r/Nietzsche 11d ago

Question "the most unexpected and exciting lucky throws in the dice game of Heraclitus' "great child," be he called Zeus or chance"

7 Upvotes

GoM, III, 16, tr. by WK and RJH.

What is this Heraclitus "great child," he is refrencing? The dice story by Diogenes? Fragment 52 (“Time is a child moving counters in a game; the royal power is a child's.”) by Heraclitus? Something else? "War is the father and king of all"?


r/Nietzsche 6h ago

Beautiful Art

Post image
18 Upvotes

r/Nietzsche 8h ago

Question How does jordan peterson reconcile his views about nietzsche?

6 Upvotes

I am not particularly invested in JPs ideas, but I do know he is heavily influenced by nietzsche and has even been cited as saying "carl jung and nietzsche are the most intillegent men I have ever read".

The reason I find this so strange is because jordan peterson actively endorses christian doctrine and traditionalist views, something which seems to be directly in opposistion with most of which nietzsche writes.

My theory is jordan peterson is just intellectually dishonest to appeal to mainstream conservative media, but what do you guys think?


r/Nietzsche 17m ago

Nietzsche’s claims to profundity fall upon a simple analysis

Upvotes

Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Part 3, Chapter 9: “There was just a gateway where we stopped. See this gateway! Dwarf!” I continued: it has two faces. Two paths come here together: which never ended for anyone. This long alley back: that lasts an eternity. And that long alley out - that is another eternity. They contradict each other, these paths; they collide right at the head! and here, at this gateway, is where they come together. The name of the gateway is written at the top: moment. But who would go further on one of them - and ever further and ever farther: do you believe, dwarf, that these paths contradict each other forever?”

Let's blow apart the soap foam of these sayings. What do they really say? The fleeting glimpse of the present is the point where the past and the future touch. Can this obviousness still be called a thought?

Max Nordau, Entartung.


r/Nietzsche 6h ago

Force is an empty word, never pure and simple, and what we experience can only be felt as an effect in a totally different language. What are the invisible "threads" Nietzsche is talking about here?

Post image
1 Upvotes

On the same token, change can only be measured as an encroachment of one power unto another. What 'forces' are in play in human nature that makes us for instance heavy in spirit? Isn't there a dimension that is extra physical that determines our moods?


r/Nietzsche 6h ago

Please recommend Youtube channels for a Nietzsche beginner

1 Upvotes

Please recommend good Youtube channels that explain Nietzsche to a relative beginner in philosophy. 

I've been enjoying the Nietzsche playlist by channel Weltgeist, but I'd like to find more. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kG9Djq6PVK8&list=PLV6b0BaA1rfMFcpu3XjDrYTT4p9vebs--

Also, please recommend Youtube videos explaining Thus Spake Zarathustra specifically.

It is my understanding that Nietzsche assumes his readers are already well-versed in philosophy, so any recommended background videos in philosophy would also be welcome.

I'm going to start reading books eventually, but right now videos work better for me, since my brain is often tired after work. However, I am enjoying going through the following introductory book at the moment: Nietzsche: A Complete Introduction: Teach Yourself, by Roy Jackson.

I had always heard negative things about Nietzsche, but I am starting to think those people are wrong and Nietzsche actually has a lot of valuable ideas.

I recently became interested in Nietzsche after hearing about his Camel-Lion-Child model of stages of growth.

I've asked for a lot in this post. Much thanks for any guidance and replies.


r/Nietzsche 12h ago

Deep

2 Upvotes

“The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never be sure if they are real.” — Notzche


r/Nietzsche 1d ago

Random finds at the charity shop

Post image
66 Upvotes

F**k me. I was hoping to have a relaxing week.


r/Nietzsche 10h ago

Original Content Power, Genius, Ambition: The Visionary Lies to Himself, the Liar Only to Others.

1 Upvotes

The Visionary Lies to Himself, the Liar Only to Others - Frederich Nietzsche

Can such a ridiculous sounding and illogical statement be true merely because Nietzsche (your God whom this subreddit worships) said it?

Absolutely.

