Are we Nietchzes last men?

Yeah, I actually gain the ability to not only create meaning, but to also manipulate the nature of reality

>The famous polish philosopher Nietzsche

Attached: nietzsche.png (1458x239, 45K)

Nietchze went insane because by abandoning religion you're disconnecting your controller from the console. Your reality interface is gone. He tried coming up with a new interface from scratch but it wasn't Epicurus tier so he suffered for it. Nowadays normies have a mainstream atheism structure, but it was mostly designed by modern jews.
>inb4 LE BABYLONIANS WUZ JESUS N SHEIT XDDDDD

he never read anything about Nietzsche he just shitposts memes about him

Correct me if I'm wrong cause I never read Nietzsche, but didn't he basically advocate for subjective meaning that arises through the power of the will? If so, I don't see a difference between no meaning and subjective meaning. Just because you pretend really hard that what you do has any meaning doesn't make it so. In my mind subjective meaning has equal value as no meaning, it's just worthless. Is that a misrepresentation of what he believed in?

Jow Forums's values are born out of resentment for normies. Nietzsche would literally hate every single one of you shit head cretins.

Attached: youngfritz.jpg (402x521, 22K)

Mein Gott!!!111
you are the Ultraomegaubermensch Kwisatz Haderach

he was more upset about people who lied to him

[citation needed]

Attached: 1522164343790.jpg (465x744, 111K)

Leftists won't read "problematic" books so they just go with assumptions. That's why they think Ayn Rand is super libertarian too.

>Nietzsche

Ich beschwöre euch, meine Brüder, bleibt der Erde treu und glaubt denen nicht, welche euch von überirdischen Hoffnungen reden! Giftmischer sind es, ob sie es wissen oder nicht.
t. Fedora overlord of euphoria and Darwinism

Attached: 143282744067.jpg (474x528, 20K)

I'm absolutely aware that he didn't want to accept Nihilism because of what it can potentially imply for the human race (Especially since Schopenhauer before him advocated for antinatalism). I'm just asking what his solution to this problem was, and if his solution was subjective meaning than in my opinion that's utterly worthless and no better than fully embracing Nihilism.

you realise the Ubermensch is like the Buddha anyone can in theory become one.
You may be right in expecting a quality one to come forth but you yourself are one in the potential unfolding

Attached: uber.jpg (520x412, 127K)

>Ûbermensch

Was ist der Affe für den Menschen? Ein Gelächter oder eine schmerzliche Scham. Und ebendas soll der Mensch für den Übermenschen sein: ein Gelächter oder ein schmerzliche Scham.
t. Enlightened by his intelligrnce

Attached: Tipper of fedoras.gif (263x396, 649K)

Understood, I am aware of this but try to keep my pride in check by avoiding such a declaration.

Wie sagt mann "Faggot" auf Deutsch?

Instinct is the solution. He sees meaning as emerging from life esteeming and evaluating as it does naturally and preconsciously. Conscious thought is more likely than not to constrain and pervert the esteeming of life. This is why he argued against notions of good and evil. He saw such ideas (most ideas really) as derailing our evolution from animal to overman.

Neitzche was weak,
I don't look down on monkeys I don't look down on corn or dogs or cows. I merely accepts them as lower order, his assumptions on the state cognition of his Ubermensch was only that. The feelings leading to the mind set he theorized are based in a personality that is insecure which an Ubermensch would not posses by definition

Attached: forms.jpg (465x600, 94K)

Du bist eine Schwuchtel = You are a faggot

I see. I'm assuming he wasn't too fond of rationalists and empiricists then. However, life progressing in a more organic fashion, unobstructed by unsubstantiated ideas of morality and other constructs based on axioms still doesn't make the process of life inherently meaingful in any way. It's a more logically consistent position for someone who isn't spiritual (I often think it's pretty funny when materialists try to claim their systems of morality are objective and people should follow them for some reason), but it still doesn't grant any sort of objective meaning or purpose to the process of life. Perhaps one can find beauty in the process, and that beauty inspires them to live and experience, but that itself is a very subjective reason for life. So I still feel that his reasoning boils down to subjective reasoning, it is a simplification that lacks the poetic beauty of his explanation, but in terms of substance it really does boil down to subjective meaning.

Nietzsche and his writings are useless. Only fedora tipping morons take him seriously. He's the German equivalent of Ayn Rand.

Attached: your average atheist.jpg (500x338, 53K)

>eine
>feminine
Based germans

I think a post nihilist would argue that the meaning isn't subjective so much as objectively created by the Will. It's ultimately objectivity in the process of creation, like a log graph reaching its limit as I approaches infinity. Now the question I need to resolve is whether that limit can be broken without reaching infinity and how we do it.

