?

Log in

Thus Spake Nietzsche [entries|friends|calendar]
Thus Spake Nietzsche

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ calendar | livejournal calendar ]

Aware [21 Mar 2010|11:28pm]

saruryujin
Dreams.- We have no dreams at all or interesting ones. We should learn to be awake the same way - not at all or in an interesting manner.

- Nietzsche
3 comments|post comment

Morale et vérité [17 Jan 2010|02:41am]

saruryujin
Girard félicite Nietzsche d’avoir mis en évidence la singularité du judéo-chrétien qui défend la victime. Mais Nietzsche y voit une différence d’essence seulement morale. Une morale, bien méprisable, vu qu’elle est la revanche sournoise des faibles contre les forts. C’est ce que Nietzsche a appelé la “ morale des esclaves “. Mais pour Girard il ne s’agit pas d’une morale de la foule des faibles contre l’élite des forts. Nietzsche ne voit pas le phénomène de foule mimétique derrière les mythes, dit Girard. L’innocence des victimes, c’est la vérité. Les victimes sont des boucs émissaires désignés par le seul mimétisme violent. Elles sont donc réellement innocentes. Il y a là une coïncidence saisissante de morale et de vérité. La défense des victimes n’est pas un prêchi-prêcha. En proclament la vérité des boucs émissaires, le judéo-chrétien ébranle le système mythique dans son ensemble, car le mensonge dénoncé joue un rôle essentiel dans la culture humaine.

Source: Présentation de la théorie de René Girard, Simon De Keukelaere
post comment

an intersection [02 Dec 2009|10:35pm]

tragicomic
"It is said of Nietzsche, after breaking with Lou, entered into a final solitude, walked at night in the mountains that dominate the Gulf of Genoa and lit immense fires there that he watched smolder. I've often thought of these fires and their gleam has danced behind my entire intellectual life. So even though I've sometimes been unjust toward certain thoughts and certain men whom I've met in this century, it is because I've unwillingly put them in front of these fires and they were promptly reduced to ashes." -Albert Camus, Notebooks: 1951-1959
post comment

Iconoclasm New & Old [21 Apr 2009|11:57pm]

benjaminista
From State of Exile:

"Alas, my brothers, this god whom I created was man-made and madness, like all gods! Man he was, and only a poor specimen of man and ego: out of my own ashes and fire this ghost came to me, and, verily, it did not come to me from beyond."
- Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

"Their idols are silver and gold, the work of human hands. They have mouths, but do not speak; eyes, but do not see. They have ears, but do not hear; noses, but do not smell. They have hands, but do not feel; feet, but do not walk; and they do not make a sound in their throat. Those who make them become like them; so do all who trust in them."
- Psalm 115

Friedrich Nietzsche was the modern idol-smasher par excellence. The Jews were the ancient idol-smashers par excellence. The reason Jews are not the modern idol-smashers par excellence is because too many Jews have taken on new idols like  revolution, "the oppressed", the American dream and the nation-state. The difference between ancient Jewish iconoclasm and modern Nietzschean iconoclasm is that the ancient Jewish iconoclasts left one God standing. In the nineteenth century Nietzsche pushed that remaining idol over (it was already toppling thanks to Spinoza and the Enlightenment). Yet the ancient Jews were wiser iconoclasts than Nietzsche. They knew that man needed to worship something, even if it was an empty space in a tabernacle. Nietzsche had too much faith in man's ability to cope with a godless world. If he had lived to see the new idols man would erect in the twentieth century, he might have regretted being so quick to push the old one down. Yet like any good Biblical prophet, he too had his premonitions:

"And it is not only the long-eared and shortsighted who sink to their knees. Alas, to you too, you great souls, it whispers its dark lies.  Alas, it detects the rich hearts who like to squander themselves. Indeed it detects you too, you vanquishers of the old god. You have grown weary with fighting, and now your weariness still serves the new idol. With heroes and honourable men it would surround itself, the new idol! It likes to bask in the sunshine of good consciences - the cold monster!"
3 comments|post comment

die krähen schreien, und ziehen schwirren flugs zur stadt [16 Apr 2009|12:24pm]

ismaelive
Salve!

i am all all for sharing this finding with friends of neechee and film.. Andrey tarkowsky's "Stalker" contains a scene inside the zone, which in my pinion is a direct reference to a poem by neeche: "vereinsamt". It is short before the author falls into the well, and twiche crows fly over the desert landscape in which he stands.

