Nietzsche

[Animavore]

Right now I'm reading Thus Spoke Zarathustra which I just got back from my friend after nearly 2 years.

I can't believe how great this book is and that I've forgotten it.
I'm not even sure I was immersed in it the first time around. Or the second or third for that matter. This was the book that shook the cob-webs off me 5 years ago. That snapped me out of the self-destructive buzz I was on and helped me put worth into this meaningless existence. I haven't put it down all day except for the odd break every once in a while to let something sink in. I understand fully why Nietzsche is considered a dangerous philosopher. He could rattle the belief out of the faithful like apples from a tree and leave them bare and desolate. Maybe even feeling worthless for a while but, hopefully they can sweep away the despair and new fruit can grow, sweet and juicy and more ripe, lacking the bitter and sour taste of the past. I'm sure many a faithful was left weeping, the weak would've run to the arms of a preacher for comfort while the strong would despise and distrust them and curse them for their lies.






Rant over.


Edit by XC: I split this off from the What Are You Reading thread because I felt it deserved a thread of its own.

[Existentialist1844]

Right now I'm reading Thus Spoke Zarathustra which I just got back from my friend after nearly 2 years.

I can't believe how great this book is and that I've forgotten it.
I'm not even sure I was immersed in it the first time around. Or the second or third for that matter. This was the book that shook the cob-webs off me 5 years ago. That snapped me out of the self-destructive buzz I was on and helped me put worth into this meaningless existence. I haven't put it down all day except for the odd break every once in a while to let something sink in. I understand fully why Nietzsche is considered a dangerous philosopher. He could rattle the belief out of the faithful like apples from a tree and leave them bare and desolate. Maybe even feeling worthless for a while but, hopefully they can sweep away the despair and new fruit can grow, sweet and juicy and more ripe, lacking the bitter and sour taste of the past. I'm sure many a faithful was left weeping, the weak would've run to the arms of a preacher for comfort while the strong would despise and distrust them and curse them for their lies.






Rant over.

It was a really good book. Granted, some of his metaphors and language went over my head, but all-in-all, it was pretty readable. Reading Nietzsche can get confusing. The book manifested itself as the work of a very isolated and lonely man, seeking to overcome his own "demons." Maybe my interpretation is wrong.

[Animavore]

Right now I'm reading Thus Spoke Zarathustra which I just got back from my friend after nearly 2 years.

I can't believe how great this book is and that I've forgotten it.
I'm not even sure I was immersed in it the first time around. Or the second or third for that matter. This was the book that shook the cob-webs off me 5 years ago. That snapped me out of the self-destructive buzz I was on and helped me put worth into this meaningless existence. I haven't put it down all day except for the odd break every once in a while to let something sink in. I understand fully why Nietzsche is considered a dangerous philosopher. He could rattle the belief out of the faithful like apples from a tree and leave them bare and desolate. Maybe even feeling worthless for a while but, hopefully they can sweep away the despair and new fruit can grow, sweet and juicy and more ripe, lacking the bitter and sour taste of the past. I'm sure many a faithful was left weeping, the weak would've run to the arms of a preacher for comfort while the strong would despise and distrust them and curse them for their lies.






Rant over.

It was a really good book. Granted, some of his metaphors and language went over my head, but all-in-all, it was pretty readable. Reading Nietzsche can get confusing. The book manifested itself as the work of a very isolated and lonely man, seeking to overcome his own "demons." Maybe my interpretation is wrong.

The first time I read it I thought that. It shook me a bit and even made me question right and wrong. I thought the tone was bitter at first but, after a couple more reads I found that the tone was one of power and motivation. It urges you to become an individual, to break away from the sheep and carve a life out for yourself with tooth and claw against jealousy and adversary.

[Existentialist1844]

Right now I'm reading Thus Spoke Zarathustra which I just got back from my friend after nearly 2 years.

