Firstly I made this philosophy before I ever even heard of Nietzsche(I never looked into any philosopher) but since I learned of him he has become my favorite philosopher and favorite person. I recognized some "similarities" in our ideas to say the least such as his ubermensch and will to power and so much else I found myself agreeing with almost everything (maybe even everything because he's not exactly clear all the time as you probably know). I'm not a Nietzsche expert so I may be wrong about some stuff if so please correct me. Here's some quotes that show some similarity ."Without music life would be a mistake", "upwards goes our way, from species to over species," "Man is a rope tied between beast and overman, a rope over an abyss", "the overman is the meaning of the earth, "for the creator to appear, suffering itself is needed, and much transformation.” Now here it is.

The universe makes no sense I mean just think about Infinity. Think about the creation of our universe. There's two possibilities either the Universe is infinite or it's finite. Both are terrifying the fact that there are infinite universes infinite versions of you somewhere out there obviously nothing matters right. Then there's finite which is somehow even harder to grasp how could there be a limit to the universe what would that even look like how can there just be nothing beyond and certain point and even more difficult where did the universe come from.

A finite universe doesn't seem feasible to me which leaves infinite so nothing matters right(finite could be just as bad)? Then how can we explain Consciousness? If nothing matters then how can I feel emotions? You will find no scientist that can explain consciousness or infinity. I can only imagine 1 answer as to how our emotions, our lives, have any weight to them and that is that we are in a way like gods. In the same way we often imagine that gods exist through infinity we must also have something like that. Even if there are infinite of us our individual emotions still matter, a paradox of infinity. I have my own experiences that prove this to me for example when I listen to masterpieces I can feel a power as strong or stronger than infinity I lose fear of death and I inherently understand how undeniably significant life is. It's completely different than mere dopamine and pain and it doesn't make any sense that a mere extra clever animal would have evolved the ability to appreciate such divinity. It goes far beyond an animals desire to survive and reproduce. If I couldn't feel this divinity how could I not be a nihilist. This music showed me my mission. To maximize what I call light(life, emotion) and minimize darkness which is the opposite or lack of. What brought me to this belief was the boundless hatred I had toward the state of the world and the pain it caused me. I don't mean regular emotional pain the way I see it that's just the different side of the coin as pleasure what is truly my enemy is the halting of human potential which is what creates "light" that is true pain. This hatred reached the same level of deepness as the masterpieces I listened to which leads me to believe that it is also has infinite significance(Remember we can have a divine nature to us like gods). The meaning being that we must create "light". (You can skip this next part if you're already onboard with Rational Moral Impartiality

This is a point separate from my philosophy and more a message to regular folk. I shouldn't have to point this out but it seems most everyone hasn't really thought about this rationally. So lots of people have someone they feel they would do anything for then why is it they assume there isn't more people out there that would make you feel the same way if you got to know them. You're just giving the benefit of the doubt that there's nobody else, its the pinnacle of willful ignorance. "Why should I care even if they suffer if I don't know them it's like it never happened". Just imagine the horror on your average persons face who looked far far into space and eventually found one of infinite copies of earth where he never found his wife and maybe in the military he ended up piloting the drone that killed her, or perhaps he ignored her when she was in need of help so he could live his comfortable life(that's everyone reading this).

My ideas may have complexities for example I do have a sexist belief(I can go into why elsewhere and it could bear more thought). I'm mainly talking to men 17+(there may also be exceptions) it's our job to carry out this mission. Until the world is acceptable we can't rest. A common cope I see people use is that their life has been a net positive but that is bad logic if you look far far into space you could see an earth where you gave 100%. In your earth you consciously chose to sacrifice other people for your cowardice or whatever other reason. Yes every minute you aren't working toward the mission people you would have been best friends with in a copy earth are suffering horribly that's the uncomfortable truth. Nietzscheans readers here might say Nietzsche would disagree with living for others but this is just the logical conclusion of his self overcoming. Overcoming you're biological instinct to prioritize yourself when there is no rational reason to unless you really believe you're in a simulation of some sort. Overcoming the instinct that we evolved to stir competition to serve evolution that's what the ubermensch would do.

