Nietzche claimed that theistic explanation was bankrupt and so man must rise out of the ashes of intellectual cowardice and dishonesty, to rise above primitive concepts of good and evil and discard comforting lies in favour of harsh yet empowering truths. To live is to struggle and so to embrace truth, to value life one must praise struggle and the fatalistic nature of reality. Man in his efforts is ultimately doomed but by accepting this bravely we transcend our limitations by the courage of our intellect and strength of our spirit. Plus he was an impeccable dresser.
Nietzsche may have been the first to describe people operating on 2 levels. The Christian who acts out of what he believes to be loving self sacrificing humility and the craven coward who comforts himself with delusions because he has nothing to be proud of and relishes the thought of his enemies being punished in the after life even as he "loves his enemies". A conscious and an unconscious level to which even the individual is not aware. Nietzsche had a powerful influence on the psychoanalysts of the 20th century.
B.R. Jesus may not have existed. Even if he did he is not the most inspirational or profound thinker. Only another dying and rising messiah like so many others. Just think about the message. His way, and ONLY his way, else you'll be in danger of hellfire. Worship him or DIE in fire. That's very humble of him. That's very peaceful and loving of Jesus.
Nah, this is stupid. Nietzsche never meant God is dead as a triumphant statement; it was more like a statement of lament. And his ideas did play out just as he predicted in the form of Soviet Communism / Nazism. You Christians are just too salty
If this is how you feel after actually reading and THINKING or analysing ALL of Nietzsche's books, then you are easily moved, specially by this pseudo-intellectual.
Transformational experience changes the physical structure of the mind. After one of these experiences you are no longer the same person. The interesting thing is, this experience cannot be measured and quantified, is is a quality in the relationship of your orientation to the world.
This video indicates a total misunderstanding of Nietzsche. Nietzsche never suggested that 'we get rid of morality'. This is a common and unsubtle sort of 'reading into' of Nietzsche that takes him as a kind of political propagandist, a man who desired to change the minds of his society in general. He had no such agenda. He suggested that the societies of his milieu had already effectively abandon Christian morality and that what was left of it was a shell game which served mostly to confuse people's senses. He suggested that individuals, not the big 'We', try to revisit the study of moral phenomena in light of past events (hence the title - 'the genealogy of morals'), and bring as few pretensions to the table as they could manage in doing so.
Nietzsche said much, and most of what he says is misconstrued to service an agenda. The Nazi's for instance tried to claim him as their own, when he specifically mentions on more than one occasion he despised both "antisemitism" and "nationalism". The christian will pick and choose Nietzsche's most contentious claims without ever researching in any way what it is he meant by it.
He despised much if not all of the paradigm which naturally lead to the common morality of the West, beginning with Christ. He believed that those who should be in control, the most powerful, were being held back by Christian morality, to allow the weak to flourish and be exalted above them, which Nietzsche saw as blaspheming the laws of nature, so to speak. He believed the greatest, the Übermensch should reign superior and dictate morality in place of Christian morality. I'm afraid in the end it was essentially a slight modification of social Darwinism in essence.
What kind of morality one talks about in the world where nothing makes sense , absurd and meaningless. Nietzsche believes he is just an animal and thus has to act on his instincts unapologetically. He advocates for the aristocracy to do what they please and stop to examine or question themselves. That's why he hates Socrates for his desire to look for logic and explain one's actions. Nietzsche loathes Christian values because they advocate for compassion which he considers to be the moral of the slave. He basically is a proponent of social darwinism and eugenics: the survival of the fittest and letting suffer and die the less fortunate. He was a misanthrope and misogynist. What he thinks of women is appalling and downright abhorrent ! And yet Nietzsche is deemed to be a gran intellectual. Especially, the nazis , Mussolini anf Hitler himself just loved his work...I wonder why😂
I find it interesting how Dionysus is also the god of wine and sensual pleasure. This guy (and nietzsche) talk about how the Greeks understood this figure as I guess a sorta outward expression of the tragedy of life itself. I wanted him to point out how and clarify exactly how Dionysus is a tragic figure. I guess it’s because Dionysus is a figure of sensual pleasure but also one who understands the innately cruel aspect of life.
Nietzsche was too good a person to truly understand the value and neccessity of morals. That is the achilles heel of his philosophy. He did concede the need for a pleb religion, but failed to see that elites need guardrails even more than the plebs.
I think he understood that morals were a byproduct to maintaining a sustainable society, yet he also knew that morality often constrains ones mental state in exchange for docility. This is immediately apparent when we analyze who exactly it was who placed these moral laws into the minds of plebs, thus being Augustus upon becoming Emperor and Hong Qigong also when he became Emperor. To live as Nietzsche suggests is thrilling for the individual, yet dangerous for the meek and vulnerable, i.e weak men, women and children.
Nice summary! Re the conclusion: It is the injection of Aristotelian elements by Aquinas that renders Christianity this worldly. In essence it is Platonist/other worldly. Nietzsche was objecting to the Platonist aspect of Christianity, especially the “slave morality”.