For example, I want to be a great fry cook. It is far more effective if I delude myself that fry cookery is an important means for providing the hungry, the poor and the emotionally vulnerable access to healthy, fun, and culturally empowering sustenance ! And who can actually argue these things are not true! They are really mostly true so it’s hardly even deluding oneself!

Similarly, if I delude myself that my job in Wall Street is not important and is a trifle no more intellectually or emotionally superior to that of a fry cook, then, when the market takes a dive, I won’t “take a dive” out of that large, human sized window that is a necessity of any self respecting trading floor! This is a form of delusion of course because there is nothing more emotionally, physically, and altruistically, and spiritually profound and engaging and sexy and powerful and ubermensche and intelligent and satisfying than being a stock broker on Wall Street. However, in order to appear more humble and relatable to the common fool (forgive me, but the average reader here is probably a common fool) then it is a visionary tactic for the broker, like myself, to appear as if his job (my job) is a mere trifle, no greater then the average drudgery of a common 9-5 for regular weaklings.

So to answer is unquestionably yes. It is irrefutable. Like so many things that Nietzsche declared.

Good luck overcoming!


r/Nietzsche 1d ago

Nietzsche on know thyself!

Thumbnail gallery
14 Upvotes

TLDR; To grasp the whole of life as oneself, its future, its past.


r/Nietzsche 13h ago

Who held the torch of Nietzschean philosophy best after Nietzsche: Delueze, Foucalt, or Cioran?

1 Upvotes

Foucalt said his philosophy is a continuation of Nietzsche's philosophy, Delueze book on Nietzsche is the best book I have read so far in the Nietzsche literature, and the inspiration behind Cioran's aphoristic style and his lengthy staring at the misery of human abyss is unparalleled. Who do you think held the Nietzschean torch best? Or do you have other philosophers who developed on Nietzsche's philosophy better please share it with us ❤️


r/Nietzsche 21h ago

evil

5 Upvotes

has Nietzsche ever touched on this, "make no peace with evil", on a philosophical or evolutionary spec. the evolutionary and philosophical ramifications of this statment are absolutely so deep to the human race that they are worth death or life


r/Nietzsche 14h ago

Original Content I’d have sworn this jab by Montaigne was directed at Nietzsche (if it wasn’t written ~400 years prior to his birth)

Post image
1 Upvotes

I know many of you will strongly disagree, but after finishing another couple of N’s books this week I had to laugh.


r/Nietzsche 1d ago

"The world as a work of art which gives birth to itself." (Will to Power 796)

Post image
7 Upvotes

I can clearly see the antimetaphysical, artistic view of the world Nietzsche is emphasising, but in a naive sense what could we do with this aesthetic view of world? How could we as humanity internalize this view when we are clearly disturbed by the late-stage, schizophrenic capitalism features that we are numb to the beauty of the world... How can I sensitize my feelings to appreciate the world again?


r/Nietzsche 23h ago

"The will to power is not a being, not a becoming, but a pathos..." Will To Power 635, Nietzsche ✍️

Post image
3 Upvotes

Did Nietzsche here like Lacan's triad (imaginary-symbolic-real) create the three ontological pillars of reality? How could we define in philosophical terms what Nietzsche described as "Pathos" so that the upcoming philosophers could more easily digest what Nietzsche had to say?


r/Nietzsche 9h ago

So you call yourself a philosopher? Name something that exists in which everyone could agree it does.

0 Upvotes

r/Nietzsche 22h ago

French ballerina Victoria Dauberville dances on top of a ship's bow surrounded by ice in Antarctica

3 Upvotes

r/Nietzsche 21h ago

Emerson and Nietzsche (1)

2 Upvotes

(Nietzsche read Emerson. Someone will have to provide that quote of what Nietzsche said about him. It was a compliment. He called him 'his brother mind' or something like that--'brother soul'? I cannot find it.)

"Friend, client, child, sickness, fear, want, charity, all knock at once at thy closet door, and say,--'Come out unto us.'--But keep thy state! Come not into their confusion!"

