/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.15537793]

After reading Nietzsche I decided to create my own values.
But how does one follow through on their values religiously? Is it only though action? If we make a value that denies a human constraint and follow it everyday we might be able to surpass that constraint

Example:
Value= I will not shackle myself to motivation in order to do things

If this was correctly followed, the purpose to abide by this value would paradoxically give me near infinite motivation

[Anonymous No.15537893]

>>15537793
bump

[Anonymous No.15537914]

what do you create these values out of, anon?

[Anonymous No.15537919]

>>15537914
Good question. Desire I guess

[Anonymous No.15537924]

>>15537919
if you haven't started with the greeks you need to right now. read through plato carefully

[Anonymous No.15537936]

>>15537924
After finishing my exams I will. I actually planned that. But why do you say that anon?

[Anonymous No.15538041]

cringe.

[Anonymous No.15538051]

>>15538041
why

[Anonymous No.15538086]

>>15537924
>start with the greeks
low quality

[Anonymous No.15538088]

NEETche

[Anonymous No.15538127]

>>15537793
>Value= I will not shackle myself to motivation in order to do things

>If this was correctly followed, the purpose to abide by this value would paradoxically give me near infinite motivation

[Anonymous No.15538159]

>>15538127
>You feel low motivation
>You think that your highest value is not to be bound by motivation so you follow it since its the most important thing at the moment
>You do the thing you want to do

How does this not work? It worked all the times I actually took the effort to follow the value

[Anonymous No.15538251]

>>15538086
why

[Anonymous No.15538260]

>>15537793
No you didn’t. The very response is that of the camel. Nice bait tho...

[Anonymous No.15538280]

>>15538260
I read genealogy of morals, BGE and Zarathustra

I don't understand where you're getting at

[Anonymous No.15538376]

>>15537793
I've been meaning to read NEETzsche. I have BG&E and The Antichrist, but I've just not gotten around to it I guess, lol.

[Anonymous No.15538395]

>>15538280
Go back to the three metamorphosis dawg. Read selections of WTP, and go back to Gay Science, especially books three and four.

[Anonymous No.15538543]

>>15537793
>After reading Nietzsche I decided to create my own values.
>But how does one follow through on their values religiously? Is it only though action?
Did you mean after reading *about* Nietzsche? You should read Nietzsche.

[Anonymous No.15538569]

>>15538543
I responded here faggot>>15538280

[Anonymous No.15538982]

>>15538159
Based

[Anonymous No.15539005]

How you do you create your own values bros? DO you just say X is my value now and hey presto a new value appears?

[Anonymous No.15539006]

>>15539005
This is why I posed the question retard

[Anonymous No.15539019]

>>15539006
You know what, buddy. I ain't taking that shit from you. I only read the first line you wrote the whole way through, I started on the rest and you know what, hate me for it if you will, but it was fucking boring so I stopped and typed this instead, and it turns out I asked the same question better, more succinctly, and less like a cry baby than you did, so kindly back off!

[Anonymous No.15539118]

>>15539019
Shut up faggot

[Anonymous No.15539130]

>>15539118
Suck my worm last man!

[Anonymous No.15539312]

>>15537793
You are on a wrong path here. You would lower yourself to arbitrariness, the precise thing that you sought to escape. Do not have so little trust in your own power of reason. Why should it be incapable of reaching the Good?
>>15538251
I would honestly say that starting with Plato is not a good idea. Because his proofs seem idiotic if one cannot see their essence. He conceals more than he shows, he is deceptively simple. I would say that it might be better to start with early modern philosophy, particularly with Descartes. Although Descartes is also somewhat deceptively simple.

[Anonymous No.15539342]

>>15539312
>You are on a wrong path here. You would lower yourself to arbitrariness, the precise thing that you sought to escape. Do not have so little trust in your own power of reason. Why should it be incapable of reaching the Good?

What do you mean anon?

[Anonymous No.15539348]

>>15538569
It sounds to me like you're trying to collapse Nietzsche right back into what he was trying to escape with the question "how does one follow through on their values religiously" and your other question "is it only through action" is even stranger. What do you mean by action? Do you oppose thought to action?

[Anonymous No.15539373]

>>15539348
>and your other question "is it only through action" is even stranger. What do you mean by action? Do you oppose thought to action?

