How Nietzsche Overturned Centuries of Thinking | Socrates is Dead!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 апр 2020
- In 399 BC Socrates was condemned to death for corrupting the youth and challenging the gods of the state.
Centuries later, Friedrich Nietzsche contends that it was in fact not Capital Punishment, but Suicide.
For what reason did Socrates choose to drink the poisoned chalice of Hemlock without appeal? What instincts drove him to do so - this man who claimed to be a doctor to the masses?
Going into battle with Aristotle, Plato and Socrates, flouting the 'rules' governing the limits of legitimised argument and thought, Nietzsche turns the idols on their heads and shakes the minae out of their mouths.
Twilight of the Idols was written in 1888, but its insights remain timeless.
#Socrates #Nietzsche #Aristotle #Philosophy #reason #logic
RECOMMENDED READING:
The Twilight of the Idols by Friedrich Nietzsche (Oxford World's Classics): amzn.to/2W2Bhyd
The Last Days of Socrates by Plato (Penguin Classics): amzn.to/3bMLfdB
Plato's Republic (Penguin Classics): amzn.to/35cEnDP
The Organon - Complete Edition - (Logical Works) by Aristotle: amzn.to/2KHFEti
PATREON:
Support me on Patreon: / thewrittenworld
SOCIAL MEDIA:
Twitter: / thewrittenw0rld
Instagram: / thewrittenw0rld
Facebook: / thewrittenworldonyoutube
THE WRITTEN WORLD WEBSITE:
thewrittenworldblog.com
CREDITS:
Music: Curtains Always Drawn by Kai Engel: FMA: creativecommons.org/licenses/...
Boy looking out of a ship window - Kiril Dobrev
Star Spirals Over Lake Tekapo - Mitchp
Huge Waves Hitting Bali Coastline
Sunset Over LA City and Hills
Seagull at Dusk
provided by Videvo: www.videvo.net
Audio snippet of voice of Alexander Nehamas: Empires: The Greeks: crucible of civilisation: episode III
If You Love Literature - Subscribe.
THEWRITTENWORLD. Life Lessons from Literature...
![MORTAL KOMBAT 1 - KOMBAT PACK 2 REVEAL TRAILER!! [REACTION]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Mi2M58zEQVc/mqdefault.jpg)
Nietzsche's thinking and writing is so absolutely beautiful. It's such a shame that people think of him as some bitter nihilist, which is so, so far from what he really was. His unique love for mankind is so inspiring and precious. Liked and subbed, keep this up my man! Great video!
Adam Nyman - Nietzsche was the very antithesis of a Nihilist. Anyone who thinks of him as such, has either not read him properly, or severely misunderstood him. Agreed. And thanks for subscribing Adam!
@@TheWrittenWorldSubscribeNow he said he was up until will to power, but he could be stricter with himself you or I
He didn't live well it seems nor long and well .
Look at the auto biography of Ben Franklin as a symbiotic philosopher entrepreneur inventor leader and diplomat who lived well, long, courageously, wisely, just and long.
Had a lot of good times too.
And traveled a lot too.
And without a lot of today's material, science, medical, infrastructure, essential services and consumer conveniences.
Nietzsche used to be the cool philosopher. Now, all the woke leftists replaced him with Hegel as your go-to guy.
Something to tell: Narrator's voice has depth but the music is slightly on higher pitch, sometimes music overshadows and contrasts narration.
Thanks for the advice. Will take it into consideration!
I thought that too, love the presentation and voice. Oh my what a lovely voice, but music was too loud
It was Nietzsche 's labelling of Socrates as the "vortex of world history" that brought me to his works to begin with. How right he was.
I loved it! Really well done 👍 you’ve given me something to think on in a succinct and powerful package. Really appreciate it.
Thank You Matt. You're latest video on Arrivals is excellently done! Keep them coming - It's good to have you back!
Well Done 👏👏👏 Keep The Videos Coming, Can't Wait For The Next One.
Very informative,keep up the excellent work
Man..I'm lost for words how good this video is. I really look forward to your next videos.
That's very kind of you David. Thank You and keep in touch.
Great Video Keep Up The Good Work. 👍
I can only say that "I know that I know nothing"
I love your take bro! Very succinct and insightful. Kudos!
Thank You Psych Maestro... So keep watching! Appreciated.
Thanks for the very unique topic. Most choose not to address this bruise on the arm of philosophy. You gave me much to ponder! All of your videos are quite informant and well put together. You deserve many more subscribers!
