Happy New Year! The January Philosophy Book of the Month is The Runaway Species. Discuss it now.

The February Philosophy Book of the Month is The Fourth Age by Byron Reese (Nominated by RJG.)

Who Is God?

Discuss philosophical questions regarding theism (and atheism), and discuss religion as it relates to philosophy. This includes any philosophical discussions that happen to be about god, gods, or a 'higher power' or the belief of them. This also generally includes philosophical topics about organized or ritualistic mysticism or about organized, common or ritualistic beliefs in the existence of supernatural phenomenon.
User avatar
SimpleGuy
Posts: 338
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 12:28 pm

Re: Who Is God?

Post by SimpleGuy » July 25th, 2018, 12:59 pm

The corresponding link writes as well:

https://www.thoughtco.com/nietzsche-and-nihilism-250454

Describing nihilism isn't the same as advocating nihilism, so is there any sense in which Nietzsche did the latter? As a matter of fact, he could be described as a nihilist in a normative sense because he regarded the "death of God" as being ultimately a good thing for society. As mentioned above, Nietzsche believed that traditional moral values, and in particular those stemming from traditional Christianity, were ultimately harmful to humanity. Thus, the removal of their primary support should lead to their downfall — and that could only be a good thing.

Fooloso4
Moderator
Posts: 3557
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Who Is God?

Post by Fooloso4 » July 25th, 2018, 2:09 pm

SimpleGuy:
I think you simply tend to misinterpretate nietzsche where the case seems to be quite clear better read his Götzendämmerung to realize that the nihiilsm cannot be a transitional state from the simple fact that any tendency to any other state has nothing to do with the dynamics of nihilism.
When he says, as you quoted (in German for some inexplicable reason that I suspect is nothing more than obfuscation):
… the universe seems to have lost value, seems "meaningless"-but that is only a transitional stage. (7)
being a simple guy I take this to mean what it says unless there is textual evidence to the contrary.

The dynamics of nihilism are part of a larger dynamic, the dynamic of self-overcoming.

You point to Twilight of the Idols (by its German title). About nihilists he says:
There I have caught you, nihilist! The sedentary life is the very sin against the Holy Spirit. Only thoughts reached by walking have value. (Maxims and Arrows, 34)
Don’t be misled by his ironic appeal to the Holy Spirit. Heed what he says about thoughts reached by walking being the only thoughts that have value. One cannot follow the path of his thoughts without walking them.
By the way if you don't believe my interpretation of the cited text. How about the following webpage in english:

https://www.thoughtco.com/nietzsche-and-nihilism-250454

The first sentence says:
There is a common misconception that the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche was a nihilist.
SimpleGuy:
We could also categorize Nietzsche as a nihilist in the descriptive sense that he saw that many people in society around him were effectively nihilists themselves.
That he saw the pervasiveness of nihilism does not make him a nihilist any more than watching a basketball game makes me a basketball player.
Many, if not most, probably wouldn't admit to it, but Nietzsche saw that the old values and old morality simply didn't have the same power that they once did.
I do not know what most would admit or its relevance. Not only did Nietzsche see that the old values and old morality simply didn't have the same power that they once did, he sees that they have gone from being a source of strength to a source of weakness. Hence the need to reject them, to say no to them. But such nay-saying is not an end in itself but rather a necessary step in the creation of new values.

The cited text claims :
Once again, though, he parts company with nihilists in that he did not argue that everything deserves to be destroyed. He was not simply interested in tearing down traditional beliefs based on traditional values; instead, he also wanted to help build new values. He pointed in the direction of a "superman" who might be able to construct his own set of values independent of what anyone else thought.
This supports what I have said and stands in opposition to your claim that:
So nihilism is his alternative. Which he then tries to develop a real philosophical standpoint for his own in this works.
And:
… nihiilsm cannot be a transitional state.
If, as the article you quote says, the tearing down of traditional values is to be followed by the building of new values, then nihilism (the tearing down or destruction or saying no to traditional values) is a transitionary stage from the old to the new.

User avatar
SimpleGuy
Posts: 338
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 12:28 pm

Re: Who Is God?