As someone of a spiritual nature, I believe it is through Trascdent experiences that we can defy the nature of reality and push beyond mortal limitations, but I don't quite know how to "Trascend" and have no strong philsophical backing to make that claim.

Attached: not.jpg (567x565, 34K)

He was spiritual, but knew of the churches corruption and expected it to be replaced by nihilism.
Basically he is trying to explain brainlets that they should create their own meaning of life through 'power of will' if they aren't able to comprehend the concept of god

>I was only 19 years old.
>I loved Žižek so much, I had all the books and films.
>I pray to Žižek every night, thanking him for the knowledge he's given me. “Žižek is love” I say, “Žižek is life."
>My dad is Jordan Peterson. He hears me and calls me a cultural marxist. I knew he was just jealous of my devotion to Žižek.
>I called him a pseudo-intellectual.
>He hits me and sends me to sleep.
>I'm crying now and my face hurts.
>I lay in bed, really cold. I feel something warm...
>It's Žižek! I was so happy.
>He whispers in my ear an obscene joke.
>As I laugh he grabs me with his slavic hands, and puts me on his lap. I'm ready.
>I am all ears for Žižek.
>He penetrates my mind and expands my view on the current predicament.
>It hurts so much, but I do it for Žižek. I can feel my illusions shattering and eyes watering.
>I want to learn from Žižek.
>He sniffs a mighty sniff as he fills my young mind with his wisdom.
>My dad walks in.
>Žižek looks him straight in the eye and says,
>"We are approaching a catastrophe."
>Žižek crushes him in a debate and leaves through my window.
>Žižek is love. Žižek is life.

I don’t think it matters that there is no objective meaning. If you buy his argument then meaning inheres in life itself. The solution then is to purge yourself of any thinking that defies your will which naturally acts in accordance with the “meaning” of your life.

>Stefan Molyneux

Fedora tipping moron, pretty much. Nietzsche tier.

Würdig schien mir dieser Mann und reif für den Sinn der Erde: aber als ich sein Weib sah, schien mir die Erde ein Haus für Unsinnige.
t. Überfedora

Attached: 143320610764.jpg (350x466, 37K)

> As someone of a spiritual nature

Ah, there we go. See, I'm exactly the same way. This is exactly the puzzle piece I feel is missing from the vast majority of philosophical position. I am very sympathetic towards Nietzsche's rejection of dogma. To me it seems like a very nessecary step in one's spiritual evolution. Since I feel the same way as you I'll share some things I've been very interested in lately, and perhaps they can help you as well.

I became very interested in spirituality as of late and started delving into various religions. What I found in certain sects of Hinduism and Buddhism really appeals to me, because these religions aren't actually faith-based. These religions are more experimental in the sense that they tell you exactly what to do in a practical sense, and claim that you will get results if you do those things. Concrete claims like that got me really interested, because their very nature of such claims means they can be proven/disproven.

This is all hypothetical currently, but I came to the conclusion that there's one universal truth that can only be reached through direct experience (as of now), and religions are basically human attempts to convey that truth to other unenlightened individuals. However, due to the abstract nature of the truth this was usually done through symbolism and stories which unforunately often got misrepresented along the way. So, currently I believe that meditation/yoga in combination with rational contemplation is my best shot at "transcendence". Rationality on it's own isn't enough, you can have an IQ 180 but any reasoning you follow will eventually lead to an axiom and that's a dead end. Not to mention the problem of infinite regress in a strictly mechanistic model of the universe. So the only way forward is to transcend rationality and delve into the realms of intuition, instinct and direct experience, and yoga and meditation might be the best way for this (As far as we know so far).

Nothing crushed Nihilism as much Nietzscheism.

Source: National Socialist Germany.

Well, I can definitely see the following: If there is such a thing as meaning then you are much more likely to reach the goal by being authentic to your will and your being than following false constructs. In other words, if you let things flow organically and naturally you are more likely to progress in a better direction than if you follow dogma which is probably false. I find this very relateable, because I'm a very "gut instinct" kind of person, and I do feel like my intuition is bringing me closer to the truth every day. If this is his argument I am very sympathetic to his ideas.

Sadly I didn't read Nietzsche so I am just probing for information, but you guys have certainly made me more interested in him with your posts.

He rants about the mob repeatedly

"tracend"? or transcend?

