Discussion:
Nietzsche
Add Reply
islander
2018-06-12 13:04:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Does anyone here know anything about Friedrich Nietzsche? While I have
heard the name and seen quotes attributed to him from time to time, I
really know nothing about him or his political philosophy. Basically,
he was a late 19th century German philosopher who supposedly had a
strong influence on western philosophy. His writings spanned a lot of
topics and it is not completely clear how much of what he believed was
biased by his sister who took responsibility for his writings after he
went crazy at age 44. She had a definite tendency to promote German
nationalism that may have had influence leading to both world wars.

So, why would anyone care about Nietzsche? My interest is in how his
thinking may still be influencing politics today, not in a good way.

Has anyone here developed any opinion about him and his writings?
Emily
2018-06-12 22:54:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Does anyone here know anything about Friedrich Nietzsche? While I have
heard the name and seen quotes attributed to him from time to time, I
really know nothing about him or his political philosophy. Basically,
he was a late 19th century German philosopher who supposedly had a
strong influence on western philosophy. His writings spanned a lot of
topics and it is not completely clear how much of what he believed was
biased by his sister who took responsibility for his writings after he
went crazy at age 44. She had a definite tendency to promote German
nationalism that may have had influence leading to both world wars.
So, why would anyone care about Nietzsche? My interest is in how his
thinking may still be influencing politics today, not in a good way.
Has anyone here developed any opinion about him and his writings?
Not I. For reasons long forgotten I bought "Thus Spake Zarathustra"
when I was in college. I don't remember if I ever actually read it,
but if I did, I remember nothing about it.
mg
2018-06-13 18:02:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Does anyone here know anything about Friedrich Nietzsche? While I have
heard the name and seen quotes attributed to him from time to time, I
really know nothing about him or his political philosophy. Basically,
he was a late 19th century German philosopher who supposedly had a
strong influence on western philosophy. His writings spanned a lot of
topics and it is not completely clear how much of what he believed was
biased by his sister who took responsibility for his writings after he
went crazy at age 44. She had a definite tendency to promote German
nationalism that may have had influence leading to both world wars.
So, why would anyone care about Nietzsche? My interest is in how his
thinking may still be influencing politics today, not in a good way.
Has anyone here developed any opinion about him and his writings?
A few quick internet searches indicates to me that studying Friedrich
Nietzsche could consume weeks or months (or years?). However, as a
quick summary, there's this:

-----------

"Liberalism turns men into cattle.” ~ Friedrich Nietzsche [1]

Friedrich Nietzsche was not in favor of Democracy. He equates
Democracy with Christianity

https://www.quora.com/What-were-Nietzsches-political-views

--------------

Nietzsche’s existential philosophy included such things as;

Popularized the idea that God is dead.

Insisted that without God, life is meaningless.

Was convinced that Christian virtues made weak people. That
meekness was a liability.

Did not believe in values or truth.

Believed that all people should strive to be a superman.
Personal power was essential.

Logically disputing and discriminating truth from opinion and
error was his esteemed virtue.

Believed good and evil kept the world as it was and in a state of
eternal occurrence.

Praised the Greek ideals of Dionysius who exalted life in its most
irrational and cruel features, and that the proper task of the
superman was to exist beyond and not effected by good and evil.

Viewed that freedom and greatness is desiring to love self and
life as it is, was, and embracing the fate of what self and life will
be in the future to come.

Convinced that a person only lives once and then they exist no
longer so they must be aggressive in living the short life they have.

https://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/friedrich-nietzsche-faq.htm
rumpelstiltskin
2018-06-13 19:16:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mg
Post by islander
Does anyone here know anything about Friedrich Nietzsche? While I have
heard the name and seen quotes attributed to him from time to time, I
really know nothing about him or his political philosophy. Basically,
he was a late 19th century German philosopher who supposedly had a
strong influence on western philosophy. His writings spanned a lot of
topics and it is not completely clear how much of what he believed was
biased by his sister who took responsibility for his writings after he
went crazy at age 44. She had a definite tendency to promote German
nationalism that may have had influence leading to both world wars.
So, why would anyone care about Nietzsche? My interest is in how his
thinking may still be influencing politics today, not in a good way.
Has anyone here developed any opinion about him and his writings?
A few quick internet searches indicates to me that studying Friedrich
Nietzsche could consume weeks or months (or years?). However, as a
-----------
"Liberalism turns men into cattle.” ~ Friedrich Nietzsche [1]
Friedrich Nietzsche was not in favor of Democracy. He equates
Democracy with Christianity
https://www.quora.com/What-were-Nietzsches-political-views
--------------
Nietzsche’s existential philosophy included such things as;
Popularized the idea that God is dead.
"God isn't dead" of course. "God" never was, so it's
only the belief in "God" that is now dead for many.
This is a pretty good summary of the consequences:
https://tinyurl.com/y8kzbefp

Without a Big Daddy to tell you what to do, you are
of course on your own to find a "purpose to life", and
anything you make up has to be a fiction because it
doesn't have any basis outside itself. Nevertheless,
the fiction is better than a fake "truth" such as "god"
because a fake truth may well lead you into your own
errors but that's better than following other people's
errors.

The only big thing I've read of Nietzsche is "Also
sprach Zarathustra" (translated into English as
"Thus spake Zarathustra". Zarathustra is Zoroaster,
a pre-Christian Jesus-type-oerson, whose religion
still persists in Northwestern Iran, in fact I worked
once with a guy who was a Zoroastrian from that
part of Iran where the religion survives. Although
many of the chapters of Nietzsche's book end
with the phrase "Also sprach Zarathustra", I'm not
sure to what extent Nietzsche's thoughts really
reflect Zoroaster.

I'm not sure personally if I'd call what I know of
Nietzsche as a "philosophy" if that word implies
"truth". Maybe it could be seen as a way of living
without asserting its truth or falsehood. I read
"Also Sprach Zarathustra" as though it were a
novel, not a pretense to absolute truth like Kant.

GBS has a play "Man and Superman" inspired
by Nietzsche, so he'd done some thinking about
Nietzsche himself but I'm not sure if his
conclusions, if he had any, were any better than
mine. As Hamlet said to Horatio, "There are
more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than
are dreamt of in your philosophy."

For myself, although I sometimes find some of
what's called "philosophy" interesting, mostly it
flows off me like water off a duck's back. I'm a
much bigger fan of "art" which creates worlds
rather than trying to delineate the general world
in which we find ourselves.
Post by mg
Insisted that without God, life is meaningless.
Was convinced that Christian virtues made weak people. That
meekness was a liability.
Did not believe in values or truth.
Believed that all people should strive to be a superman.
Personal power was essential.
Logically disputing and discriminating truth from opinion and
error was his esteemed virtue.
Believed good and evil kept the world as it was and in a state of
eternal occurrence.
Praised the Greek ideals of Dionysius who exalted life in its most
irrational and cruel features, and that the proper task of the
superman was to exist beyond and not effected by good and evil.
Viewed that freedom and greatness is desiring to love self and
life as it is, was, and embracing the fate of what self and life will
be in the future to come.
Convinced that a person only lives once and then they exist no
longer so they must be aggressive in living the short life they have.
https://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/friedrich-nietzsche-faq.htm
mg
2018-06-14 02:22:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Post by islander
Does anyone here know anything about Friedrich Nietzsche? While I have
heard the name and seen quotes attributed to him from time to time, I
really know nothing about him or his political philosophy. Basically,
he was a late 19th century German philosopher who supposedly had a
strong influence on western philosophy. His writings spanned a lot of
topics and it is not completely clear how much of what he believed was
biased by his sister who took responsibility for his writings after he
went crazy at age 44. She had a definite tendency to promote German
nationalism that may have had influence leading to both world wars.
So, why would anyone care about Nietzsche? My interest is in how his
thinking may still be influencing politics today, not in a good way.
Has anyone here developed any opinion about him and his writings?
A few quick internet searches indicates to me that studying Friedrich
Nietzsche could consume weeks or months (or years?). However, as a
-----------
"Liberalism turns men into cattle.” ~ Friedrich Nietzsche [1]
Friedrich Nietzsche was not in favor of Democracy. He equates
Democracy with Christianity
https://www.quora.com/What-were-Nietzsches-political-views
--------------
Nietzsche’s existential philosophy included such things as;
Popularized the idea that God is dead.
"God isn't dead" of course. "God" never was, so it's
only the belief in "God" that is now dead for many.
https://tinyurl.com/y8kzbefp
Without a Big Daddy to tell you what to do, you are
of course on your own to find a "purpose to life", and
anything you make up has to be a fiction because it
doesn't have any basis outside itself. Nevertheless,
the fiction is better than a fake "truth" such as "god"
because a fake truth may well lead you into your own
errors but that's better than following other people's
errors.
The only big thing I've read of Nietzsche is "Also
sprach Zarathustra" (translated into English as
"Thus spake Zarathustra". Zarathustra is Zoroaster,
a pre-Christian Jesus-type-oerson, whose religion
still persists in Northwestern Iran, in fact I worked
once with a guy who was a Zoroastrian from that
part of Iran where the religion survives. Although
many of the chapters of Nietzsche's book end
with the phrase "Also sprach Zarathustra", I'm not
sure to what extent Nietzsche's thoughts really
reflect Zoroaster.
I'm not sure personally if I'd call what I know of
Nietzsche as a "philosophy" if that word implies
"truth". Maybe it could be seen as a way of living
without asserting its truth or falsehood. I read
"Also Sprach Zarathustra" as though it were a
novel, not a pretense to absolute truth like Kant.
GBS has a play "Man and Superman" inspired
by Nietzsche, so he'd done some thinking about
Nietzsche himself but I'm not sure if his
conclusions, if he had any, were any better than
mine. As Hamlet said to Horatio, "There are
more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than
are dreamt of in your philosophy."
For myself, although I sometimes find some of
what's called "philosophy" interesting, mostly it
flows off me like water off a duck's back. I'm a
much bigger fan of "art" which creates worlds
rather than trying to delineate the general world
in which we find ourselves.
I think "Also sprach Zarathustra" was the theme song for the movie
2001: A Space Odyssey, btw.

In my old age, I've learned to prioritize my time by deciding in
advance what sort of projects I want to undertake, rather than just
hopping into something without thinking about it. And now days, if I
do hop into something, I usually try to figure out a way to minimize
my time and effort. In regard to reading books, for instance, I just
bought the short-summary version of "Why Nations Fail" and "Capital in
the Twenty-First Century" from Amazon.