Thank You Heljos 24. It really is a 'bruise on the arm of philosophy' and certain cascading events, may even prove it to be an internal haemorrhaging.
I am glad that you enjoy the videos and I hope that they keep improving and I keep making more that matter.
Thanks again and take care for now Heljos.
Wow, not even 300 subscribers. Great video!
Thank You Blake. Appreciated.
Amazing work again Thankyou 🙏🙏👍
You’re very welcome Suna.
This is amazing
Excellent analysis. Thank you
You’re very welcome Papa Noms. And Thank ‘You’.
Sir, what is this video starting music?
Great video! I am not familiar with Nietzsche but I have a question. From this video, I think Nietzsche is intrinsically wrong about the Dialectic being simply Socrates' Will to Power(if I understand the term correctly). If It is reason that bonded humanity into a prosperous force, then reason in thoughts needs to be expressed in speech - that would entail the occurence of the Dialectic method. I would presume that Dialectics is the natural consequence of the "thought" reason - it is simply "spoken" reason. I can't wrap my head around what Nietszche proposes as a counter-argument of reason. Physicality, passion and force? Aren't these the same values that dictate the laws of the jungle? Is Nietszche arguing against reason itself?
Hello Abstract Apes. For Nietzsche, Reason did not 'bond humanity into a prosperous force' as you put it. Nor does he see the Dialectic as synonymous with reason itself. The Dialectic is not merely spoken reason, - but a strategem to will to power. He in-fact called for the 'renaturalistion' of man, holding that our bending to so-called 'Moral' principles is in fact im-moral, and that the instinctively strong had no truck with 'modern' moral principles which he saw as the attempt of the weak to use the only resource they had available to overthrow the naturally superior - the Dialectic - forged out of the poisonous fumes of resentment, of the downtrodden. Nietzsche did think this was a brilliant move, but a decadent one. I recommend you read him.
@@TheWrittenWorldSubscribeNow Thank you so much for such a great reply. That is indeed a very different viewpoint to the generally accepted philosophical thinking. You mentioned that he called for "the 'renaturalistion' of man". I think I grasp that he considers the so-called "slave-morality" immoral. So, he says "Reason is simply a weapon, because the only idea that men base their actions on is the will to power". What does he think about the will to truth (The Stoic way)? Correct me if I'm wrong here, but doesn't that entail that we are to live in animal hierarchies? Since reason would be ignored(and even attacked as he does), it would not allow large groups of humans to bond over ideologies and consequently not be any different than mere animals (as they would be controlled through mere physical and psychological violence). Humans would be neglecting the only thing that makes them different from other animals(and here you might argue that they might not survive if it is so). But perhaps he considers the animalistic way of life correct? I think it's good to ask what Nietszche considers the scope of reason and if he has even given formal definitions of what he thinks reason and truth are. And does he ever formalize an opinion on a way of life. Thanks again for your carefully crafted response. :)
Abstract Apes. Here is Nietzsche on Truth: “What then is truth? A movable host of metaphors, metonymies, and anthropomorphisms: in short, a sum of human relations which have been poetically and rhetorically intensified, transferred, and embellished…” I have read tomes of Philosophies and Philosophers throughout my life, and I can easily say, that although I have many disagreements with him, Nietzsche is one of the greatest thinkers I have ever read. He is also easily the most misunderstood. Anything that is a manifestation of life itself - instincts which lead towards the empowerment of life - he loved.
He was a Philosopher of life. He wanted to empower the individual and attacked everything that was hostile to life as he saw it. So-called truths, to him, were merely post-hoc rationalisations, games that we play for one-upmanship, for increasing ones power in the world. He moved against Schopenhauer, who was his idol (in every sense of the word) who was himself a Buddhist. He then realised that the tenets of Buddhism were in fact opposed to life and leant towards nothingness - willing death on one level, but empowering those who call themselves spiritually superior, on another.
In the Genealogy of Morals he wrote: "man would rather will nothingness - than not will at all." The crux is that Will is always in the equation - and what one wills determines their so-called truths.
For Nietzsche, whatever 'Truth' one expresses, is essentially merely a symptom, exposing one's deepest instincts, - pointing towards a burgeoning health and a life-overflowing, or a decline towards death.
Indeed, no matter what it is that we mean when we say 'Animalistic', THAT we are animals, is undeniable.
Consider: One of the Maxims that was inscribed at the Temple of Apollo at Delphi was "Know Thyself'.
Nietzsche wanted people to truly know themselves.
He was in Love with Life. But wanted for it to be honoured, in all its glory. Read him.
