/lit/ - Literature

When Nietzsche spoke of the will to power, what did he mean in terms of:
Power over what?
Power FOR what?

I read Andrew Roberts' "Napoleon: A Life" a short time ago and found it to be an excellent read. I've got an itch for the French Revolution now. Are there any notable recommendations? My health is well, thank you for reading.

>>17564681
>Paint me a picture of the Übermensch.
Here's an actual picture. A damn lot of Nietzsche's Übermensch is modeled after him, as he was the most recent example of his time of those exceptional men he wrote about

>>15663221
No, I believe human beings are biological creatures vying for power and that in this struggle the best will come out on top, regardless of the dominant framework of the times. In every age in history there was a tiny minority ruling over the masses
>greco-roman society was 2% freeman and 98% slave
>feudal society much the same, just other vocabulary (lord and serf)
>industrial society, yet again 2% rich capitalist and 98% proletariat
>postindustrial society, still 2% rich capitalists but now mixed in with government cronyism
But this is a huge digression, what I meant with my first post was simply that I believe high T men will be more attracted to rightwing policies not because they're inherently more true or just, but simply because their genetic makeup selects the best ideas for their own genetic propagation; in other words, a physically strong, competitive, combative, ambitious person (high T) will tend towards an individualistic society because that society will allow him the best chances to climb up the hierarchy. Weak, conflict-avoidant, timid bodies (low T) will prefer an equalized society in which everyone gets free stuff, because that's the only environment in which he'll get a shot at surviving and procreating. He would perish in the high-T, high conflict society, so his brain tricks him into prefering more egalitarian policies

Academic discussions tend to focus on certain trends and Carlyle was very unfashionable for his time and period given his strong adoration of German Idealism and aesthetics, which was further ruined by WWI in England. It is a shame as Carlyle is a genuinely interesting thinker with curious and really distinctive conclusions that are as you say discontented antecedents to thinkers like Nietszche. Man lived in the legacy of Napoleon, like the rest of Modern Europe did. It left a major influence upon philosophy and just general contemplation I think.

nothing but your own thought

Is there any religious faith, whether a branch of the major religions or otherwise, compatible with the idea of striving for personal greatness? All of them seem to have some variation of:
>you and your body are sinful and inadequate >life on Earth is to be scorned
>the goal is to be righteous, not great

>>9550648

>>9001236
back to /pol/ with you