In regard to Nietzsche not actually being a philosopher, I agree with
you. I would characterize him more as a boy-genius
social/religious/political/cultural critic, or maybe I might call him
a Jimmy Dean sort of a rebel without a cause, although I admit
whenever one is talking about religion, they have a damned good reason
to be a rebel.
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Insisted that without God, life is meaningless.
Was convinced that Christian virtues made weak people. That
meekness was a liability.
Did not believe in values or truth.
Believed that all people should strive to be a superman.
Personal power was essential.
Logically disputing and discriminating truth from opinion and
error was his esteemed virtue.
Believed good and evil kept the world as it was and in a state of
eternal occurrence.
Praised the Greek ideals of Dionysius who exalted life in its most
irrational and cruel features, and that the proper task of the
superman was to exist beyond and not effected by good and evil.
Viewed that freedom and greatness is desiring to love self and
life as it is, was, and embracing the fate of what self and life will
be in the future to come.
Convinced that a person only lives once and then they exist no
longer so they must be aggressive in living the short life they have.
https://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/friedrich-nietzsche-faq.htm
rumpelstiltskin
2018-06-14 05:10:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mg
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Post by islander
Does anyone here know anything about Friedrich Nietzsche? While I have
heard the name and seen quotes attributed to him from time to time, I
really know nothing about him or his political philosophy. Basically,
he was a late 19th century German philosopher who supposedly had a
strong influence on western philosophy. His writings spanned a lot of
topics and it is not completely clear how much of what he believed was
biased by his sister who took responsibility for his writings after he
went crazy at age 44. She had a definite tendency to promote German
nationalism that may have had influence leading to both world wars.
So, why would anyone care about Nietzsche? My interest is in how his
thinking may still be influencing politics today, not in a good way.
Has anyone here developed any opinion about him and his writings?
A few quick internet searches indicates to me that studying Friedrich
Nietzsche could consume weeks or months (or years?). However, as a
-----------
"Liberalism turns men into cattle.” ~ Friedrich Nietzsche [1]
Friedrich Nietzsche was not in favor of Democracy. He equates
Democracy with Christianity
https://www.quora.com/What-were-Nietzsches-political-views
--------------
Nietzsche’s existential philosophy included such things as;
Popularized the idea that God is dead.
"God isn't dead" of course. "God" never was, so it's
only the belief in "God" that is now dead for many.
https://tinyurl.com/y8kzbefp
Without a Big Daddy to tell you what to do, you are
of course on your own to find a "purpose to life", and
anything you make up has to be a fiction because it
doesn't have any basis outside itself. Nevertheless,
the fiction is better than a fake "truth" such as "god"
because a fake truth may well lead you into your own
errors but that's better than following other people's
errors.
The only big thing I've read of Nietzsche is "Also
sprach Zarathustra" (translated into English as
"Thus spake Zarathustra". Zarathustra is Zoroaster,
a pre-Christian Jesus-type-oerson, whose religion
still persists in Northwestern Iran, in fact I worked
once with a guy who was a Zoroastrian from that
part of Iran where the religion survives. Although
many of the chapters of Nietzsche's book end
with the phrase "Also sprach Zarathustra", I'm not
sure to what extent Nietzsche's thoughts really
reflect Zoroaster.
I'm not sure personally if I'd call what I know of
Nietzsche as a "philosophy" if that word implies
"truth". Maybe it could be seen as a way of living
without asserting its truth or falsehood. I read
"Also Sprach Zarathustra" as though it were a
novel, not a pretense to absolute truth like Kant.
GBS has a play "Man and Superman" inspired
by Nietzsche, so he'd done some thinking about
Nietzsche himself but I'm not sure if his
conclusions, if he had any, were any better than
mine. As Hamlet said to Horatio, "There are
more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than
are dreamt of in your philosophy."
For myself, although I sometimes find some of
what's called "philosophy" interesting, mostly it
flows off me like water off a duck's back. I'm a
much bigger fan of "art" which creates worlds
rather than trying to delineate the general world
in which we find ourselves.
I think "Also sprach Zarathustra" was the theme song for the movie
2001: A Space Odyssey, btw.
Those are the opening notes from Richard Strauss'
tone poem "Also Sprach Zarathustra", which has not
much connection with Nietzsche's book since it's a
tone-poem with no words, and Nietzsche was long
dead. It's heroic, and Nietzsche's writing is heroic,
but that's not much of a connection really, except in
that the "heroic" mindset that was becoming
fashionable which unfortunately led up to Nazism.


I personally don't think one can fairly blame
Nietzsche at all for Nazism, though perhaps
Richard Wagner and Richard Strauss can't be
completely exonerated even if they didn't realize
how far things were going to go.

I think Strauss' tone poem will outlive the movie,
but maybe that's just because I'm not much of a
movie fan.

Richard Strauss is no relation to the Austrian
Strausses Josef, Johann I, and "waltz king" Johann II,
of mid-19th-century Austria.
Post by mg
In my old age, I've learned to prioritize my time by deciding in
advance what sort of projects I want to undertake, rather than just
hopping into something without thinking about it. And now days, if I
do hop into something, I usually try to figure out a way to minimize
my time and effort. In regard to reading books, for instance, I just
bought the short-summary version of "Why Nations Fail" and "Capital in
the Twenty-First Century" from Amazon.
In regard to Nietzsche not actually being a philosopher, I agree with
you. I would characterize him more as a boy-genius
social/religious/political/cultural critic, or maybe I might call him
a Jimmy Dean sort of a rebel without a cause, although I admit
whenever one is talking about religion, they have a damned good reason
to be a rebel.
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Insisted that without God, life is meaningless.
Was convinced that Christian virtues made weak people. That
meekness was a liability.
Did not believe in values or truth.
Believed that all people should strive to be a superman.
Personal power was essential.
Logically disputing and discriminating truth from opinion and
error was his esteemed virtue.
Believed good and evil kept the world as it was and in a state of
eternal occurrence.
Praised the Greek ideals of Dionysius who exalted life in its most
irrational and cruel features, and that the proper task of the
superman was to exist beyond and not effected by good and evil.
Viewed that freedom and greatness is desiring to love self and
life as it is, was, and embracing the fate of what self and life will
be in the future to come.
Convinced that a person only lives once and then they exist no
longer so they must be aggressive in living the short life they have.
https://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/friedrich-nietzsche-faq.htm
Ellie
2018-06-14 10:58:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Post by rumpelstiltskin
For myself, although I sometimes find some of
what's called "philosophy" interesting, mostly it
flows off me like water off a duck's back. I'm a
much bigger fan of "art" which creates worlds
rather than trying to delineate the general world
in which we find ourselves.
I think "Also sprach Zarathustra" was the theme song for the movie
2001: A Space Odyssey, btw.
Those are the opening notes from Richard Strauss'
tone poem "Also Sprach Zarathustra", which has not
much connection with Nietzsche's book since it's a
tone-poem with no words, and Nietzsche was long
dead. It's heroic, and Nietzsche's writing is heroic,
but that's not much of a connection really, except in
that the "heroic" mindset that was becoming
fashionable which unfortunately led up to Nazism.
http://youtu.be/6SFAAsdqkuQ
I personally don't think one can fairly blame
Nietzsche at all for Nazism, though perhaps
Richard Wagner and Richard Strauss can't be
completely exonerated even if they didn't realize
how far things were going to go.
Nazi is a Jewish-Hebrew expression for people who used to lived in
the ancient land of Naz. Naz was the area that we now call Germany.
They even named their European cousins for that area. They called
them the Ashkenazi. Ashke meaning "our beloved" who live in the
"land of the Nazi". Or those damn "Germans".

When Hitler took power, American journalists heard their Jewish
superiors talking about those "damn nazis" -- they thought they
referred to the German Fascists. You know how stupid journalists
are.

I use to wonder why the only two times I ever heard that word used it
was applied to either the Fascist Germans or the European Jews. Odd
isn't it !!
rumpelstiltskin
2018-06-14 17:08:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ellie
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Post by rumpelstiltskin
For myself, although I sometimes find some of
what's called "philosophy" interesting, mostly it
flows off me like water off a duck's back. I'm a
much bigger fan of "art" which creates worlds
rather than trying to delineate the general world
in which we find ourselves.
I think "Also sprach Zarathustra" was the theme song for the movie
2001: A Space Odyssey, btw.
Those are the opening notes from Richard Strauss'
tone poem "Also Sprach Zarathustra", which has not
much connection with Nietzsche's book since it's a
tone-poem with no words, and Nietzsche was long
dead. It's heroic, and Nietzsche's writing is heroic,
but that's not much of a connection really, except in
that the "heroic" mindset that was becoming
fashionable which unfortunately led up to Nazism.
http://youtu.be/6SFAAsdqkuQ
I personally don't think one can fairly blame
Nietzsche at all for Nazism, though perhaps
Richard Wagner and Richard Strauss can't be
completely exonerated even if they didn't realize
how far things were going to go.
Nazi is a Jewish-Hebrew expression for people who used to lived in
the ancient land of Naz. Naz was the area that we now call Germany.
They even named their European cousins for that area. They called
them the Ashkenazi. Ashke meaning "our beloved" who live in the
"land of the Nazi". Or those damn "Germans".
I don't know you, but I think that mg has maintained the
same thing. I know of no basis for it whatsoever.