Marvellous pictures in this movie anyway, but that particular image seemed strikingly literary. Waht do you say?

Regards!
post comment

emotional keys to self overcoming [17 Oct 2008|12:39pm]

jonamo_cat
jungs' archytypes are forces to be set in relation with and against one another in an effort to undermine the emotional inbalence that brings about psychosis. the idea is pressumably that the concepts therin can be clinicaly or sophisticatedly manipulated from without so as to reverse an individuals perspective on themselves or their situation.

but this active process of willingly rearranging myths for a person, though a relativists dream come true, does not restore control to the person. but rather sublimates them through the myth itself into a particular standpoint. it increases one area of their emotional ressonance, but does it not neccessarily create a polarity from the alternative ressonance?

not just from the polar emotional state, but concievably from the polar relation of archytypes. in otherwords, they become entrenched in a system of good and evil.

precisely by the cementing of the emotions within the frame of archytypes.

and yet, by the will to power, nietzsche id not mean to provide us with an emotional key...or did he?

if he did, it is one designed only to overcome resentment and nothing more, and if he didnt, then what the will to power means is something else entirely. something of the very nature of emotional action towards revealing truth/revealing falsities to be on some other grounds entirely.

and that the expanse of your own grounds.....is a potentialy ceaseless process, so long as one does not confuse your grounds with external definitions. this too is presumably the intended meaning of heideggers contemplation of nothing. seeking to deny emotional keys all together, and yet if everything is the will-to-power, contemplation of nothing, seems, nonsensensical. infact the very idea of nothing, when requiring of a specific absense of a fruit of a specific will, could be merely a sublimation of resentiment, and by no means freedom from it.
1 comment|post comment

Can anybody help to find publisher for Poesophy, pleease. [25 Jul 2008|06:04pm]

milosvet

This  is experimental direction in a science and the literature through merge of poetry and a science (philosophy). This direction did not exist till now in the pure state. Earlier there was a direction in poetry? Philosophical poetry (Empedocl, V. Solovyov, M.Voloshin, I.Brodsky, O.Khajyam, etc.), but did not exist directions in a science of philosophy in rhyfm philosophical gamble. One of representatives of German classical philosophy F.Schelling, named a similar direction didactic poetry.

The method of rhyming of philosophical positions is entered for popularization and generalization of philosophical questions which arise in connection with disclosing of the basic concepts describing surrounding and a private world of the person. Therefore, in any way it is impossible to name poetry and verses Poesophy, even, in spite of the fact that externally poeses (so I name each separate product in Poesophy) Are similar to verses. In the Poesophy I try to reflect where probably to generalize, and in process of intellectual opportunities to develop, ideas of representatives of philosophy and a science since the most ancient times (an ancient philosophy, and ancient religious doctrines) finishing modern concepts of a postmodernism and poststructuralism and existentialism, not passing thus medieval and German classical philosophy, sociology, Russian historiosophy, and scientific divinity.

By means of poeses, in a cycle Poesophy, I have tried to open such concepts close to everyone person as: time, essence, authority, money, value, conscience, kindly, the true, system, etc. Poesophy is difficult for perception, however it is calculated on the people who are not having intellectual taste to metaphysics in the classical (is textual-speculative) form and to whom it would be reasonably interesting will familiarize with philosophical gamble in more accessible and popular (art) form. Section? Poesophy  It will be probably interesting to such segment of the reader which is inclined to search for the classical maintenance in the new form.