@@TheWrittenWorldSubscribeNow Sir, you are an absolute master of thinking! This is the most valuable response I've read on RUclips, ever.
You have rendered me speechless, I can neither ask anything nor add anything. You have caused a paradigm shift in my opinion on Nietzsche. I will definitely read him. I deeply appreciate your time invested in this response and I hope we have a great discussion again. I'm going to go watch all of your other clips and share this one :)
@@abstractapes3444 It's great exchanges like this that restore my faith in the YT comment section
Wonderful.. Utterly Marvellous
@Sumit Dalavi. Appreciated Sumit. Thank You...
Verrry nice.
Reminds me of my thinking on Herbert Marcuse.
Socrates must have had a hard time in Athens, being so ugly, and took his revenge the only way he could.
Glad you liked it Stephan... More to come.
Keep ideas alive. Love from India
If one is going to discuss arguments about the man, the best explanation for Socrates trial and execution is Socrates role dissenting from the execution of the victorious Athenian generals following the Battle of Arginusae. There is even apparently a theory that the Athenian oligarchy deliberately betrayed the Athenian war effort to end their democracy.
John. Thank You for your contribution. Despite the historical / political events surrounding the trial and execution of Socrates (which are of course, critical to understanding what happened on that fateful day), this essay focuses on Socrates' psychological and intellectual constitution.
We know for example that Athenian law allowed for the condemned to come up with their own alternate punishment in place of their execution.
We also know that Socrates proposed the payment of a fine as punitive settlement. But when he was asked was he was actually proposing, he said - 30 minae, which was probably considered an insult.
We also know that his acolytes (such as his wealthy friend and student, the general and orator, Alcibiades), offered to pay off the guards to allow for his escape, which he refused, chasing death over escape.
According to Xenophon his defiance to the jury was indicative of the fact that he believed he would be better off dead, and if we are to reject Xenophon's version of events, Plato tells us that Socrates' last words were 'We owe a cock to the good Asclepius', (a god to whom a cock was offered by the sick in order to receive a cure) - indicating that he thought life itself a disease and his execution, the 'cure'.
Nietzsche unravels this thinking showing Socrates to be a decadent and a nihilist, which goes to the heart of this essay.
Thanks again John and do keep in touch.
Take care.
impressive, most impressive
Nice
What are the beautiful paintings at 7:33 and 8:32 ?
Hello Seabastiaan. The first is 'Judith Beheading Holofernes' by Caravaggio and the second is called 'The Flammarion Engraving' which is actually a woodcut by Nicolas Camille Flammarion. Beautiful indeed.
08:00 Affirmation of life is itself a problem. On one hand, one might say all one is doing is simply affirming the good and the bad, while not judging life to be wholey good. But affirmation itself seems like a coping mechanism, afterall one can not not live a life inorder to make such a statement. One is always a part of life, so until one commits suicide, one by default affirms life as a practicle consiquence of ones being.
DeadEndFrog I can see your point here. Consider though the dichotomy between ‘Being Towards life’ and ‘Being towards death’. For example the idea of life as illusion and the concept of a true world ‘behind’ the world, fundamentally orientates ones entire being towards a nothingness which is Nihilism itself. Just a consideration. Thanks for your thoughts. Appreciated.
The Written World indeed, and im not arguing for any of these, all im saying is that Nietzsche himself has a problem within his own view.
DeadEndFrog I’m with you. I too can say that my disagreements with him are legion. But he is a very interesting thinker to say the least... I’m sure you’ll agree on that. Rarely so we find a thinker whose passion for human life is so broad and deep. I continue to read him and always find some profundity that forces us to engage with his ideas. Thanks again DeadEndFrog.
The Written World indeed, he is and probably will always be in my top 10 philosophers of all time :^)
"Affirmation of life is itself a problem...a coping mechanism"
You seem to presume malady, in a way that makes any sign of health just a sign of deeper illness.
Please turn down the music a little bit.
This video is amazing, why does it have so few views?
Thanks Jacob I appreciate that. Why so few views? Algorithms? Supply and Demand? - or something of the sort I fear. It will grow in time. (I hope). Keep Watching and take care for now...
Don’t waste your time, the music is from another video I think. But I’m sure the transcript would be good.
the part where you say that nietzsche read ancient cultures like India, I want to add something here. Many idols of India like Ganesha, kali, hanuman etc who are most revered were all ugly.
You need to post more stuff
Hello Aman. You’re right. Completely. I do. There’s one on the way. Thanks for your input. Appreciated. 👌🏼
@@TheWrittenWorldSubscribeNow Looking forward to it. Cheers!!!