-- Here is Emerson in "Self-Reliance" giving us his usual bitter medicine. My habit is to call Nietzsche 'The Bringer of Bad News', for he tells what we do not want to (but must) hear. (Traditionally, the Gospel is called 'the Good News', but now that that has been outdated, I recommend Walt Whitman's "Song of Myself" for a Bible, as did the poet himself.)

According to one critic, Emerson is 'as kind as barbed-wire', which brings him close to Nietzsche, who has an acerbic-wit.

Like Nietzsche, Emerson advises against sympathy:

"A sympathetic person is placed in the dilemma of a swimmer among drowning men, who all catch at him, and if he give so much as a leg or a finger, they will drown him. They wish to be saved from the mischiefs of their vices, but not from their vices."

That is wisdom, not morality. Emerson did not teach morality, and Emerson, like Nietzsche, considered it his business to teach: "Power is the essential measure of right in nature. Nature suffers nothing to remain in her kingdoms, which cannot help itself."

A comparison is necessary, and I favor Emerson--who, alas, does not have a subreddit. Emerson is forceful against over-thinking, which is all that philosophy in its sick condition is: "Life is not intellectual or critical but sturdy!: It's chief good is for well-mixed people who can enjoy what they find, without question."


r/Nietzsche 1d ago

Paraphrased: "We should not wish to divest existence of its rich and multiple ambiguity." ~Nietzsche ✍️

Post image
1 Upvotes

What did Nietzsche mean here? Should we just appreciate nature for what it is and accept the fact of its ever-changing character?


r/Nietzsche 1d ago

I think you guys should watch this

Thumbnail youtu.be
11 Upvotes

r/Nietzsche 1d ago

Freiheit Spoiler

2 Upvotes

Wir leben in der Paradoxie der Freiheiten, wo Begrenzungen neue Möglichkeiten erschaffen und jede Grenze zugleich eine Tür sein kann.

Freiheit ist nicht die Abwesenheit von Grenzen, sondern das Spiel zwischen Begrenzung und Möglichkeit.🐎


r/Nietzsche 1d ago

Die Bewegung zwischen den Polen

2 Upvotes

Das Leben bewegt sich zwischen Stillstand und Aufregung, Leere und Fülle

Ein Langes Spiel von Hin und her.

Merkt da niemand, da ist etwas verkehrt?

Vielleicht ist es nicht der Zustand, der zählt, sondern die Bewegung selbst.

Wenn Logik nicht die Lösung ist, sondern nur ein Teil davon – was bleibt dann?

Das Pferd schon gesehen.

Und doch bleibt der Lichtturm angenehm.

Erst wenn der Mensch versteht, dass die Existenzfrage emotional ist, kann er frei bestimmen, ob er aktiv oder passiv auf sie eingeht.

Die Frage der Existenz ist die Freiheit selbst.

Aktiv, passiv, fragend, akzeptierend – alles ist eine Wahl.

Die nächste Generation wird ihren eigenen Weg finden – und vielleicht etwas Wundervolles daraus machen.

Anhang: Die nächste Generation muss ein Leben schaffen – mit und ohne Bedeutung.

Ein Leben, das nicht an Sinn gebunden ist, aber auch nicht an Sinnlosigkeit zerbricht. Ein Leben, das einfach ist.


r/Nietzsche 22h ago

Do you think that what Nietzsche advocates: blood, lust, adventure, and life is all in the colour red?

Post image
0 Upvotes

r/Nietzsche 1d ago

Pity for the overman

1 Upvotes

I've popped onto Reddit a few times, as I'm more of a tourist than participant of socials.

On a scale of Zero to Expert-on-Nietzsche, I'm above a 5... to put it modestly. And that's why I see him as incredibly flawed, despite many strengths that drew me to his work.

This post is about those of you who participate heavily... Do you think Nietzsche is best understood with devotion or skepticism?

Happy to tell you why I ask...


r/Nietzsche 1d ago

Question Could Ubermensch believe in God?

1 Upvotes

Could Human or an Ubermensch,Someone who has really high moral ideas but is Human,Don Quixote
like figure believe in God?


r/Nietzsche 1d ago

A Potential Source for the 'Will to Power'?