               I think that Poesophy may be intresting for the mass auditory, and I want to offer you the partnership for publishing of Poesophy. It published in internet in Russian edition (http://www.stihi.ru/readers.html?milosvet), and it published on paper forms in Russia.

 

2 comments|post comment

Poesophy. part. 2 [25 Jul 2008|06:03pm]

milosvet

Will

 

The will is authority above itself,

the authority is will above others.

The will recovers a direction,

and doing the world destiny,

freedom of destiny in the world-

the will inspires in a pressure.

The duty as the center of will -  Good Honour,

freedom as the center of a duty – The good Gospel’s message.

The reason is a duty a measure,

a belief is a freedom’s share,

outside of reason will -belief,

but in reason belief - will.

 

 

 

rs.html?milosvet

post comment

Poesophy part.1 [25 Jul 2008|06:02pm]

milosvet

Time

 

Time is something an average  between

that the friend the friend is pregnant:

movement and an idea.

The first the last the clothes called time,

dresses in sense.

Temporariness inside of sense - moves,

immovable in sense - It is thought.

I also do the conclusion

that time is think of a seed:

outside of an idea time - movement,

but in an idea movement - time.

 

 

post comment

[21 Jul 2008|12:51pm]

suprdialect
Nietzsche : We are mistaken as to the degree to which we believe ourselves hated or feared: we ourselves may know very well the degree to which we differ from a person, tendency, party, but others know us only very superficially and therefore hate us only superficially. We often encounter goodwill that we find inexplicable; when we understand it, however, it offends us, because it shows we are not being taken with sufficient seriousness.
Suprdialect: LULZ, good 1 NeeChee, U R a Major WIN!!!!1111111 
post comment

eternal reoccurance [15 Jul 2008|07:56pm]

suprdialect
Ok, I am to live life as if I would have to do it all over again, just keep going on and on and on.  I will consider a few ground rules for living life.

1. Never ask questions that have only one answer.  For it will be quite boring to hear for all eternity something that only needed to be said once.  Probably best not to answer questions at all.  Unless you expect the answer to be a quite funny quip.  Especially one that is funny on several levels.  Especially one that makes fun of the fact that you have heard the joke so many times.  Like when someone says knock-knock jokes ironically.  God that never gets old.

2.  Don't think that it is like ground-hog day, remember YOU have to live the same life, if you commit suicide and it looks lame, it will continue to look lame for all eternity.  But then again if you do commit a really cool suicide, then everyone will be thinking that you must have a lot of balls to jump off a building in flames shooting grenades at your feet, and you are doing this for over a million times.  For all eternity. 

3. Don't move your lips mocking when others talk.  NO one likes that.  It is like quoting Shrek.

4.  Don't say goodbye when you die, because that will get old.  Instead become a total prick near the end of your life, because then they won't miss you when you leave, and when you come back they'll say, "oh, he's not a prick anymore" and they'll be really happy to see you.
4 comments|post comment

Nietzsche's Birthday [16 Aug 2007|04:09pm]

richips
Hello fans of Nietzsche,
Please let me know if this is inappropriate to post and i will take it down.
It so happens that Nietzsche and i have the same birthday. I am turning 21 and he is turning 163. For our birthday this year, i am trying to raise money for Partners in Health (http://www.pih.org), an organization which provides free health care in areas in the globe where there is no health care at all.
Please visit my fundraising page for more details, promote it wherever you can (blogs, profiles, etc), and donate a few dollars:
http://www.firstgiving.org/raya3

Any help is much appreciated! Thank you!
16 comments|post comment

Nietzsche And Satanic "Stratification" [31 Jul 2007|02:55am]

saruryujin
Nietzsche And Satanic "Stratification"
an article by Magister Joe Necchi

[]
10 comments|post comment

a genuine question/answer [26 Jun 2007|01:02pm]

jonamo_cat
I should first say, this question should well be unanswerable, but i am interrested in hearing a few fresh opinions about it.

so, without further ado.