Through action I seem to solidify my values. Better with action than with reason, because reason gives me no "drive"

Even if I say "I hold X as my value", its is only when I'm acting on that value that they seem to work and have their desired effect on my behaviour

[Anonymous No.15539437]

>>15539342
"Creating your own value". Consider the statement. In its essence, it means that you would make a decision, on confused and arbitrary grounds (as you did not reach virtue through cognition, but put if forward out of will), of putting forward a system of determinations on behaviour, binding for the future. The grounding for this system is, on the one hand, an unclear system of equally unclear cognitions (as the system of determinations you put forward cannot be entirely arbitrary) and your arbitrary will, will without a grounding. As these are the grounding for your system, it will fail to bind you - confused cognitions easily change places, shift one into the other or into their opposite, taking away your grounding, and arbitrary will is, by its nature, arbitrary - it is whim, a choosing between passions, and it is perfectly ready to leave the system you determined as binding for you. It is perfectly willing to elect to support, for example, your lust, which will, as it is a passion, also influence your unclear system of judgements, precisely because the system is unclear, and the system of determinations will drop temporarily, to be taken up again when the judgements return to their previous state, and the arbitrary will finds it appropriate to return to this. You will always find yourself transgressing your own system, because it does not have any other grounding than the unclear judgements that drive you toward the satisfaction of your passions, and it will always be in conflict with them. The true grounds of any binding system of determinations of behaviour is true, certain knowledge. And the only way to reach it is through serious effort.
The obvious issue is that this effort already requires a system of binding determinations of behaviour, a provisional morality. And this is where you can say that you have willed your determinations into existence without grounding (because grounding will only be supplied at the end of the path). The path is difficult of what I have already said - its grounding is in arbitrariness, and it will often fail. That is why it can only be provisional.

[Anonymous No.15539541]

>>15539437
>The true grounds of any binding system of determinations of behaviour is true, certain knowledge. And the only way to reach it is through serious effort.
>The obvious issue is that this effort already requires a system of binding determinations of behaviour, a provisional morality. And this is where you can say that you have willed your determinations into existence without grounding (because grounding will only be supplied at the end of the path). The path is difficult of what I have already said - its grounding is in arbitrariness, and it will often fail. That is why it can only be provisional.

So basically create a value system (bounded to provisional morality) and through action find the certain knowledge to ground it?

What I always wanted to do was will behaviours out of nothingness, just blind fanatic following of a certain value, but apparently that is impossible

Sorry if I misread you in any way. Could you recommend anything on the topic?

[Anonymous No.15539545]

>>15539342
Oh, and I forgot to recommend you Spinoza's Ethics. What a wonderful book.

[Anonymous No.15539574]

>>15539545
Thank you! :)

[Anonymous No.15539606]

>>15539541
>So basically create a value system (bounded to provisional morality) and through action find the certain knowledge to ground it?
Yes. You will not be able to act toward attaining the truth without obliging yourself to act that way - otherwise arbitrary will, determining itself for this and that passion, will simply ride you in circles. But this determination cannot have absolute strength, because it lacks the grounding in clear cognition of human perfection. Therefore it still remains as a passion among passions, as uncertain judgements of the same quality as the judgements connected to passions, and in conflict with them. This is what makes provisional morality absolutely deficient in comparison to true morality, but true morality cannot be attained without cognition, which requires labour, which requires provisional morality.
>What I always wanted to do was will behaviours out of nothingness, just blind fanatic following of a certain value, but apparently that is impossible
I would not say so. Absolute morality promises, if knowledge of it can be attained, precisely that. If knowledge of it cannot be attained, then we are doomed to this unclear existence, which I would like to avoid by all means.
>>15539574
No problem, anon. I wish you good fortune. There is nothing more respectable than the path you wish to take.

[Anonymous No.15539656]

>>15539373
I don't disagree but Nietzsche's whole question to the reader is about which values are worth having. You can't ask, generally, "how do I solidify values" without begging for vague answers.
>have their desired effect on my behaviour
who desires these effects? what do they value?

[Anonymous No.15539666]

>>15539606
Not the same anon, but by your reading then holding action as the ultimate value is basically the most pragmatic thing to do right? Because it will accelerate your cognition

[Anonymous No.15539697]

>>15539666
What do you mean by "holding action as the ultimate value"? Is there anything other than action? The subject that is important for us is the proper principle of action.
As far as what I say goes, it is a confused mixture of judgements. I have not attained the system of truth, and only possess very few certain truths, those which I cannot doubt. So it is perfectly possible that I will not be able to answer you, or that my view of the soul is false, unclear, confused etc.

[Anonymous No.15539748]

>>15539697
When I say holding action as ultimate value, I mean action trumping reason or thought when making a judgement

>The subject that is important for us is the proper principle of action.

