A(nother) Follower Of Nietzsche

[HexHammer]

Affirmation of life means asserting that life exists? or that life is true?

This is either a buzz word meaning something different than the normal definition of 'affirm' or else a senseless statement. I am not, like hex, trolling here. But a cliche, catch phrase, bromide, or banner is not enough for a philosophical discussion. Still sounds an awful lot like 'happiness' to me.

Asking for proof of relevance isn't trolling, thanks!

[Enigma3]

The opposite of pessimism is optimism (I'm pretty sure), which brings us back to my first statement - optimism is for believers. I see optimistic people as happy, but if you insist, I'll give up 'happy' for 'optimistic.' Again, I'll never understand optimistic nihilists - I'm not denying that they may exist, I'll just never understand them. Optimism implies hope and I'm not sure what they have to hope for, except perhaps immediate gratification of the senses. That trails off somewhat as you age.

You are putting your words in my mouth, Wyman. That is not what I said.

-

[Wyman]

The opposite of pessimism is optimism (I'm pretty sure), which brings us back to my first statement - optimism is for believers. I see optimistic people as happy, but if you insist, I'll give up 'happy' for 'optimistic.' Again, I'll never understand optimistic nihilists - I'm not denying that they may exist, I'll just never understand them. Optimism implies hope and I'm not sure what they have to hope for, except perhaps immediate gratification of the senses. That trails off somewhat as you age.

You are putting your words in my mouth, Wyman. That is not what I said.

-

The clearest way to put it is that it is the opposite of Schopenhauer-ian pessimism --or pessimism in general (such as many Britons exhibit) without the philosophical implications, if you like.

That's what I was referring to - 'it is the opposite of... pessimism in general....' That's optimism by any definition. I don't begrudge you being an optimist. Have at it!

[Melchior]

Hello to all. I consider myself a philosopher by natural inclination. I really love good ideas in general. Like the idea in physics that there are many possible worlds or universes or histories and all of the possibilities that are latent in nanotechnology and potential alien life on other planets (or living in space somehow, like the Gods) and this type of thing.

My favorite book is Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil. In my opinion it is one of the greatest books ever written. Of course I am prejudiced because after all I am a Modern like most of us (in that we are all skeptical of grand metaphysical systems).

Anyone who loves philosophy and great literature should love Beyond Good and Evil, the epochal book of modernity in which nearly the entire range of Nietzsche's mature philosophy is on display. The R.J. Hollingdale translation with running commentary (located at the end) is the best edition. The commentary is necessary if only as a beginning, and the text is a serious piece of artistic workmanship. But I don't believe anyone can grasp all that there is to grasp without also reading Kaufman's edition, which contains footnotes as well as a totally different approach in the translation.

But who can be such an individual as the type that Nietzsche calls for? apparently no one. The best ideas are the ones that nobody can bear. The Will to Power, his Schopenhauerian adaptation gets 'the hottest and most beautiful women in his bed, at its service. (The quote "Supposing truth were a woman, what then?", is the first sentence of the book.) Nobody seems to want to be this heated tragic hero of modernity, they seem to shun the idea of it.

To me its important to begin with Schopenhauer where nature is pointless and indifferent to human wishes. Nature is harsh and understanding is to suffer. And Nietzsche's Will to Power ideas are the proper correction of Schopenhauer's pessimism.

I love Nietzsche's and Schopenhauer's basic ideas because they coincide with the thrust of modernity that, we're on our own in the universe; it's up to us and not some resurrected (allegedly) god-man to save us. I love nihilism for what it does to us (hint: there will be no survivors) and I love modernity for the opportunities it provides me.

Thanks for reading.

Hollingdale's translations are excrement (I know, because I have made my own and checked his translations word for word). Nietzsche was a self-righteous, arrogant asshole by today's standards. If you 'like' him you clearly do not understand him.

Unlike what you say (that his ideas 'coincide with the thrust of modernity') he opposed everything 'modern', and by no means was he a 'philosopher'. He was a child of Victorian times and looked up to aristocrats and hated the common man. He was not one of us, and thought himself superior to everyone around him. He probably was. You should hate him. I don't, because I am just like him.

[Melchior]

Since you are such a fan, you should easily be able to enlighten me how Nietzsche has relevance for modern time, never understood the fascination.

Please do!

How ironic! He is not 'one of us'!

[HexHammer]

Since you are such a fan, you should easily be able to enlighten me how Nietzsche has relevance for modern time, never understood the fascination.

Please do!

How ironic! He is not 'one of us'!

Could you stop trolling? Just answer the damn question, it's a very simple question, yet you keep dodging.

[Ginkgo]

Overall I think Nietzsche wants to say that we live in a universe of clockwork precision. It is very much Newtonian, mechanical, fragmented, predictable and disconnected and very mundane. Nietzsche would probably say that we have lost our soul (figuratively speaking in the case of Nietzsche) in the face of modernism. In other words, in Newtonian universe there is no need to search for any sort of transcendental or higher standards- we have killed them off, "God is dead" we have pulled the rug out from under our own feet.

