Its been long overdue to see Nietzsche finally dismounted. Even more amusely, by something as simple as the portrayal of Zarathustra as the anima of this man. A spirit which was never enabled. Altogether the dionysian ESFP which Nietzsche himself only embodied after falling to madness by *syphilis*. Presumely of the only time in his youth he was forced into an act of true passion. A bit pathetic, but so is the idealization of character when it mocks us all. Now even the analytical conclusion would be rebuked by most philosophers today, only to witness reality fall for once into square angles: chracters, words, stories; yet as soon as Nietzsche sat down to write, he found his future demise after the fact. Thanks for this piece of work Michael.
Good morning Michael! I definitely see why you’re writing a book lol! There is a lot to unpack, when you approach the material from multiple angles and metaphors. My first response is similar to what I felt when reading Atlas Shrugged - “Thank God I’m not alone!” Which is funny considering that a major point of both stories seems to be the necessary isolation of the INTJ. I enjoyed your section on language itself being a tool of culture and the universal, and I appreciate the difficulties of communicating a contextual experience universally. I can’t help but feel like this was a problem for both Nietzsche and Rand. They had a lot to say, but neither really seemed to understand that they represented only one percent of the population. INFJs are the answer lol! Thanks to you and Carl Jung for committing heresy and bridging the contextual and universal axes.
Most of this material could have been written by the likes of Crowley (although I suspect that not even he had a thesis as bad as Nietzsche's musings on Language). What's next, the Tates?
@@RowansWay A regular reference in his books, yes. But I would not say "great admirer", mostly due to theoretical differences (or I would not care about admiration or lack thereof, since it is the theory that makes the Philosopher a Philosopher, and the theory that makes a Philosopher akin to another Philosopher, not the person, and Baudrillard's theory is fundamentally incompatible with Nietzsche's, i.e. the former is against the reality principle while the latter is all but literally Catholic, etc.).
@@AeonBaudrillard Nietzsche certainly admired Schopenhauer, despite their intellectual differences. In any event, I am glad that Mr Pierce is devoting time to Nietzsche, and not to Crowley, as I do not consider the latter a philosopher, nor even a particularly good writer - scarcely comparable to Nietzsche, who works would exert a tremendous influence on CG Jung, who is the reason I began listening to Mr Pierce in the first place. As for Baudrillard - if he denied being influenced by Nietzsche, he was most certainly deceiving himself!
@@RowansWay You could ascribe Crowley excerpts to Nietzsche and no one would notice (least of all his fans). In fact, you could ascribe Joe Rogan, Andrew Tate, Tony Robbins, etc. quotes and no one would notice.
@@AeonBaudrillard Nietzsche was not one to seek defenders, and I don't think Mr Pierce wants people arguing in his comment section either, so I will leave it there with a Zarathustran effort to let you believe what you will.
Its been long overdue to see Nietzsche finally dismounted. Even more amusely, by something as simple as the portrayal of Zarathustra as the anima of this man. A spirit which was never enabled. Altogether the dionysian ESFP which Nietzsche himself only embodied after falling to madness by *syphilis*. Presumely of the only time in his youth he was forced into an act of true passion. A bit pathetic, but so is the idealization of character when it mocks us all. Now even the analytical conclusion would be rebuked by most philosophers today, only to witness reality fall for once into square angles: chracters, words, stories; yet as soon as Nietzsche sat down to write, he found his future demise after the fact. Thanks for this piece of work Michael.
Good morning Michael!
I definitely see why you’re writing a book lol! There is a lot to unpack, when you approach the material from multiple angles and metaphors. My first response is similar to what I felt when reading Atlas Shrugged - “Thank God I’m not alone!”
Which is funny considering that a major point of both stories seems to be the necessary isolation of the INTJ. I enjoyed your section on language itself being a tool of culture and the universal, and I appreciate the difficulties of communicating a contextual experience universally. I can’t help but feel like this was a problem for both Nietzsche and Rand. They had a lot to say, but neither really seemed to understand that they represented only one percent of the population.
INFJs are the answer lol! Thanks to you and Carl Jung for committing heresy and bridging the contextual and universal axes.
I see a michael pierce.. i click
Most of this material could have been written by the likes of Crowley (although I suspect that not even he had a thesis as bad as Nietzsche's musings on Language). What's next, the Tates?
I wonder what Jean Baudrillard, a great admirer of Nietzsche, would think of someone posting this contra-Nietzsche take under his name?
@@RowansWay
A regular reference in his books, yes. But I would not say "great admirer", mostly due to theoretical differences (or I would not care about admiration or lack thereof, since it is the theory that makes the Philosopher a Philosopher, and the theory that makes a Philosopher akin to another Philosopher, not the person, and Baudrillard's theory is fundamentally incompatible with Nietzsche's, i.e. the former is against the reality principle while the latter is all but literally Catholic, etc.).
@@AeonBaudrillard Nietzsche certainly admired Schopenhauer, despite their intellectual differences. In any event, I am glad that Mr Pierce is devoting time to Nietzsche, and not to Crowley, as I do not consider the latter a philosopher, nor even a particularly good writer - scarcely comparable to Nietzsche, who works would exert a tremendous influence on CG Jung, who is the reason I began listening to Mr Pierce in the first place. As for Baudrillard - if he denied being influenced by Nietzsche, he was most certainly deceiving himself!
@@RowansWay
You could ascribe Crowley excerpts to Nietzsche and no one would notice (least of all his fans). In fact, you could ascribe Joe Rogan, Andrew Tate, Tony Robbins, etc. quotes and no one would notice.
@@AeonBaudrillard Nietzsche was not one to seek defenders, and I don't think Mr Pierce wants people arguing in his comment section either, so I will leave it there with a Zarathustran effort to let you believe what you will.