What do you mean? So for example if I think: I want to make a bowl of soup. Then the bowl of soup os the principle of action (silly example)

[Anonymous No.15539800]

>>15537793
To create new values you must first destroy the old ones. Well, anon, do you have the strength to kill the dragon?

[Anonymous No.15539857]

>>15539748
You mean, then, the question whether to act more or less hastily, in the context of incomplete information? That is, the question of sufficient grounds for making a practical judgement?
I think this question cannot be elucidated theoretically. Its place is within the region that belongs to practical reasoning, not the clear, theoretic reasoning. Possibly these are two different powers of the soul, but, as I have stated, I have not reached the truth of the matter, other than the observation that I cannot fully elucidate the considerations of my practical reasoning - for example, I cannot fully elucidate the reason I pick a black notebook instead of a yellow one. But I can point to the normative considerations that create the border of this sort of judgement - I can say that this decision belongs to the scope of purely arbitrary decisions. That is what I mean by "principle of action"; the borders that are erected on practical reasoning, which is, by its nature, unclear, and which direct it in a broad way (for example, in the general rule of helping those in need).

What is important to note is that these are my observations on my own process of comprehension. They follow the rule, sadly, of empirical generalisations.

[Anonymous No.15539922]

>>15538159
this sounds absolutely based and why listen to someone telling you it doesn't make sense if it's making your life better

[Anonymous No.15539933]

>>15539019
based

[Anonymous No.15540017]

>>15539800
The more time passes the more I agree Jordan Peterson was right about everything. Call me cringe all you like

[Anonymous No.15540057]

>>15539857
Great explanation anon thank you! But honestly why do you weight more value on theoretical reasoning rather than empiricism? Isn't the best way to construct the image of truth (in relation to psychological phenomena) empiricism?

[Anonymous No.15540085]

>>15540017
What does that post have to do with JP?

[Anonymous No.15540263]

>>15540057
I must go, so I will, unfortunately, have to respond very briefly, without real elaboration.
Firstly, because innate cathegories allow sense to form perceptions in the first place, secondly, because empiric knowledge is by necessity probabilistic, third, because it is only truly appropriate to that which can be only a sense-object, that which is exhausted within sense, which not only means that it is inappropriate to comprehension of the self (hence the constant issues in empiric psychology and sociology), but also to all that which is necessary for human perfection.
Good luck, anon, see you.

[Anonymous No.15540285]

>>15540085
Hero narrative. Thats basically JP's motto

[Anonymous No.15540373]

>>15540285
All these heaviest things the load-bearing spirit taketh upon itself: and like the camel, which, when laden, hasteneth into the wilderness, so hasteneth the spirit into its wilderness.

But in the loneliest wilderness happeneth the second metamorphosis: here the spirit becometh a lion; freedom will it capture, and lordship in its own wilderness.

Its last Lord it here seeketh: hostile will it be to him, and to its last God; for victory will it struggle with the great dragon.

What is the great dragon which the spirit is no longer inclined to call Lord and God? "Thou-shalt," is the great dragon called. But the spirit of the lion saith, "I will."

"Thou-shalt," lieth in its path, sparkling with gold- a scale-covered beast; and on every scale glittereth golden, "Thou shalt!"

The values of a thousand years glitter on those scales, and thus speaketh the mightiest of all dragons: "All the values of things- glitter on me.

All values have already been created, and all created values- do I represent. Verily, there shall be no 'I will' any more. Thus speaketh the dragon.

My brethren, wherefore is there need of the lion in the spirit? Why sufficeth not the beast of burden, which renounceth and is reverent?

To create new values- that, even the lion cannot yet accomplish: but to create itself freedom for new creating- that can the might of the lion do.

To create itself freedom, and give a holy Nay even unto duty: for that, my brethren, there is need of the lion.

[Anonymous No.15540399]

>>15540373
>To create new values- that, even the lion cannot yet accomplish: but to create itself freedom for new creating- that can the might of the lion do.
>To create itself freedom, and give a holy Nay even unto duty: for that, my brethren, there is need of the lion.

based based based

[Anonymous No.15540671]

>>15537914
sex

[Anonymous No.15540744]

Imagine thinking values are created and not discovered.

[Anonymous No.15540750]

>>15540744
How does one discover them? Where does one search?

[Anonymous No.15540769]

>>15540744
Are they hiding from us? Did God deposit them beneath the earth for us to find? What gold picks do we use to uncover those elusive veins?