/lit/ - Literature

>>18284801
>hits his dick on a fucking tranny and dies like a retard

Was he actually wise?

Just finished Zarathustra, what else should I read by him? I'm also planning on reading "On Nietzsche" by Bataille and "Nietzsche and Philosophy" by Deleuze at some point.

>The pessimist despairs at the fact that time is transient, that the present is always passing away, and he has accepted that this pattern is unalterable and thus must be tolerated, rather as one tolerates having a runny nose or having to stand on a train — that is, grudgingly and sulkily. This feeling of sorrow as the present moment disappears forever into the past makes it easy to doubt whether anything is worthwhile at all. As Arthur Schopenhauer writes, ‘For that which in a moment ceases to exist, which vanishes as completely as a dream, cannot be worth any serious effort.’ (On the Suffering of the World, Arthur Schopenhauer.) We spend most of our lives in a state of endless striving for satisfaction; and once we achieve this satisfaction the desire and the pleasure ceases — as a result, satisfaction ‘can never be more than a deliverance from pain.’ Moments of happiness rarely last long, and if they are repeated often enough they only lead to boredom; thus human existence, according to Schopenhauer, is essentially swinging ‘like a pendulum to and from between pain and boredom, and these two are in fact its ultimate constituents.’

>what if socrates really was corrupting dem youth tho

Let's discuss the actual content of the book please.

>>17559285
True. But look at his tense, perpetually anxious stare and think about how painful it looks to be as neurotic as he was. He looks like he never relaxed or felt calm for even a split second in his entire life.

Is Christianity a cucked religion? Christianity preaches egalitarianism, charity, meekness and considers self-interest, will to power, ambition, imperialism, anger and greed a sin.

Oswald Spengler said "Christian theology is the grandmother of Bolshevism."
Marxism is sometimes called a Christian heresy. That is because both have at the base a belief that society moves towards an utopia. In Christianity that perfect future is heaven through the apocalypse and in Marxism the perfect future is the development of the socialist utopia through the revolution.

So, Bolshevism can be seen as a grandchild of Christianity. Most Christians would call it a bastard grandchild of Christianity.
But that's a false dichotomy between Christianity and Bolshevism. You can reject all kind of slave morality.
I think

I've finally taken the Nietzsche-pill. I feel shit though because I was deeply Christian and this is shocking to me.

>homeless?
get a job
>no jobs out there?
move to a new town
>family won't help you move?
should've kept close to family instead of calling only when you want something
>no money?
get a better job
>no gf?
learn to clean your dick and dress nice
>no future?
fix your attitude
>no luck?
stop making excuses

Why do you resent other people? You'll have more if you stopped making excuses and focused on building your life.

The contempt of wealth keeps the poor without it.

What does everyone think about this quote from Nietzsche... “That for which we find words is something already dead in our hearts. There is always a kind of contempt in the act of speaking.”

> stop being sheeple!
> instead, do nothing at all forever in a cave somewhere, probably, because it's the only thing you've never been told to do!
> i promise i'm not a nihilist!

hic niger est

I don't think we read Nietzsche for his 'opinions' which are often very problematic, e.g. on gender, but as a spur to think for ourselves. Even the fact that there are Nietzsche scholars is to a degree ironic given his comments about scholars are very critical. And I agree with @VII that reading Nietzsche as a thinker with systematic and consistent views is not to read him well - he seems to detest that kind of system building, as well as 'scholarly' philosophy. I find reading Nietzsche has a lot of highs and lows - some wonderful moments of poetry and profundity, and then some very disappointing and downright offensive arguments as well. I think the angle he takes on the French Revolution is the worst kind of 'philosophy' - reacting to a perceived 'spirit' that is transmitted somehow from a metaphysical 'Judaism' - an interpretation which allows him to dismiss in a sentence all of the actual history/socio-cultural factors and human suffering for the sake of such a reductive theory. All that I would take away from that argument is a) don't philosophize like that b) reflect critically on our ideals and look at where they are coming from - that is to say, for example, that we don't give up on our ideals of justice or equality, but try to cultivate ourselves, so these come from a healthy place, e.g. not from wanting revenge. That way, our struggle for a better world won't be tainted by what we would today call our 'baggage' or something 'toxic'.

I think the term ressentiment, which Nietzsche uses, is quite useful when you observe human behaviour, but it's just that examples of ressentiment that he provides are questionable to me. I noticed a couple of examples of ressentiment myself, for example when one of my peers downplayed the other person's erudition on philosophers, claiming something like: "He reads secondary literature instead of actual works of philosophers, and thus his knowledge of philosophers' ideas is twisted and incorrect." The ridiculous implication of it being - He who goes out and reads a lot actually knows less than me who doesn't have such eagerness to read and gain knowledge. Not that secondary literature cannot create this problem, but his reason for saying it was envy, he didn't know whether the person in question reads the important philosophical works on their own.

Or when one woman justified and rationalized her laziness to herself when listening about other person's hard work and vegetable produce by saying: "Bah, it's all GMO anyway."

https://discord.gg/bgNecx4

Join this discord server if you want to discuss this further.

>>15362153
>Christians used the "it's just a metaphor" tactic in order to apply genesis to evolution
>apply genesis to evolution
"uhhh yea the metaphor is, much like god created everything, he also created evolution...."
christcucks are mentally bankrupt

Did this guy read the part in Crime and Punishment where Raskolnikov spergs out about Napoleon and actually took it seriously?

>>15274938
>t. Dionysus Crucified

>le epic warrior aristocrat is the best because he is the glorius and he is strong and mighty! hail glory! fuck english psychologists and christianity!!

>He was proud of the fact that he had discovered a new faculty in human beings, the ability to make synthetic judgments a priori. Suppose that he deceived himself here. But the development and quick blood of German philosophy depend on this pride and on the competition among all his followers to discover, if possible, something even prouder - at all events "new faculties"! But let's think this over. It's time we did. "How are synthetic judgments a priori possible?" Kant asked himself. And what did his answer essentially amount to? Thanks to a faculty. However, unfortunately he did not answer in three words, but so labouriously, venerably, and with such an expenditure of German profundity and flourishes that people failed to hear the comical niaiserie allemande [German stupidity] inherent in such an answer. People even got really excited about this new faculty, and the rejoicing reached its height when Kant discovered yet another additional faculty - a moral faculty - in human beings, for then the Germans were still moral and not yet at all "political realists." Then came the honeymoon of German philosophy. All the young theologians of the Tubingen seminary went off right away into the bushes - all looking for "faculties." And what didn't they find - in that innocent, rich, still youthful time of the German spirit, in which Romanticism, that malicious fairy, played her pipes and sang, a time when people did not yet know how to distinguish between "finding" and "inventing"! Above all, a faculty for the "super-sensory." Schelling christened this intellectual contemplation and, in so doing, complied with the most heartfelt yearnings of his Germans, whose cravings were basically pious. The most unfair thing we can do to this entire rapturously enthusiastic movement, which was adolescent, no matter how much it boldly dressed itself up in gray and antique ideas, is to take it seriously and treat it with something like moral indignation. Enough - people grew older - the dream flew away. There came a time when people rubbed their foreheads. People are still rubbing them today. They had dreamed: first and foremost - the old Kant. "By means of a faculty," he had said, or at least meant. But is that an answer? An explanation? Or is it not rather a repetition of the question? How does opium make people sleep? "By means of a faculty," namely, the sleeping virtue, answered that doctor in Moliere. Because it has the sleeping virtue, whose nature makes the senses sleep.

The more I read Kant the more right I realize Nietzsche was.

I finished reading Thus Spoke Zarathustra and realised that everyone affected by modernity is a weakling. A complete and utter cuck.
I decided to become a straight shooter and from now I just tell everyone how it is.
My friends started to despise me for it, but I gave them an honest assessment and told them what they are doing wrong and how they can improve.
One of them always cracks out bad jokes so I told him to his face that his jokes are not funny and everyone laughs at him, not with him.
I have a lab assistant at uni who always stinks, but no one had the guts to tell him, so I recommended that he takes regular showers and use deodorant.

I don't know if this is what Im suppose to be getting but overall I think Im working to improve my enviorment and human condition.

>>14693652
Who wants a mustache ride?

>tfw once you read him all other books feel watered down, midwit tier trash
>one of his aphorisms has more substance than an entire book written these day
Is there any other author that has a similar style and is as good and edgy as he is?

>*does nothing to block your path and allows your going under*
Heh, nothing personal

Which one of these books is a good way of start reading him? The Birth of Tragedy, Beyond good and evil or perhaps Thus spoke Zarathustra?

He cried over a horse, how cringe. I can't believe people actually take this hack seriously.