Nietzsche Forum.

[Bilby]

I remember there was a Nietzsche forum before the fatel delete key stroke.I never added anyhting in it, but it was good reading.So are we getting it back?

[Defence_mechanism]

im not sure if i recall the thread you're talking about... but i'd certainly be happy to partake!

im currently reading one of Nietzsche's books 'Beyond Good and Evil'. he's a very intersting guy. albeit angry with the world and with many a gripe about philosophers and christrians and women... ;) but, an interesting guy all the same.

usually if someone was a mysogonist i wouldnt give them a bar, but he had things to say about all sorts of other issues that i thought i'd give him a chance...

anyone else have any thoughts?

[sky_pink]

Are you sure? Never noticed anything like it. Sure sounds strange, an entire forum devoted to a single philosopher...

[fractalated]

Nietzsche's thought is so rich and diverse you need more than one forum....

what intrigues me about his life is that he spent so much of it being kicked in the teeth with life, and despite his simultaneous love and hatred of it he never acheived happiness. he died alone and insane. maybe it is the curse of those who stand beyond our world to never be happy within it...

[Antimatter235]

He did achieve happiness but it was short-lived

[Juiceman3000]

I do recall a few threads which were about Nietzsche, although I dont recall an actual sub-forum devoted to just this particular existentialist.

Im sure it was the Existentialism sub-forum you were refering too?

Nietzsche seems to have maintained a relative popularity among existentialists, I suspect because he is fairly easy to read (in the good sense of being straightforward) and because he asks a lot of 'leading' questions which allow the simple readers to feel as if they are partaking.

It always seemed to me that Nietzsche had a very basic grasp of spirituality (especially Christianity) and consequently a lot of his rhetorical questions were not nearly as clever as the 'uninitiated' reader might suppose.

Of course, Nietzsche was forever accused of being 'Anti-Christian' or 'Anti-God', but one forum member suggested that Nietzsche was really playing a game of 'devils advocate' with the reader. In fact, simply challenging the reader to give reason for the faith that lies within him?
The simple readers may not get past answering the 'leading question' with anything less than acceptance -yet- the more sophisticated reader is hopefully answering Nietzsche back with his OWN question.

I personally think he just was bitchy about religion in general, but the former theory is interesting to consider.
(and can still be entirely possible whether Nietzsche intended it that way or not)

Yep, Nietzsche is dead. Exististentialism is on life-support and Christianity is making a fierce comeback - yet - Nietzsche is still worth a good read once in a while.
If nothing else than to reflect on the 'glory days' of Atheism in Philosophy.

[sky_pink]

Well, I respect Nietzsche, but I didn't enjoy Thus Spake Zarathustra as much as I could have. I most value the ideas he expressed in The Birth Of Tragedy.

Anyway, much of what he proposed had already been formulated before.

[Ediction421]

"what intrigues me about his life is that he spent so much of it being kicked in the teeth with life, and despite his simultaneous love and hatred of it he never acheived happiness. he died alone and insane. maybe it is the curse of those who stand beyond our world to never be happy within it..."

Great,so this could mean im fucked. And whats worse, I've already had thoughts that some types of knowledge can be a curse. Maybe if I can find a way to apply it to something usefull...

[jackovgoesjacko]

wtf is a christrian?

[jackovgoesjacko]

is it like a religious crustacean

[jackovgoesjacko]

i dont think a world misanthrope like Nietchze is good or nor do i consider him a contributor of philosophical elegance!

[Brocktoon]

wtf is a christrian?
is it like a religious crustacean
Oh My Non-Dead God that was funny LOL!

Christian reader - 4:00 AM

[weaselpop]

Was Nietzsche an existentialist? I don't really know that much about him. Now I come to think about it, what i do know seems to point to that. I've just never heard his name used in referal to it.

There should be a thread on Kirkegard (sp?), he was the granddaddy of it all.

[Defence_mechanism]

Was Nietzsche an existentialist?
i should say so.

[Andy73]

Nietzsche was first and foremost a psychologist.