Post by SimpleGuy » July 25th, 2018, 2:16 pm

Just if you don't accept nihilism as a value for itself deary , which implies that there cannot be a real transition to anything. I qoute in german the will to power:

Der Nihilismus als psychologischer Zustand hat noch
eine dritte und letzte Form. Diese zwei Einsichten
unsres streben, dass mit dem Werden nichts erzielt werden
soll und dass unter allem Werden, keine grosse Einheit
waltet, in der der Einzelne völlig untertauchen darf wie
in einem Element höchsten Werthes: so bleibt als
Ausflucht übrig, diese ganze Welt des Werdens als
Täuschung zu verurtheilen und eine Welt zu erfinden,
welche jenseits derselben liegt, als wahre Welt. Sobald
aber der Mensch dahinterkommt, wie nur aus psychologischen
Bedürfnissen diese Welt gezimmert ist und
wie er dazu ganz und gar kein Recht hat, so entsteht
die letzte Form des Nihilismus, welche den Unglauben
an eine metaphysische Welt in sich schliesst, —

This text claims then, nihilism as a transition into itself as a last consequence.

User avatar
SimpleGuy
Posts: 338
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 12:28 pm

Re: Who Is God?

Post by SimpleGuy » July 25th, 2018, 2:22 pm

Not only that in his work will to power the belief in the categories of reasoning, is the true source of nihilism. I cite in german:

Resultat: Der Glaube an die Vernunft-Kategorien
ist die Ursache des Nihilismus, — wir haben
den Werth der Welt an Kategorien gemessen, welche
sich auf eine rein fingierte Welt beziehen.

User avatar
SimpleGuy
Posts: 338
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 12:28 pm

Re: Who Is God?

Post by SimpleGuy » July 25th, 2018, 2:24 pm

And even one of his results just support this thought:

Schluss-Resultat: Alle Werthe, mit denen wir bis
jetzt die Welt zuerst uns schätzbar zu machen gesucht
haben und endlich ebendamit entwerthet haben, als
sie sich als unanlegbar erwiesen — alle diese Werthe
sind, psychologisch nachgerechnet, Resultate bestimmter
Perspektiven der Nützlichkeit zur Aufrechterhaltung und
Steigerung menschlicher Herrschafts-Gebilde: und nur
fälschlich projicirt in das Wesen -der Dinge. Es ist
immer noch die hyperbolische Naivetät des
Menschen, sich selbst als Sinn und Wertmass der Dinge
anzusetzen.

So all values are just existent to support man made psychological premises for power.

User avatar
SimpleGuy
Posts: 338
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 12:28 pm

Re: Who Is God?

Post by SimpleGuy » July 25th, 2018, 2:28 pm

If you don't put much value on the will to power book of nietzsche and try to support your argumentation via beyond good and evil as a book, this may seem different. The problem is the will to power book is by far more postulating a direct viewpoint than the book beyond good and evil.

User avatar
SimpleGuy
Posts: 338
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 12:28 pm

Re: Who Is God?

Post by SimpleGuy » July 25th, 2018, 2:35 pm

In his will to power nihilism is a transitional state but this state cannot be left, because there is no truth for nietzsche in his will to power:

Der ' Nihilismus stellt einen pathologischen
Zwischenzustand dar (pathologisch ist die unheure
Verallgemeinerung, der Schluss auf gar keinen
Sinn): sei es, dass die produktiven Kräfte noch nicht
stark genug sind, — sei es, dass die decadence noch
zögert und ihre Hilfsmittel noch nicht erfunden hat.
Voraussetzung dieser Hypothese: — Dass
es keine Wahrheit giebt; dass es keine absolute
Beschaffenheit der Dinge, kein „Ding an sich" giebt. —
Dies ist selbst nur Nihilismus, und zwar der
extremste. Er legt den Werth der Dinge gerade
dahinein, dass diesen Werthen keine Realität entspricht
und entsprach, sondern dass sie nur ein Symptom von
Kraft auf Seiten der Werth-Ansetzer sind, eine Simplifikation
zum Zweck des Lebens.