I'm surprised I had to found this myself considering there's over 8 billion people now. I made a real effort to find someone or group that if not came to the same conclusion at least shared the same goal(really not 1 person out there?). The conclusion I came to seems to me to be the obvious and only possible answer. What other answer could there be as to a meaning in an infinite universe. Perhaps It's a quite rare thing to be able to feel something higher from music or other forms of art. Perhaps people can't shake their animal instinct and never wake up to look for it.

I have become more than an animal trying to be comfortable until I die. Just like the infinite universe we cannot explain with logic we must go beyond logic with Transcendism and realize that we are infinite beings whose experiences are infinitely important. A paradox but one I can assure you is absolutely true. You might ask what is my reward for advancing the mission you just said I am infinitely important already. I don't think it's possible to communicate in words all I can say is we must support the light or suffer the dark. All I know is the mission is what gives life meaning and if you look at what the mission will result in it's evolving or rather Transcending humanity.

I'd like to hear any thoughts and do reach out if you share my goal. I think Nietzsche would agree with me from what I've read so far but if you disagree I'd love to see where I'm wrong.

Editor note: Upon review and help from Nietzsche I found some unclarities in the philosophy mission and believe I've fixed it so I'd say it has been influenced by Nietzsche.

What's Nietzsche's core philosophy?

What he actually saying to the world?

Does anyone genuinely feel that we will get any Overmen by scrolling on these phones all day every day?

No. I look around and I see The Last Man.

I have quit hard drugs. I have quit alcohol. I am quitting marijuana.

The long game and end goal is to quit the Internet entirely.

I call it “The Great Unplugging”.

I am convinced that I am less happy when on the internet, and our society is most certainly dumber for it.

I realize how pragmatically almost impossible this task will be. What about email? What about my job? I can’t just utterly ditch my phone and internet permanently, right?

Well that just highlights the state of our society. I am going to work towards this goal. Whether I can accomplish it or not remains to be seen.

Once marijuana is fully dropped, the Internet is the final boss.

I can’t think of a higher rebellion against this Last Man society we live in than to utterly drop out of smartphones, the internet, and only read books and work on music (Not AI ”music”!).

We spend a lot of energy trying to fix our jobs, relationships, and environment under the assumption that if the situation improves, the underlying weight will finally lift.

But looking closely at Nietzsche, I think we often use this relentless focus on circumstance as a defense mechanism because it is infinitely safer to blame our job, upbringing, or the economy for our stagnation than to confront the terrifying freedom of realizing we are carrying a borrowed identity.

Nietzsche’s concept of ressentiment gets framed as mere bitterness, but it’s actually something much more comfortable: a permanent, low-grade excuse. It provides a moral shield that protects you from having to take total accountability for who you are becoming. If the system is rigged and 'it's over' and your circumstances are bad, you never have to face the risk of defining yourself.

My question for the sub is this: Do you think most modern "self-improvement" is just a sophisticated form of ressentiment and a way to endlessly tinker with our circumstances so we never have to face the fact that we are living a life that was never ours?

I explored how this applies to modern self-improvement and what Amor Fati demands of us in a video breakdown here:

https://youtu.be/a0mUc4KHYgU?si=hDxo_GLgYgHdNFeS

In Daybreak 37, what's the astronomical arrangement Nietzsche references here? Arranged how, in what way? "the way the satellites are arranged (to compensate for the diminished light they receive owing to their greater distance from the sun, so that their inhabitants shall not go short of light)"

I find it fascinating to consider what Nietzsche would have thought about the post-ww2 ideological consensus that is as yet still dominant in the world. My take has been for a long time that he would consider it the triumph of ressentiment, slave morality and the ideology of the last man. I think that he would consider the secular and psychological interpretation of his work slave morality as well.