[Zaruthustra]

To really know Nietzsche as both a human being and as a philosopher (and to know truly know his philosophy you need to do both), reading more than just one or two of his books from any given point in his philosophical developement is sorta important. As every Nietzschean knows, Birth of Tragedy was written during his period with Wagner and the philosophy of Schopenauer. The intellectuals hated it-but the nationalists and royalty dug it. Nietzsche's philosophy is heroic in its formulation and progression-it required of him over the course of his life to systematically cut himself off from all that he loved and was most attached to. He would destroy and malign his relationships with his family (especially his sister and mother), his surrogate father and best friend Richard Wagner, and his most admired thinker, Schopenhauer. He sacrificed his most valued relationships to communicate his ideas, and not lightly. Nietzsche would continue to be haunted by the memory those he broke away from (especially Wagner), and his sister would go on to make a mockery of him after his mental and physical collapse (it occured after he witnessed a carriage driver whipping a horse excessively and was horrified by the cruelty).

He wasn't the first to champion eternal recurrence, but his ideas on it differed significantly from Heine's, especially in the grave horror he took in it while still believing it to be the most "scientific" and mature view of the afterlife. An important contention of his was that pain is as necessary as pleasure (and they require each other's existence) and that the fact that pain hurts is not an arguement against it. Also, something isn't true because it has positive consquences, and something isn't false because it has negative consequences, and the path towards knowledge isn't a path towards comfort or security.

[Floris]

I'm sorry but what ou're saying is that somebody who goes insane can't be a genius...

I think that's a bit of a prejudice. Nietzsche probably went insane because of several facts. One is that he suffered from severe sudden headaches. A second one is that he was ill and lonely for most of his life. A third one is that he thought he wrote a book that would change the world, but nobody showed any interest in it (the interest came at the end of his life when he was already going insane). Now if that wasn't enough, his close family and friends became followers of Hitler - a man who used Nietzsches theory totally the wrong way... so he didn't only get any interest at all, he saw Germany and even his friends and family turn against his theory. That's quite a reason to become insane.

A strange story I heard was that when Nietzsche had become insane, his sister would wrap him in a tablecloth (because that just looked insane-ish) and show him to people. She actually let those people pay for it.

[thumontico]

Native Americans considered the 'insane' the wisest among them.

Nietzsche was a genius.

[Brocktoon]

I still say Nietzche is currently over-rated.

I have the same take on Soren Keirkagarrd (sp) whom I think becomes 'Trendy' every 8 years or so.

Now Blake.. hehe.. that guy really was insane.
Im not sure if he was 'Genius' but I would be far more intrigued with Blakes wackiness than Nietzshe anyday.

[Floris]

yeah, I'm not saying I'm a big fan of Nietzsche's theories... I do like parts of his theory, but there are a lot of things I don't agree with. That's a major problem with Nietzsche anyway, he never had any structure so almost any 'ism' can use the theory for their beliefs. Fascism, socialism, feminism, aristocratism...

[Brocktoon]

Well Said Stan.

I actually do give a 'measure' of credibility to the popular sentiments of Nietzche being a 'Devils Advocate'.

A small measure.

To me its clear Niezche realised he could not be taken seriously by outright attacking his 'opponents'.
He would throw in enough 'Devils Advocate' to give himself that 'out' whenever needed.

Neitzsche has another thing working to his current popularity advantage - he is relatively easy to read and follow.
This makes him far more 'accessible' to the average college kid who wants to find a philosopher to hang his or her hat on.

Further to that.. its 'romantic' to believe one is a 'Rebel' and 'Going against the Status Quo.'
Nietzche certainly would have been BACK THEN.

Now its pretty much standard 'Think Speak' to be opposed to 'Religion'.

I still say he is over-rated.

[Brocktoon]

I cant get enough Stan Grossman these days!

OH SHIT.... That was fast - Stans name now says 'BANNED'

Can anyone explain why Stan Grossman is banned?

[BlackGuardXIII]

I cant get enough Stan Grossman these days!

OH SHIT.... That was fast - Stans name now says 'BANNED'

Can anyone explain why Stan Grossman is banned?