(while im sure this question has been asked before)

Dionysian pessimism, suppossed to liberate us entirely from our ressentment/romantic pessimism, so that we can continue to discharge our will to power even in the face of (i love the way this sentence is sounding-please ignore this comment in the brackets-i simply cannot help myself) our pasts or what we may or may not think is the big picture of those things which effect or have effected us.That we continue to effect ourselves.(im sure i said enough when i said will to power, take no notice of the connotations of discharge).

My question is on the over-man, and werther or not he would supposedly overcome(i apollogise-i am clearly full of pun-esk wording today) even this pessimism, to be able to excersise his will to power anywhere/everywhere?

Some of you may think i am missing the point here, "dionysian pessimism is sufficient" you say. but to illustriate my point i will offer another interpretation of dionysian pessimism - that of the pessemism of the dionysian, that well-known formula of leaving that which is out of your hands out of your hands.

And i shall end this shortly, so as not to detract too heavily from the request for your opinions, rather than present you with a sacrificial animal, the sight of the blood of which i suspect you would not be able to resist.

And it is the connection between money and power(obviously), which ammounts to the rich having a million hands, and the poor having two(if lucky, ). And the question that if we must have democracy, must we have this kind of democracy?
where it is not an abundence of anything but money and greed that are required to qualify?

while a true abundence of will to power, of the true organising, life ordering, body making principle....that carries with it above all, not prudence or greed, but health!



so, without further ado, i await opinions on my question about the overman being able to overcome dionysian pessimism? (of which my example is but a potential example)

not succumbing to hopeless romantisicm for the loss of an expected future, nor being limited to taking meaning only from that which is at hand and being in the dionysian state of the continual be-coming,

but almost of a practising of cleanliness of the wills, a tremendous swelling of energy of all kinds, in preperation for a becoming the likes of which....
3 comments|post comment

Active Nihilism [04 Jun 2007|11:28am]

crowdrevolt
"One could say this form of self-reductive process, is a form of philosophical nihilism. Nihilism comes from the Latin word nihil, meaning 'nothing' or 'not anything.' The most common definition and use of nihilism, is the belief in nothing or a rejection of objective truth, social conventions, and moral meaning. Nihilism as a philosophy goes back several hundred years B.C., when certain philosophers used a scepticist outlook to claim that absolute concepts, like the Christian God, were illusions and thus had to be denied. During the latter half of the 19th Century, nihilism gained both a cultural and political revival, when Russian writers started to reject social conventions such as the traditional family, the church, and the State.

The German philosopher Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche developed a larger perspective on nihilism as a phenomenon. He claimed that the West, through science and secular humanism, had "killed God" by proving his non-existence. According to Nietzsche, this would mean that both Heaven was seen as an illusion but also that the Earthly life was a lie, since it had been demonized by the Christian doctrine. He called this "nihilism," or the state when the West had found that there were no gods up in the sky, but that the current life on Earth also was filthy, immoral, and violent, thus reducing the existential outlook on life to a state of emptiness.

Nietzsche therefore saw nihilism as something horrible and destructive, because it meant the end of the European civilization and cultural life. However, Nietzsche also saw this process as inevitable and therefore attempted to use nihilism as a philosophical tool, a process, in which moral conventions and absolutes, had to pass through his "philosophical hammer." The idea behind this, was that only true values would survive the beating of the hammer - those that remained dust, were therefore false values. By utilizing this metaphor, Nietzsche - perhaps unintentionally - realized that nihilism, which otherwise to most people seemed as something illogical and dangerous, had potential in creating new values, if used as a process and not an end in itself. Below we will examine this process in depth and explain its relevance to other philosophies..."

Thought this group might be interested in the idea of nihilism as a transcendent process and not a goal.

