Is this /ourPhilosopher? and what does that say about /pol?
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
He loved Jews. His last name is likely Hebraic.
Was he the original Incel? Is there any evidence that he ever got laid?
He hired prostitutes because he couldn't get a normal woman.
How many polAcks will end up like this?
98%
see
“The Jews achieved that miracle of inversion of values thanks to which life on earth has for a couple millennia acquired a new and dangerous fascination - their prophets fused "rich", "godless", "evil", "violent", "sensual" into one, and were the first to coin the word "world" as a term of infamy. It is this inversion of values (with which is involved the employment of the word for "poor" as a synonym for "holy" and "friend") that the significance of the Jewish people resides: With them, there begins the slave revolt in morals.”
He opposed anti-semitism. Therefore, he loved jews.
/Our philosopher/ is Nick Land.
He was friends with several Jews, but he also blamed their people for the inversion of morality. So it’s a little more complicated than you like to pretend, goy.
true, his best friend and the guy he got the thesis for 'on the genealogy of morals' from was his best friend. they were so tight, they had a threesome together (nietzsche got cucked), and his jewish best friend committed suicide after nietzsche died
not true. there was a story of nietzsche going into a whorehouse with a friend, striking a chord on the piano and leaving. he seems to have enjoyed sensual pleasure, but it was most likely from art hos. was probably a compulsive masturbator
***his bff was a jew
He pretty much argues against this morality too.
If he would step out of my sunlight he can be whoever he wants
Did God strike him down with madness for much the same reason that He struck down Christopher Hitches with cancer? (And for much the same reasons?)
t. schizophrenic peasant living in the middle ages
I will consider this to be proof of God's existence, until proven otherwise.
He argues against what morality? Are you trying to say he advocates for Jewish slave morality? LOL. Please give me quotes. I doubt you’ve read any of his work.
ok
The real question is, how many Jow Forumsacks will end up fapping to this.
what busts my balls about him is how most people think he was a champion for nihilism and how the absolutely based philosopher E. Michael Jones makes the dumbest mistake in the history of philosophy by believing that Nietzsche's philosophy is based on syphilis.
he praises the jews for their slave revolt in morality, but advocates a more greco-roman. 'master' morality instead, mixed with a shit-ton of negative theology in this later works
That’s not Manly P. Hall
Nietzsche is a must read if youre interested in 20th century western philosophy because basically he influenced most of it
Jung and (((Freud))) were heavily influenced by them
t. pseud
What exactly do you mean by negative theology? You're over simplifying everything. He doesn't "advocate" a system of morality for any individual, but uses morality as a description of power relations. He wrote an entire book about it, Beyond Good and Evil.
On egalitarian morals:
"It is the lack of nature, it is the utterly ghastly fact that anti-nature itself has received the highest honours as morality"
>Jung and (((Freud))) were heavily influenced by them
Also Marx, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot...
>"It is the lack of nature, it is the utterly ghastly fact that anti-nature itself has received the highest honours as morality"
As opposed to the purely amoral unfettered homicidal purely materialist greed practiced by the oligarchs who paid his bills.
>oligarchs who paid his bills
he sold books and taught at a university for money
>anti-egalitarian = materialist pro-monarch
you are lost. I'm guessing you are a christian apologist.
>marx was influenced by nietzsche
Marx wrote the manifesto 20 years before Nietzsche released anything.
>Marx wrote the manifesto 20 years before Nietzsche released anything.
All Darwin-quoting Evolutionists.
Nietzsche wrote a ton of anti-Darwin stuff. Called him an ape-genealogist and mediocre british psychologist.
"What surprises me most when surveying the great destinies of man is always seeing before me the opposite of what Darwin and his school see or want to see today: selection in favor of the stronger, in favor of those who have come off better, the progress of the species. The very opposite is quite palpably the case: the elimination of the strokes of luck, the uselessness of the better-constituted types, the inevitable domination achieved by the average, even below-average types."
He also denied macro-evolution. You can just google this shit. You know, if you don't have the nuts to read the books. You're just making a stronger case FOR Nietzsche lol.
There's really no doubt that Nietzsche got his amoral nihilism from Darwin, just like the rest of the European aristocracy. Darwin wrote his door-stop to justify inherited wealth. He was also one one of the wealthiest men in Europe.
>"What surprises me most when surveying the great destinies of man is always seeing before me the opposite of what Darwin and his school see or want to see today: selection in favor of the stronger, in favor of those who have come off better, the progress of the species. The very opposite is quite palpably the case: the elimination of the strokes of luck, the uselessness of the better-constituted types, the inevitable domination achieved by the average, even below-average types."
Here he is arguing that something is working against Darwin's so-called "Natural Law" he is not disavowing it
>There's really no doubt that Nietzsche got his amoral nihilism from Darwin
Wrong. "There really is no doubt" - Nice argument. I've read both authors, here's your DOUBT. Prove me wrong. I've just proven what Fred thought of Darwin with quotes, moron. Nietzsche wasn't a nihilist as you perceive nihilism anyway. He didn't think life was meaningless.
>Here he is arguing that something is working against Darwin's so-called "Natural Law" he is not disavowing it
He's literally pointing to an obvious point that any clear mind could understand that refutes Darwin's theory of the fittest human surviving. His point would be that Darwin did not account for metaphysical principles like "POWER" but just pretended ape-ish strength or something was the highest value. Literally the same line of argument any platonist or religious person would make.
relativist who personally hated anti-semitism, nationalism, and christianty, however his contempt for the underclass obscures the fact the he's closer to the far left
ok foucalt
Ok brainlet
he exposes the Abrahamic religion for the slave moral it is. But he was arguing for a Dionysian world outlook were pol is Apollonian.
>that refutes Darwin's theory of the fittest human surviving
Nietzsche misunderstood the basics and subtleties of Darwinian theory in the same ways you evidently do. To begin with, Darwin's use of the word "fitness" has to do with an organism's capacity to survive and pass on its genes through reproduction. It has everything to do with adaptability to environment and reproductive success, and nothing to do with Nietzschean notions of power/Aristocratic noble values etc. The organism that produces the greatest number of viable offspring, passing on its genes, needn't be the most noble and aristocratic. It simply needs to have survived its particular conditions long enough to reach maturity, to have secured mates, and to have successfully reproduced with them.
Evolution by natural selection is also accepted by the vast majority of biological scientists as a powerful theory and explanatory apparatus that is essentially right. Nietzsche can be forgiven for not having properly understood it--it rubbed against him in the wrong ways for a number of reasons, and at the time there was a great deal of misinformation about Darwin's theories and their implications floating around in the intellectual ether. You, however, cannot justly seek the refuge of such excuses.
Challenge accepted