>These religions are more experimental in the sense that they tell you exactly what to do in a practical sense, and claim that you will get results if you do those things
You can achieve somewhat the same thing by listening to the televised Jew.

Transcend*

My bad bro

You're completely on to something.
Have you ever Read Evola, this is almost exactly in line wit his philosophy.

no worries, i just didnt know if you had a different term. If your interested you should pick up "The Metaphysics of War" by Evola. He clearly emphasizes what the spirit and will are in that book.

Thanks I will; I've already read Ride the Tiger, Men Amongst the Ruins, and the Path of Cinnabar. I'm gonna work on Revolt against the Modern world then check out your recommendation

Attached: IMG_0729.jpg (1056x1536, 143K)

I haven't read Evola, but I have heard of him and know some very superficial wiki-tier stuff about him. I suppose I'll have to add it to my reading list as well. At this point it's getting so big that I feel like it will take me an entire year to get through it if I want to properly digest the information. It's a bit overwhelming.

Damn, I know that feel; take it slow dude. Action and experience is ultimately more important than the ideas, and if you don't take time to full digest and live the ideas, then you ultimately never learned them.

People who live so they can reach retirement age and retire peacefully without financial concern are last men.

Jow Forums is a combination of other things that Nietzsche criticized.

Nietzsche was certainly an interesting person, but above the level of his peers and his lack of adaptibility drove him mad.
He studied theology to find out that everybody is taking it in a literal sense and cannot comprehend the metaphors, nor was anyone interested in listening to his church-opposing interpretations.

The guy ended up spending his whole life on defining 'power of will', hoping the people 'in 100 years' are more intelligent and manage to use it wisely to find their own paths in order to create a better society.

Turns out his philosophies are even better to manipulate people, so nazi germany twisted everything and then the modern nihilists did the same in the opposite way

Unironically this.

Attached: 1519701147149.jpg (882x1323, 473K)

HIS NAME IS NIETZKI
FUCKING GERMANS!!!!!!!!!!!

HE WAS POLISH1!111

/thread

Nietzsche's last men already came and went, we are androgynous slime from the unformed clay degrading reality by our mere presence

Yes, you people specifically are the Last Men

How do you figure it was twisted by Germans?

>Just because you pretend really hard that what you do has any meaning doesn't make it so
That's exactly how it works user. Nothing has meaning if you don't give it meaning. There's NO inherent meaning to life. You're left with biological instinct. There's no one true guiding force besides the collection "absolute truths" (truth as we know thus far) itself. Now you have a choice.
Go the way of your "instincts", by floating through life, pleasing every whim, drowning in vice.
OR! Uphold the traditions of old, carry on the torch of human legacy, perfect the human condition, spread human civilization over the entirety of the universe. All that gushy bullshit about prestige, duty, honor and shit.

At the end of the day you'll probably choose a hybrid of trying to do what you personally and group-collectively deem as "righteous" and failing due to human imperfection just as every creature you descend from. Nietzsche's pursuit of the overman is the idealized version of yourself you envision as perfect. The absolute truth man, never wrong, peak efficiency, the culmination of human potential.

Attached: 1523008341033.jpg (978x1536, 333K)

Likewise if you take the axiom of Transcendence (if you will Transcendence into reality) ithen you can see how your Will to power begins to shape the nature of reality, thus the meaning your create becomes objective meaning.

Nietzsche was a perspectivist, he believed truth was not the highest value at all. Hence, the Will to Power manufactures truth. You just don’t understand it because you’re a collectivist herd animal and needing objective morality is wired into you from generations of being a slave
Nietzsche rejected transcendant experience as psychotic
he never advocated a god
>there i found my pathetic clinging to otherworldliness
National socialist germany was nihilist that’s why they lied constantly
He would hate them all the same for ressentiment but you are correct, Jow Forums has mob values though. You all are cattle psychologically
No he specifically called this type maggot men, and his ape, he hated everything about Jow Forums before it existed and the same for the national socialists who already, in their nascent stages, were present in germany

What makes you think objective meaning can exist? If it was objective, we probably wouldn't be disagreeing about it. Subjective meaning is harder to deny.

He was more of a prophet - he knew the collapse of religion would bring an age of nihilism, and argued to overcome it. He was a fan of Amor Fati, embracing fate. It's very reminiscent of the Philosophy of the Stoics and Marcus Aurelius.

His idea was about individuals taking responsibility to set their own moral standards. The exact opposite of an ideological belief and he was known to oppose church and nazis.

I don't give a fuck what Nietsche thought about Transcendence.

Is it not the right of the Ubermensch to rule over the last men?

