/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.20003631]

My theology teacher at one point said Nietzsche mostly stole his ideas from someone else. But I forget the name. Do you guys have any idea who it might be?

[Anonymous No.20003635]

God

[Anonymous No.20003643]

>>20003631
schoperhauooooooooooooooor

[Anonymous No.20003647]

Zarathustra

[Anonymous No.20003650]

from me

[Anonymous No.20003656]

>>20003631

F Gardner

[Anonymous No.20003665]

Stirner. But no. Your theology teacher is mistaken and has probably learned this from some other theology teacher who made it up.

[Anonymous No.20003673]

>>20003631
Spinoza? Hegel? Schelling? Schopenhauer? Stirner? Thrasymachus? Theognis?

[Anonymous No.20003690]

[Anonymous No.20003728]

>>20003631
Leopardi

[Anonymous No.20003770]

>>20003631
You're probably thinking of Philipp Mainländer, who was the first to postulate that God is dead.
Mainländer meant it in a much more literal way, though.

[Anonymous No.20003774]

>>20003631
You dont "steal" someones ideas, you literally build on the ideas of previous men. The purpose of philosophy is not originality.

[Anonymous No.20003794]

>>20003770
That seems interesting. Can you elaborate on what he means and his philosophy?

>>20003774
That’s not what I mean though. I mean literally stole ideas. It’s not building on top if you just regurgitate shit

[Anonymous No.20003812]

He copied no one, he was groundbreaking. He was refering either to Kierkegaard or Stirner tho.

[Anonymous No.20003814]

>>20003794
He believed that the logic of pantheism was irrefutable (don't ask me why), but that it is very clear that all is not one; therefore God must be dead (by his own hand no less) and we are inhabiting his corpse.
God chose to die because existence is le bad and God being perfect wanted to rid himself of his own existence. Ending himself however, was the one thing he couldn't do because he was too powerful, so he broke himself into smaller and smaller parts which now make up the universe.

So yeah, pretty out there but I'm also memeing it a bit desu. Look it up if you're interested.

[Anonymous No.20003824]

>>20003774
tell that to the peer review committees!

[Anonymous No.20003828]

>>20003774
>he purpose of philosophy is not originality.
Tell that to Western philosophy.

[Anonymous No.20003829]

>>20003814
Sounds like a kino cosmology.

[Anonymous No.20003835]

>>20003814
This is literally just Nordic cosmology from the Prose Edda. Replace "god" with "Ymir."

[Anonymous No.20003901]

>>20003631
Wagner.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOc6iZtukrs

>'Wotan’s relationship with Siegfried is something wonderful, like no other poetry in the world: love and enforced enmity and the desire for destruction. This is highly symbolic for the understanding of Wagner’s character: love for that which redeems, judges, and destroys; but splendidly perceived!'

>The confrontation between Zarathustra (as ‘Untergehender’) and his progeny, the ‘Übermensch’, appears as a free paraphrase of the confrontation between Wotan and his progeny, ‘the man of the future’, in Siegfried, Act III, where Wotan (in Wagner’s own words) rises to the tragic height of willing his own fall. Nietzsche’s attempt to improve on the scene he described as comparable to no other poetry in the world will be evident to the student in the long excursus of ‘Zarathustra’s Vorrede’, beginning

>'What is great in man is that he is a bridge and not a goal. What can be loved in man is that he is a going-across and a going-down.'

>By availing himself of material culled from the dramatic climax of the trilogy, he prepares to deliver his own answer to the question propounded in both works.

[Anonymous No.20003904]

>>20003901
Nietzsche while writing Zarathustra:
>With this book I have stepped into a new Ring
>Finally, if I am not completely mistaken about my future, it is through me that the best part of the Wagnerian enterprise will live on—and that’s what is almost droll about the affair.
>I am better now and I even believe that Wagner's death was the most substantial relief that could have been given me just now. It was hard for six years to have to be the opponent of the man one had most reverenced on earth, and my constitution is not sufficiently coarse for such a position. After all it was Wagner grown senile whom I was forced to resist; as to the genuine Wagner, I shall yet attempt to become in a great measure his heir (as I have often assured Fräulein Malvida, though she would not believe it).
>It's already beginning, what I prophesied for a long time, that in many pieces I will be R.W.'s heir.—

Ecce Homo:
>Suppose I had christened my Zarathustra with a name not my own,—let us say with Richard Wagner's name,—the acumen of two thousand years would not have sufficed to guess that the author of Human, all-too-Human was the visionary of Zarathustra.

[Anonymous No.20003950]

your teacher was probably referring to Buddhism i think?

[Anonymous No.20004189]

Hitler

[Anonymous No.20004249]

>>20003814
I forgot which one but wasn’t there a presocratic who believed that 1/ the universe was cyclical 2/ the primary state is chaos and multiplicity, and everything move toward order and unity 3/ once unity is achieved, “God" appears and eventually decide to commit sudoku by turning everything into chaos again
?

[Anonymous No.20004260]

>>20003643
this

[Anonymous No.20004266]

>>20004249
Sounds like a memefied version of Heraclitus.