Chritianity debunked using science & history As per Bible the creation Begins in 4004 BC at 9 AM on 23rdOctober. Means creation took place nearly 6000 year ago. Bible said earth is flat , sun moving around the , But Galileo said that the earth is round and circles the sun , and the church blinded him , so that he can never look into another telescope. Also punish copernicus . In reality by modern science cosmos is 15 billion years old and that the mind and consciousness has to be factored in. Well the advent of quantum physics has proved Bible wrong. Undermining of science is evil When I think of all the harm the Bible has done, I despair of ever writing anything to equal it’ - Oscar Wilde (1854-1900), Irish author
"In the entire first Christian century Jesus was not mentioned by a single Greek or Roman historian, religion scholar, politician, philosopher or poet. His name never occurs in a single inscription, and it is never found in a single piece of private correspondence. Zero! references." "Jesus Christ Was never Exist " Plz see video... ruclips.net/video/QTmZlckcwMY/видео.html
Do not watch "specials" about Nietzsche, unless you have already read and feel like you've comprehended him through his own books and words; this man isn't intended to perhaps be properly understood by esteemed speakers or school-teachers. There is a curious exception on RUclips . . . See channel 'Ontologistics', and his videos. The seperate rest I have seen were completely obnoxious and without proper purpose. They typically tend to include "expected" character attacks versus an objective penetration of the man's thought. Or more properly put: "blah blah blah"
+Paul R. ...thnx Paul...I'm a home reader (wanna-be-scholar) and find it frustrating with vids that do not get to the meat of the matter. I'll check out that channel.
I find the most useful thing about this video is that is it a more reasonable Christian response to Nietzsche. Nothing beat just reading the original works, rather than someone else' interpretation.
I used to read a lot of Nietzsche, but now I really have out grown his philosophy and thought, for I as an individual have made my own mind up and view the semantics of life to be more important than the dryness of a scholarly world of theological concepts. Meaning is essential to life, i have chosen to view life as an experience for which we cannot place in tangible and physical concepts solely but in an expanding mind of intelligence.
Syphilis was a terror in those days. Text Books lie, he had paresis cerebral atrophy in late-stage syphilis.which the wrongly label Mental Breakdown . General paresis, also known as general paralysis of the insane (GPI) or paralytic dementia, is a severe neuropsychiatric disorder, classified as an organic mental disorder and caused by the chronic meningoencephalitis that leads to cerebral atrophy in late-stage syphilis.Signs and symptoms · Prognosis · History
Thank you Nicola Reddwooddforest and Leopard King. I am about to start reading and feel as if I have had a primer in reading your debate. You both raise some excellent points and a few nutty ones. Leopard-King has values closer to my own. Clearly, you are more advanced in understanding Nietzsche than me. I will be thinking about your comments.
Nietzsche used his own body as a human shield to protect the horse from being beaten by a carriage driver. Nietzsche saw compassion and responsibility as power. So the power he was talking about is real love.
That is not true. Nietzsche did not try to get rid of morality. He kept pointing out that the old morality based on Christianity is false. He offered a new morality which is the morality of love, freedom, and full responsibility.
***** As I said before, Nietzsche wanted to get rid of the old Christian based morals. He offered new ones. You need to read Nietzsche's books again and pay close attention to what he says. He tries to educate others on higher morals, on love and kindness for all beings free from dictation, religion, and dogma based ideas like holding the other cheek. That is not utilitarian and not materialistic. He protected a horse once from being beaten by shielding him with his own body. That action proved that he was walking his talk on the ideal of the superhuman. He was only against what other people regarded as responsibility which he rejected. Kant is the philosopher who taught irresponsibility in a very dangerous form giving people permission to do cruel acts. Nietzsche condemned this. Someone might argue that they find it "responsible" to shoot abortion doctors to do "gods" work. I am using a drastic example here, there are many more examples in the Christian religion which would take months to describe. Nietzsche's idea of responsibility is to live a clean life free from alcohol, free from tobacco, free from dishonesty, free from bragging, free from speciecism, racism and bigotry. His teachings are very clear and straightforward. Nietzsche gave his life to teaching and it was indeed rough.
***** I have a problem with the current translations that's why I am translating Thus Spoke Zarathustra and will later on translate his other books if I still have the time to do so since it will take years and years. But I have seen some of the English translations and they are pitiful and even dangerous because they make themselves misunderstood. Nietzsche's work is already subject for misinterpretation enough that's why Hitler and later Nazis hawked his work for themselves to promote something that he was against. His sister Elisabeth has rewritten some of his text! This is a horrific crime because it falsified Nietzsche's important teachings of love, respect and honesty. She made it into something which it was Not. Rudolf Steiner has tried to rescue his work but who knows how much was falsified. How could anybody have found out which was which. What he praised was not to be a ruthless dictator like Napoleon, but the power from within instead of the submissiveness to dictators. He criticized people for rewarding the pity instead of helping others to empower themselves. Compassion is Not pity. Compassion is feeling the other being's needs and doing something to really help that individual. Not to pity him. Not to feed him and make him dependent. This in regards to humans of course. For animals they can't feed themselves so we have to feed them because we took them out of the wild where they used to be independent. But we can still empower a dog or horse by showing him or her how to do certain simple things and then praise them with love, words and food, that empowers them, that makes them feel like they achieved something. I talk from experience with dogs and horses who I have trained. All beings work on this principle of empowerment.