Well... individualism vs collectivism there isn't it?
I get how he espoused against ideology. But to say his words were "twisted" for a collectivist use? I dunno... maybe. As bad as it may be perhaps there's "good" utility to doing so. Lots of lemmings need leadership, I think it's how humans have come so far so fast. But that hierarchy system is under scrutiny currently.

Attached: 1523033080945.jpg (1729x1500, 327K)

Except he thinks Stoics are retards.

>Beyond Good and Evil

> You just don’t understand it because you’re a collectivist herd animal and needing objective morality

I never once claimed that. The discussion wasn't about morality, it was about the perception of reality. My goal and desire is to perceive reality as objectively as possible. Not in the sense of morality, but in the sense of seeing reality for what. It's about truth-seeking.

> There i found my pathetic clinging to otherworldliness

There is no such thing as otherwordliness, there is only nature and reality. Everything that can occur within nature is not otherwordly. Why should anyone take this world at face value? Reality is processed through our brains and our brains are inherently limited. What makes you think humans percieve anything as it is with our limited ape-brains? As we move on to more complicated and subtle forms of science our basic assumptions about reality are questioned. We already have tons of evidence ponting towards the fact that the way humans percieve space-time isn't objective, but we can move towards a more objective view of the universe through science and perhaps direct experience/mysticism. I already said that mysticism for me is not about faith, it's an experimental process. Dismissing any direct experience you don't like as psychosis because it doesn't fit into a materialist narrative is intellectually dishonest.

I don't know if objective meaning can exist. I'm more interested in objective perception. Perhaps objective meaning will become apperant once you enhance your perception, or perhaps it doesn't exist. Eitherway I'm not assuming anything because that would be skipping a step.

He didn't advocate a god and I specified it as 'concept of god', which is not the same.
God is a man-made idea, metaphorically, the 'collective'.

'god is dead' was merely a provocation against the churches understanding of god and how their ideological, literal interpretations are going to be the reason for the death of christianity

>he hated everything about Jow Forums before it existed and the same for the national socialists who already, in their nascent stages, were present in germany
Right, but his description of the last man doesn't fit, and I don't recall him ever refer to German nationalists as last men.

How did we kill God?

He's basically full of shit.
I see people try to make this argument all the time "Nietsche hated Nazis" but it makes no god damn sense how they can make that claim considering the time frame of his idealogical development.

Nieztche was a fag and so are you so I guess the answer is yes.

Nietzsche was anti-darwinian.

Absolutely agree.

They didn't have the historical, philosophical nor biological (evolution) knowledge we have today, though.
He thought humans can evolve into intellectual individualists within a very short time (he mentioned this hope of an increase of intelligence 'within 100 years' few times)

National Socialists brought Nietzsche's ideas to their logical conclusion: not the individual, but the Volk needs to set its own moral standards and enforce them.

An individual is something unnatural. An individual does not exist. There is no "individual" living in the wilderness. There is no "individual" which survives. Humans are pack animals. Neither mindless herds, nor enlightened lone wolves. Humans are very similar to chimps in their social structures. Either the group as a whole survives or every single individual will die. We are bound to our tribe. All philosophies that idealize the individual and put it on a pedestal are inherently flawed by the very fact that human individuals cannot survive without social group.

National Socialism is a practically applied, disillusioned form of Nietzscheanism.

"No"

"Yes"

Brave, strong, American individual detected. Try surviving alone outside in the wilderness, then.

>National Socialists brought Nietzsche's ideas to their logical conclusion: not the individual, but the Volk needs to set its own moral standards and enforce them.

This is correct, but then you kind of shit the bed a little with the rest of your post. You are leaving out one aspect of Nietzsche's philosophy, which NatSoc left out (deliberately, by Hitler's volition), but which Hitler himself certainly did not ignore: the Overman is the meaning of the earth. Nietzsche doesn't "idealize the individual" but his philosophy is certainly pointed at creating the ULTIMATE individual that stands above all social groups. In other words, the whole point of the Third Reich was to lay the groundwork for the future Overman, and in order to do that you need to organize the herd first.

Attached: IMG_1359.jpg (780x497, 71K)

>not the individual, but the Volk needs to set its own moral standards and enforce them
So what every collection of individuals, and every state does. How are National Socialists the only applicants of this?
>There is no "individual" living in the wilderness.
Treating any collective larger than your social circle as your "Volk" is just as unnatural as humans living without a tribe. Your countrymen are not your tribe, you haven't even seen 1/100th of them.

nice, those are great too