/lit/ - Literature

>Ecce Homo
>The Gay Science

What did he mean by this?

>>9700236

Orwell: Not sure.

Nietzsche: Since I am extremely familiar with Nietzsche, I think he would focus on two things:

1) The focus of his polemics/etc would shift from Christianity to modern/Western liberal democracy, which is really just Christianity without the god (George Elliot's dream come true) - and thus the logical consequence of God having died. Indeed. liberal democracy is the next step in the EVOLUTION of Christianity - just as Christianity was Judaism evolved. Indeed, even at the time of his writing, he had already caught on to the cult of 'progress'/etc.

2) I think he'd probably be quite enthusiastic about the rise/success of Islam in the West, although being in much closer proximity to it than at the time of his writing, I think its exotic/oriental charm would probably wear off. Still, in our evermore nihilistic/consumeristic modern world, he'd probably still see it as something to admire.

>>9652365
>The perfect woman is a higher type of human than the perfect man, and also something much more rare.

>everyone I don't like is a nihilist lmao

Dies ist ein /Deutsch/ Faden gerade!

>>9344957
Nietzsche. He literally thought that time was a circle and that evolution is real.

>>9342151
I disagree

>>9282753
Power

>>9281931
*blocks your path*

Untermensch, leave. NOW.

>>9277405

>Is philosophy dead? Why or why not?

It isn't dead as such, but currently awaiting another Copernican Revolution, or 'explosion' if you prefer, à la Kant/Nietzsche/etc.

Nietzsche was the last 'big' philosopher, so to speak. The 20th century didn't, and the 21st century hasn't yet, produced a philosopher of such scope/insight as to have permeated our (intellectual) culture to the same extent as yet.

If you think we have become "unphilosophical" or in some way more stupid over the past century or so, then ol' Nietzsche comes to the rescue with some words of comfort:

>"Bad! Bad! What? Is he not going - back?"
>"Yes! But you do not rightly understand him if you complain at that. He goes back as everyone must who is trying to take a great leap forward."

What's his endgame, /lit/?

>>9253219
This katana has been forged in the fires of Japan, with steel folded in excess of 1000 times and honed by trained samurai.

I am trained in the art of the blade. Are you sure you want to challenge me?

Heh, you have no idea who you're dealing with.

Move. Now.

>>9252269
Begone, shitposter

>>9203085

>tfw this anon literally can't imagine someone accepting chastity in order to produce great art and philosophy
>Nietzsche accepted chastity

50% of the time he spends shitting on Wagner is because Wagner advocated chastity.

In the unlikely event that ol' Neetch actually was chaste, he was reluctantly so.

>>9134304

>Destroying idols for yourself means that you don't hold others to a standard

>Thinking for yourself means that you can't judge others

Sounds like it's you that needs to read the Neetch again, kid. He was extremely judgemental, just by his own standards/values. That's what counts.

>>9104712

Stop believing in 'will' - free or not.

>tfw ugly Socrates was actually guilty of the crimes for which he was charged
>tfw he died in the name of his stubborn pride

>>8973776

This.

>>8945554

Nietzsche criticized buddhism.

He called it an improvement upon Christianity, but nonetheless concluded that it is ultimately nihilistic.

>Buddhism is a hundred times rirore realistic than Christianity: posing problems objectively and coolly is part of its inheritance, for Buddhism comes after a philosophic movement which spanned centuries. The concept of "God' had long been disposed of when it arrived. Buddhism is the only genuinely positivistic religion in history. This applies even to its theory of knowledge (a strict phenomenalism): it no longer says 'struggle against sin' but, duly respectful of reality, "struggle against suffering! Buddhism is profoundly distinguished from Christianity by the fact that the self-deception of the moral concepts lies far behind it. In my terms, it stands beyond good and evil

>Buddhism is a religion for late men, for gracious and gentle races who have become overspiritual and excessively susceptible to pain (Europe is far from ripe for it) : it is a way of leading them back to peace and cheerfulness, to a diet for the spirit and a certain inuring of the body. Christianity would become master over beasts of prey: its method is to make them sick. Enfeeblement is the Christian recipe for taming, for 'civilizing." Buddhism is a religion for the end and the weariness of civilization; Christianity finds no civilization as yet - under certain circumstances it might lay the foundation for one.

>Buddhism, I repeat, is a hundred times colder, more truthful, more objective. It is no longer confronted with the need to make suffering and the susceptibility to pain respectable by interpreting them in terms of sin, it simply says what it thinks: "I suffer." To the barbarian, however, sufiering as such is not respectable: he requires an exegesis before he will admit to himself that he is sufiering (his instinct would sooner direct him to deny his sufiering and bear it in silence). Here the word 'devil' was a blessing: man had an overpowering and terrible enemy - man need not be ashamed of suffering at the hands of such an enemy

Buddhism is nihilistic decadence.

Has there ever been someone with more penetrating insights into both the human psyche and la condition humaine than pic related? How can a man be endowed with such a intimidating mind? Was it the fruits?

>Beyond Good and Evil
>Human, All Too Human
>Anti-Education (Nietzsche)
>The Portable Nietzsche
>Untimely Meditations
>The Last Days of Socrates
>Sayings and Anecdotes (Diogenes)
>The Analects (Confucius)
>Peer Gynt
>Empress Dowager Cixi (Jung Chang)
>The English and their History (Robert Tombs)
>Goethe Parts I & II

I had a very Nietzsche-heavy 2016. I spent 2015 on Kant and Schopenhauer for the most part. The Birth of Tragedy is my last remaining straggler in that regard.

I'm planning on paying the Greeks a 2nd visit in 2017. Read the key works several years ago, and a sliver of Plato this year.

>>8891633

>Some level Nietzsche was on.

Retard. Nietzsche's views on women were actually remarkably nuanced. He implies, for example, that they are the most cunning sex - capable of enslaving a man, if they choose. Given his high praise for traits such as cunning, it's not hard to extrapolate.

>Nietzsche differs in that he was a more bitter man

Not really, though. If you want a genuinely bitter man, look at H.L. Mencken - who was basically Zarathustra's Ape without realizing it. Nietzsche was genuinely someone who "loved his enemies"/etc.

>just read "the idol" in Zarathustra, he rejects everything about the state and society in a very bitter way

And why shouldn't he?

For Nietzsche, the state is the opposite of what it is for Marx: "The executive of the modern state is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole proletariat/rabble/herd" - Nietzsche might say something to that effect. Indeed, unlike Marx, Nietzsche praises the state for precisely that. His qualms with the state revolve around the fact that it hinders 'Great Men' and steals their work/achievements/etc.

>Finally his will to power was already well defined by Schopenhauer.

Only retards conflate the Will to Power with the Will to Life.

Stop pretending that you've read my work.

Stop strawmanning what I said and believed.

Stop selectively adopting and interpreting what I said and believed.