If you read the books by Rudolf Steiner you will see that Elisabeth was capable of manipulating his statements. And who knows who else has tempered with them. Have you read Thus Spoke Zarathustra yet? This book is a fairy tale about a teacher who had actually lived before the Buddha. His wisdom is free from religion and full of love. Nietzsche most likely did not touch a darker skinned person inappropriately. He was very careful and particular about his conduct. Only when he got sick with a virus which disabled his frontal cortex he began doing weird things, but not aggressive things and not abusive things. His love for the horse has nothing to do with his illness. I would do the same if I encountered a situation like that. He taught deep caring and love and mental freedom therefore he was unhappy with the main agenda on people's minds which is hedonism, wastefulness, and selfishness.
I only have read the German version. In that version the eagle, snake and other animals are only equated with specific good characteristics, I don't remember anything like what you pointed out. They probably translated it poorly. I have seen this before from other translated books. That is very sad. That is the only reason why I translate the book other than that its hard work and would rather be drinking hot carob with whipped cream on it. What he means by favoring sickly over healthy folks is that society in general seems to value a submissiveness over a self empowerment. Those values today have shifted a bit with people like Tony Robbins. They did indeed carry a lot of impotent beliefs in the past which have come from Christianity. The native beliefs before the Roman Empire took over Europe were much more in tune with nature, the animals and with metabolism. They respected their own needs, mental and physical. Christianity was trying to take that natural self respect away from people in order to make them more dependent and submissive. Only this trend is what Nietzsche criticized. He wrote provocatively and loud but one has to put things into perspective. I do appreciate your interest in this historic figure.
***** Just because the dominating factor of survival is the flight syndrome rather than the fight syndrome does not give the concept of submission a glorification status.
@@SamMoreno970 His point is that Nietzsche's morality was anti-Christian -- evil. The Nazis were even more evil and so if Nietzsche was ahead of his time, then you could say the Nazis were even more ahead of their time.
It is a held thought even in psychology that a fully socialized individual needs to maintain proper boundaries between himself and others. It is the basis of the social contract in both sociology and politics. Think what you will of Christianity, but do unto others is so much preferred than do what thou wilt as aliester Crowley would’ve had it. Whatever paths are chosen, there are benefits and consequences. I myself see it’s better to “err” on the side of Christianity. I firmly believe that Neitzsche’s madness stemmed from the struggle he had with God. That’s just my opinion.
Nietzsche clearly defined his "human exemplar" (free spirit, ubermensch, philosopher of the future, etc) as someone who was worldly and rejected any supernatural foundations for himself. I am not sure what you mean by "old metaphysical sense", but Nietzsche would clearly be against any such thing as is clear in his attacks on Platonism.
Since we are in a theological context, I think he means metaphysical in the sense of that old german lutheran based subjectivism, as opposed to the catholic materialistic philosophies
The idea that taste is what will drive people to abandon Christian morality is very true, and reveals what's really going on with Neitsche, what he was rationalising and what had alienated Christian morality, and continues to alienate people from Christianity and Judaism in western society, which is capitalist consumerism, and the false values inculcated by advertising and by commodity exchange in itself. The power of advertising should hardly need explaining, but it is remarkable how much intellectuals tend to ignore it as a cultural force influencing public mores, especially those who like to blame all moral decline on the presence of religious or skin-colour minorities, or so-called "cultural marxism" (which doesn't exist, and actually turns out to be traditional Christian humanism on inpection). That was the force driving atheism during Neitsche's lifetime, and remains the case, both by the implicit and explicit denigration of all means of joy, wonder, fulfilment and hope not available for sale in shiny packaging, on the same basis as the implicit denigration of all things not for sale, such as the home-made, homecooked and home grown. The broader commecial necessity is of destroying popular capacity to resist advertising pressures, such as fulfilment and inner peace and joy through relationship with God, by the inculcation of false values which facilitate consumerism such as greed, selfishness, gluttony and egotism in general ("you're worth it"), as well as the corrolaries of low self-esteem, social anxiety, body dismorphia and addictional consumption of all kinds, and the squeezing of Christian expression and self-representation out of popular culture, primarily just by incessant barrage of entertainment commodities. Tastes are manufactured with the invention of new products and lifestyles, as well as the advertising of the same, as Marx noted. Thus Nietsche was just another fashion victim, another unconscious object of capitalist cultural dissolving and corrupting.
Correction…his critique of Catholicism…He was heavily influenced by Dostoyevsky….another guy who criticized Catholics for becoming superstitious….Christian god is a moral god. Early Greek Christian’s we’re all about following morality,free will and study of psychology
the problem we have is that most people want to interpret the bible literally, that's when it becomes an absurd mess of hypocrisy and misconceptions, not all of us have the intellectual capability to understand it metaphorically, as it was intended, it took a long time for me to gain this perception,
Jim Adams this is a later response but he was against the categorical imperative, which was devised but Immanuel Kant and which is in essence a highly intellectual golden rule. Read Twilight of the idols by Nietzsche for more.
