What would his Ubermensch look like?

[Anonymous No.12249442]

How do you imagine he would affect the world around him, and in what way? How'd he rise to prominence? How would he run the world, or wouldn't he?
>Inb4 brainlet
I know this is all interpretation bullshit

[Anonymous No.12249453]

[Anonymous No.12249455]

I've heard Salvador Dali nominated as a good example of an Ubersmench

[Anonymous No.12249485]

>>12249442
Nostalgia. They had become obsolete.

[Anonymous No.12249499]

>>12249453
>overdosed on steroids
Wow he really made a great change in the world

[Anonymous No.12249524]

>>12249442
Someone in this picture is the Overman.
Guess who.

[Anonymous No.12249569]

>>12249442

[Anonymous No.12249578]

>>12249442
capital is the ubermensch

[Anonymous No.12249685]

>>12249442

[Anonymous No.12249694]

[Anonymous No.12250926]

Lebron James
Jordan Peterson
Richard Branson
Roger Federer
Dolph Lungderon
Sylvester Stallone
Arnold Schwarzanegger
Me

[Anonymous No.12250943]

>>12249455
Christ no. That man did not suffer enough.

[Anonymous No.12250947]

[Anonymous No.12250959]

>>12249442
>The Ubermensch would want to rule us all and be seen by us all
That's a narcissist not an Ubermensch. He'd walk around the forest and think about how he likes trees.

[Anonymous No.12250996]

>>12250959
>He'd walk around the forest and think about how he likes trees.
Lel
>"You desire to LIVE "according to Nature"? Oh, you noble Stoics, what fraud of words! Imagine to yourselves a being like Nature, boundlessly extravagant, boundlessly indifferent, without purpose or consideration, without pity or justice, at once fruitful and barren and uncertain: imagine to yourselves INDIFFERENCE as a power--how COULD you live in accordance with such indifference? To live--is not that justendeavoringto be otherwise than this Nature? Is not living valuing, preferring, being unjust, being limited, endeavouring to be different? And granted that your imperative, "living according to Nature," means actually the same as "living according to life"--how could you do DIFFERENTLY? Why should you make a principle out of what you yourselves are, and must be? In reality, however, it is quite otherwise with you: while you pretend to read with rapture the canon of your law in Nature, you want something quite the contrary, you extraordinary stage-players and self-deluders! In your pride you wish to dictate your morals and ideals to Nature, to Nature herself, and to incorporate them therein; you insist that it shall be Nature "according to the Stoa," and would like everything to be made after your own image, as a vast, eternal glorification and generalism of Stoicism! With all your love for truth, you have forced yourselves so long, so persistently, and with such hypnotic rigidity to see Nature FALSELY, that is to say, Stoically, that you are no longer able to see it otherwise-- and to crown all, some unfathomable superciliousness gives you the Bedlamite hope that BECAUSE you are able to tyrannize over yourselves--Stoicism is self-tyranny--Nature will also allow herself to be tyrannized over: is not the Stoic a PART of Nature? . . . But this is an old and everlasting story: what happened in old times with the Stoics still happens today, as soon as ever a philosophy begins to believe in itself. It always creates the world in its own image; it cannot do otherwise; philosophy is this tyrannical impulse itself, the most spiritual Will to Power, the will to "creation of the world," the will to the causa prima."

[Anonymous No.12251019]

>>12250996
>Only those ideas won by walking are worthwhile.

>We do not belong to those who only get their thought from books, or at the prompting of books, -- it is our custom to think in the open air, walking, leaping, climbing, or dancing on lonesome mountains by preference, or close to the sea, where even the paths become thoughtful. Our first question concerning the value of a book, a man, or a piece of music is : Can it walk? or still better: Can it dance?

[Anonymous No.12251046]

>>12251019
He's talking about learning values from living life instead of just being a pure bookfag, not that one ought to walk around appreciating trees only

[Anonymous No.12251075]

Like Marquis de Sade. You know its true

[Anonymous No.12251115]

Not you.

[Anonymous No.12251333]

>>12249442
A litteral neet cuck incel. He does What he pleases because He's writing new laws upon new tablets regardless of the fact that those new laws are badly written smut.

[Anonymous No.12251336]

>>12249524
Salome

[Anonymous No.12251362]

>>12251115
Rude

[Anonymous No.12251386]

>>12249442

[Anonymous No.12251398]

>>12249442
icycalm

daily reminder you haven't fully understood nietzche until you read pic related

[Anonymous No.12251406]

>>12249442
Post you Übermensch morning routines and your Übermensch supplement stacks pls

[Anonymous No.12251451]

[Anonymous No.12251463]

>>12251451
But Panzram considered himself a follower of Schopenhauer

[Anonymous No.12251479]

>>12251046
You know he wrote ASZ after walking in the mountain forest for months at Eze and recommends similar things in Ecce Homo as how to become wicked smart and cool? You're hoping your prejudice sticks to canon and history and you should imagine /a/ justifiably laughing at you.

[Anonymous No.12251481]

>>12249442
https://youtu.be/4r60-5YK3-k

[Anonymous No.12251485]

>>12251075
>a degenerate hedonist with no ethics or moral

Try again.

[Anonymous No.12251486]

>>12251463
Forgot to add: And also did not affirm even his own life, instead wishing for death

[Anonymous No.12251493]

>>12251463
did he? well in the end, he WAS the embodiment of blind and indifferent force

[Anonymous No.12251496]

[Anonymous No.12251502]

>>12251493
It's in the book. Also he was so disgusted and confused by phenomenology of the spirit that he tore it up

[Anonymous No.12251506]

>>12251486
to affim life you have to accept death and sometimes yearn for it

[Anonymous No.12251511]

>>12251075
this

[Anonymous No.12251530]

>>12249442

[Anonymous No.12251536]

>>12251530

[Anonymous No.12252587]

>>12249442
Socrates, on all instances.

[Anonymous No.12252607]

>>12251536

Bogpilled.

[Anonymous No.12252628]

>>12249442
Napoleon but better

[Anonymous No.12252643]

>>12252628
How would Genghis Khan fare?

[Anonymous No.12253007]

[Anonymous No.12253035]

Donar, Herakles, Superman
but it was not limited to physique as you know.

[Anonymous No.12254172]

Hamlet. The only good answer is fictional - real Ubermensch don't exist yet.

[Anonymous No.12254176]

Pro tip: the ubermensch is female.

[Anonymous No.12255500]

[Anonymous No.12255639]

>>12254176
>Pro tip: the ubermensch is female.
Ubermensch is female, female is cow, cow is ubermensch.

[Anonymous No.12255727]

>>12253007
Peterson honestly looks like a fucking vampire necromancer that has just risen from the dead in this pic

[Anonymous No.12255762]

>>12249453
Hey Thad.

[Anonymous No.12256694]

>>12255727
Kek, it is quite disturbing

[Anonymous No.12256803]

>>12251481

[Anonymous No.12256816]

>>12249442

[Anonymous No.12256818]

>>12249442

bait / serious?

[Anonymous No.12256874]

>>12249578
Someone just read Benjamin

[Anonymous No.12257189]

I think they would come in many flavors, but they would all be disciplined.

Their looks could care less, but their attitude would be paramount.

There has already been overmen on our planet. Eliphas Levi was one of them. And Goethe. And Paracelsus. Apollonius of Tyana. These are the ones I can think of, but of course there were more.

[Anonymous No.12257225]

>>12251398
why does icycalm play so much videogames?