brave rabbit and a strong bear, the bear could unkindly eat the babies with much less risk and hassle. It would be so easy and risk-free for the bear to eat the delicious babies; it's as surprising as it is admirable and beautiful that the bear chooses loving self-restraint over delicious baby-eating.
As a vegetarian, I have a special personal respect for the bear's decision. I too do not eat rabbit babies. But any diet, vegetarian or otherwise, can require great grace and self-discipline to keep. Surely there are hungry days where the poor hungry bear is gazing at those delicious-looking rabbit babies but kindly and lovingly chooses not to eat them. I am really growing fond of this bear.
Scott wrote:Friedrich Nietzsche wrote:When power becomes gracious and descends into the visible — such descent I call beauty. And there is nobody from whom I want beauty as much as from you who are powerful: let your kindness be your final self-conquest. Of all evil I deem you capable: therefore I want the good from you. Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws.
"When conscious will becomes gracious and manifests from the spiritual into the physical — such self-actualization I call beauty. And there is nobody from whom I appreciate such free-spirited beauty as much as from those who are powerful: let your kindness be the ultimate expression of self-discipline (a.k.a. spiritual freedom). Of extreme unkindness and selfish egotistical domination, I deem you capable: therefore I most appreciate loving restraint from you, the powerful. Indeed, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves righteous because they had no claws."
gad-fly wrote: ↑February 28th, 2021, 7:31 pm
Scott,
I can find the following in your rephrasing:
1. power = conscious
2. descend = self-actualization
3. self-conquest = self-discipline
4. the good = loving restraint
I cannot see how you arrive at 1. On 2, the descent into visible is self-actualization? Should be actualization. On 3, self-conquest is self-discipline? Perhaps. On 4, I believe the good is more on being gracious than on restraint.
1-- I did not rephrase
power to
conscious per se, but rather to
conscious will. Would you find it more correct if instead of
conscious will I used
conscious willpower?
2. Yes, I believe self-actualization is an accurate term for the figurative descent of the figuratively heavenly spirit that is one's true self (i.e. their consciousness or non-supernatural spirit). Some would call this their 'higher self' or 'best self'.
4. Aside from self-discipline (namely loving self-restraint), what else do you believe Nietzsche means in this quote by wielding being gracious? How do you define grace? What do you see as being the relationship between grace and inner peace?
For reference, here is a link to my explanation of what the word
grace means to me:
What Grace Means to Me
gad-fly wrote: ↑February 28th, 2021, 7:31 pm
I am not one to worship idol, but I can see little room for improvement (even after all these years) on what Nietzsche has said so poignantly, tastefully, and poetically.
I don't speak German, so I wouldn't know.
I certainly think many newer translations of Nietzsche are preferable to older ones.