So I think Wyman is correct when he says that life is true and it exists. I am sure Nietzsche would agree with him, but the problem for Nietzsche is to reestablish meaning now we have unwittingly pulled everything apart.

Having said the above I haven't read Nietzsche for a long time. I may have to go back and have another look at his works.

[Melchior]

Since you are such a fan, you should easily be able to enlighten me how Nietzsche has relevance for modern time, never understood the fascination.

Please do!

How ironic! He is not 'one of us'!

Could you stop trolling? Just answer the damn question, it's a very simple question, yet you keep dodging.

To whom is that remark addressed?

[HexHammer]

To whom is that remark addressed?

Your mom?

[Melchior]

To whom is that remark addressed?

Your mom?

You're a moron.

[Wyman]

Hello to all. I consider myself a philosopher by natural inclination. I really love good ideas in general. Like the idea in physics that there are many possible worlds or universes or histories and all of the possibilities that are latent in nanotechnology and potential alien life on other planets (or living in space somehow, like the Gods) and this type of thing.

My favorite book is Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil. In my opinion it is one of the greatest books ever written. Of course I am prejudiced because after all I am a Modern like most of us (in that we are all skeptical of grand metaphysical systems).

Anyone who loves philosophy and great literature should love Beyond Good and Evil, the epochal book of modernity in which nearly the entire range of Nietzsche's mature philosophy is on display. The R.J. Hollingdale translation with running commentary (located at the end) is the best edition. The commentary is necessary if only as a beginning, and the text is a serious piece of artistic workmanship. But I don't believe anyone can grasp all that there is to grasp without also reading Kaufman's edition, which contains footnotes as well as a totally different approach in the translation.

But who can be such an individual as the type that Nietzsche calls for? apparently no one. The best ideas are the ones that nobody can bear. The Will to Power, his Schopenhauerian adaptation gets 'the hottest and most beautiful women in his bed, at its service. (The quote "Supposing truth were a woman, what then?", is the first sentence of the book.) Nobody seems to want to be this heated tragic hero of modernity, they seem to shun the idea of it.

To me its important to begin with Schopenhauer where nature is pointless and indifferent to human wishes. Nature is harsh and understanding is to suffer. And Nietzsche's Will to Power ideas are the proper correction of Schopenhauer's pessimism.

I love Nietzsche's and Schopenhauer's basic ideas because they coincide with the thrust of modernity that, we're on our own in the universe; it's up to us and not some resurrected (allegedly) god-man to save us. I love nihilism for what it does to us (hint: there will be no survivors) and I love modernity for the opportunities it provides me.

Thanks for reading.

Hollingdale's translations are excrement (I know, because I have made my own and checked his translations word for word). Nietzsche was a self-righteous, arrogant asshole by today's standards. If you 'like' him you clearly do not understand him.

Unlike what you say (that his ideas 'coincide with the thrust of modernity') he opposed everything 'modern', and by no means was he a 'philosopher'. He was a child of Victorian times and looked up to aristocrats and hated the common man. He was not one of us, and thought himself superior to everyone around him. He probably was. You should hate him. I don't, because I am just like him.

So is the motivating impulse of human life the will for survival or the will for power, or something else? - anyone?

[HexHammer]

To whom is that remark addressed?

Your mom?

You're a moron.

Mayhaps, but your a greater moron, you should know to whom the message was adressed.

[Lev Muishkin]

A person who self identifies as a "follower of Nietzsche" is failing to understand his philosophy.

Nietzsche is turning in his grave at the inhuman slavish mentality inherent in "following".

Go back and read some more. Maybe you will get it one day?

[Blaggard]

Speaking of trolling Hex, it's a good job you aren't or that might of sounded insincere to the forums ears.

A person who self identifies as a "follower of Nietzsche" is failing to understand his philosophy.

Nietzsche is turning in his grave at the inhuman slavish mentality inherent in "following".

Go back and read some more. Maybe you will get it one day?

Quite: fundamentally everyone was wrong, even him as he said in his prose, you can't follow a "nihilist", but you can take note/not of him.

[Arising_uk]

Overall I think Nietzsche wants to say that we live in a universe of clockwork precision. It is very much Newtonian, mechanical, fragmented, predictable and disconnected and very mundane. Nietzsche would probably say that we have lost our soul (figuratively speaking in the case of Nietzsche) in the face of modernism. In other words, in Newtonian universe there is no need to search for any sort of transcendental or higher standards- we have killed them off, "God is dead" we have pulled the rug out from under our own feet. ...

I'd have thought his 'God is dead' more a response to Darwin? As, if correct, he'd pulled the latest prop to Christian morality away, i.e. we were made by 'it' to be the apple of 'its' eye so behave.