The BG is too loud, It's really hard to understand what you say even when I'm concentrating, not to mention in the background. I just stopped after 1 and half minute.
Hi Eralfion. I know, I'm aware. This video was terribly mixed down. Apologies. Been getting better since. Try one of the newer videos. 😁 Thanks for letting me know though. I do appreciate it.
Socrates wanted to die? He fought in the battle of Potidaea and saved general Alcibiades. Who wants to suicide and go and fight for his own city? Just by this fact changes everything about Socrates, and sheds some light on Nietzsche's own resentment against Socrates. Nietzsche just tried to find a cause and whom to blame for christianity, and he found some common symptoms in Socrates and Plato, therefore he had to find a way to hold them accountable. But I dare you to study all dialogues by Plato thoroughly and then read Nietzsche, then I would like to see you make a video about this. But we have to admit that Nietzsche got one thing right, he blamed the Jews for the birth of Christianity.
Nietzsche was saying that Socrates hated something about himself, and that is why he took the poison himself. From Nietzsche's perspective, a lover of life would fight to the bitter end and refuse to dismiss his own life in such a way.
That doesn't mean Nietzsche is correct, but his writings are brilliant. The point of this video is that we cannot simply dismiss the person and address only the argument. People take action because they have desires, and people will lie freely and forcefully if they want something strongly enough. Arguments are a means, not an end. Power is the end. It is always wealth and power that people desire. This is natural for us, because we need power to defend ourselves from nature and harvest its bounty, and is not shameful. The shame comes from desiring wealth and power and LYING about it, which is exactly what politicians and priests and leaders have done for millennia. Even worse is when we lie to ourselves, and convince ourselves that we are somehow devoid of these things, which is one of the common causes of mental illness... etc. etc. etc.
@@jacobwiren8142 woah yeah man, thats it!
Hello there K. I have studied the dialogues and know them well. Also - I do not agree that Socrates fighting as a general saves him from the accusation of the will to death by suicide. Ever head of islamist martyrs? That’s just one example. Also to state that ‘Nietzsche just tried to find a cause and who to blame’ is to misunderstand him thoroughly. First of all, that cause is in the equation is no surprise and secondly that plato/socrates believed in a world behind the world does raise both questions and eyebrows as to their psychologies and instincts.
I suggest you reread them both and ask / what are they looking for? As the great book of blaa blaa tells us - ‘seek and ye shall find’.
@Jacob Wiren. This is a first rate answer. Well fathomed. 😉
@@jacobwiren8142 I would say they are in denial more than lying, that would drive someone to insanity.
The music behind the narration has got to go.
I beg to differ. ;D No in all seriousness, what is it? The volume or the genre? Let me know..
@@TheWrittenWorldSubscribeNow volume for sure.
Yes.. But because of Socrates the ancient western societies moved to Christianity and the ancient Zoroastrian ideas.
There is a reason why sensible people reject ad hominem arguments: What right does Nietzsche of all people have to criticize Socrates? At least Socrates married and had three sons. Meanwhile Nietzsche's life in modern terms can only be described as the nightmare of parents for millennial children: Apparent success early only for their child to provide incapable of adulting and being forced to come home to be cared for by mother and then sister. Why would any person at any time take advice from Nietzsche of all people on how to successfully live life as an autonomous adult? See where this line of reasoning goes?
John.
I think we are at cross-purposes. Your tone of voice leads me to believe you are christian - it seeps through. If not, undoubtedly (see what I did there?) - still alas, labouring under christian values.
Ah and yes. Marriage. Children. What an original and liberating life that must be.
Now hear John. 'What 'right' does Nietzsche have to criticise Socrates?' What a silly question.
He has the same right that every thinker has, that is, the right to critique is every thinkers inalienable right. And rights are nothing but veiled power. Follow the thread?
Socrates was of the weak. He was rabble. And it's true - he was extremely ugly.
Now. What weapon must the weak 'cultivate' (there's a word), in order to compete with the strong? In order to overthrow them?
Think : skinny school-boy among the giants in the playground. He becomes rather sharp-tongued and quit-witted doesn't he?
My final word. Nietzsche was wrong on many fronts, but here - he nailed it. And dare I say it - he was a far greater thinker than Socrates could ever be. He stripped away illusions, while Socrates piled them up - because 'needed' them.
Thanks for your contribution John.
@@TheWrittenWorldSubscribeNow "Your tone of voice leads me to believe you are christian"
Is it ad hominem?
@@zbyszeks3657 No. Just ad wronginem.