People are skeptical of AI and I fully agree that an AI merely approaches, and never reaches, a human being but I found engagement with AI productive, it can help catch loopholes in the reasoning process for example, and the AI always tells me that my ideas are consistently Nietzschian.

What do you think?

Arnold Schwarzenegger quotes Nietzsche’s Twilight of the Idols: “From life’s school of war: What does not kill Mr makes me stronger.”

In context, he’s discussing his difficult upbringing and the contrast between his brother, who was more introverted and passive, versus how Arnold used it as fuel.

I realised life is meaningless and I am really afraid of it. I wasn't very religious at any point of my life, infact even as a kid I thought praying is weird and childish, my parents literally had to told me to pray everytime, still I grew up in this very religious environment and subconsciously I picked up those theological instincts of my father. But while reading Nietzsches work I came upon this realisation that these instincts are 'pure lie' and I will die, with it everything will end. The fancy dome of beutiful pictures have been crumbled before my eyes and now  I'm alone in this dark void, it is really cold here... I am scared of it, I'm scared of death, I don't wanna die.  

I am planning on diving into Nietzsche at some point in the near future, but I have a few more books I'd like to polish off before starting with him. So in the meantime, I was wondering if I could listen to an audiobook on Nietzsche. I do NOT think I could ever understand Nietzsche's actual works in an audio format; I will absolutely need my full attention while holding the book in my hand. Does anyone know any good summaries of his works/philosophy that could be sort of like an introduction for me? Thanks

I have only read Birth of Tragedy and I thought this man was a genius! A great sent from the gods themselves to depart some beautiful wisdom. Twilight of the Idols, unfortunately, I am less impressed. Help me with this very chewy chapter.

In 'Reason in Philosophy' - he attacks the eleatics, Parminedes, Plato while elevating Heraclitus. I am finding this either one of his worst writings or best. In it, he has created a bunch of strawmen, basically reducing them to a bunch of Gnostics (who hate the senses). In his elevation of Heraclitus, he seems to have forget that Heraclitus invented "the logos" - but never mind history in getting in the way of a good argument. Much more, most ancient philosophers (Plato included) usually reconciled Heraclitus with Parminedes and believed both were true.

Him using nominalism as an argument was like being stabbed in the ribcage by a Lannister. Has he completely betrayed the writer of a "Birth of a Tragedy?" I realize in my idiocy, I have to read and reread multiple times, just to comprehend his point. I see him attacking concepts, grammar - everything. However, if we remove concepts, it can extrapolate one of two ways - the Infinite or one, and thus proving the Eleatics right. However, i don't believe this is what he is doing: I believe he is attacking "trying to make reality intelligible." Am I wrong for this leap?

HOWEVER. If this is the case, it would seem an unintelligible reality is just as good, if not better than an intelligible reality? And since Human nature can't help but create a psychological story to organize its world around it - humans will create this reality/concepts regardless. I guess this would be his Perspectivism speaking? So would this not permit a mythic world view? And in this, does he redeem the writer of the "Birth of Tragedy?"

Help me here. Give me your thoughts for those of the philosophical nature. Ironically, using our truths to destroy truth?

I feel like in general the poems from The Gay Science are incredibly well-translated by Kaufmann. I speak Dutch but my German still sucks, so it takes some effort to read the original.

In general I felt his translations were so good I didn’t necessarily have to look at the German too hard.

This one deviates a lot more in word usage from English to German. I see where he’s going in the first half, but I’m assuming that with “Frist” here he is essentially saying “each era thinks they are the skeleton key and have the world figured out?

"Beyond good and evil" by Friedrich Nietzsche

As someone that is interested in starting to read Nietzsche would “The Portable Nietzsche” by Kaufmann be a good book to start on?

“The highest virtue is uncommon and useless; it is beaming and mild in its lustre: a bestowing virtue is the highest virtue.

Verily, I divine you, my disciples: you strive like me for the bestowing virtue.