Jerad Clark-----Sounds GOOD to me. I have nothing against self-confidence or autoreliance. However I know no one is "Superman". I almost died in ER from blood infection. My life was in the hands of the nurses.
I'm surprised that you are not interested, especially with your obvious opinions, but it is just as well....we both agree that neither of us really know, that's a great accomplishment for me.
I like what Zizek said about this: Christianity IS, in a literal sense, faith in the shadow of the death of god, of an absolute beyond or transcendent certainty
17:06 Is that face in the clouds in the upper right corner of the painting intentionally painted by the artist? What Nietzsche means is that humans have "killed" or a better term is disconnected themselves from the infinite cosmos through their religiousness. That's why he said in his books that humans need to yet be saved from their savior. The infinite cosmos can not die because it is eternal.
"The Christian theological division of agent and action itself is artificial for Nietzsche, if not all out false. For him, it is impossible for a person not to be equal to their actions or for their worth not to be defined by their actions. Further, by affirming the division between agent and action in ideology we... we perpetuate the system of masters and slaves." The Journal of Magnus Opium The Chaotic Impulse of Philosophy A Wordpress Blog
One thing people should know is that Nietzsche's criticism of Christianity is mostly about German Christianity, which is all he knew, though he traveled to Italy a few times it seems he had little interactions with the Italians. German Christianity was perhaps one of the most dour forms of Christianity, and so speaks more perhaps of the Germans than of Christianity. How Germans went from being barbarians in the Roman times to freaks about precision and punctuality is impossible to explain, but they did, and the German dourness may have been present in Roman times as well, but I don't think anyone really knows. Few people seem to know that shortly (a few decades) after the murder of Yeshua of Nazareth, Christianity spread to Southwest India where it barely spread, but it did a little, and did not have any of the German dourness in it's character. And those who took up Christianity initially in S. West India formed a lasting community which came to be more pleasant and sane in many ways than life in the rest of India. Even today, Kerala, India, which is I think a majority Christian state, has one of the highest, if not the highest literacy rates in India. Life is laid back in Kerala and nothing at all like Germany. So I think it makes sense to look around a bit and see if Christianity really is the poison claimed by Nietzsche.
Huh? Kerala is much different than Germany, and Christianity in Kerala never acquired the Lutheran dourness or bitterness that N. disliked. So reaction to Christianity actually did change people differently in these two widely separated places. One can hardly call the difference between Kerala and Germany "nothing". Another example of a very different cultural feel brought about by Christianity is in the Indian state of Meghalaya, which is generally considered a Christian state in India though there are still many tribals on the outskirts. Like Kerala, Meghalaya is very laid back, except that the tribals often have squabbles over land rights and government handouts, but those flare up and then extiquish again without much of significant effect on the overall laidbackness. The largest golf course in the world is in Meghalaya. Meghalaya is somtimes called the Scotland of India due to similar weather.
+rh001YT why does Wikipedia say Kerala's population is 50% Hindu the other 50% Christians and Muslim ? It seems Christianity is not reason for the area's high standard of living conditions.
Huh? 50% Christian is incredibly significant for India where Christians make up only about 10% or less of the population. It is the significant % of Christians in Kerala that tip the culture into the more pleasant environment. That comes about for several reasons, one notable reason being the large number of Christian schools which have spurred that state towards something close to 100% literacy which is quite impressive for India. Within Christianity in Kerala women have enjoyed good status, higher than that of Hindu women in HIndu culutre who are typically considered second to men. In fact Hindus have a holiday known as Bhai Phonta, which means "brother gratitude/celebration" when boys put on their finest clothing and sisters give them presents and serve them a special holiday meal. There is no similar holiday for the girls. Meghalaya, the other state in India with a large percent of Christians, is the only state not connected to the rail grid. It's not that the govt in Delhi does not want to pay for the connection, it's that the people of Meghalaya oppose the connection! Meghalaya is fairly sedate with a low crime rate, but there are somewhat frequent agitations and sometimes political murders by indigineous/animist groups that can't get along with each other and want more government sops. None of this would be a surprise to Nietzsche who sometimes praised Christianity and only sometimes disparaged her on the mere grounds of having a dim view of some strong pleasures, and on the claim that all people are politically equal which can lead to a dumbing down of society. However Christianities significant effort to educate has sort of dispelled the dumbing down hypothesis.
rh001YT btw, Nietzsche also critiqued the supposed life of Jesus as described in the Bible. That is central to all Christianity, not just in Germany.
I found the opening remarks unfathomable. All thoughts comes from someone somewhere. Why wouldn't someone be inclined to think critically and independently?! Did I detect a hint of chauvinism?! Interesting.
The idea of a supreme being is man's creation. Someone we humans can look up to emulate and regard as a model and a good example. But God or whatever we want to call it has a life independently of us humans. God doesn't need us. It is the other way around.
It's really too bad Nietzsche never came across the esoteric aspects of Torah. He derived much of the dogma on his own, but only the questions never reaching over to grasp even a single answer. We can all learn from this. What a noble and brave soul.
Which esoteric aspects do you mean? Years ago, I read Nietzsche alot, and some of the Kabbalah. A lot of passages in Zarathustra seemed to echo the Zohar
Nietzsche's success in spreading his view was heavily infuenced by timing principally. Mid to late 19th century was simmering in the psychological understanding of the human being.