But as you see this transition is never left, the premises for nietzsche is, that ther is no truth about the absolute structure of things. De facto this state cannot be passed. Is a final state and a transition. Values are just claiming power on the side of the persons who define the values (Werth-Ansetzer),
real values are simply non-existent.

User avatar
SimpleGuy
Posts: 338
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 12:28 pm

Re: Who Is God?

Post by SimpleGuy » July 25th, 2018, 2:57 pm

So these new values are simply non permanent or persistent in society , nihilism is then a periodic state and after nietzsche the reality, due to the fact that they are made (Kraft auf Seiten) due to the power of the defining people (Werth-Ansetzer) as a simplification for their life reasoning. That means they are simply not constructed out of altruistic reasons, but for personal profit and with it will fail as false moral. Although values may seem not bad they turn out to fail a test for persistent realism.

User avatar
SimpleGuy
Posts: 338
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 12:28 pm

Re: Who Is God?

Post by SimpleGuy » July 25th, 2018, 3:05 pm

And i still have to recite it, who believes in the categories of reason, believes after nietzsche in nihilism.

Again:

Resultat: Der Glaube an die Vernunft-Kategorien
ist die Ursache des Nihilismus, — wir haben
den Werth der Welt an Kategorien gemessen, welche
sich auf eine rein fingierte Welt beziehen.


Translated:
As a result: The belief in the categories of reasoning
is the the cause of nihilism- we have measured the value
of this world in categories, which do rely on a totally
faked(cheating/decieving) world.

So every transition is removed through reasoning into nihilism.

User avatar
AresKenux
New Trial Member
Posts: 16
Joined: July 19th, 2018, 1:33 pm

Re: Who Is God?

Post by AresKenux » July 25th, 2018, 5:37 pm

To know what God is at the beginning, you have to start at the end.

When i was psycho-religious, in other words delusionally religious, i wrote this.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=12yzVW ... c44D24Yflg

Take much of it with a grain of salt, but there are some good points there.

But if you want a direct answer?
"Nearly all religions were brought to people
And imposed on people by conquerors
And used as the framework to control their mind
My main point here is that if you are a child of God
And God is a part of you, then in your imagination
God is supposed to look like you
And when you accept a picture of the deity assigned to you
By another people, you become the spiritual prisoner of that other people." - John Henrik Clarke

So to me, God is life. Life is what you make of it. God must be life itself. I don't read the bible anymore, much of it seems filtered through a biased lens after being transliterated. But regardless, nature, stoicism, asceticism, existentialism. Even animism. But in my mind, morality is absolute and universally applicable. That which heals absolutely and only harms that which is largely harmful, is God. And every harmful action can be reversed, as long as you change your mind,choose not to do it again, and get right with life.

Of course except for blasphemy of the holy spirit, i think you can only do that when the antichrist arrives through lightning in the sky claiming to be God Himself.

Fooloso4
Moderator
Posts: 3557
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Who Is God?

Post by Fooloso4 » July 25th, 2018, 6:00 pm

SimpleGuy:
I cite in german …
Please don’t. This is an English speaking forum, use English. This is not chauvinism, it is simply that the majority of participants do not speak or read German. If you wish to be understood then speak the language that people here will understand.

And please use references so that others can read the quoted material in context.
The problem is the will to power book is …
The Will to Power is not a book. It is a collection of notes. Nietzsche was an extremely careful writer, one should not mistake his notes for a book.
In his will to power nihilism is a transitional state …
That is a step in the right direction.
… but this state can not be left
The text you quote calls it an “intermediary state”. If cannot be an intermediary state unless it is a state from something to something else.
But as you see this transition is never left, the premises for nietzsche is that there is no truth about the absolute structure of things.
You are correct with regard to what Nietzsche calls “deadly truths”:
... the sovereignty of becoming, the fluidity of all concepts, the lack of any cardinal difference between man and animal (Untimely Meditations,
Uses and Disadvantages of History for Life
, 9)
but the transition out of the state of nihilism is not dependent on an absolute structure of things.