I can't believe how great this book is and that I've forgotten it.
I'm not even sure I was immersed in it the first time around. Or the second or third for that matter. This was the book that shook the cob-webs off me 5 years ago. That snapped me out of the self-destructive buzz I was on and helped me put worth into this meaningless existence. I haven't put it down all day except for the odd break every once in a while to let something sink in. I understand fully why Nietzsche is considered a dangerous philosopher. He could rattle the belief out of the faithful like apples from a tree and leave them bare and desolate. Maybe even feeling worthless for a while but, hopefully they can sweep away the despair and new fruit can grow, sweet and juicy and more ripe, lacking the bitter and sour taste of the past. I'm sure many a faithful was left weeping, the weak would've run to the arms of a preacher for comfort while the strong would despise and distrust them and curse them for their lies.






Rant over.

It was a really good book. Granted, some of his metaphors and language went over my head, but all-in-all, it was pretty readable. Reading Nietzsche can get confusing. The book manifested itself as the work of a very isolated and lonely man, seeking to overcome his own "demons." Maybe my interpretation is wrong.

The first time I read it I thought that. It shook me a bit and even made me question right and wrong. I thought the tone was bitter at first but, after a couple more reads I found that the tone was one of power and motivation. It urges you to become an individual, to break away from the sheep and carve a life out for yourself with tooth and claw against jealousy and adversary.

I agree 100%. Nietzsches whole philosophy is based on self overcoming. Ive always thought that Zarathustras own quest to become the Ubermensch represented Nietzsches own quest to become the Ubermensch-to overcome his own self. I think his work was a manifestation of his own life and quest.

[Animavore]

Right now I'm reading Thus Spoke Zarathustra which I just got back from my friend after nearly 2 years.

I can't believe how great this book is and that I've forgotten it.
I'm not even sure I was immersed in it the first time around. Or the second or third for that matter. This was the book that shook the cob-webs off me 5 years ago. That snapped me out of the self-destructive buzz I was on and helped me put worth into this meaningless existence. I haven't put it down all day except for the odd break every once in a while to let something sink in. I understand fully why Nietzsche is considered a dangerous philosopher. He could rattle the belief out of the faithful like apples from a tree and leave them bare and desolate. Maybe even feeling worthless for a while but, hopefully they can sweep away the despair and new fruit can grow, sweet and juicy and more ripe, lacking the bitter and sour taste of the past. I'm sure many a faithful was left weeping, the weak would've run to the arms of a preacher for comfort while the strong would despise and distrust them and curse them for their lies.






Rant over.

It was a really good book. Granted, some of his metaphors and language went over my head, but all-in-all, it was pretty readable. Reading Nietzsche can get confusing. The book manifested itself as the work of a very isolated and lonely man, seeking to overcome his own "demons." Maybe my interpretation is wrong.

The first time I read it I thought that. It shook me a bit and even made me question right and wrong. I thought the tone was bitter at first but, after a couple more reads I found that the tone was one of power and motivation. It urges you to become an individual, to break away from the sheep and carve a life out for yourself with tooth and claw against jealousy and adversary.

I agree 100%. Nietzsches whole philosophy is based on self overcoming. Ive always thought that Zarathustras own quest to become the Ubermensch represented Nietzsches own quest to become the Ubermensch-to overcome his own self. I think his work was a manifestation of his own life and quest.

Well Nietzsche himself believed that to understand a philosophy you shoud 'know the philosopher' ie. the person behind the philosophy. Nietzsche wasn't against laying out what we would call ad hominem attacks against other philosophers (Socrates was ugly) if he thought it was relevant to the philosophers philosophy. You could say of Nietzsche that he was a weedy and sickly man who wanted to be so much more.

[Existentialist1844]

Right now I'm reading Thus Spoke Zarathustra which I just got back from my friend after nearly 2 years.