"and he never reached a point of sanity again".. Insanity is a social construct. His thoughts were probably evolving and accelerating, breaking his thoughts out of the prison frameworks of society. Definitely the most misunderstood thinker of all time.
Correction: At about 12:50, you display a well known image of Aristotle when Williams is talking about Plato and Plato's name and dates are displayed with the photo. This video and all of the sample videos I've previewed are excellent. Thank you for doing this.
Francis William Edwards - thanks for that. I seriously actually had said to myself “wow - Plato sure looked like Aristotle when he was younger! When did he lose all that hair?” 🤣🤣🤣
Nietzche's brother in law could not have been properly fascist before Mussolini, as the syndicalist anarchism/socialism movement had not splitted yet from the internationalism. The germans have carried the supermacist vice for centuries
The Gnostic ideology is quite interesting. While most enjoy learning, if it is taken to its end though an abnormal reasoning process the consequences appear profound. The more you know should demonstrate that you may not know much at all. As an old man, that's where I am ending up and it's not a bad thing at all.
Intellect, thoughts, reasoning, brilliance; a curse I bear. A judgement against my imprisoned soul, sentenced to a thousand years. In a human form wired to the terrestrial god of pain, I live my life, in thoughts, in my head, through my intellect, and all my days go up like smoke and perishes in vain. This brilliance that men worship has caused sleep to become an enemy to my eyes. Eyes bloodshot with hatred for men of a certain sort, men I have come to despise. Untransformed caterpillars revelling in their subsistence lives, refusing to be cocooned, taking on wings and learning to fly. But I, I have fully embraced the sarcophagus of death, transforming my insignificant drab existence into a glorious being that takes flight. My intellect has lifted me up in a cloud of arrogance that causes me to look down on my brethren. A superman I have become, wise unto myself. But in my wisdom, the knowledge of birth pain eludes me, and I am mocked in my reasoning, in my thoughts, in my intellect, in my brilliance because I will never know what it feels like to be a creator. I will never know how it feels to have life come forth from my body. And in the pain of my displeasure, I belittle her for giving suckle to the young. Oh of the beast she reminds me, raw, natural, unsophisticated. I become oppressive in my disdain, for in the leisure of my laziness, I have become a thinker, a true enemy of life that has attained enlightenment by means of disparaging others. My seed is sown in pleasure, and my short intellectual orgasm is my only reward. My boast in the excellency of my mind is my shame. A shame I have craftily persuaded a world locked in the pleasures of dark follies to celebrate. And drunk, they all agree to make my shame my Glory; pretending that it is also theirs. But this glory is temporary until something else comes along that can give them hope, making them sober again. Something distracting, perhaps a smartphone. And when that moment comes my glory will vanish in the amnesic bowls of tomorrow. I have risen up early, stayed up late just to feast on the bread of sorrow. And now my moment has come, it was a blink, a fruit fly like existence, and I reconsider, I would have fared better being a dog. My intellect has deceived me, and all my life lived, was in disillusionment.
As someone with great respect for Nietzsche, I think it is really cool that Christians are able to present his life and philosophy in a fair and respectable manner. Especially not giving any heed to the accusations of fascism that are common. I would agree that Christianity is not just otherworldly in its outlook, and I think in a sense N. would agree too. I think the real problem here is that Christians use the otherworldly as a foundation for their values. This is was N. was attacking.
Stop trying to explain Nietzsche's philosophy on basis of the experiences of his own life. His life does not prove at all his reasonings are valid or not
Well as a person who is a huge fan of Nietzsche, his life does explain his philosophy. For Nietzsche you have to have certain experiences, you must "hit the ground" to see what you have to overcome. Despite Nietzsche being ill most of his live his point was to affirm his own life, regardless whether he would reach his highest goals or not. When you examine one's philosophy you must look at the thinker themselves. Nietzsche was certainly an advocate of that, you can certainly see this in his critique of Rousseau, Wagner, Schopenhauer, Kant, Machiavelli, Hegel, Paul of tarsus but also in his praises for Goethe, Emerson and Jesus the man. Nietzsche is the Father figure that led to modern day psychology and in psychology you always take into account one's conditioning and background in explaining one's thought pattern. I mean even when you examine his metaphysical claims of the will to power and his method of examining history, all experiences are a part of his view of "becoming". We could not come to our own views without going through our own experiences. We must suffer and feel joy in order to see an understanding of the world. This is a Dionysian man
Casual Philosopher Thank you. If you want to give an explanation to yourself of how somebody came to a particular idea, you are free to do it. In the case of Nietzsche, he lived such an average life of anybody on the XIX or XX centuries, that to understand his philosophy I'd rather examine my own experiences, not his. That what I'm concerned of, is people (mostly christians) trying to diminish the validity of his reasoning by saying that he was a bad man in short words. In that case you must be blind with respect of the person who writes the book, to avoid prejudice.