Nazi" evolved as shorthand from "Nationalsozialist" which
is German for "National Socialist".
Post by Ellie
When Hitler took power, American journalists heard their Jewish
superiors talking about those "damn nazis" -- they thought they
referred to the German Fascists. You know how stupid journalists
are.
I use to wonder why the only two times I ever heard that word used it
was applied to either the Fascist Germans or the European Jews. Odd
isn't it !!
I've never heard it applied to European Jews. I think you may
be thinking of the "Land of Nod" which is in the bible, It's where
Cain supposedly went to get a wife. There's cognitive dissonance
there as to who the wife's parents would be, but this is the Bible
so the less sense things make, the more virtuous people are felt
to be for believing in them.
islander
2018-06-14 20:03:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by Ellie
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Post by rumpelstiltskin
For myself, although I sometimes find some of
what's called "philosophy" interesting, mostly it
flows off me like water off a duck's back. I'm a
much bigger fan of "art" which creates worlds
rather than trying to delineate the general world
in which we find ourselves.
I think "Also sprach Zarathustra" was the theme song for the movie
2001: A Space Odyssey, btw.
Those are the opening notes from Richard Strauss'
tone poem "Also Sprach Zarathustra", which has not
much connection with Nietzsche's book since it's a
tone-poem with no words, and Nietzsche was long
dead. It's heroic, and Nietzsche's writing is heroic,
but that's not much of a connection really, except in
that the "heroic" mindset that was becoming
fashionable which unfortunately led up to Nazism.
http://youtu.be/6SFAAsdqkuQ
I personally don't think one can fairly blame
Nietzsche at all for Nazism, though perhaps
Richard Wagner and Richard Strauss can't be
completely exonerated even if they didn't realize
how far things were going to go.
Nazi is a Jewish-Hebrew expression for people who used to lived in
the ancient land of Naz. Naz was the area that we now call Germany.
They even named their European cousins for that area. They called
them the Ashkenazi. Ashke meaning "our beloved" who live in the
"land of the Nazi". Or those damn "Germans".
I don't know you, but I think that mg has maintained the
same thing. I know of no basis for it whatsoever.
I haven't noticed that Max took this position, but Gary has asserted
this repeatedly.
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Nazi" evolved as shorthand from "Nationalsozialist" which
is German for "National Socialist".
Post by Ellie
When Hitler took power, American journalists heard their Jewish
superiors talking about those "damn nazis" -- they thought they
referred to the German Fascists. You know how stupid journalists
are.
I use to wonder why the only two times I ever heard that word used it
was applied to either the Fascist Germans or the European Jews. Odd
isn't it !!
I've never heard it applied to European Jews. I think you may
be thinking of the "Land of Nod" which is in the bible, It's where
Cain supposedly went to get a wife. There's cognitive dissonance
there as to who the wife's parents would be, but this is the Bible
so the less sense things make, the more virtuous people are felt
to be for believing in them.
Gary
2018-06-14 22:48:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by Ellie
Nazi is a Jewish-Hebrew expression for people who used to lived in
the ancient land of Naz. Naz was the area that we now call Germany.
They even named their European cousins for that area. They called
them the Ashkenazi. Ashke meaning "our beloved" who live in the
"land of the Nazi". Or those damn "Germans".
I don't know you, but I think that mg has maintained the
same thing. I know of no basis for it whatsoever.
I haven't noticed that Max took this position, but Gary has asserted
this repeatedly.
I still believe it to be true. Funny thing is when I first posted
this to newsgroups -- 8 or 10 years ago -- I could do a google on the
word and get several dozens hits. Now I can't get a single one. I
suppose the Jews are highly offended that this was made public. I had
no idea it was a secret. But .. it was true then -- and it's still
true. I wonder why the Jews object to the truth ?

Ashkenazi amazes me. A few years back, a google for it would turn
up many answers. Most described the fact that "ashke" meant "our
beloved" and "nazi" was "who lived in Germany". No more !

I doubt you will believe me -- but what I say is the truth. It was
no uncommon 10 years ago. Today -- I cannot find a single site that
admits this is true. All I can figure is the Jews do not want to
admit to being the originators of "nazi". I can almost understand
that. Also -- this is one of their family secrets. And they don't
want us goyim discussing it.
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Nazi" evolved as shorthand from "Nationalsozialist" which
is German for "National Socialist".
That's what the Jews taught the idiot American journalists. And they
believed it.

mg
2018-06-14 11:44:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Post by islander
Does anyone here know anything about Friedrich Nietzsche? While I have
heard the name and seen quotes attributed to him from time to time, I
really know nothing about him or his political philosophy. Basically,
he was a late 19th century German philosopher who supposedly had a
strong influence on western philosophy. His writings spanned a lot of
topics and it is not completely clear how much of what he believed was
biased by his sister who took responsibility for his writings after he
went crazy at age 44. She had a definite tendency to promote German
nationalism that may have had influence leading to both world wars.
So, why would anyone care about Nietzsche? My interest is in how his
thinking may still be influencing politics today, not in a good way.
Has anyone here developed any opinion about him and his writings?
A few quick internet searches indicates to me that studying Friedrich
Nietzsche could consume weeks or months (or years?). However, as a
-----------
"Liberalism turns men into cattle.” ~ Friedrich Nietzsche [1]
Friedrich Nietzsche was not in favor of Democracy. He equates
Democracy with Christianity
https://www.quora.com/What-were-Nietzsches-political-views
--------------
Nietzsche’s existential philosophy included such things as;
Popularized the idea that God is dead.
"God isn't dead" of course. "God" never was, so it's
only the belief in "God" that is now dead for many.
https://tinyurl.com/y8kzbefp
Without a Big Daddy to tell you what to do, you are
of course on your own to find a "purpose to life", and
anything you make up has to be a fiction because it
doesn't have any basis outside itself. Nevertheless,
the fiction is better than a fake "truth" such as "god"
because a fake truth may well lead you into your own
errors but that's better than following other people's
errors.
The only big thing I've read of Nietzsche is "Also
sprach Zarathustra" (translated into English as
"Thus spake Zarathustra". Zarathustra is Zoroaster,
a pre-Christian Jesus-type-oerson, whose religion
still persists in Northwestern Iran, in fact I worked
once with a guy who was a Zoroastrian from that
part of Iran where the religion survives. Although
many of the chapters of Nietzsche's book end
with the phrase "Also sprach Zarathustra", I'm not
sure to what extent Nietzsche's thoughts really
reflect Zoroaster.
I'm not sure personally if I'd call what I know of
Nietzsche as a "philosophy" if that word implies
"truth". Maybe it could be seen as a way of living
without asserting its truth or falsehood. I read
"Also Sprach Zarathustra" as though it were a
novel, not a pretense to absolute truth like Kant.
GBS has a play "Man and Superman" inspired
by Nietzsche, so he'd done some thinking about
Nietzsche himself but I'm not sure if his
conclusions, if he had any, were any better than
mine. As Hamlet said to Horatio, "There are
more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than
are dreamt of in your philosophy."
For myself, although I sometimes find some of
what's called "philosophy" interesting, mostly it
flows off me like water off a duck's back. I'm a
much bigger fan of "art" which creates worlds
rather than trying to delineate the general world
in which we find ourselves.
I think "Also sprach Zarathustra" was the theme song for the movie
2001: A Space Odyssey, btw.
Those are the opening notes from Richard Strauss'
tone poem "Also Sprach Zarathustra", which has not
much connection with Nietzsche's book since it's a
tone-poem with no words, and Nietzsche was long
dead. It's heroic, and Nietzsche's writing is heroic,
but that's not much of a connection really, except in
that the "heroic" mindset that was becoming
fashionable which unfortunately led up to Nazism.
http://youtu.be/6SFAAsdqkuQ
I personally don't think one can fairly blame
Nietzsche at all for Nazism, though perhaps
Richard Wagner and Richard Strauss can't be
completely exonerated even if they didn't realize
how far things were going to go.
I think Strauss' tone poem will outlive the movie,
but maybe that's just because I'm not much of a
movie fan.
Richard Strauss is no relation to the Austrian
Strausses Josef, Johann I, and "waltz king" Johann II,
of mid-19th-century Austria.
While skimming through some of the information on Nietzsche, I ran
across something that said he can't be blamed for Nazism. His dislike
of democracy is interesting, though, and supposedly he associates it
with Christianity. So, perhaps he got carried away with his hatred of
religion and made a hasty decision on democracy, although I'll admit
that democracy does have some serious problems. There's a theory also
that he had brain cancer and suffered from headaches, etc.,

I don't know if he left behind anything of value in the way of a
legacy. He obviously hated the herd mentality, like you and I do. So,
that's something and I think he did a lot to help accelerate the
Darwin effect and destroy the fairy tale of religion which caused a
lot of people to ask the question: "If there is no God, what is the
purpose of life?".

Fortunately, however, I have finally discovered the answer to that
question. The purpose of life is to import as many Muslims as possible
(so that we won't be called bigots) before we run out of clean air,
oil, and water. :-) :-) :-)
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
In my old age, I've learned to prioritize my time by deciding in
advance what sort of projects I want to undertake, rather than just
hopping into something without thinking about it. And now days, if I
do hop into something, I usually try to figure out a way to minimize
my time and effort. In regard to reading books, for instance, I just
bought the short-summary version of "Why Nations Fail" and "Capital in
the Twenty-First Century" from Amazon.
In regard to Nietzsche not actually being a philosopher, I agree with
you. I would characterize him more as a boy-genius
social/religious/political/cultural critic, or maybe I might call him
a Jimmy Dean sort of a rebel without a cause, although I admit
whenever one is talking about religion, they have a damned good reason
to be a rebel.
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Insisted that without God, life is meaningless.
Was convinced that Christian virtues made weak people. That
meekness was a liability.
Did not believe in values or truth.
Believed that all people should strive to be a superman.
Personal power was essential.
Logically disputing and discriminating truth from opinion and
error was his esteemed virtue.
Believed good and evil kept the world as it was and in a state of
eternal occurrence.
Praised the Greek ideals of Dionysius who exalted life in its most
irrational and cruel features, and that the proper task of the
superman was to exist beyond and not effected by good and evil.
Viewed that freedom and greatness is desiring to love self and
life as it is, was, and embracing the fate of what self and life will
be in the future to come.
Convinced that a person only lives once and then they exist no
longer so they must be aggressive in living the short life they have.
https://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/friedrich-nietzsche-faq.htm
me
2018-06-14 13:09:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (/ˈniːtʃə, -tʃi/;[6][7] German: [ˈfʁiːdʁɪç ˈvɪlhɛlm ˈniːtʃə] (About this sound listen); 15 October 1844 – 25 August 1900) was a German philosopher, cultural critic, composer, poet, philologist and a Latin and Greek scholar whose work has exerted a profound influence on Western philosophy and modern intellectual history.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Nietzsche
mg
2018-06-14 16:32:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (/?ni?t??, -t?i/;[6][7] German: [?f?i?d??ç ?v?lh?lm ?ni?t??] (About this sound listen); 15 October 1844 – 25 August 1900) was a German philosopher, cultural critic, composer, poet, philologist and a Latin and Greek scholar whose work has exerted a profound influence on Western philosophy and modern intellectual history.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Nietzsche
Somehow I missed that in my quick review of Nietzsche, which isn't too
surprising, because I purposely try not to spend too much time on this
sort of stuff; experience has told me that it can become a bottomless
pit, if one isn't careful.