No, but if I could, I wouldnt cuzz


You wouldn't understand

[MattInVegas]

You guys might be thinking of the "Quote of The Day" thread in Old Hippies.
There's lots of Neitche there.

[Floris]

Nietzsche went insane from syfilis (just found that out, don't know why I didn't think of it myself...)

Nietzsche didn't start a new way of thinking... he was also inpired by others... Ockham for example, a monk in the middle-ages had theories that resemble Nietzsche's very much... Now if this post isn't a paradox I don't know what is...

[thumontico]

All philosophers build on concepts of others.

[amiera]

I've to read:Die fröhliche Wissenschaft. The English title of this book is a bit odd. Does somebody know more Nietzsche forum on the web? They are especially imporant if they criticize Nietzsche.

[Zaruthustra]

If anyone asks me to direct them to a good overview of the many misconceptions had of Nietzsche (especially by people who've never read him), I'll know to direct them here.

True, Nietzsche had suffered quite a bit. But he didn't exactly bring it upon himself. And regardless of what he his personal experience and life was, his philosophy often reflected something quite different. He thought love was man's greatest danger? Now here is just an example of outright manipulation of his words. What you are thinking of, I'm afraid, is pity, which is quite a bit different than love. And here his arguement against pity is anything but pessimistic or hateful. It is this: that we base our relationships on shared joy, and not shared suffering. He all too often upheld the ideal of the comic, of the child, and of laughter. In the last few aphorisms of the Gay Science, he begins making fun of himself for being "too tragic" and to lighten up.

It is just plain ignorant to compare him with Hitler and call him the Nazi's semi official philosopher. First of all, Nietzsche lived and died well before the advent of Nazism. Second of all, he made a point of showing his disgust with anti semite Wagnerians and the proto fascist tendencies of Bismarck's Germany, something quite unusual for a German in that time.

Yes Nietzsche attacked faith, Christianity, morality, as well as reason. He posed the question mark of the value of such things which so many readily assume to be absolute certainties. Sure, today there is nothing remarkable about attacking the archaic institution of the church, but Nietzsche hardly stopped there. He questioned both the conservative traditions of the day as well as the beliefs and intentions of the liberal reformers.

I'm not saying he was flawless. He had many faults, the most despicable being mysoginy. But so many of your attacks on him are the same unfounded and unoriginal ones being made for the latter half of the 20th century.

[Bilby]

I have not read Niezsche but as I understand it he was not against people having any relegious faith per se but against people drowning their problems in a feel good church service or getting drunk.He believed in engaging and comming to terms to with your problems instead.The paradoxical thing is the latter is something preached in many modern churches.
As for Nazism , he was no Nazi but as a person he and his ideas were appropriated by the Nazis. Great Britain had produced Issac Newton and France had produced Voltaire so Germany needed its own original thinker.

[Brocktoon]

Zarathrusta:

Do not refer to 'The Thread' as if this was a group of people 'You' are commenting on.
There are a whole variety of comments and critisisms here (and some silly) but there is no 'You' commenting to 'Us' here bud.

If you have a counter-point by all means address it to the individual posters.
Thnx

*That goes for all of you poster including your Zaruthrusta

;)

[Brocktoon]

In case it went unnoticed.. i was being 'fun' by refering to 'all you posters'. :P

[Zaruthustra]

Actually Bilby, Germany had produced quite a few original thinkers, who Nietszche was not very fond of. His writing style was meant to reflect a "Southern" spirit and to distance himself from traditional Germany philosophy (Kant, Hegel, Schopenhauer). I believe he spent quite a good time in Provence, France, like Van Gho. He was quite disgusted with Bismarck's Germany and the rise in nationalism and anti semitism. There's actually an aphorism in Gay Science where Nietzsche talks about how his contributions to philosophy should never be attributed to the German spirit.:)

[quotient]

Nietszche's problem was the same as all others who follow the path of naturalism to existentialism to nihilism. Morals. The logic doesn't hold. His personal letters show that it is at least possible that he did not believe or live as if he believed his own philosophy. Besides the truth of it can't be proven any more than theism or deism.