/lit/ - Literature

*ting ting ting*

*clears throat*

I have an announcement to make: FUCK NORMIES. Also, FUCK RICHARD WAGNER.

That will be all.

Just getting into philosophy and I have found Nietzsches ideas to be very interesting to think about. In my opinion, Nietzssche is probably the Best Philosopher that has lived. Why is Nietszsche the best philosopher? Any other books like Nietzsches?

>>18279143
You guys always misunderstand the method of Nietzsche's critiques. He never says "Is this true"? That is the question of a priest of a philosopher, but not Nietzsche. Rather he says "What kind of person believes this?". This question is valid even if the thing believed is true. What would lead someone to believe it, and what would lead someone to deny it? So when he says that Christianity is life denying, he simply doesn't care about whether God is "real" or not, he thinks that question is worthless, he is merely exposing the forces at play.

>god is dead
how do you fight this retorics

“There are no facts only interpretations”
Is that a fact?

So you telling me all that time I spent studying I was wasting my time? That I would have been better on playing in the street? That all that discipline I invested in learning facts was a waste? That I would have been better off just following instinct?

Nietzsche: Yes

Are all his books just a fancy way of saying "bro just be yourself and stop worrying about these crazy questions"?

>Obviously there was a world of bottled up aggression in him, but for a long time he found it difficult if not impossible to express it in any direct way. From early on he felt a need to do this: in 1867, before meeting Wagner, he wrote to a friend that ‘one cannot go one's own way independently enough’ (letter, 6 April 1867). But in 1872, after the publication of The Birth of Tragedy, he was writing: ‘I have only just begun to speak my mind somewhat; I still need confidence and strong friendship - above all, good and noble examples, so as not to run out of breath in midspeech’ (letter, 7 November 1872). By this time his supreme example was Wagner, who perceived his problem in this respect and tried actively to encourage him to be more himself – and showed displeasure when Nietzsche failed to comply. On 18 April 1873 Nietzsche wrote to him: ‘If you seemed not satisfied with me when I was present, I understand it only too well; but I cannot help it, for I learn and perceive very slowly and, every moment when I am with you, I realize something of which I have never thought, something that I wish to impress upon my mind. I know very well, dearest Master, that such a visit cannot be a time of leisure for you, and must sometimes even be unbearable. I wished so often to give at least the appearance of greater freedom and independence, but in vain.’ Nevertheless Wagner was of decisive value for Nietzsche in this respect. More than three years after they had seen one another for the last time Nietzsche, writing to a friend about the separation between them, said: ‘I always think of him with gratitude, because to him I am indebted for some of the strongest incitements to intellectual independence’ (letter, 14 January 1880).

What's the best way to learn philosophy if you're not in college anymore? Should I read certain texts and discuss them with online communities?

The relation between Wagner and Nietzsche is like the relation between the foot and an ant. While Nietzsche was flailing about scribbling pamphlets against Wagner, Wagner was writing Parsifal.

On my view, Nietzsche is entirely inferior to Wagner. Wagner is an alternative view to say Stirner, or Mainlaender, or Hoelderlin and Goethe. An alternative to Schiller and Beethoven. Nietzsche is just a deranged pseud whose posthumous fame is derived from the fact that the Nazi's misappropriated some of his writings, which made him really popular, after which Kaufmann rescued him from their clutches, which sustained his popularity as people began to read him in a new light and all the sources for all the ideas he had plagiarised had slowly faded out of the public consciousness (in the Anglo world) due to their books going out of print, not being translated into Engish in the post-War era or being deliberately suppressed for ideological reasons and anti-German sentiments

>>18089202
it's dense and I don't fully understand it, but there's a few tenets to the system

1.) you need an all-powerful, unchallengeable over-military presence that will fuck up anyone who goes against the world order, but do not rule and are only enforcers of the system

2.) thousand and thousands of small states ruled by monarch CEOs who are accountable to the over-military but are otherwise free to have absolute power and can do whatever they want in their sovereign state

3.) no borders, this is mandatory and it has a name called free exit or something like that, people are free to travel from one sovereign state to another as they please, as simply as it is to sell your home and buy another one somewhere else

4.) citizens otherwise have 0 say in what happens to the sovereign states but exercise their free will through travelling and leaving states that are not desirable to them, for states with better living conditions

the idea is to have a sort of permanent tug-of-war match between all the world's monarchs who are trying to attract people to live and grow their states, so the currency becomes literally people

there is also a sort of executive committee that can have the monarch replaced who are also part of the sovereign corporation, so it's a kind of feudalism I believe, but the ideal is that even if you have a shitty person ruling a country they are motivated to do good because the system inherently demands it

This is one of the greatest authors there is. I have read like 2 of his books and am enjoying them.

>>18038025
>it usually doesn’t stay with a belief, it often gets translated into condemning and even killing people who disagree with yo
In other words, based and meaning-pilled.

If philosophers/philosophies had a theme song what would they be? What would German Idealism’s be?

Wagner's poetry suc-

>Wagner's poetry is all about revelling in the German language, the warmth and candour in his communion with it, something that as such cannot be felt in any other German writer except Goethe. Earthiness of expression, reckless terseness, control and rythmic diversity, an extraordinary richness of powerful and significant words, the simplification of syntactical constructions, an almost unique inventiveness in the language of surging feeling and presentiment, and every now and then a totally pure bubbling forth of colloquialisms and proverbs — we ought to make a list of such characteristics, and even then we would forget the most powerful and admirable of them ... the forging of a distinctive new language for each work and the giving of a new body and a new sound to each new interior world.

>>17993692
"Whatever lives, obeys. And this is the second point: he who cannot obey himself is commanded. That is the nature of the living."

someone please explain for my retard brain. is n simply saying that those who are not in control of themselves are susceptible to commandment?

>Wagner's poetry is all about revelling in the German language, the warmth and candour in his communion with it, something that as such cannot be felt in any other German writer except Goethe. Earthiness of expression, reckless terseness, control and rythmic diversity, an extraordinary richness of powerful and significant words, the simplification of syntactical constructions, an almost unique inventiveness in the language of surging feeling and presentiment, and every now and then a totally pure bubbling forth of colloquialisms and proverbs — we ought to make a list of such characteristics, and even then we would forget the most powerful and admirable of them ... the forging of a distinctive new language for each work and the giving of a new body and a new sound to each new interior world.

>>17998331
looks like i'm way ahead of him, instead of reading retards like rousseau and voltaire I was reading pic related instead
>>17998337
they were both "great men". part of being great is causing a lot of deaths.

What would Nietzsche have thought about 2010s/20s internet culture?

he was right about everything bros..

Is it true that Nietzsche's texts are overly sanitized and that the visions of fascists from the 20th century weren't far away from his texts? If so, what translation would you recommend that avoids cleansing his more controversial thoughts?

The superior species is missing, that is, the one whose inexhaustible fertility and power maintain belief in man. Think about what is owed to Napoleon: almost all the highest hopes of this century.
>Friedrich Nietzsche

Any links to Kaufmann translations of Nietzsche

ITT: Authors who nearly fapped themselves blind.