Nietzsche identifies two causes of nihilism:
1. The higher species is lacking, i.e., those whose inexhaustible fertility and power keep up the faith in man. (One should recall what one owes to Napoleon: almost all of the higher hopes of this century.)

2. The lower species ("herd," "mass," "society") unlearns modesty and blows up its needs into cosmic and metaphysical values. In this way the whole of existence is vulgarized: in so far as the mass is dominant it bullies the exceptions, so they lose their faith in themselves and become nihilists. (Will to Power, Nihilism, 27)
He continues:
Main proposition. How complete nihilism is the necessary consequence of the ideals entertained hitherto.

Incomplete nihilism; its forms: we live in the midst of it.

Attempts to escape nihilism without revaluating our values so far: they produce the opposite, make the problem more acute. (28)
The overcoming of nihilism is only accomplished by the “higher species” of man. Those for whom the deadly truths do not lead to pessimism and nihilism, those who still value valuing and take as their task the revaluation of values.

SimpleGuy:
… real values ​​are simply non-existent…
Nietzsche’s denial of absolute, eternal, unchanging values is not a denial of values per se. His call for the revaluation of values is necessary because it is of value to us.
So these new values … [are] for personal profit …
On the contrary, Nietzsche says:
THE REAL PHILOSOPHERS, HOWEVER, ARE COMMANDERS AND LAW-GIVERS; they say: "Thus SHALL it be!" They determine first the Whither and the Why of mankind, and thereby set aside the previous labour of all philosophical workers, and all subjugators of the past - they grasp at the future with a creative hand, and whatever is and was, becomes for them thereby a means, an instrument, and a hammer. Their "knowing" is CREATING, their creating is a law-giving, their will to truth is - WILL TO POWER. - Are there at present such philosophers? Have there ever been such philosophers? MUST there not be such philosophers some day? . (Beyond Good and Evil, aphorism 211)

It is always more obvious to me that the philosopher, as a man INDISPENSABLE for the morrow and the day after the morrow, has ever found himself, and HAS BEEN OBLIGED to find himself, in contradiction to the day in which he lives; his enemy has always been the ideal of his day. Hitherto all those extraordinary furtherers of humanity whom one calls philosophers - who rarely regarded themselves as lovers of wisdom, but rather as disagreeable fools and dangerous interrogators - have found their mission, their hard, involuntary, imperative mission (in the end, however, the greatness of their mission), in being the bad conscience of their age. In putting the vivisector's knife to the breast of the very VIRTUES OF THEIR AGE, they have betrayed their own secret; it has been for the sake of a NEW greatness of man, a new untrodden path to his aggrandizement (212).

User avatar
SimpleGuy
Posts: 338
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 12:28 pm

Re: Who Is God?

Post by SimpleGuy » July 26th, 2018, 5:51 am

May be you seem to know how he thought. I and Nietzsche were'nt in need of cannibal nazi gods like yours. He was sick of your adorno interpretation of nietzsche as well as i am , you simple seem to neglect the fact where he came from and what he told us.

User avatar
SimpleGuy
Posts: 338
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 12:28 pm

Re: Who Is God?

Post by SimpleGuy » July 26th, 2018, 5:59 am

Why don't you cite the bible , to proof that nietzsche was wrong and nietzsche was allowed to interpretate this in a different way?

This could match at least your understanding.

User avatar
SimpleGuy
Posts: 338
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 12:28 pm

Re: Who Is God?

Post by SimpleGuy » July 26th, 2018, 6:04 am

You should better edit OOlon Coluphids:

Where NIetzsche was wrong?
Whats is this Nietzsche stuff anyway?
Who is this Nietzsche for me?

Becaus you don't cite him.
He claimed that nihilism can be derived from pure logical implication. But it "true" you garganturan argumentator. He was wron by beeing no nihilist.

User avatar
SimpleGuy
Posts: 338
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 12:28 pm

Re: Who Is God?

Post by SimpleGuy » July 26th, 2018, 6:12 am

Why don't you realize that nietzsche is no moralist but even wrote works like the antichrist by him? If you don't get this just look at this link.

https://infidels.org/library/modern/tra ... hrist.html

Post Reply