[Anonymous No.20004280]

>>20003794
>I mean literally stole ideas
That poster understands exactly what you meant. He's telling you that you are wrong and that theft of ideas isn't possible. It's the height of irony that an academic, whose institution is ostensibly built on the furthering of ideas and knowledge, would say that. It may be unsurprising, considering he's a theology professor, but still ironic. The only possible way to "just regurgitate" something would be to repeat without understanding, because in the process of understanding you by necessity shape and enrich that understanding with your own unique mix of experiences and beliefs. What you're saying is that Nietzsche repeated without understanding some unknown philosopher. You have no clue what the content of this regurgitation or the slightest idea whose idea it "originally was." Yet, despite your complete and abject cluelessness, you feel comfortable and confident in asserting that YOU are the one who's saying something that means LITERALLY anything at all.

Unfuck yourself, retard.

[Anonymous No.20004289]

>>20004249
That's probably Empedocles, but his is slightly more complicated than a 3 step progression, and includes the conflicting dual forces of love and strife which lead from primordial chaos, to differentiation and then back to a unity.

[Anonymous No.20004307]

>>20003631
Max Stirner?

[Anonymous No.20004726]

>>20003631
If your teacher thinks filtering out select ideas from other works and reassembling them in new works with new contexts is "stealing," then there isn't a single known philosopher in history who wasn't a thief at some point. To philosophize is to be a criminal, then.

[Anonymous No.20004745]

>>20004726
>To philosophize is to be a criminal, then.
This is what Nietzsche wanted for his future philosophers anyway

[Anonymous No.20004790]

>>20003794
Jonas Ceika has a real good video on him on youtube - really worth a watch

[Anonymous No.20004827]

>>20003770
>>20003814
Holy shit the mainlander retard at it again. I have tomd you a billion of times how Nietzsche’s death of god is COMPLETELY different from mainlander’s conception of it. Holy fuck.

And this anon >>20003835 is right. You want to claim an originality that has no relation to what Nietzsche did that is not even original. It is found in many different cosmogonic myths.

[Anonymous No.20004905]

>>20003774
To build on what this anon said, one does not "steal" the ideas of another. Instead, one adds to the ideas of those who came before. Originality is not the aim of philosophy.

[Anonymous No.20004960]

>>20003631
Me

[Anonymous No.20004964]

>>20003635
>steal his ideas
>claim that he's dead
Man, what a con

[Anonymous No.20005136]

>>20003673
This and Pascal.

[Anonymous No.20005144]

>>20004960
na man, pretty sure me

[Anonymous No.20005178]

And Jesus stole all of his shit from the Essenes, what's your point?

[Anonymous No.20005186]

>>20005178
le what now?

[Anonymous No.20005192]

Das right
The real author was BLACK and n*etzskkkhe was actually NIGGTZSCHE a BLACK MAN

[Anonymous No.20005246]

>>20003631
his stuff about ubermensch sounded an AWFUL lot like Hitler, any chance it was from him, OP?

[Anonymous No.20005330]

If he was talking about morals, I think he meant Guyau.

[Anonymous No.20005339]

>>20005186
Pre-Christian sect that was around at the time. He also straight up stole his golden rule from Rabbi Hillel

[Anonymous No.20005499]

>>20004280
Just because you understand something doesn’t mean you can’t repeat something and literally add nothing to the philosophy. Someone can read one man’s work then read another’s then say it was a waste of time because they’re saying nothing new. Reinventing the wheel and such. And even if the context of their life might change it it could be in no meaningful way so they’re basically just regurgitating shit. Your a fucking retard kill yourself. Are you really going to take the absurd position that VERY single philosopher something completely unique to say?

[Anonymous No.20005515]

>>20003828
Gay take

[Anonymous No.20005589]

I'm being sophistic and skirting around an answer learned in any philosophy that isn't ancient, but you can see parallels between his thought and Thrasymachus. Read the Greeks I guess

[Anonymous No.20005634]

>>20003643
Nietzsche hated Schopenhauer.

[Anonymous No.20005920]

>>20005634
No he didn't. He admired Schopenhauer, and he managed to transcend him when he became a fully fledged philosopher of his own right.

[Anonymous No.20005939]

Wagner

[Anonymous No.20006041]

>>20005634
lol probably

[Anonymous No.20006254]

>>20005634
Why do you people who know damn well you know absolutely nothing on a subject feel compelled to weigh in? Genuinely curious

[Anonymous No.20006333]

>>20005634
>guaranteed replies

[Anonymous No.20006414]

>>20005178
>>20005339
>the Jewish messiah had ideas that were similar to Jews who preceded him
Great insight, Einstein.

[Anonymous No.20006455]

>>20003631
>stole
Ridiculous phasing. Which makes me think that this is some bait to have il/lit/erate retards sperg out. But i’ll take the bait, there are overlaps with Feuerbach and his theses on Christianity but that’s how philosophy goes. Read something, take what you like/think is true, and reject what you don’t like/think is untrue

[Anonymous No.20008042]

>>20005920
dis_nigga.jpg