However, in taking a second look at his "philosophy", if one can call
it that, it appears that his "profound influence" has been to alert
Western civilization to the dangers of "nihilism".

Speaking of nihilism, am I a nihilist? Are you a nihilist? Will all
the nihilists on this newsgroup, please raise their hand. :-)

https://www.iep.utm.edu/nihilism/
https://www.iep.utm.edu/nietzsch/
rumpelstiltskin
2018-06-14 17:08:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mg
Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (/?ni?t??, -t?i/;[6][7] German: [?f?i?d??ç ?v?lh?lm ?ni?t??] (About this sound listen); 15 October 1844 – 25 August 1900) was a German philosopher, cultural critic, composer, poet, philologist and a Latin and Greek scholar whose work has exerted a profound influence on Western philosophy and modern intellectual history.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Nietzsche
Somehow I missed that in my quick review of Nietzsche, which isn't too
surprising, because I purposely try not to spend too much time on this
sort of stuff; experience has told me that it can become a bottomless
pit, if one isn't careful.
However, in taking a second look at his "philosophy", if one can call
it that, it appears that his "profound influence" has been to alert
Western civilization to the dangers of "nihilism".
Speaking of nihilism, am I a nihilist? Are you a nihilist? Will all
the nihilists on this newsgroup, please raise their hand. :-)
https://www.iep.utm.edu/nihilism/
https://www.iep.utm.edu/nietzsch/
I guess I have to raise my hand, though I think
I'm pretty optimistic and cheerful, and considerate
of others, as nihilists go.
mg
2018-06-14 17:52:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (/?ni?t??, -t?i/;[6][7] German: [?f?i?d??ç ?v?lh?lm ?ni?t??] (About this sound listen); 15 October 1844 – 25 August 1900) was a German philosopher, cultural critic, composer, poet, philologist and a Latin and Greek scholar whose work has exerted a profound influence on Western philosophy and modern intellectual history.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Nietzsche
Somehow I missed that in my quick review of Nietzsche, which isn't too
surprising, because I purposely try not to spend too much time on this
sort of stuff; experience has told me that it can become a bottomless
pit, if one isn't careful.
However, in taking a second look at his "philosophy", if one can call
it that, it appears that his "profound influence" has been to alert
Western civilization to the dangers of "nihilism".
Speaking of nihilism, am I a nihilist? Are you a nihilist? Will all
the nihilists on this newsgroup, please raise their hand. :-)
https://www.iep.utm.edu/nihilism/
https://www.iep.utm.edu/nietzsch/
I guess I have to raise my hand, though I think
I'm pretty optimistic and cheerful, and considerate
of others, as nihilists go.
I was wondering if I ought to raise my hand, also, but I don't know
enough about the subject to be sure.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-06-14 17:08:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mg
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Post by islander
Does anyone here know anything about Friedrich Nietzsche? While I have
heard the name and seen quotes attributed to him from time to time, I
really know nothing about him or his political philosophy. Basically,
he was a late 19th century German philosopher who supposedly had a
strong influence on western philosophy. His writings spanned a lot of
topics and it is not completely clear how much of what he believed was
biased by his sister who took responsibility for his writings after he
went crazy at age 44. She had a definite tendency to promote German
nationalism that may have had influence leading to both world wars.
So, why would anyone care about Nietzsche? My interest is in how his
thinking may still be influencing politics today, not in a good way.
Has anyone here developed any opinion about him and his writings?
A few quick internet searches indicates to me that studying Friedrich
Nietzsche could consume weeks or months (or years?). However, as a
-----------
"Liberalism turns men into cattle.” ~ Friedrich Nietzsche [1]
Friedrich Nietzsche was not in favor of Democracy. He equates
Democracy with Christianity
https://www.quora.com/What-were-Nietzsches-political-views
--------------
Nietzsche’s existential philosophy included such things as;
Popularized the idea that God is dead.
"God isn't dead" of course. "God" never was, so it's
only the belief in "God" that is now dead for many.
https://tinyurl.com/y8kzbefp
Without a Big Daddy to tell you what to do, you are
of course on your own to find a "purpose to life", and
anything you make up has to be a fiction because it
doesn't have any basis outside itself. Nevertheless,
the fiction is better than a fake "truth" such as "god"
because a fake truth may well lead you into your own
errors but that's better than following other people's
errors.
The only big thing I've read of Nietzsche is "Also
sprach Zarathustra" (translated into English as
"Thus spake Zarathustra". Zarathustra is Zoroaster,
a pre-Christian Jesus-type-oerson, whose religion
still persists in Northwestern Iran, in fact I worked
once with a guy who was a Zoroastrian from that
part of Iran where the religion survives. Although
many of the chapters of Nietzsche's book end
with the phrase "Also sprach Zarathustra", I'm not
sure to what extent Nietzsche's thoughts really
reflect Zoroaster.
I'm not sure personally if I'd call what I know of
Nietzsche as a "philosophy" if that word implies
"truth". Maybe it could be seen as a way of living
without asserting its truth or falsehood. I read
"Also Sprach Zarathustra" as though it were a
novel, not a pretense to absolute truth like Kant.
GBS has a play "Man and Superman" inspired
by Nietzsche, so he'd done some thinking about
Nietzsche himself but I'm not sure if his
conclusions, if he had any, were any better than
mine. As Hamlet said to Horatio, "There are
more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than
are dreamt of in your philosophy."
For myself, although I sometimes find some of
what's called "philosophy" interesting, mostly it
flows off me like water off a duck's back. I'm a
much bigger fan of "art" which creates worlds
rather than trying to delineate the general world
in which we find ourselves.
I think "Also sprach Zarathustra" was the theme song for the movie
2001: A Space Odyssey, btw.
Those are the opening notes from Richard Strauss'
tone poem "Also Sprach Zarathustra", which has not
much connection with Nietzsche's book since it's a
tone-poem with no words, and Nietzsche was long
dead. It's heroic, and Nietzsche's writing is heroic,
but that's not much of a connection really, except in
that the "heroic" mindset that was becoming
fashionable which unfortunately led up to Nazism.
http://youtu.be/6SFAAsdqkuQ
I personally don't think one can fairly blame
Nietzsche at all for Nazism, though perhaps
Richard Wagner and Richard Strauss can't be
completely exonerated even if they didn't realize
how far things were going to go.
I think Strauss' tone poem will outlive the movie,
but maybe that's just because I'm not much of a
movie fan.
Richard Strauss is no relation to the Austrian
Strausses Josef, Johann I, and "waltz king" Johann II,
of mid-19th-century Austria.
While skimming through some of the information on Nietzsche, I ran
across something that said he can't be blamed for Nazism. His dislike
of democracy is interesting, though, and supposedly he associates it
with Christianity. So, perhaps he got carried away with his hatred of
religion and made a hasty decision on democracy, although I'll admit
that democracy does have some serious problems. There's a theory also
that he had brain cancer and suffered from headaches, etc.,
I don't recall a specific dislike of democracy, though his
insistence on a man who wants to be a "high man" being
independent from and even at odds against "lesser men"
can with justice be taken that way.
Post by mg
I don't know if he left behind anything of value in the way of a
legacy. He obviously hated the herd mentality, like you and I do. So,
that's something and I think he did a lot to help accelerate the
Darwin effect and destroy the fairy tale of religion which caused a
lot of people to ask the question: "If there is no God, what is the
purpose of life?".
He left more behind than you or I or 99.9999% of the
rest of the human race.

Why didn't those people ask the question "If there IS
a God, what is the purpose of life?" That actually makes
more sense than the contrary.

As I've maintained ad nauseam though, whatever is
at the end of a chain of causality CANNOT have a purpose,
or it's not actually the thing at the end of causality. If
there is a "Supreme Being", that "supreme being" by
necessity cannot have a purpose or it's not really supreme.
If there is no "Supreme Being", then we can pick out
existence, or life, or whatever else strikes our fancy, as
the supreme thingamajig, but whatever we choose as
supreme cannot have a purpose or its supremacy
immediately devolves onto the thing it's supposed to be
a purpose for. As cummings wrote of "Princess
Selene" (the Moon),

