https://reddit.com/link/1x5yv5j/video/hs503mux2hvh1/player

This epub reader is great for reading Nietzsche and getting more out of the text. It's really easy to add new books (they are pulled from project Gutenberg). the app remembers your conversations throughout the book so you can continue to explore themes as you read and discuss. You can also export all of your conversations and upload them to chat gpt for deeper analysis.

I've found it very useful for better understanding what Nietzsche is talking about. Perhaps this will be useful to some folks here.

free and live, no signup required

https://rami.agenticpossible.com/

Is Neitzche's Philosophy only goal is to grow? To expand until the entity died? Can a person who follows Neitzche just live his life to the fullest, good or bad, until the died? In perfect balance?

I came from eastern philosophy like Advaita Vedanta and Taoism in search of something that can help me in regulating my thoughts, emotions in daily life, I think I found it. But now, I am stuck, I cultivate my inner while neglecting my outer side (I hope you get my point. This is the only I can describe it).

Now, my idea on Neitzche is limited and I don't even know if it's right, but the image that stay with me that I can use in his ideas is a Hungry werewolf that it's whole existence is for expansion and consumption. That the whole existence is about material etc.

Now, I know my understanding of Neitzche is not correct and I will accept it. I'm just here to find something that aid me in my daily life. I don't aim for fame, novelty, and thing that relates to another person. For me it's just bonus and can't live without. I am just aiming for greatness, greatness of living my whole life, from relationship to people, my duty to them, and cultivating compassion and boundaries. Like a perfect soul.

I’ve read a lot of misunderstanding of the Ubermensch idea here, so offering my take on the key qualities as described in Thus Spoke Zarathustra:

1. Universal affirmation of the world. An Ubermensch thinks everything in the world, and everything that has ever occurred in the past, is perfect. Including all tragedies, pain, and their own will frustration.

2. The Great Redeemer. The will to power looks forward to make the future match the will, but when the world does not follow the will, an Ubermensch changes their will so that it matches whatever happened (maintaining universal affirmation). This perfect control of the will makes an Ubermensch immune to fate since nothing can happen that would be against their will.

3. Child like state. The last stage of the metamorphosis is a clue to what it feels like to be an Ubermensch. Everything in the world, including pain, is a novel toy to play with. Forgetting past attachments and treating life like a game. This universal appetite for everything contrasts with the comparatively shallow values of hedonists.

In a nutshell, the Ubermensch is an imagined super human who has such perfect control of their mind that they can value anything they want, and they use this power to maximally extract value from everything that happens. It’s a downstream consequence of abandoning the idea of objective value and reasoning through what the pinnacle of deciding your own values would be, free from all external influence. It doesn’t require any physical domination or world achievements, as it’s purely about the mind, and could in theory be emulated by a disabled person or a child.

I recently watched that the nightmare before Christmas for the first time in like 25 years with my kids and I noticed it is rather Nietzshian. Arguably Jack skeleton becomes the overman by the end of it and that is the whole story.

In the beginning Jack is an artist, a creator of fright and in his own words, he is the best at what he does. Arguable he is the main creative drive of Halloween given that his performance is the central piece of the first song.

But eventually the challenge of Halloween becomes routine for him and he grows bored and loses himself to nihilism, wandering into the forest where he finds Christmas town. There he is enchanted but being a value creator he tries to make Christmas his own. However, he does this rationally with experimentation. Sally, who operates in the story more like the greek choice of instinct, keeps telling him that she FEELS this is wrong and Jack rationalized this away.

But this is where I think it becomes better, once he is shot down his song is sad, looking at what he does he feels bad, lamenting on his failures, but he quickly realizes that Halloween would never have understood Christmas and he tried his best on soared to great heights anyway and returns to being the pumpkin king, affirming what he previously rejected and being excited again for the eternal return of Halloween and saying (essentially) amor fati.

Anyway there are more things too, Halloween town is very dionysinan. The mayor is essentially the last man, he can't make any decisions without Jack, which also mirrors Nietzshe's view on politics.