I can't believe how great this book is and that I've forgotten it.
I'm not even sure I was immersed in it the first time around. Or the second or third for that matter. This was the book that shook the cob-webs off me 5 years ago. That snapped me out of the self-destructive buzz I was on and helped me put worth into this meaningless existence. I haven't put it down all day except for the odd break every once in a while to let something sink in. I understand fully why Nietzsche is considered a dangerous philosopher. He could rattle the belief out of the faithful like apples from a tree and leave them bare and desolate. Maybe even feeling worthless for a while but, hopefully they can sweep away the despair and new fruit can grow, sweet and juicy and more ripe, lacking the bitter and sour taste of the past. I'm sure many a faithful was left weeping, the weak would've run to the arms of a preacher for comfort while the strong would despise and distrust them and curse them for their lies.






Rant over.

It was a really good book. Granted, some of his metaphors and language went over my head, but all-in-all, it was pretty readable. Reading Nietzsche can get confusing. The book manifested itself as the work of a very isolated and lonely man, seeking to overcome his own "demons." Maybe my interpretation is wrong.

The first time I read it I thought that. It shook me a bit and even made me question right and wrong. I thought the tone was bitter at first but, after a couple more reads I found that the tone was one of power and motivation. It urges you to become an individual, to break away from the sheep and carve a life out for yourself with tooth and claw against jealousy and adversary.

I agree 100%. Nietzsches whole philosophy is based on self overcoming. Ive always thought that Zarathustras own quest to become the Ubermensch represented Nietzsches own quest to become the Ubermensch-to overcome his own self. I think his work was a manifestation of his own life and quest.

Well Nietzsche himself believed that to understand a philosophy you shoud 'know the philosopher' ie. the person behind the philosophy. Nietzsche wasn't against laying out what we would call ad hominem attacks against other philosophers (Socrates was ugly) if he thought it was relevant to the philosophers philosophy. You could say of Nietzsche that he was a weedy and sickly man who wanted to be so much more.

Well, he did have many physical problems-interestingly enough, he sort refugee in his illness. It seems as though he respected, and gained strength from his own physical illness. He writes in his autobiography "For pay heed to this-it was the in the years of my lowest vitality that I ceased to be a pessimist: the instinct for self-recovery forbade to me a philosophy of indigence and discouragement......" He always stressed turning a disadvantageous into a advantageous one. He states " he divines cures for injuries, he employs ill chances to his own adavantage; what does not kill him makes him stronger."

[Animavore]

Well Nietzsche himself believed that to understand a philosophy you shoud 'know the philosopher' ie. the person behind the philosophy. Nietzsche wasn't against laying out what we would call ad hominem attacks against other philosophers (Socrates was ugly) if he thought it was relevant to the philosophers philosophy. You could say of Nietzsche that he was a weedy and sickly man who wanted to be so much more.

Well, he did have many physical problems-interestingly enough, he sort refugee in his illness. It seems as though he respected, and gained strength from his own physical illness. He writes in his autobiography "For pay heed to this-it was the in the years of my lowest vitality that I ceased to be a pessimist: the instinct for self-recovery forbade to me a philosophy of indigence and discouragement......" He always stressed turning a disadvantageous into a advantageous one. He states " he divines cures for injuries, he employs ill chances to his own adavantage; what does not kill him makes him stronger."

The thing I like about Nietzsche is that he's such a joy to read. I recently had to put down Bing and Nothingness because I was finding it difficult to read. A lot of literal acrobatics and self-indulgent waffle just to make a point. The reason I got it was because of a series of lectures I have by Rob Solomon who basically put forward Sartres views in simple terms and that's enough for me. Kant and Spinoza have the same problem, you can shave all the waffle off and be left with a book the third of the size and saying the same thing much better. The only other philosopher I know of who is a joy to read is A.C. Grayling.
Nietzsche's books are the philosophical equivalent of a good martial arts flick. Y'know like when you first see Ong Bak in the cinema and you're all pumped up and want to just run into the nearest convent and start kicking seven shade of shit out of your worst enemies with physical flair? That's what Nietzsche does to my mind.