"princess selene doesn't know a thing
who's much too busy being her beautiful yes."
http://plagiarist.com/poetry/261/
Post by mg
Fortunately, however, I have finally discovered the answer to that
question. The purpose of life is to import as many Muslims as possible
(so that we won't be called bigots) before we run out of clean air,
oil, and water. :-) :-) :-)
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
In my old age, I've learned to prioritize my time by deciding in
advance what sort of projects I want to undertake, rather than just
hopping into something without thinking about it. And now days, if I
do hop into something, I usually try to figure out a way to minimize
my time and effort. In regard to reading books, for instance, I just
bought the short-summary version of "Why Nations Fail" and "Capital in
the Twenty-First Century" from Amazon.
In regard to Nietzsche not actually being a philosopher, I agree with
you. I would characterize him more as a boy-genius
social/religious/political/cultural critic, or maybe I might call him
a Jimmy Dean sort of a rebel without a cause, although I admit
whenever one is talking about religion, they have a damned good reason
to be a rebel.
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Insisted that without God, life is meaningless.
Was convinced that Christian virtues made weak people. That
meekness was a liability.
Did not believe in values or truth.
Believed that all people should strive to be a superman.
Personal power was essential.
Logically disputing and discriminating truth from opinion and
error was his esteemed virtue.
Believed good and evil kept the world as it was and in a state of
eternal occurrence.
Praised the Greek ideals of Dionysius who exalted life in its most
irrational and cruel features, and that the proper task of the
superman was to exist beyond and not effected by good and evil.
Viewed that freedom and greatness is desiring to love self and
life as it is, was, and embracing the fate of what self and life will
be in the future to come.
Convinced that a person only lives once and then they exist no
longer so they must be aggressive in living the short life they have.
https://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/friedrich-nietzsche-faq.htm
mg
2018-06-14 18:26:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Post by islander
Does anyone here know anything about Friedrich Nietzsche? While I have
heard the name and seen quotes attributed to him from time to time, I
really know nothing about him or his political philosophy. Basically,
he was a late 19th century German philosopher who supposedly had a
strong influence on western philosophy. His writings spanned a lot of
topics and it is not completely clear how much of what he believed was
biased by his sister who took responsibility for his writings after he
went crazy at age 44. She had a definite tendency to promote German
nationalism that may have had influence leading to both world wars.
So, why would anyone care about Nietzsche? My interest is in how his
thinking may still be influencing politics today, not in a good way.
Has anyone here developed any opinion about him and his writings?
A few quick internet searches indicates to me that studying Friedrich
Nietzsche could consume weeks or months (or years?). However, as a
-----------
"Liberalism turns men into cattle.” ~ Friedrich Nietzsche [1]
Friedrich Nietzsche was not in favor of Democracy. He equates
Democracy with Christianity
https://www.quora.com/What-were-Nietzsches-political-views
--------------
Nietzsche’s existential philosophy included such things as;
Popularized the idea that God is dead.
"God isn't dead" of course. "God" never was, so it's
only the belief in "God" that is now dead for many.
https://tinyurl.com/y8kzbefp
Without a Big Daddy to tell you what to do, you are
of course on your own to find a "purpose to life", and
anything you make up has to be a fiction because it
doesn't have any basis outside itself. Nevertheless,
the fiction is better than a fake "truth" such as "god"
because a fake truth may well lead you into your own
errors but that's better than following other people's
errors.
The only big thing I've read of Nietzsche is "Also
sprach Zarathustra" (translated into English as
"Thus spake Zarathustra". Zarathustra is Zoroaster,
a pre-Christian Jesus-type-oerson, whose religion
still persists in Northwestern Iran, in fact I worked
once with a guy who was a Zoroastrian from that
part of Iran where the religion survives. Although
many of the chapters of Nietzsche's book end
with the phrase "Also sprach Zarathustra", I'm not
sure to what extent Nietzsche's thoughts really
reflect Zoroaster.
I'm not sure personally if I'd call what I know of
Nietzsche as a "philosophy" if that word implies
"truth". Maybe it could be seen as a way of living
without asserting its truth or falsehood. I read
"Also Sprach Zarathustra" as though it were a
novel, not a pretense to absolute truth like Kant.
GBS has a play "Man and Superman" inspired
by Nietzsche, so he'd done some thinking about
Nietzsche himself but I'm not sure if his
conclusions, if he had any, were any better than
mine. As Hamlet said to Horatio, "There are
more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than
are dreamt of in your philosophy."
For myself, although I sometimes find some of
what's called "philosophy" interesting, mostly it
flows off me like water off a duck's back. I'm a
much bigger fan of "art" which creates worlds
rather than trying to delineate the general world
in which we find ourselves.
I think "Also sprach Zarathustra" was the theme song for the movie
2001: A Space Odyssey, btw.
Those are the opening notes from Richard Strauss'
tone poem "Also Sprach Zarathustra", which has not
much connection with Nietzsche's book since it's a
tone-poem with no words, and Nietzsche was long
dead. It's heroic, and Nietzsche's writing is heroic,
but that's not much of a connection really, except in
that the "heroic" mindset that was becoming
fashionable which unfortunately led up to Nazism.
http://youtu.be/6SFAAsdqkuQ
I personally don't think one can fairly blame
Nietzsche at all for Nazism, though perhaps
Richard Wagner and Richard Strauss can't be
completely exonerated even if they didn't realize
how far things were going to go.
I think Strauss' tone poem will outlive the movie,
but maybe that's just because I'm not much of a
movie fan.
Richard Strauss is no relation to the Austrian
Strausses Josef, Johann I, and "waltz king" Johann II,
of mid-19th-century Austria.
While skimming through some of the information on Nietzsche, I ran
across something that said he can't be blamed for Nazism. His dislike
of democracy is interesting, though, and supposedly he associates it
with Christianity. So, perhaps he got carried away with his hatred of
religion and made a hasty decision on democracy, although I'll admit
that democracy does have some serious problems. There's a theory also
that he had brain cancer and suffered from headaches, etc.,
I don't recall a specific dislike of democracy, though his
insistence on a man who wants to be a "high man" being
independent from and even at odds against "lesser men"
can with justice be taken that way.
Post by mg
I don't know if he left behind anything of value in the way of a
legacy. He obviously hated the herd mentality, like you and I do. So,
that's something and I think he did a lot to help accelerate the
Darwin effect and destroy the fairy tale of religion which caused a
lot of people to ask the question: "If there is no God, what is the
purpose of life?".
He left more behind than you or I or 99.9999% of the
rest of the human race.
That's true. I think he probably had an IQ of about a thousand. I
think I've mentioned it before, but I was planning on writing the
great American novel once, in the mid 70s, and then had what I figured
out about 10 years later was probably a stroke and now I'm lucky to
put a short sentence together that makes sense.
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Why didn't those people ask the question "If there IS
a God, what is the purpose of life?" That actually makes
more sense than the contrary.
One does hear religious people say a lot of things in that regard with
most of them involving going to heaven when they die. In my opinion,
though, the real reason, for Mormons at least, I think, is the social
experience. Mormonism has been said to be more of a social club than a
religion.

Here's something Aristotle said about humans being social animals:

“Man is by nature a social animal; an individual who is unsocial
naturally and not accidentally is either beneath our notice or more
than human. Society is something that precedes the individual. Anyone
who either cannot lead the common life or is so self-sufficient as not
to need to, and therefore does not partake of society, is either a
beast or a god. ”
Post by rumpelstiltskin
As I've maintained ad nauseam though, whatever is
at the end of a chain of causality CANNOT have a purpose,
or it's not actually the thing at the end of causality. If
there is a "Supreme Being", that "supreme being" by
necessity cannot have a purpose or it's not really supreme.
If there is no "Supreme Being", then we can pick out
existence, or life, or whatever else strikes our fancy, as
the supreme thingamajig, but whatever we choose as
supreme cannot have a purpose or its supremacy
immediately devolves onto the thing it's supposed to be
a purpose for. As cummings wrote of "Princess
Selene" (the Moon),
"princess selene doesn't know a thing
who's much too busy being her beautiful yes."
http://plagiarist.com/poetry/261/
I think I've learned something about life from the two dogs that I
have owned since I retired, but I'm not sure what it is. Dogs are
unbelievably wonderful people; totally trusting, totally loving,
totally loyal.
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Fortunately, however, I have finally discovered the answer to that
question. The purpose of life is to import as many Muslims as possible
(so that we won't be called bigots) before we run out of clean air,
oil, and water. :-) :-) :-)
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
In my old age, I've learned to prioritize my time by deciding in
advance what sort of projects I want to undertake, rather than just
hopping into something without thinking about it. And now days, if I
do hop into something, I usually try to figure out a way to minimize
my time and effort. In regard to reading books, for instance, I just
bought the short-summary version of "Why Nations Fail" and "Capital in
the Twenty-First Century" from Amazon.
In regard to Nietzsche not actually being a philosopher, I agree with
you. I would characterize him more as a boy-genius
social/religious/political/cultural critic, or maybe I might call him
a Jimmy Dean sort of a rebel without a cause, although I admit
whenever one is talking about religion, they have a damned good reason
to be a rebel.
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Insisted that without God, life is meaningless.
Was convinced that Christian virtues made weak people. That
meekness was a liability.
Did not believe in values or truth.
Believed that all people should strive to be a superman.
Personal power was essential.
Logically disputing and discriminating truth from opinion and
error was his esteemed virtue.
Believed good and evil kept the world as it was and in a state of
eternal occurrence.
Praised the Greek ideals of Dionysius who exalted life in its most
irrational and cruel features, and that the proper task of the
superman was to exist beyond and not effected by good and evil.
Viewed that freedom and greatness is desiring to love self and
life as it is, was, and embracing the fate of what self and life will
be in the future to come.
Convinced that a person only lives once and then they exist no
longer so they must be aggressive in living the short life they have.
https://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/friedrich-nietzsche-faq.htm
rumpelstiltskin
2018-06-14 20:46:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
<snip>
Post by mg
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
While skimming through some of the information on Nietzsche, I ran
across something that said he can't be blamed for Nazism. His dislike
of democracy is interesting, though, and supposedly he associates it
with Christianity. So, perhaps he got carried away with his hatred of
religion and made a hasty decision on democracy, although I'll admit
that democracy does have some serious problems. There's a theory also
that he had brain cancer and suffered from headaches, etc.,
I don't recall a specific dislike of democracy, though his
insistence on a man who wants to be a "high man" being
independent from and even at odds against "lesser men"
can with justice be taken that way.
Post by mg
I don't know if he left behind anything of value in the way of a
legacy. He obviously hated the herd mentality, like you and I do. So,
that's something and I think he did a lot to help accelerate the
Darwin effect and destroy the fairy tale of religion which caused a
lot of people to ask the question: "If there is no God, what is the
purpose of life?".
He left more behind than you or I or 99.9999% of the
rest of the human race.
That's true. I think he probably had an IQ of about a thousand. I
think I've mentioned it before, but I was planning on writing the
great American novel once, in the mid 70s, and then had what I figured
out about 10 years later was probably a stroke and now I'm lucky to
put a short sentence together that makes sense.
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Why didn't those people ask the question "If there IS
a God, what is the purpose of life?" That actually makes
more sense than the contrary.
One does hear religious people say a lot of things in that regard with
most of them involving going to heaven when they die. In my opinion,
though, the real reason, for Mormons at least, I think, is the social
experience. Mormonism has been said to be more of a social club than a
religion.
That can be said of a lot of things, as your quotation
below from Aristotle also notes. Dawkins in one of his
books notes that the fundamental unit of ant-existence
is not each individual ant, but each ant-hill. The same
could arguably be said of Mormons, or of citizens of
the United States, or of Western Civilization in general,
or of the entire history of civilization, etcetera.
Post by mg
“Man is by nature a social animal; an individual who is unsocial
naturally and not accidentally is either beneath our notice or more
than human. Society is something that precedes the individual. Anyone
who either cannot lead the common life or is so self-sufficient as not
to need to, and therefore does not partake of society, is either a
beast or a god. ”
Sounds good to me! I have heard that Aristotle dude
was a pretty smart guy.
Post by mg
Post by rumpelstiltskin
As I've maintained ad nauseam though, whatever is
at the end of a chain of causality CANNOT have a purpose,
or it's not actually the thing at the end of causality. If
there is a "Supreme Being", that "supreme being" by
necessity cannot have a purpose or it's not really supreme.
If there is no "Supreme Being", then we can pick out
existence, or life, or whatever else strikes our fancy, as
the supreme thingamajig, but whatever we choose as
supreme cannot have a purpose or its supremacy
immediately devolves onto the thing it's supposed to be
a purpose for. As cummings wrote of "Princess
Selene" (the Moon),
"princess selene doesn't know a thing
who's much too busy being her beautiful yes."
http://plagiarist.com/poetry/261/
I think I've learned something about life from the two dogs that I
have owned since I retired, but I'm not sure what it is. Dogs are
unbelievably wonderful people; totally trusting, totally loving,
totally loyal.
They're better than us. We don't deserve their love.