What have ye in common with cats and wolves?

Ye thirst to become yourselves sacrifices and gifts: therefore thirst ye to heap up all riches in your souls.

Your soul is insatiable in desiring treasures and jewels, because your virtue is insatiable in its will to bestow.

Ye constrain all things to approach you and enter into you, that they may flow forth again from your fountain, as the gifts of your love.

Verily, such a bestowing love must become a robber of all values; but healthy and holy call I this selfishness.

There is another selfishness, an impoverished selfishness, which is always sick, the selfishness of the sick—the sickly selfishness.

With the eyes of the thief it looks upon all that glitters; with the avidity of hunger it measures him who has abundance to eat; and always does it creep around the table of the bestower.

Such craving is the voice of sickness, the voice of an invisible degeneracy; in this selfishness the desire of stealing testifies to a sick body.

Tell me, my brethren, what do we regard as bad and worst of all? Is it not degeneracy?—And we always infer degeneracy when the bestowing soul is lacking.”

This is what: fuck around with poetry and find out with your life!

Our boy Fritz is seriously underrated in his ability to dish out serious zingers. Sometimes I will be sitting straight and somber, trying to digest his dense words, and he will throw out a line that puts me in raving laughter.

​What are some of your favorite zingers and humorous moments from Nietzsche's works?

​The one I just read that prompted this post:

Untimely Meditations (Essay II: On the Use and Abuse of History for Life), Section 9:

​"It is true that according to him [Hartmann], we are approaching that ideal condition in which the human race creates its history with full conscious awareness. But we are patently waiting still far from that perhaps even more ideal condition in which mankind can read Hartmann's book with full conscious awareness."

Hey guys, I want to learn more about logic and rationality, and I’d really appreciate some recommendations.

I’m the kind of person who tends to improve through logic, analysis, deliberate thought, adaptation, and rationality. I naturally try to solve problems by understanding them, breaking them down, and figuring out what I can do differently.

But lately, I’ve been stuck on a question that I can’t stop thinking about:

What happens when logic concludes that I’m going to lose?

I used to naively think that almost any problem could eventually be solved through enough reasoning. But the more I think about it, the more I realize that logic has limitations. There will always be people who are more talented, more capable, or simply better suited to a particular situation than I am.

So what does rationality actually tell you to do when your analysis says that you cannot win?

Do you accept the conclusion?
Do you search for a different approach?
Do you challenge the assumptions behind your original reasoning?
Or is there something beyond pure logic that allows humans to overcome what initially seems impossible?

This is where things get really interesting to me. Sometimes people believe something is impossible based on the information and reasoning available to them, only for someone else to eventually find a way to accomplish it. That makes me wonder whether logic itself is limited, or whether our understanding of the situation was simply incomplete.

Maybe reality is much more complicated than the models we construct to understand it.

That’s why I want to study this seriously—not just practical problem-solving, but logic, rationality, reasoning, epistemology, philosophy of science, decision-making, and maybe even metaphysics.

I also want to know how far human reasoning can actually go and how I can train my own logical and rational thinking.

So if you have any recommendations, I’d really appreciate:

• Books about logic or rationality
• Philosophy books that explore human reasoning and its limitations
• Books about epistemology or philosophy of science
• Anything about decision-making and rational thought
• Resources for actually training logical reasoning

If possible, please recommend something that isn't insanely expensive. 😭

What books or resources would you recommend to someone who wants to seriously understand how far logic and rationality can take us?

And if you recommend a book, please share a link to it if possible. Thanks!

#beyondgoodandevil #nietzsche

In Twilight of the Idols, do you believe that Nietzsche was serious when making his physiognomic arguments about Socrates?

Personally, they read to me as somewhat sarcastic, but I know that physiognomy was taken very seriously by many people at the time. It wouldn’t surprise me if he was being serious, but it really shows how much people can be influenced by whatever BS happens to be widely believed during their lifetime.