@@TheWrittenWorldSubscribeNow That was nietzschean, mean full of despise towards another as ubermenschen has for others. No more comments. That's the road to hell.
I am astonished ! I never really tried to read something from Aristotle or Socrates or Nietzsche because I thought the language was going to be a super complex and formal set of paragraphs to convey a meaning of a sentence. please tell me where I can find this book which says to live in life is to live ill. also what about the first book of Nietzsche? is it simply written? can i understand it as a beginner english level learner?
I always have been told that Nietzsche was against religions and that most of his works were debunking the holly books of religions and disproving god and inviting people to nihilism?
Nietzsche is a life metaphysician. So for him, life is absolute. But we need here the socratic method again, and ask: how do you know, how do you justify that life is absolute, or are we supposed to be convicted by your beautiful rhetoric? No i don't buy it.
Convinced. Convinced by my beautiful rhetoric. But the rhetoric is less mine and more Nietzsche’s. Also, what do you mean by ‘life is absolute’? If you mean that all there is, is life - then yes. That is my conviction. And Nietzsche’s. In fact, it’s beyond mere ‘conviction’. The onus is on you to prove otherwise, since life, is all that exists. That much is obvious. Thank You.
So is it saying Socrates was the voice of those who could not speak the voice for the oppressed that went against the voice of the oppressor and because of his looks he was wrong cause he didn't meet society standards or qualified to be the greatest philosopher of all times I'm confused about this man that i will not say his name but the man that this video is about but if he was true and a humanitarian why did he hate one man that tried to change the world's view of life as we think we knew it and gave mankind a different way to look at life this is just a simple question
Firstly - "why did he hate one man that tried to change the world's view of life as we think we knew it and gave mankind a different way to look at life", both hits, and misses the point. Nazism also tried to give mankind a different way to look at life, as did communism, as did christianity, arguably, but so what? A different way to see the world, does not mean a better or greater way to see the world. For Friedrich Nietzsche (I will say his name), what Socrates did was to weaken humankind, and made all weaknesses seem strong, and strength seem like weaknesses, this is Nietzsche's concept of 'The Slave Revolt of Morality'. --- How? through the Dialectical Method - a tool which only the weak and the ugly, who desire strength of some kind, would inevitably develop. You say "Oppressor and Oppressed" (relatively new creations of thought), where Nietzsche says, "No! - only The Strong, and The Weak , who also want strength" - this is his 'Will to Power'.
Thank you millyondadon.
@@TheWrittenWorldSubscribeNow then we are all still blinded and have no answer to what it's really all about until we agree on what things are as Socrates says he made people think for themselves not be weak he wasn't even scared of death most people are his teachings are pure and of the heart came from the Gods not his own thoughts as others do i just don't understand but i know that i know nothing.
@@millyondadon Did he really make people think for themselves? And if he did, did he not replace the impotence of physical strength, with the poor substitute of the Dialectic? According to Nietzsche - the strong don't need to argue. Think of past cultures, and pure physicality, and you'll glimpse a grain of his mound. And did Socrates 'not fear death', or did he desire it? Was the life force in him, weaker than his will to nothingness? And no. His ideas didn't come from the gods, that's just childish. And to say that one knows that one knows nothing, is to concede that one knows something, at the very least. It smacks of "god knows". To understand Nietzsche fully, you'll have to read him. Your thinking (according to Nietzsche of course), is the result of Socratic poison. To break free from such modes of thinking, you'll have to have a conversation with Friedrich Nietzsche himself. To truly understand him - begin - at the beginning...
Take care.
Precisely, he appealed to the lowly mob.
How about a critique of Nietzsche's critique.
Either or thinking may NOT be the intent.
Awareness of tactics and foundation of different philosophy and psychology makes sense.
The expert professional or hobbyist will have more words, techniques, and tools but a consistency nonetheless.
In a world of tyrants against the tyranny of age, time, taxes interest inflation and bullys in charge requires that professional's or hobbyist's tool bag.
One such does NOT make excuses so much, eg, blaming tools, or other things for his kack of competence.
In court, pound on the law then the facts, and if that isnt enough pound on the desk and appeal to the jury and judge Appeal to their interests and persuasions.
Id want Nietzsche and Plato on my team not one or the other. I'd rather be armed then unarmed too. Proficient in the arts of survival and thriving, more, the merrier.
And please turn down the drama and music. As is, it muddles the purity and ability to hear the messaging.
Working on it. Thanks Madasin. 👌🏼
This is amazing
Thank You Frost...