<snip>
me
2018-06-14 13:21:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Nietzsche had as much to do with Nazis as Communists. Hitler, Stalin and Mao might have been equallylabeled ‘Uebermensch’ as they willed their own morality and reality. In that sense they resembled your favorite composers who, as you recognize, created their own worlds.
islander
2018-06-14 15:45:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Post by islander
Does anyone here know anything about Friedrich Nietzsche? While I have
heard the name and seen quotes attributed to him from time to time, I
really know nothing about him or his political philosophy. Basically,
he was a late 19th century German philosopher who supposedly had a
strong influence on western philosophy. His writings spanned a lot of
topics and it is not completely clear how much of what he believed was
biased by his sister who took responsibility for his writings after he
went crazy at age 44. She had a definite tendency to promote German
nationalism that may have had influence leading to both world wars.
So, why would anyone care about Nietzsche? My interest is in how his
thinking may still be influencing politics today, not in a good way.
Has anyone here developed any opinion about him and his writings?
A few quick internet searches indicates to me that studying Friedrich
Nietzsche could consume weeks or months (or years?). However, as a
-----------
"Liberalism turns men into cattle.” ~ Friedrich Nietzsche [1]
Friedrich Nietzsche was not in favor of Democracy. He equates
Democracy with Christianity
https://www.quora.com/What-were-Nietzsches-political-views
--------------
Nietzsche’s existential philosophy included such things as;
Popularized the idea that God is dead.
"God isn't dead" of course. "God" never was, so it's
only the belief in "God" that is now dead for many.
https://tinyurl.com/y8kzbefp
Without a Big Daddy to tell you what to do, you are
of course on your own to find a "purpose to life", and
anything you make up has to be a fiction because it
doesn't have any basis outside itself. Nevertheless,
the fiction is better than a fake "truth" such as "god"
because a fake truth may well lead you into your own
errors but that's better than following other people's
errors.
The only big thing I've read of Nietzsche is "Also
sprach Zarathustra" (translated into English as
"Thus spake Zarathustra". Zarathustra is Zoroaster,
a pre-Christian Jesus-type-oerson, whose religion
still persists in Northwestern Iran, in fact I worked
once with a guy who was a Zoroastrian from that
part of Iran where the religion survives. Although
many of the chapters of Nietzsche's book end
with the phrase "Also sprach Zarathustra", I'm not
sure to what extent Nietzsche's thoughts really
reflect Zoroaster.
I'm not sure personally if I'd call what I know of
Nietzsche as a "philosophy" if that word implies
"truth". Maybe it could be seen as a way of living
without asserting its truth or falsehood. I read
"Also Sprach Zarathustra" as though it were a
novel, not a pretense to absolute truth like Kant.
GBS has a play "Man and Superman" inspired
by Nietzsche, so he'd done some thinking about
Nietzsche himself but I'm not sure if his
conclusions, if he had any, were any better than
mine. As Hamlet said to Horatio, "There are
more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than
are dreamt of in your philosophy."
For myself, although I sometimes find some of
what's called "philosophy" interesting, mostly it
flows off me like water off a duck's back. I'm a
much bigger fan of "art" which creates worlds
rather than trying to delineate the general world
in which we find ourselves.
Zarathustra was an early Persian prophet who is credited with the origin
of monotheism and the concept of forces for good and evil.
Zoroastrianism dominated the religious belief system in the region until
it was replaced by Islam, but a few followers still persist today.
Nietzsche evidently used Zarathustra in a work of fiction to promote his
ideas about the futility of morality. He was opposed to religion in the
context of the role of morality imposed by a deity as I understand it.

He evidently had strong feelings about how history repeated itself
despite our best efforts to emphasize good over evil. His notion of
ubermench was that humans could only strive to take it all in stride.
He evidently had only disdain for the mob and supported strong
leadership that was above morality which explains his influence on
German culture, ultimately resulting in German imperialism in WWI and
Nazism in WWII.

The reason that Nietzsche peaked my interest is the reference to him in
Pinker's "Enlightenment Now." Pinker argues that Nietzsche opposed the
ideals of the Enlightenment or at least did not support the notion of
progress based on an emphasis on human rights. This is not an argument
about religion since Pinker is an atheist himself. Rather it is a
criticism of Nietzsche's implied opposition to democratic rule and
acceptance of manipulation of the masses by autocratic rulers. Pinker
links Nietzsche's writings to emergence of alt-right and other white
supremacist movements in the US and Europe.

Personally, I find this interesting because Nietzsche's ideas have
persisted in political thought, perhaps not consciously, but as
justification for abuse of political power. Hitler is sometimes cited
as an example. As I mentioned earlier, I'm not sure how much of this
was Nietzsche and how much was his sister who promoted his ideas and
writings after he became disabled by whatever was wrong with his mind.
She was an enthusiastic supporter of Nazism.

