Friedrich Nietzsche - Beyond Good and Evil (English Audio Book) Part 2 - Prejudices of Philosophers
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 июн 2012
- Beyond Good and Evil (German: Jenseits von Gut und Böse; subtitled "Prelude to a Philosophy of the Future" (German: Vorspiel einer Philosophie der Zukunft)) is a book by the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, first published in 1886.
It takes up and expands on the ideas of his previous work, Thus Spoke Zarathustra, but approached from a more critical, polemical direction.
In Beyond Good and Evil, Nietzsche accuses past philosophers of lacking critical sense and blindly accepting Judeo-Christian premises in their consideration of morality. The work moves into the realm "beyond good and evil" in the sense of leaving behind the traditional morality which Nietzsche subjects to a destructive critique in favour of what he regards as an affirmative approach that fearlessly confronts the perspectival nature of knowledge and the perilous condition of the modern individual.
"Without a continual falsification of the world by means of numbers, mankind could not live - that to renounce false judgements would be to renounce life, would be to deny life. To recognize untruth as a condition of life: that, to be sure, means to resist customary value-sentiments in a dangerous fashion; and a philosophy which ventures to do so places itself , by that act alone, beyond good and evil." (Beyond Good and Evil, 333)
23:43
Just my timestamp for when I read this
thank you
Unrelenting brilliancy. Would love to have heard Wittgenstein's take on this book. Especially, parts of this chapter.
don't you just love the internet.!!..
Thanks for taking your time to read this 😀
Thank you for sharing > highly appreciated!
Skilled reading.
kinda makes you wanna listen to Megadeth after this.
We are farming with ego.
7:40 lool I love this guy
0:01
I'm going to need to read this again and again to understand it. I'm too dumb to get it the first time. It's okay I have time.
He's wrong at around 36:00, when he makes the distinction between the Commanding, the Obeying and Acting out when we Will something. He talks as if these are necessarily seperate and that its a mistake to think they're unified. I would correct him and say that the true unity of thought, speech and action is reserved for the Nobel kind of person and that a person can become 'Whole' and 'know themselves' and 'be one with themselves' are real and good states of existence, and we dont need any evidence or convincing argument for this since we all know this state of 'flow' by direct experience, when we have no rebellion in the soul but a total resoluteness in everything, and we hardly feel the difference between ourselves and our environment, and so on. This to me is the only free will a person can taste, and again I would say free will is thereby a privelege for these kinds of 'higher' people
I may need to listen more, but I have an issue with any philosopher who proclaims every other philosopher wrong, it may be a testament to his own biography, or perhaps to mine.
We build upon the knowledge and understanding of those who came before us.
Someone needed to be "wrong" for someone to be "right"
Philosophizing with a hammer.
@@JackSmith-up7qt it’s often the case that many are right from from there perspective and proclaiming them wrong limits Ideas ability to be refined and grow more correct
who narrates this?
stephen crossley, unfortunately I don't think he narrated any other of Nietzsche's works
@@jacobschmidt :( Shame. This one is superb.
@@samharper5881 yes, it really is
23:40
26:50
;)
6:00 How could anybody live with a feeling of seperation from reality itself and take his views from what he considers to be some superficial furthering of his species with nothing greater than that, thats too much of a definite aim for me. And the idea itself doesnt seem life furthering to me at all, it seems very cold and shallow and so by his own criteria I should dismiss it lol. Humanity IS ina sense the measure of things. We ARE molded by nature and we mold nature in turn, we are a reflection of her, we are the multitude, shes the whole, we are an expression of her and vice versa, there is no real distinction in my opinion. And Im sure he'd have some smart shit to say but maybe he'd agree who knows, I agree with a lot of this guys views.. But he has a tendency to melancholy which I think informs his shit at times Ion like dat shiet mane
We are farming.
Beautiful prose ... but rings empty and supremely false because the writer hardly ever lived up to his own precepts. A syphilitic mama's boy tied to his women folk's apron strings hardly fits the image of the superman who lives beyond good and evil. (Give me Marcus Aurelius any day of the week--walked the talk.) Nevertheless, thanks for the upload.
25:48
26:26