Philosophy Forums
Forums Articles Gallery Links


Register Login Members Calendar New Posts Search Chat Help
Philosophy Forums » Introduction to Philosophy / Factual Issues / Books » Nietzsche - understandable? » Nietzsche - understandable?

Nietzsche - understandable?

PrintPrint


Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Nietzsche - understandable?
mutemaler
Professor
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 17, 2006

Total Topics: 8
Total Posts: 664
Posted 09/14/09 - 09:40 AM:
quote post
#41
Nietzsche is just one of those guys, seems to attract more than his fair share of Fervent Followers like bees to honey, each knowing better than the other what he "really" means, and seemingly willing to battle to the death over their own "true" interpretation.

Ayn Rand seems to have that effect also on people (although maybe that phase is past), reinforces some kind of "I am the wolf and you are the sheeple" mentality (or master and slave). Can be real ego builders I suppose. And what I suspect is that most of these people go flying Nietzsche right by, without really seeing him.

A presumptuous thing for me to say really, not having meticulously studied all his works, and even worse (!) having no plans to do that. But I think with someone like a Nietzsche more than with many others that people bring their own preconceptions.

About the original question at least, what I have read of Nietzsche I have 1) enjoyed, and 2) largely found quite good. I think his reputation as significant at least is deserved. Like the passion, he is a good writer. And I don't really understand when people talk of being unbearably difficult or purposely vague.

When I hear a criticism like that I think more of someone like a Kant (on hearsay alone), or maybe a Heidegger (at least I have read some of him). Probably everyone has their own favorite in the "now, don't get me wrong, I know this guy is one of those big names, but this stuff honestly is dreadfully dreary, and I am truly starting to wonder if this guy is so great after all" category.

Because texts above all have to speak to you. Have to resonate so to speak, like tapping a tuning fork, or placing a sea shell right next to the ear.


Edited by mutemaler on 09/14/09 - 10:45 AM
Elston
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Sep 10, 2009

Total Topics: 0
Total Posts: 17
Posted 09/14/09 - 02:16 PM:
quote post
#42
yebiga wrote:
A good summation Elston.
Nietzsche's fear that slave morality would entirely subvert master morality appears, to date at least, to be unfounded. The two seem to paradoxically thrive in the one breast.


Your right. He mentions in Beyond Good & Evil that we live in a culture of mixed morality, where slave and master morality are mediated in order to coexist. This results in a continual misunderstanding of the other, which often takes place inside the single soul of a modern man.
imoet
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Sep 01, 2006

Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 9
Posted 09/14/09 - 11:03 PM:
quote post
#43
does a 5 years old kid will understand a simple adult's conversation about relationship?
Banno
Old goat
Avatar

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
Location: Oz

Total Topics: 111
Total Posts: 6293
Posted 09/16/09 - 01:53 PM:
quote post
#44
van keister wrote:
Why is it so important in your psychological make-up to separate Nietzsche from Hitler? Why the warum?

I also find this fascinating. But remember that it is this that permits us to play a quick game of "Wind up the overman" in the time that the eggs poach. One of my favourite pastimes.

My own theory comes from noticing that Nietzsche appeals to adolescent males. It is something to do with the rejection of the family, especially of the father. He is a philosopher for those who need help to stand on their own...

nod

Anybody with five consonants in a row in their name has to be wrong. I would eschew the company of the overman for that of the bungled and botched. See http://forums.philosophyforums.com...s-and-spastics--36659.html

Davidson: We make maximum sense of the words and thoughts of others when we interpret in a way that optimizes agreement.
Russel Morris: There's a meaning there, but the meaning there doesn't really mean a thing...
Ned: Such is life
180 Proof
kynic
Avatar

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Apr 27, 2003
Location: NOTHINGlifeNOTHING

Total Topics: 84
Total Posts: 5117
Posted 09/16/09 - 04:40 PM:
quote post
#45
Banno wrote:
My own theory comes from noticing that Nietzsche appeals to adolescent males. It is something to do with the rejection of the family, especially of the father. He is a philosopher for those who need help to stand on their own...

This sort of psychologism is beneath you, Banno.

disapproval
The question isn't "Which explanations do I believe?" but rather "Which explanations do I least disbelieve?"

Absence of evidence THAT MUST BE THERE (i.e. implied by any claim, concept, or (its) predicates, that affects changes in/to the world) entails evidence of absence.