Camilo Cuesta Yet you can't help but see the person through their writing. Everything is perspective of course, but I think you can't take a blind eye when it comes to Nietzsche. Actually looking at the life of Nietzsche helps us avoid negative outlooks on him, like clearing the image of him as a sort of proto-nazi. Plus it allows us to understand some of his parables better as well. I don't think Nietzsche would have cared if Christians were judging him badly or calling him evil. He probably would have taken it as a badge of honor and would have knew that the fact his philosophy unsettles them exposes the insecurity in their morality. Nietzsche is credited with saying that great despisers are great admirers
There we disagree. I do think we must take a blind eye on Nietzsche. Maybe he was a racist indeed. Maybe he was a bad person. But the point is that even if he was cruel, that wouldn't mean his ideas about all subjects are automatically wrong. He said "the weak shall perish and one should help them to do so". There is little room for interpretation there, it is at least clear he wasn't nice to "weaks". And it is a terrifying idea, yet it describes perfectly how things have worked in modern human history
It seems to me that Nietzsche derived his understanding of Christian anthropology from a particular tradition- namely, the tradition in which he was raised, Lutheranism- that isn't actually representative of Christian thought more generally. The Reformers (Luther and Calvin, etc) had a bleak and pessimistic understanding of human nature; whereas thinkers such as Thomas Aquinas and the Eastern Fathers were far more balanced. I would also add that the OT & NT give the lie to the Reformers, I think
16:03 "In Human, All Too Human, Nietzsche talks about the way in which Christian's, barely humans as it were, in mud. [Christians] regard humans as miserable little worms, and then humans cry out gratefully to God because of all his grace. And Nietzsche hates that." Sounds like Nietzsche was of sound mind to reject that version of Christian anthropology which comes from Luther and Calvin.
Like thousands of journalists and economists mostly speculate over contemporary issues; do modern philosophers and teachers do the same (needless thing) ? About these by-gone greats and personas important? Almost every major post-modern philosopher disagrees about the definitions we can draw about Nietzche's discourse and text - or for that matter Spinoza, Kant and XYZ
I will write about the first two minutes of this video, and it is no good: He says, "...it's hard to say why N. is so influential in some ways, because it's been pointed out that his thought is idiosyncratic [0:15]....." Why is that a bad or a good thing?? He is of course idiosyncratic, he is an individual. And to say he doesn't KNOW why, and then make a video telling us why... well, that's just dishonest, not to mention he is most probably wrong. "... and there's always an element that's incalculable here I think,... but N. I think, spoke for things that were already going on, articulated things going on... christianity has come to an end in terms of intellectual respectability... and I think one reason he is so influential is that N. pushes hard to get us to understand the implications of what he called the death of god... now lets get rid of morality..." Incalculable?? well tell me something that is not so damn obvious!! Anything that lends itself to interpretation by so much a wide range of "intellectuals" has to have an "incalculable" element, or ten. The whole damn video is like that. A dwarf disguisedly hating on a giant, in the form of "criticism". I mean, "... it caught something in the atmosphere in his day, and has caught something in the atmosphere since then as well..."
Jim Adams, truth is what you make it. It is NOT absolute but personal and diverse. Why do you think there are so many paths to heaven-man's perception/s. The creators spirit lives in all things organic. Love and respect of others is the ultimate act and conquest. That's my perspective.
So when he said, "God is dead.", he was referring to his father, who died when he was 4. Or he was angry at God for taking his father away when he was so young.
No, he meant that modern thought had made the historical conception of a purpose-giving God obsolete, and that humanity was both free and cursed to find their own reason to live on Earth.
Grasping this tension in the mind of Nietzsche, would be odd . . . people are a perception between the distraught and open dialect. Change the adjective to a noun and see what it means; grasping notions upon this is a point of logic, if it was to say a point in time it would mean some new definition, as i say this, it seems to be a point of a direct path with conceptual motivation directing to a bold solution. (We are) to become a surging of emotion and feeling. Nietzsche is talking about the nerve and the culture surrounding this so called Christianity in no appointment for any nerve, yet they try to define it, and as I can say is always there. A solution decays in a universe where the mind is apart of the antenna's dimension.
@@eagleeye182 his apparent intellect lead him to sleep with prostitutes which of course lead to his syphilitic downfall. Which life was superior, Christ's or Nietzsche's?
Very limited views of the work of Nietzsche. I could easily say this guy is a Christian Apologist. It hurts to say "dead is god", hun? I saw your pain. I am on the wrong channel.
How tragic, how pathetic that so many people still cling to ancient fantasies like the return of christ & the resurrection of all souls. We should have done with all that centuries ago. Jim, if it was going to happen as Jesus predicted, it should have happened in the lifetime of the people he was talking to, as he predicted. Give it up. Get a life. Or at least get out of everybody's faces about it.
2,000 years overdue. I think you've been stood up. "Some of the present generation will not taste death......" yadda yadda yadda. Obviously billions have tasted death since including 100% of the Jesus generation. To think that people today are awaiting a magician to return after 2,000 years and wave a magic wand to get all the zombies to rise up. As if! You have been standing for 2,000 years and your date still has not showed but still you KNOW they will. If you're that gullible I have a bridge you might like to buy.
When you only have been exposed to the western form of christianity that lacks all true mysticism and understanding of the mysteries, this is what happens. Orthodoxy had the answers.