Full article here: http://corrupt.org/data/open_courseware/nihilism/
2 comments|post comment

Zarathustra [26 May 2007|04:47pm]

enders_shadow
Okay, it's been awhile, but this question plagued me when I took a course on Nietzsche and me and another student wrote opposing papers on this question:

Was Zarathustra an/the overman?

Difference of course being "an overman" allows for other, distinct overmen (and I suppose overwomen too) and I contest that Z was AN overman, though not THE. Of course, there's reason to believe he was not. I'm curious what you all think, and here is the paper I wrote on it, so you can know what my reasons are, and then, perhaps, I can learn your reasons for agreeing/disagreeing.

From Aristotle to ZarathustraCollapse )

Thanks!
3 comments|post comment

Dear Nietzche Scholars, [20 May 2007|06:26pm]

epictetus_rex
O learned ones, hear my plea. I have two questions.


I am doing a large project, studying Nietzchean influences on modern ethical thinkers. Bernard Williams and Ricky Rorty are the most obvious candidates, but do you know of any others, roughly in the analytic tradition, who display some kind of Nietzschean outlook?

My second question is more complex. Given the famous characterization of Will To Power from BGE 259:

Anything which] is a living and not a dying body... will have to be an incarnate will to power, it will strive to grow, spread, seize, become predominant - not from any morality or immorality but because it is living and because life simply is will to power!

Do you think it's reasonable to conclude that Will To Power is the wellspring of ALL human action? That is to say, we cannot act but out of (conscious or unconscious) will to expand, grow, dominate?

If this is the case, doesn't it seem ludicrous that Nietzsche is often portrayed as commanding us to excercise our WTP? What sense could there be in such a command, when we cannot help but act under the influence of WTP?

As a corollary, what do YOU see as Nietzsche's ultimate command/reccomendation? It is purely existential, involving affirmation in the face of eternal recurrence? Or is it more other-directed, perhaps a command to protect ourselves from domination by others?
12 comments|post comment

[31 Mar 2007|07:08pm]

peak_in_darien
[6] Nietzsche text icons in a multi-fandom post.


Preview:




To the rest of the icons.
1 comment|post comment

My learned Brethren.... [23 Feb 2007|02:46pm]

enders_shadow
I'm going to be giving a presentation on the Master-Slave Morality in a Moral Problem class.

The class is an intro level (104) and most of the students are freshman with little knowledge of philosophy in general, and I doubt anything more than a pop culture representation of Nietzsche.

The presentation is going to be about 10-20 minutes, and my professor wants me to link a film to the readings. The readings are very small however, only 12 pages total. It begins with the Aphorism of the Madman in The Gay Science who cries out about the Death of God. Then a few pages on What is Noble and then a few pages from Beyond Good and Evil, ending with two or three Paragraphs from The Anti-Christ (The first paragraphs too, I believe)

As a sketch, I have prepared to talk about:

Death of God--Destruction of Morality (though not neccesarily of ethics)
Elitism--N believed in a Hierarchy. ("Men are essentially unequal.") Nobles were near top--Overman was at the top. But I worry since the Overman isn't even talked about in the readings, I may just confuse my students.

Master Morality: Creative, self-centered, proud
Slave Morality: Reactionary, other-centered, disgraced

Christianity was weak because it was Slave-Morality. It turned the other cheek and did not boldly assert its power.

I'm really grasping at straws for a film clip. Philosophy in film is hard enough, but N in film seems near impossible.

Any advice?
11 comments|post comment

I have an especially primitive question to put to you all [08 Feb 2007|09:41pm]

masha_999
I'm editing my friend's PhD thesis on Nietzsche and have found a reference to a bit in BGE that's missing its section number. It's a passage that refers to the modern age's "dubious taste for facts". I've looked through my copy, hoping that I would have underlined/annotated it myself, but have had no luck with it.

I'm hoping that one of you might know where this passage occurs and might save me the trouble of going through the entire text again and finding the exact quote.

My apologies for this rather rudimentary question.

M
6 comments|post comment

navigation
[ viewing | most recent entries ]
[ go | earlier ]