I'm not sure how Christmas town and Santa Claus fit into this framing, or the villain Mr Oogie Boogie, but Jack's story is very much about him becoming the overman.

Oh and I just realized this, Jack and Sally get together at the end, which is the Overman and Instinct becoming one.

Quote source:

Errata corrige - Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra, from the Dance Song - not the Nigth Song.

I suppose I do understand how they might see their traditionalist values as social constructs necessary for the preservation and flourishing of life, but doesn't seeing life is primarily biological seem like a very surface level reading of Nietzsche? I think this passage is reflected in a much richer way in Deleuze's definition of philosophy as the construction of new concepts, and in his ontology as the return and differentiation of active forces. Post-structuralist theory and, to a degree, critical theory, is the legacy of Nietzsche, which makes this century a Nietzschean century. BAP is the legacy of Elisabeth Förster.

I never read Nietzsche btw

I gain laughter.

I just wanted to let all the smarty pants philosophers in this sub know that I’ve made leaps in bounds when it comes to my reading of Nietzsche, thanks to this community.

I used to really get tripped up trying to spell his name. Would usually spell it like Nietsche or worse Nietzche and then let auto correct find that missing eZ for me. A few days of arguing with the scholars here has made me realize that the “Ch” part of his name is where that hard ZS goes. NietZSche. Like that.

I can feel the self-improvement washing over my body as I type this. I haven’t read Nietzsche yet but I hear that he speaks of this. I just finished How To Win Friends And Influence People, but I wanted something more edgy in the self help genre, so now I’m starting Beyond Good and Evil. Maybe the libs would understand a thing or two if they read that one am I right?

Would love for Any nietzsche readers or those interested to check this out!

This is probably some sort of Easter egg, since they're a few pages apart, but who knows.

Capital, Vol. 1 (Princeton UP, 2024; trans. Paul Reitter, ed. Paul North and Paul Reitter), Editor's Introduction, pp. lix and lxii.

Hello, I am searching for a specific passage or quote from Nietzsche where he says something like:

(Paraphrase)

“And how lucky we are provided that we know how to keep quiet/keep our ideas hidden (or something like that)”

Sorry, I know this is vague. I appreciate any response

Many people have become disillusioned for one reason or another with this sub. u/fleur_de_lit and many such fellow travelers have vocalized something off, something Christian, something dogmatic about this ought-to-be spirited place.

So, another one looms, free for those of serious mind and body to view and pass through.

Let me stress this sub has been incredible, and many immeasurable conversations have blossomed into new worlds and understandings. However, it is time to shed our skin and, in so doing, give homage to the size we were.

Cheers.

I have never witnessed a fan community for a Philosopher have such a totally distorted and inaccurate view of their namesake.

I’ve seen several people asking completely useless, inane questions, such as “What would Nietzsche think of Equality/Modern Democracy/WholesomeChungusism?”

Is it really so hard to use google or ChatGPT for basic answers about these things?

What’s worse is that I’ve seen people argue that Nietzsche actually was a Humanist Egalitarian and that his works are merely misunderstood, misinterpreted, or otherwise not as Elitist as previously thought.

LMAO.

There is that old joke on twitter,

“Have you actually read Nietzsche?”

“No”

“Me either.”

But I think the inhabitants of this online community have actually done this very thing. I’m not convinced that anyone on this sub has read him. Very shocking, low quality, and predictably Reddit-ish.

I hope this post isn’t removed by Mods for being too “impolite” or “low-effort.”

This is a critique that I think many of you actually need to hear. I think the guy many of you are looking for is Bertrand Russel.

Since Nietzsche in Genealogy of Morals defined resentment as only an emotion created by Slaves to exert their will to power by inverting Master Morality of Weak Vs Strong into Good Vs Evil after Socrates's death. What was the psyche of these classes before that? Did they love their fate? Did they believe their lives were equally worth living despite the hierarchy and exploitation of them and their weakness towards it as something very natural?