Christianity is no system but rather its a process, a process with an end game which is directly connected to the nature of the ubermensche. So what really did Nierzsche actually believe??
How very interesting! I wonder if Neitsche considered all religions similarly when he referred to God being dead. If a god is dead or never existent then it is true for all the world. Why could he not accept morality as good because all people publicly profess it? Our actions indicate we do not always achieve our professed morality but we do pronounce it as a Good goal for which to strive. Good would be literally a god in itself, an ideal to which most of humanity strives.
He probably would consider God to be dead for all the world, since Christianity was the tradition he was raised in and proclaims itself to have the one true God. Thomas Aquinas tried to define God as the supernatural sum of all humanities beatitudes (blessings) which seems to be similar to what you are aiming at here. I can't speak for Nietzsche but not all people do publicly profess morality. Honestly, I think the majority of people who talk about morality publicly are politicians trying to manipulate the public, journalists looking to create scandal and outrage to sell their products and religious people who take pleasure in telling the rest of us how degenerate we are. The average person in the street is more concerned with football and day to day survival than morality. They might give the occasional thought to charity but otherwise it's not that high a priority. I think that describing good as a God or morality as good is to confuse the issue. Good is a relative term, after all if I enslaved you then you would think me evil, but I might consider it good. Some Catholic clergymen seem to find paedophilia morally acceptable (probably on account of the Roman public's dismissal of the excesses of the Emperor Justinian on Capri as just something tyrants do). By what standard do you set morality? The Bible considers it acceptable to stone people who work on the Sabbath or disobedient children which most modern people would consider abhorrent. Is the UN convention on Human Rights the starting point? If so I consider freedom of religion to be immoral because it allows you to preach to me about a Religion I have already dismissed as a waste of my and everyone else's time and you can't give me my time back. Morality can only ever be something personal to oneself within the bounds of the laws of the country you inhabit so you don't end up on the receiving end of criminal penalty.
Bless his heart, Nietzsche is sleeping. If he should wake up, tell him I hope his dreams were pleasant. Seems he had a bad day I hear. I'll leave you alone with him, poor dear. If you see Sigmund Freud coming around to play with him, keep an eye on that one. He likes bad cocaine, they say. If you need me, I'll be playing my guitar, but not so loud so as to wake him up.Young Charles Darwin is resting, too, and has school in the morning, I think. There may be a pop exam. If it happens to be raining, make sure they all have their galoshes. We needn't let them at all catch cold.
the message of Jesus is the same as the message of Nietzche, which is : Struggle to survive and triumph in the world of lies by being the truth. Neitzche is not Anti Jesus, but anti christian organization and anti interpretation of Jesus's ministry by imaginitive authors of scriptures. The narrator incorrectly interprets the signature of Nietzche.
Nietzsche realised that morality was inherent...not dependent on a fear if punishment by God. He has been misinterpreted by those who choose to choose to use his philosophy for justification of far right sociopathy. Like Christians who follow JC (do unto others...) Use parts of the bible elsewhere to condemn homosexuality (eg) as abominable to justify their hatred of the different.
Nietzche claimed that theistic explanation was bankrupt and so man must rise out of the ashes of intellectual cowardice and dishonesty, to rise above primitive concepts of good and evil and discard comforting lies in favour of harsh yet empowering truths. To live is to struggle and so to embrace truth, to value life one must praise struggle and the fatalistic nature of reality. Man in his efforts is ultimately doomed but by accepting this bravely we transcend our limitations by the courage of our intellect and strength of our spirit. Plus he was an impeccable dresser.
+Jerad To embrace which truth?
not truth. he didnt like that search for truth.
+Daniel Pasterp I think Truth is that which is revealed after we discard the primitive concepts of good and evil. May be it is God in Real sense.
Nietzsche may have been the first to describe people operating on 2 levels. The Christian who acts out of what he believes to be loving self sacrificing humility and the craven coward who comforts himself with delusions because he has nothing to be proud of and relishes the thought of his enemies being punished in the after life even as he "loves his enemies". A conscious and an unconscious level to which even the individual is not aware. Nietzsche had a powerful influence on the psychoanalysts of the 20th century.
B.R. Jesus may not have existed. Even if he did he is not the most inspirational or profound thinker. Only another dying and rising messiah like so many others. Just think about the message. His way, and ONLY his way, else you'll be in danger of hellfire. Worship him or DIE in fire. That's very humble of him. That's very peaceful and loving of Jesus.
Nietzsche: God is dead.
God: Nietzsche is dead.
Nietzsche: Some are born posthumously.
Jesus: True dat.
(The) Word..
@ nice
This is a seriously under-appreciated set of puns. I guess the audience is too Nietzsche.
Nah, this is stupid. Nietzsche never meant God is dead as a triumphant statement; it was more like a statement of lament. And his ideas did play out just as he predicted in the form of Soviet Communism / Nazism. You Christians are just too salty
Very good recap. I read all the books, but there's nothing like an earnest review to get you thinking it all over again. Great video!
If this is how you feel after actually reading and THINKING or analysing ALL of Nietzsche's books, then you are easily moved, specially by this
pseudo-intellectual.
Transformational experience changes the physical structure of the mind.
After one of these experiences you are no longer the same person.