One thing is very clear to me. Nietzsche was a very complicated person,
given to extreme ideas. It would be interesting to get the opinion of
psychologists about his sanity. Was he brilliant or just insane? How
did his illness progress? Here is one hypothesis:
https://mindhacks.com/2006/12/01/what-caused-nietzsches-insanity-and-death/
mg
2018-06-14 16:43:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Post by islander
Does anyone here know anything about Friedrich Nietzsche? While I have
heard the name and seen quotes attributed to him from time to time, I
really know nothing about him or his political philosophy. Basically,
he was a late 19th century German philosopher who supposedly had a
strong influence on western philosophy. His writings spanned a lot of
topics and it is not completely clear how much of what he believed was
biased by his sister who took responsibility for his writings after he
went crazy at age 44. She had a definite tendency to promote German
nationalism that may have had influence leading to both world wars.
So, why would anyone care about Nietzsche? My interest is in how his
thinking may still be influencing politics today, not in a good way.
Has anyone here developed any opinion about him and his writings?
A few quick internet searches indicates to me that studying Friedrich
Nietzsche could consume weeks or months (or years?). However, as a
-----------
"Liberalism turns men into cattle.” ~ Friedrich Nietzsche [1]
Friedrich Nietzsche was not in favor of Democracy. He equates
Democracy with Christianity
https://www.quora.com/What-were-Nietzsches-political-views
--------------
Nietzsche’s existential philosophy included such things as;
Popularized the idea that God is dead.
"God isn't dead" of course. "God" never was, so it's
only the belief in "God" that is now dead for many.
https://tinyurl.com/y8kzbefp
Without a Big Daddy to tell you what to do, you are
of course on your own to find a "purpose to life", and
anything you make up has to be a fiction because it
doesn't have any basis outside itself. Nevertheless,
the fiction is better than a fake "truth" such as "god"
because a fake truth may well lead you into your own
errors but that's better than following other people's
errors.
The only big thing I've read of Nietzsche is "Also
sprach Zarathustra" (translated into English as
"Thus spake Zarathustra". Zarathustra is Zoroaster,
a pre-Christian Jesus-type-oerson, whose religion
still persists in Northwestern Iran, in fact I worked
once with a guy who was a Zoroastrian from that
part of Iran where the religion survives. Although
many of the chapters of Nietzsche's book end
with the phrase "Also sprach Zarathustra", I'm not
sure to what extent Nietzsche's thoughts really
reflect Zoroaster.
I'm not sure personally if I'd call what I know of
Nietzsche as a "philosophy" if that word implies
"truth". Maybe it could be seen as a way of living
without asserting its truth or falsehood. I read
"Also Sprach Zarathustra" as though it were a
novel, not a pretense to absolute truth like Kant.
GBS has a play "Man and Superman" inspired
by Nietzsche, so he'd done some thinking about
Nietzsche himself but I'm not sure if his
conclusions, if he had any, were any better than
mine. As Hamlet said to Horatio, "There are
more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than
are dreamt of in your philosophy."
For myself, although I sometimes find some of
what's called "philosophy" interesting, mostly it
flows off me like water off a duck's back. I'm a
much bigger fan of "art" which creates worlds
rather than trying to delineate the general world
in which we find ourselves.
Zarathustra was an early Persian prophet who is credited with the origin
of monotheism and the concept of forces for good and evil.
Zoroastrianism dominated the religious belief system in the region until
it was replaced by Islam, but a few followers still persist today.
Nietzsche evidently used Zarathustra in a work of fiction to promote his
ideas about the futility of morality. He was opposed to religion in the
context of the role of morality imposed by a deity as I understand it.
He evidently had strong feelings about how history repeated itself
despite our best efforts to emphasize good over evil. His notion of
ubermench was that humans could only strive to take it all in stride.
He evidently had only disdain for the mob and supported strong
leadership that was above morality which explains his influence on
German culture, ultimately resulting in German imperialism in WWI and
Nazism in WWII.
The reason that Nietzsche peaked my interest is the reference to him in
Pinker's "Enlightenment Now." Pinker argues that Nietzsche opposed the
ideals of the Enlightenment or at least did not support the notion of
progress based on an emphasis on human rights. This is not an argument
about religion since Pinker is an atheist himself. Rather it is a
criticism of Nietzsche's implied opposition to democratic rule and
acceptance of manipulation of the masses by autocratic rulers. Pinker
links Nietzsche's writings to emergence of alt-right and other white
supremacist movements in the US and Europe.
Personally, I find this interesting because Nietzsche's ideas have
persisted in political thought, perhaps not consciously, but as
justification for abuse of political power. Hitler is sometimes cited
as an example. As I mentioned earlier, I'm not sure how much of this
was Nietzsche and how much was his sister who promoted his ideas and
writings after he became disabled by whatever was wrong with his mind.
She was an enthusiastic supporter of Nazism.
One thing is very clear to me. Nietzsche was a very complicated person,
given to extreme ideas. It would be interesting to get the opinion of
psychologists about his sanity. Was he brilliant or just insane? How
https://mindhacks.com/2006/12/01/what-caused-nietzsches-insanity-and-death/
Another hypothesis is that he died of brain cancer:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/3313279/Madness-of-Nietzsche-was-cancer-not-syphilis.html
rumpelstiltskin
2018-06-14 17:08:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Post by islander
Does anyone here know anything about Friedrich Nietzsche? While I have
heard the name and seen quotes attributed to him from time to time, I
really know nothing about him or his political philosophy. Basically,
he was a late 19th century German philosopher who supposedly had a
strong influence on western philosophy. His writings spanned a lot of
topics and it is not completely clear how much of what he believed was
biased by his sister who took responsibility for his writings after he
went crazy at age 44. She had a definite tendency to promote German
nationalism that may have had influence leading to both world wars.
So, why would anyone care about Nietzsche? My interest is in how his
thinking may still be influencing politics today, not in a good way.
Has anyone here developed any opinion about him and his writings?
A few quick internet searches indicates to me that studying Friedrich
Nietzsche could consume weeks or months (or years?). However, as a
-----------
"Liberalism turns men into cattle.” ~ Friedrich Nietzsche [1]
Friedrich Nietzsche was not in favor of Democracy. He equates
Democracy with Christianity
https://www.quora.com/What-were-Nietzsches-political-views
--------------
Nietzsche’s existential philosophy included such things as;
Popularized the idea that God is dead.
"God isn't dead" of course. "God" never was, so it's
only the belief in "God" that is now dead for many.
https://tinyurl.com/y8kzbefp
Without a Big Daddy to tell you what to do, you are
of course on your own to find a "purpose to life", and
anything you make up has to be a fiction because it
doesn't have any basis outside itself. Nevertheless,
the fiction is better than a fake "truth" such as "god"
because a fake truth may well lead you into your own
errors but that's better than following other people's
errors.
The only big thing I've read of Nietzsche is "Also
sprach Zarathustra" (translated into English as
"Thus spake Zarathustra". Zarathustra is Zoroaster,
a pre-Christian Jesus-type-oerson, whose religion
still persists in Northwestern Iran, in fact I worked
once with a guy who was a Zoroastrian from that
part of Iran where the religion survives. Although
many of the chapters of Nietzsche's book end
with the phrase "Also sprach Zarathustra", I'm not
sure to what extent Nietzsche's thoughts really
reflect Zoroaster.
I'm not sure personally if I'd call what I know of
Nietzsche as a "philosophy" if that word implies
"truth". Maybe it could be seen as a way of living
without asserting its truth or falsehood. I read
"Also Sprach Zarathustra" as though it were a
novel, not a pretense to absolute truth like Kant.
GBS has a play "Man and Superman" inspired
by Nietzsche, so he'd done some thinking about
Nietzsche himself but I'm not sure if his
conclusions, if he had any, were any better than
mine. As Hamlet said to Horatio, "There are
more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than
are dreamt of in your philosophy."
For myself, although I sometimes find some of
what's called "philosophy" interesting, mostly it
flows off me like water off a duck's back. I'm a
much bigger fan of "art" which creates worlds
rather than trying to delineate the general world
in which we find ourselves.
Zarathustra was an early Persian prophet who is credited with the origin
of monotheism and the concept of forces for good and evil.
One of Nietzsche's books (which I haven't read) is entitled
"Beyond Good and Evil".
Post by islander
Zoroastrianism dominated the religious belief system in the region until
it was replaced by Islam, but a few followers still persist today.
Nietzsche evidently used Zarathustra in a work of fiction to promote his
ideas about the futility of morality. He was opposed to religion in the
context of the role of morality imposed by a deity as I understand it.
He evidently had strong feelings about how history repeated itself
despite our best efforts to emphasize good over evil. His notion of
ubermench was that humans could only strive to take it all in stride.
He evidently had only disdain for the mob and supported strong
leadership that was above morality which explains his influence on
German culture, ultimately resulting in German imperialism in WWI and
Nazism in WWII.
The reason that Nietzsche peaked
Schoolmarm here, that should be "piqued".
(Probably a spell-check gotcha.)
Post by islander
my interest is the reference to him in
Pinker's "Enlightenment Now." Pinker argues that Nietzsche opposed the
ideals of the Enlightenment or at least did not support the notion of
progress based on an emphasis on human rights. This is not an argument
about religion since Pinker is an atheist himself. Rather it is a
criticism of Nietzsche's implied opposition to democratic rule and
acceptance of manipulation of the masses by autocratic rulers. Pinker
links Nietzsche's writings to emergence of alt-right and other white
supremacist movements in the US and Europe.
Nietzsche can be used that way, but so can Christianity.
As all too often, the unattractive aspects are more the work
of the followers than of the originators.
Post by islander
Personally, I find this interesting because Nietzsche's ideas have
persisted in political thought, perhaps not consciously, but as
justification for abuse of political power.
They can be used that way, but a nation of shopkeepers is
pretty dull whereas a few original thinkers are dangerous but
far more full of life.
Post by islander
Hitler is sometimes cited
as an example. As I mentioned earlier, I'm not sure how much of this
was Nietzsche and how much was his sister who promoted his ideas and
writings after he became disabled by whatever was wrong with his mind.
She was an enthusiastic supporter of Nazism.
I didn't see any necessity toward Nazism in "Thus spake
Zarathustra". I have heard that Nietzsche's sister was a nasty
piece of work though, and she took over the propagation of
his work while she was changing his diapers toward the end
of his life.
Post by islander
One thing is very clear to me. Nietzsche was a very complicated person,
given to extreme ideas. It would be interesting to get the opinion of
psychologists about his sanity. Was he brilliant or just insane? How
https://mindhacks.com/2006/12/01/what-caused-nietzsches-insanity-and-death/
It could be both. That wouldn't be unprecedented.
islander
2018-06-14 20:08:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Post by islander
Does anyone here know anything about Friedrich Nietzsche? While I have
heard the name and seen quotes attributed to him from time to time, I
really know nothing about him or his political philosophy. Basically,
he was a late 19th century German philosopher who supposedly had a
strong influence on western philosophy. His writings spanned a lot of
topics and it is not completely clear how much of what he believed was
biased by his sister who took responsibility for his writings after he
went crazy at age 44. She had a definite tendency to promote German
nationalism that may have had influence leading to both world wars.
So, why would anyone care about Nietzsche? My interest is in how his
thinking may still be influencing politics today, not in a good way.
Has anyone here developed any opinion about him and his writings?
A few quick internet searches indicates to me that studying Friedrich
Nietzsche could consume weeks or months (or years?). However, as a
-----------
"Liberalism turns men into cattle.” ~ Friedrich Nietzsche [1]
Friedrich Nietzsche was not in favor of Democracy. He equates
Democracy with Christianity
https://www.quora.com/What-were-Nietzsches-political-views
--------------
Nietzsche’s existential philosophy included such things as;
Popularized the idea that God is dead.
"God isn't dead" of course. "God" never was, so it's
only the belief in "God" that is now dead for many.
https://tinyurl.com/y8kzbefp
Without a Big Daddy to tell you what to do, you are
of course on your own to find a "purpose to life", and
anything you make up has to be a fiction because it
doesn't have any basis outside itself. Nevertheless,
the fiction is better than a fake "truth" such as "god"
because a fake truth may well lead you into your own
errors but that's better than following other people's
errors.
The only big thing I've read of Nietzsche is "Also
sprach Zarathustra" (translated into English as
"Thus spake Zarathustra". Zarathustra is Zoroaster,
a pre-Christian Jesus-type-oerson, whose religion
still persists in Northwestern Iran, in fact I worked
once with a guy who was a Zoroastrian from that
part of Iran where the religion survives. Although
many of the chapters of Nietzsche's book end
with the phrase "Also sprach Zarathustra", I'm not
sure to what extent Nietzsche's thoughts really
reflect Zoroaster.
I'm not sure personally if I'd call what I know of
Nietzsche as a "philosophy" if that word implies
"truth". Maybe it could be seen as a way of living