[What cannot be done?[What cannot be hoped?[What cannot be known?]]]
Elston
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Sep 10, 2009

Total Topics: 0
Total Posts: 17
Posted 09/16/09 - 06:59 PM:
quote post
#46
Haha! I actually enjoyed it and thought it quite hiply Freudian.
Banno
Old goat
Avatar

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
Location: Oz

Total Topics: 111
Total Posts: 6293
Posted 09/16/09 - 10:14 PM:
quote post
#47
180 Proof wrote:

This sort of psychologism is beneath you, Banno.



Perhaps it ought to be; but apparently it isn't. I giggled for ten minutes after I wrote it.

Davidson: We make maximum sense of the words and thoughts of others when we interpret in a way that optimizes agreement.
Russel Morris: There's a meaning there, but the meaning there doesn't really mean a thing...
Ned: Such is life
philosophytomorrow
Student
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Sep 14, 2009
Location: UNT

Total Topics: 3
Total Posts: 75
Posted 09/16/09 - 10:21 PM:
quote post
#48
iamtheother wrote:
One should consider how Nietzsche speaks of "Woman" in his works. There exists some decent scholarship on the inherent sexism in his work. Some of which evaluates the very nature of sexism as it is explored in Nietzsche's work.

Derrida's Spurs Nietzsche is a very interesting look at how "Woman" is portrayed. One argument is that "Woman" itself represents a kind of anti-truth in Nietzsche's writing. This anti-truth is bound to her apparent focus on dionysian attributes that reject the western ideology of focusing on apollonian notions of reason and logic. She is constantly in flux between this "anti-truth" of passion and desires and that of the dominant truth-as-reason discourse. "Woman" then, in some senses, is a rejection of a reason itself. She is a re-evaluation of all values (to really get to the meat of Nietzsche).


This. I don't remember where, but I remember Nietzche writing "If Truth were a woman, what then?"

I read and write a lot of feminist and ecofeminist philosophy, but I appreciate Nietzche a great deal. Many great philosophers (really, anyone before John Stuart Mill) were sexist, mostly unintentionally. But Nietzche's is most blatant. But, because the bulk of his work was written practically on his death bed damning all existence, I think Nietzche, of all philosophers, needs to be read outside of his character. Nietzche pisses people off because he's kind of an asshole, but one ought care for the quality of the philosophy, not the quality of the philosopher.

(This same sort of prejudice on philosophy based on prejudice on negative characteristics of a philosopher, I argue, happens to Heidegger as well).

edit: All that being said, I don't like Nietzche.
"In short, a land ethic changes the role of Homo sapiens from conqueror of the land-community to plain member and citizen of it." - Aldo Leopold, A Sand County Almanac
"A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise." -- Ipid.
180 Proof
kynic
Avatar

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Apr 27, 2003
Location: NOTHINGlifeNOTHING

Total Topics: 84
Total Posts: 5117
Posted 09/17/09 - 01:24 AM:
quote post
#49
Banno wrote:
Perhaps it ought to be; but apparently it isn't. I giggled for ten minutes after I wrote it.

cool
The question isn't "Which explanations do I believe?" but rather "Which explanations do I least disbelieve?"

Absence of evidence THAT MUST BE THERE (i.e. implied by any claim, concept, or (its) predicates, that affects changes in/to the world) entails evidence of absence.

[What cannot be done?[What cannot be hoped?[What cannot be known?]]]
philosophytomorrow
Student
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Sep 14, 2009
Location: UNT

Total Topics: 3
Total Posts: 75
Posted 09/17/09 - 02:29 AM:
quote post
#50
Banno wrote:

My own theory comes from noticing that Nietzsche appeals to adolescent males. It is something to do with the rejection of the family, especially of the father. He is a philosopher for those who need help to stand on their own...

nod


nod

As an in-between of adolescent and adult male, I see verfent support for Nietzche from my peers, and some that have "grown out" of Nietzche as well. It's all that damn angst bursting out -- same reason kids love Fight Club.
"In short, a land ethic changes the role of Homo sapiens from conqueror of the land-community to plain member and citizen of it." - Aldo Leopold, A Sand County Almanac
"A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise." -- Ipid.
Download thread as

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15



Sorry, you don't have permission to post. Log in, or register if you haven't yet.

Powered by WSN Forum

The time is now 11/20/09 - 09:07 PM.