[Existentialist1844]

Well Nietzsche himself believed that to understand a philosophy you shoud 'know the philosopher' ie. the person behind the philosophy. Nietzsche wasn't against laying out what we would call ad hominem attacks against other philosophers (Socrates was ugly) if he thought it was relevant to the philosophers philosophy. You could say of Nietzsche that he was a weedy and sickly man who wanted to be so much more.

Well, he did have many physical problems-interestingly enough, he sort refugee in his illness. It seems as though he respected, and gained strength from his own physical illness. He writes in his autobiography "For pay heed to this-it was the in the years of my lowest vitality that I ceased to be a pessimist: the instinct for self-recovery forbade to me a philosophy of indigence and discouragement......" He always stressed turning a disadvantageous into a advantageous one. He states " he divines cures for injuries, he employs ill chances to his own adavantage; what does not kill him makes him stronger."

The thing I like about Nietzsche is that he's such a joy to read. I recently had to put down Bing and Nothingness because I was finding it difficult to read. A lot of literal acrobatics and self-indulgent waffle just to make a point. The reason I got it was because of a series of lectures I have by Rob Solomon who basically put forward Sartres views in simple terms and that's enough for me. Kant and Spinoza have the same problem, you can shave all the waffle off and be left with a book the third of the size and saying the same thing much better. The only other philosopher I know of who is a joy to read is A.C. Grayling.
Nietzsche's books are the philosophical equivalent of a good martial arts flick. Y'know like when you first see Ong Bak in the cinema and you're all pumped up and want to just run into the nearest convent and start kicking seven shade of shit out of your worst enemies with physical flair? That's what Nietzsche does to my mind.

Ever try to read The Critique of Pure Reason by Kant? I couldnt make it passed the first two pages

"It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what everyone else says in a whole book — what everyone else does not say in a whole book." Nietzsche

So yes, hes straight and to the point.

[Hermit]

Nietzsche is a master of aphorism. That, to me, is his greatest strength, but also his greatest weakness: Bricks without mortar do not a building make.

Yes, that is somewhat of an exaggeration. His critique of christianity, for instance, is relatively closely argued. My difficulty in appreciating him as a philosopher may be my pedestrian, literal, somewhat stodgy, one-small-step-at-a-time way of thinking, so I am not going to claim that he is not a good philosopher. His sizeable fan base would certainly disagree with that. It's just that the gaps between the bricks that he can't be bothered to fill in for slow plodders like me prevents me from seeing not a lot more than a consummate aphorist in him. I prefer philosophers who literally, explicitly connect their dots with lines.

[Existentialist1844]

Nietzsche is a master of aphorism. That, to me, is his greatest strength, but also his greatest weakness: Bricks without mortar do not a building make.

Yes, that is somewhat of an exaggeration. His critique of christianity, for instance, is relatively closely argued. My difficulty in appreciating him as a philosopher may be my pedestrian, literal, somewhat stodgy, one-small-step-at-a-time way of thinking, so I am not going to claim that he is not a good philosopher. His sizeable fan base would certainly disagree with that. It's just that the gaps between the bricks that he can't be bothered to fill in for slow plodders like me prevents me from seeing not a lot more than a consummate aphorist in him. I prefer philosophers who literally, explicitly connect their dots with lines.

Well, I am far from an expert on Nietzsche, so I really cant comment to your post. Though, there are many people who would not consider Nietzsche a philosopher. Either way, Ive always considered his writings as a source of inspiration during hard times. Personally, it doesnt matter whether or not hes considered a philosopher, but whether or not he affects me in a profound way.

What great quotes:

On the mountains of truth you can never climb in vain: either you will reach a point higher up today, or you will be training your powers so that you will be able to climb higher tomorrow.

I assess the power of a will by how much resistance, pain, torture it endures and knows how to turn to its advantage.

[FBM]

I was a huge Nietzsche fan when I was in undergrad philosophy. I still respect his balls to shout what others feared to think. I'm a bit wary that some of what he says could be interpreted as helpful to Social Darwinism, tho. :hum: