/lit/ - Literature

>>18110495
>no you can't undermine things only I can do that
Now where have I herd that one before?

Best books on power gathering?

you imbecilic CUR. You bitch-hearted WRETCH. You addlepated unredressed belch of flippant banality.

I WISH TO THE UBERMENSCH that I could suffer even for a second like Him so that the Will might show Its Power to all the world. I would count myself the luckiest creature to have ever existed if the Will were to deign use me as Its pitiful instrument so that IT might be Glorified. If through my sufferings which POWER ITSELF the literal ONE which Was and Is and Will Be took such interest in seeing that I suffered I was able to demonstrate Its ultimate Nature and the Sovereignty of Its Magnificence that baulks all human knowing and puts to shame all celestial accounts of grandeur, I would weep with joy that Power had chosen a wretch such as I to demonstrate it. I am nothing and It is All; and if my poetry fails to properly pronounce this, then let my suffering and sorrow be such a testament!

But you. You pitiful little lickspittle meme-ified meatmachine. You little element of homeostasic philosophy whose highest notion is the seeking for truth. You can't even conceive the sort of dreadful Majesty that POWER commands. You can only convert one of the most profound explications of how It Which Is reigns supremely over All into a glib little shitpost in hopes of (you)s. You dust mite glancing off of a Great Man's shit!

I would consider myself blessed beyond all generations if Power were to give me even half the misery it heaped upon the Ubermensch so that even one mind might look upon it and see the Will's wrath and glory and tremble to know that It is Power. And even if I were to languish to the same extremities as the Ubermensch where I dare to inexcusably attempt to justify myself to It who is Power itself, still I would ensure some crevice of my detestable heart be continually pouring out praise and counting itself blessed to be crushed by such a Will. For even the Whim of the Ubermensch is superior to man's most noble willing.

Which translation of Ovid's Metamorphoses should I choose? Allen Mandelbaum's? Charles Martin's?

Macbeth
>literally waited for 3 hours for most obvious answer
>mfw

I’ve been reading and thinking about old scratch and his arguments are so forceful and natural when he is attacking Christianity, or rather breaking it down systematically by its own premises, but then he basically uses the same themes of critique (degeneracy, weakness, life denying etc.) against artists and other philosophers, and it falls flat. It feels over extended. Basically he did one thing very well and tried to turn it into a theory of everything and failed.

Thus spoke Zarathustra

>With Socrates, Greek taste changes in favor of logical argument. What really happened there? Above all, a noble taste is vanquished; with dialectics the plebs come to the top. Before Socrates, argumentative conversation was repudiated in good society: it was considered bad manners, compromising. The young were warned against it. Furthermore, any presentation of one's motives was distrusted. Honest things, like honest men, do not have to explain themselves so openly. What must first be proved is worth little. Wherever authority still forms part of good bearing, where one does not give reasons but commands, the logician is a kind of buffoon: one laughs at him, one does not take him seriously. Socrates was the buffoon who got himself taken seriously: what really happened there?

Is Nietzsche right, should people strive to be more dudebroish instead of intellectual?

In Nietzsche's NOTES (1880-1881) he writes: "The reabsorption of semen by the blood is the strongest nourishment and, perhaps more than any other factor, it prompts the stimulus of power, the unrest of all forces toward the overcoming of resistances, the thirst for contradiction and resistance. The feeling of power has so far mounted highest in abstinent priests and hermits (for example, amoung the Brahmans)."

Is there any scientific literature that can aid his claim? I only know that supposedly ejaculating too much can cause a zinc deficiency.

>>11431093
It's true though, you can't separate personality from crude physiology and phenotypes since they also place you somewhere in the "dominance hierarchy"

Anyone else obsessed with the guy? He just expresses everything I and a lot of people already knew but wasn't smart enough to put into a narrative.

DUDE NIHILISM LMAO

>>9815037
this. just *care* about what you're reading. stop reading stuff because you feel like you should. that's some bitch behavior.

you might turn into a retard and get laughed at but you'll be your own kind of retarded. we don't need more memeing faggots who "started with the greeks" and proceed to make NOTHING out of it because they bring nothing of themselves into their study.

What's this expression trying to convey?

>>9635390

turn to nietzsche. god is dead. so become a bridge to overman, let your big self be the author of your little self, embrace suffering, become your virtue.

>>9399098
Absolutely blown the fuck out

*blocks your path*

bllllpfffffffffffffffffffffplblbpdfffffffffffffff bleeeeeeeeeeeeehhhhhhhhhhhhhh poopoo

>be an overzealous philologist
>have no philosophical background except for translating presocratics
>never studied Aristotle, Descartes, Locke, Hume. Kant
>write low IQ magnum autismo that's main message is to equate truth to life making a complete fool of yourself in the eyes of science and professional philosophy
>200 years later still laughed out of court by anyone capable of critical thought
>a fucking horse
JUST

Look at him.

Look.

Physiognomy of a school shooter. People like that tend to be pretty creative but simply are incapable of separating abstract reasoning from emotion. Well guess what happens next, you get chaos. And what is chaos? Yup, that's the antichrist bucko!

>>7951855
>Once upon a time, in some out of the way corner of that universe which is dispersed into numberless twinkling solar systems, there was a star upon which clever beasts invented knowing. That was the most arrogant and mendacious minute of "world history," but nevertheless, it was only a minute. After nature had drawn a few breaths, the star cooled and congealed, and the clever beasts had to die. One might invent such a fable, and yet he still would not have adequately illustrated how miserable, how shadowy and transient, how aimless and arbitrary the human intellect looks within nature. There were eternities during which it did not exist. And when it is all over with the human intellect, nothing will have happened.

>>7895799
No.