without asserting its truth or falsehood. I read
"Also Sprach Zarathustra" as though it were a
novel, not a pretense to absolute truth like Kant.
GBS has a play "Man and Superman" inspired
by Nietzsche, so he'd done some thinking about
Nietzsche himself but I'm not sure if his
conclusions, if he had any, were any better than
mine. As Hamlet said to Horatio, "There are
more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than
are dreamt of in your philosophy."
For myself, although I sometimes find some of
what's called "philosophy" interesting, mostly it
flows off me like water off a duck's back. I'm a
much bigger fan of "art" which creates worlds
rather than trying to delineate the general world
in which we find ourselves.
Zarathustra was an early Persian prophet who is credited with the origin
of monotheism and the concept of forces for good and evil.
One of Nietzsche's books (which I haven't read) is entitled
"Beyond Good and Evil".
Post by islander
Zoroastrianism dominated the religious belief system in the region until
it was replaced by Islam, but a few followers still persist today.
Nietzsche evidently used Zarathustra in a work of fiction to promote his
ideas about the futility of morality. He was opposed to religion in the
context of the role of morality imposed by a deity as I understand it.
He evidently had strong feelings about how history repeated itself
despite our best efforts to emphasize good over evil. His notion of
ubermench was that humans could only strive to take it all in stride.
He evidently had only disdain for the mob and supported strong
leadership that was above morality which explains his influence on
German culture, ultimately resulting in German imperialism in WWI and
Nazism in WWII.
The reason that Nietzsche peaked
Schoolmarm here, that should be "piqued".
(Probably a spell-check gotcha.)
Post by islander
my interest is the reference to him in
Pinker's "Enlightenment Now." Pinker argues that Nietzsche opposed the
ideals of the Enlightenment or at least did not support the notion of
progress based on an emphasis on human rights. This is not an argument
about religion since Pinker is an atheist himself. Rather it is a
criticism of Nietzsche's implied opposition to democratic rule and
acceptance of manipulation of the masses by autocratic rulers. Pinker
links Nietzsche's writings to emergence of alt-right and other white
supremacist movements in the US and Europe.
Nietzsche can be used that way, but so can Christianity.
As all too often, the unattractive aspects are more the work
of the followers than of the originators.
Post by islander
Personally, I find this interesting because Nietzsche's ideas have
persisted in political thought, perhaps not consciously, but as
justification for abuse of political power.
They can be used that way, but a nation of shopkeepers is
pretty dull whereas a few original thinkers are dangerous but
far more full of life.
Post by islander
Hitler is sometimes cited
as an example. As I mentioned earlier, I'm not sure how much of this
was Nietzsche and how much was his sister who promoted his ideas and
writings after he became disabled by whatever was wrong with his mind.
She was an enthusiastic supporter of Nazism.
I didn't see any necessity toward Nazism in "Thus spake
Zarathustra". I have heard that Nietzsche's sister was a nasty
piece of work though, and she took over the propagation of
his work while she was changing his diapers toward the end
of his life.
Post by islander
One thing is very clear to me. Nietzsche was a very complicated person,
given to extreme ideas. It would be interesting to get the opinion of
psychologists about his sanity. Was he brilliant or just insane? How
https://mindhacks.com/2006/12/01/what-caused-nietzsches-insanity-and-death/
It could be both. That wouldn't be unprecedented.
No, it wouldn't be unprecedented. Neitzsche was sufficiently all over
the place in his writings, especially toward the end, that advocates and
critics have had a field day in writing about him. Personally, I think
that his ideas were justification for abuses by powerful leaders and
contrary to democratic ideals.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-06-14 20:46:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Post by islander
Does anyone here know anything about Friedrich Nietzsche? While I have
heard the name and seen quotes attributed to him from time to time, I
really know nothing about him or his political philosophy. Basically,
he was a late 19th century German philosopher who supposedly had a
strong influence on western philosophy. His writings spanned a lot of
topics and it is not completely clear how much of what he believed was
biased by his sister who took responsibility for his writings after he
went crazy at age 44. She had a definite tendency to promote German
nationalism that may have had influence leading to both world wars.
So, why would anyone care about Nietzsche? My interest is in how his
thinking may still be influencing politics today, not in a good way.
Has anyone here developed any opinion about him and his writings?
A few quick internet searches indicates to me that studying Friedrich
Nietzsche could consume weeks or months (or years?). However, as a
-----------
"Liberalism turns men into cattle.” ~ Friedrich Nietzsche [1]
Friedrich Nietzsche was not in favor of Democracy. He equates
Democracy with Christianity
https://www.quora.com/What-were-Nietzsches-political-views
--------------
Nietzsche’s existential philosophy included such things as;
Popularized the idea that God is dead.
"God isn't dead" of course. "God" never was, so it's
only the belief in "God" that is now dead for many.
https://tinyurl.com/y8kzbefp
Without a Big Daddy to tell you what to do, you are
of course on your own to find a "purpose to life", and
anything you make up has to be a fiction because it
doesn't have any basis outside itself. Nevertheless,
the fiction is better than a fake "truth" such as "god"
because a fake truth may well lead you into your own
errors but that's better than following other people's
errors.
The only big thing I've read of Nietzsche is "Also
sprach Zarathustra" (translated into English as
"Thus spake Zarathustra". Zarathustra is Zoroaster,
a pre-Christian Jesus-type-oerson, whose religion
still persists in Northwestern Iran, in fact I worked
once with a guy who was a Zoroastrian from that
part of Iran where the religion survives. Although
many of the chapters of Nietzsche's book end
with the phrase "Also sprach Zarathustra", I'm not
sure to what extent Nietzsche's thoughts really
reflect Zoroaster.
I'm not sure personally if I'd call what I know of
Nietzsche as a "philosophy" if that word implies
"truth". Maybe it could be seen as a way of living
without asserting its truth or falsehood. I read
"Also Sprach Zarathustra" as though it were a
novel, not a pretense to absolute truth like Kant.
GBS has a play "Man and Superman" inspired
by Nietzsche, so he'd done some thinking about
Nietzsche himself but I'm not sure if his
conclusions, if he had any, were any better than
mine. As Hamlet said to Horatio, "There are
more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than
are dreamt of in your philosophy."
For myself, although I sometimes find some of
what's called "philosophy" interesting, mostly it
flows off me like water off a duck's back. I'm a
much bigger fan of "art" which creates worlds
rather than trying to delineate the general world
in which we find ourselves.
Zarathustra was an early Persian prophet who is credited with the origin
of monotheism and the concept of forces for good and evil.
One of Nietzsche's books (which I haven't read) is entitled
"Beyond Good and Evil".
Post by islander
Zoroastrianism dominated the religious belief system in the region until
it was replaced by Islam, but a few followers still persist today.
Nietzsche evidently used Zarathustra in a work of fiction to promote his
ideas about the futility of morality. He was opposed to religion in the
context of the role of morality imposed by a deity as I understand it.
He evidently had strong feelings about how history repeated itself
despite our best efforts to emphasize good over evil. His notion of
ubermench was that humans could only strive to take it all in stride.
He evidently had only disdain for the mob and supported strong
leadership that was above morality which explains his influence on
German culture, ultimately resulting in German imperialism in WWI and
Nazism in WWII.
The reason that Nietzsche peaked
Schoolmarm here, that should be "piqued".
(Probably a spell-check gotcha.)
Post by islander
my interest is the reference to him in
Pinker's "Enlightenment Now." Pinker argues that Nietzsche opposed the
ideals of the Enlightenment or at least did not support the notion of
progress based on an emphasis on human rights. This is not an argument
about religion since Pinker is an atheist himself. Rather it is a
criticism of Nietzsche's implied opposition to democratic rule and
acceptance of manipulation of the masses by autocratic rulers. Pinker
links Nietzsche's writings to emergence of alt-right and other white
supremacist movements in the US and Europe.
Nietzsche can be used that way, but so can Christianity.
As all too often, the unattractive aspects are more the work
of the followers than of the originators.
Post by islander
Personally, I find this interesting because Nietzsche's ideas have
persisted in political thought, perhaps not consciously, but as
justification for abuse of political power.
They can be used that way, but a nation of shopkeepers is
pretty dull whereas a few original thinkers are dangerous but
far more full of life.
Post by islander
Hitler is sometimes cited
as an example. As I mentioned earlier, I'm not sure how much of this
was Nietzsche and how much was his sister who promoted his ideas and
writings after he became disabled by whatever was wrong with his mind.
She was an enthusiastic supporter of Nazism.
I didn't see any necessity toward Nazism in "Thus spake
Zarathustra". I have heard that Nietzsche's sister was a nasty
piece of work though, and she took over the propagation of
his work while she was changing his diapers toward the end
of his life.
Post by islander
One thing is very clear to me. Nietzsche was a very complicated person,
given to extreme ideas. It would be interesting to get the opinion of
psychologists about his sanity. Was he brilliant or just insane? How
https://mindhacks.com/2006/12/01/what-caused-nietzsches-insanity-and-death/
It could be both. That wouldn't be unprecedented.
No, it wouldn't be unprecedented. Neitzsche was sufficiently all over
the place in his writings, especially toward the end, that advocates and
critics have had a field day in writing about him. Personally, I think
that his ideas were justification for abuses by powerful leaders and
contrary to democratic ideals.
They have been used that way, but I'd question to what
extent Nietzsche himself can be blamed for that. Maybe
he can though: I don't know enough to say for sure. I think
I'm pretty great stuff myself, and by rights I should be king
of the world, but I don't think that would be grounds for
laying the abuses of active megalomaniacs on me who am
just a passive megalomaniac.
me
2018-06-14 21:28:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
You can say that about lots of ideas. Take the notion of The Public Interest, for example. Where did you get that idea from? Behold the abuses! What about Marx? Pretty much any idea can be abused. The ideas forming the principles on which the US Constitutions was created have been abused so now the country is bankrupt and socially dividing.
me
2018-06-13 19:48:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Nietzshe would disdain followers of all faiths including you and yours.
https://whitelocust.wordpress.com/2011/05/12/the-nietzschean-prophecies/
https://aphelis.net/nietzsche-socialism-principle-equality/
d***@agent.com
2018-06-14 18:24:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Does anyone here know anything about Friedrich Nietzsche? While I have
heard the name and seen quotes attributed to him from time to time, I
really know nothing about him or his political philosophy. Basically,
he was a late 19th century German philosopher who supposedly had a
strong influence on western philosophy. His writings spanned a lot of
topics and it is not completely clear how much of what he believed was
biased by his sister who took responsibility for his writings after he
went crazy at age 44. She had a definite tendency to promote German
nationalism that may have had influence leading to both world wars.
So, why would anyone care about Nietzsche? My interest is in how his
thinking may still be influencing politics today, not in a good way.
Has anyone here developed any opinion about him and his writings?
https://genius.com/Friedrich-nietzsche-the-birth-of-tragedy-chap-15-annotated
[...]
There would be no science if it concerned itself only with that
one naked goddess and with nothing else. For then its disciples
would have to feel like people who wanted to dig a hole straight
through the earth, and each of them sees that, even with the
greatest lifelong effort, he is in a position to dig through only
a really small piece of the immense depths, and that piece will be
covered over in front of his eyes by the work of the person who
comes after him, so that a third person would apparently do well
to select on his own initiative a new place for his tunnelling
efforts.

Well, if someone now convincingly demonstrates that it is impossible
to reach the antipodes by this direct route, who will still want to
continue working on in the old depths, unless in the meantime he
lets himself be satisfied with the possibility of finding some
valuable rock or discovering some natural law?

For that reason, Lessing, the most honest theoretical man, ventured
to state that for him the search for the truth counted for more than
truth itself. With that statement the fundamental secret of science,
is unmasked, to the astonishment, indeed, the anger, of scientists.

Now, of course, alongside occasional recognitions like Lessing’s,
prompted by excessive honesty if not high spirits, stands a profound
delusion, which first came into the world in the person of Socrates,
the unshakeable faith that thinking, guided by the main idea of
causality, might reach into the deepest abyss of being and that
thinking is capable, not just of understanding being, but even of
correcting it. This sublime metaphysical delusion is instinctually
part of science and leads it over and over again to its limits, at
which point it must turn into art, something which is really
predictable with this mechanical process.
[...]

Nietzsche: The Gay Science: With a Prelude in German Rhymes
and an Appendix .
[...]
35. Ice.
Yes! At times I do make ice:
Useful is ice for digesting!
If you had much for digesting,
oh how you would love my ice!
[...]
Loading...