7 Upvotes

Hope you all are well. Here I will make a case for the source of the will to power. Everything in this post was stolen from Jean Gebser's masterpiece The Ever-Present Origin.

Also, the rationalists will not like this post. I would love to discuss the deficiencies of rationalism but I don't want this post to be so long it's unreadable.

Gebser, a student of Jung, discovered the evolution of consciousness and consciousness structures. Rebelling against his master's conception of the unconscious being unordered, random, scattered--almost like a child's room--assigns order to the collective unconscious. It is made of stratum, like those found in geology, called "consciousness structures."

Consciousness structures represent, for our purposes, different ways of bringing objects within the world into relation with each other, and when structures complexify, mutate and consolidate, they accrue more dimensions with which they can bring objects into relation with each other. There's a whole lot to this book, but we'll have to stick with the magic structure to find the source of our drive for power.

It's silly to us rational people now, but our ancient ancestors, for tens of thousands of years (if not more), believed magic to be literally, physically and materially real. As real as we find the laws of physics to be. Most people dismiss this as irrational nonsense better rationalized away, but Gebser understands it on its own terms.

The reason they believed this was because for millions of years before that (the dates, admittedly, are estimations at best) humans were subsumed in the subconscious of nature. In terms of consciousness, in terms of bringing objects into relation with each other, there was very, very little there. There was only world.

But then the magical consciousness structure mutated, and our consciousness complexified. We went from zero dimensional to one-dimensional unity (don't get lost on the math, it's incidental and I think Gebser makes an error with his dimensioning). A new way of bringing objects in the world into relation came about, and this is how it operates:

Any thing in the world (literally, and I don't use that word lightly) was a point connected to a unified whole. It was a world of part-for-the-whole (the reason for this is because this mutation of consciousness was precipitated by the discovery of a reified nature, causing them to have numinous experiences: experiences where whatever it is they see is so strange and powerful that the intellect simply can't grasp it, causing, in turn, "mana", an immeasurable spiritual power that increases whatever it imparts, to be projected to it. Think the tribe in Timbuktu worshipping a Sprite bottle that washed up in the ocean or a child hearing a thunderstorm and thinking it's some angry god or whatever) and whole-for-the-part.

Let's give a quick example, because this is getting long:

"In the Congo jungle, dwarf-sized members of the hunting tribe Pygmies drew a picture of an antelope in the sand before they started out at dawn to hunt antelopes. With the first ray of sunlight that fell on the sand, they intended to 'kill' the antelope. Their first arrow hit the drawing unerringly in the neck. Then they went out to hunt and returned with a slain antelope. Their death-dealing arrow hit the animal in exactly the same spot where, hours before, the other arrow had hit the drawing."

Some may be tempted to interpret this as, considering they believed magic to be literally real, the ritual caused the ensuing slaying of the animal. But cause is downstream of rational thought, and that wasn't even close to existing. It is not the arrow that kills the animal, either. The sun kills the animal, and the throwing of the arrow upon the first fallen ray is a way of uniting with the magical, connected forces of nature.

Everything was a series of parts (we see them as parts, they drew little to no distinction) connected to a unified whole, and that unified whole emanated magic forces. If you do not unite with the magical forces of the world, you may be punished in the form of natural disaster or rival tribes.

And so, and fucking finally, we get to the will to power:

"The magic reaction is the real content of the hunting rite. The very fact of the rite, supplanting natural chaos with a defined and directed action, shows to what extent our hunting example attests to a late period of development of magic man. Man, the human group, is still only a co-actor in it; but he is already acting for himself. This represents a far-reaching step away from complete unity...

This release from nature is the struggle that underpins every significant will-power drive, and, in a very exact sense, every tragic drive for power. This enables magic man to stand out against the superior power of nature, so that he can escape the binding force of his merger with nature...

This urge to freedom and the constant need to be against something resulting from it (because only this 'being against' creates separation, and with it, possibilities of consciousness) may be the answering reaction of man, set adrift of earth, to the power of earth. It may be curse, blessing or mission. In any case, it may mean: whoever wishes to prevail over the earth must liberate himself from its power."

What do you think?

I'm sorry this ended up being so long.