The interesting thing is, this experience cannot be measured and quantified, is is a quality in the relationship of your orientation to the world.
This video indicates a total misunderstanding of Nietzsche. Nietzsche never suggested that 'we get rid of morality'. This is a common and unsubtle sort of 'reading into' of Nietzsche that takes him as a kind of political propagandist, a man who desired to change the minds of his society in general. He had no such agenda. He suggested that the societies of his milieu had already effectively abandon Christian morality and that what was left of it was a shell game which served mostly to confuse people's senses. He suggested that individuals, not the big 'We', try to revisit the study of moral phenomena in light of past events (hence the title - 'the genealogy of morals'), and bring as few pretensions to the table as they could manage in doing so.
Nietzsche said much, and most of what he says is misconstrued to service an agenda. The Nazi's for instance tried to claim him as their own, when he specifically mentions on more than one occasion he despised both "antisemitism" and "nationalism". The christian will pick and choose Nietzsche's most contentious claims without ever researching in any way what it is he meant by it.
@@666Nietzschie Not all ' Christians'. How do we define one, anyway?
He despised much if not all of the paradigm which naturally lead to the common morality of the West, beginning with Christ. He believed that those who should be in control, the most powerful, were being held back by Christian morality, to allow the weak to flourish and be exalted above them, which Nietzsche saw as blaspheming the laws of nature, so to speak. He believed the greatest, the Übermensch should reign superior and dictate morality in place of Christian morality. I'm afraid in the end it was essentially a slight modification of social Darwinism in essence.
What kind of morality one talks about in the world where nothing makes sense , absurd and meaningless. Nietzsche believes he is just an animal and thus has to act on his instincts unapologetically. He advocates for the aristocracy to do what they please and stop to examine or question themselves. That's why he hates Socrates for his desire to look for logic and explain one's actions. Nietzsche loathes Christian values because they advocate for compassion which he considers to be the moral of the slave. He basically is a proponent of social darwinism and eugenics: the survival of the fittest and letting suffer and die the less fortunate. He was a misanthrope and misogynist. What he thinks of women is appalling and downright abhorrent
! And yet Nietzsche is deemed to be a gran intellectual. Especially, the nazis , Mussolini anf Hitler himself just loved his work...I wonder why😂
I find it interesting how Dionysus is also the god of wine and sensual pleasure. This guy (and nietzsche) talk about how the Greeks understood this figure as I guess a sorta outward expression of the tragedy of life itself. I wanted him to point out how and clarify exactly how Dionysus is a tragic figure. I guess it’s because Dionysus is a figure of sensual pleasure but also one who understands the innately cruel aspect of life.
He was tortured to death by other gods
Nietzsche was too good a person to truly understand the value and neccessity of morals. That is the achilles heel of his philosophy. He did concede the need for a pleb religion, but failed to see that elites need guardrails even more than the plebs.
I think he understood that morals were a byproduct to maintaining a sustainable society, yet he also knew that morality often constrains ones mental state in exchange for docility. This is immediately apparent when we analyze who exactly it was who placed these moral laws into the minds of plebs, thus being Augustus upon becoming Emperor and Hong Qigong also when he became Emperor. To live as Nietzsche suggests is thrilling for the individual, yet dangerous for the meek and vulnerable, i.e weak men, women and children.
He had a deep sense of guilt: homosexual tendency, which he repressed, hanki panki with Elizabeth Förster Nietzsche...yes, he was a saint.
Nice summary! Re the conclusion: It is the injection of Aristotelian elements by Aquinas that renders Christianity this worldly. In essence it is Platonist/other worldly. Nietzsche was objecting to the Platonist aspect of Christianity, especially the “slave morality”.
Nietzsche reminded me of Einstein...Briliently driven and gave insight to how power can be used for good or evil.
James Oliver
Just read the first essay of the genealogy of morals, and it appears that power decides what is good and evil
Noble vs common
Even einstien got it wrong too. See: static universe vs big bang. And unto whom twas it revealed..
@
You might revisit the USA and the war in Vietnam USA and the war in the Philippines USA and the Mexican American war...
Do I need to go?
Chritianity debunked using science & history
As per Bible the creation Begins in 4004 BC at 9 AM on 23rdOctober. Means creation took place nearly 6000 year ago.
Bible said earth is flat , sun moving around the , But Galileo said that the earth is round and circles the sun , and the church blinded him , so that he can never look into another telescope.
Also punish copernicus .
In reality by modern science cosmos is 15 billion years old and that the mind and consciousness has to be factored in. Well the advent of quantum physics has proved Bible wrong.
Undermining of science is evil
When I think of all the harm the Bible has done, I despair of ever writing anything to equal it’
- Oscar Wilde (1854-1900), Irish author
"In the entire first Christian century Jesus was not mentioned by a single Greek or Roman historian, religion scholar, politician, philosopher or poet. His name never occurs in a single inscription, and it is never found in a single piece of private correspondence. Zero! references."
"Jesus Christ Was never Exist "
Plz see video...
ruclips.net/video/QTmZlckcwMY/видео.html
Do not watch "specials" about Nietzsche, unless you have already read and feel like you've comprehended him through his own books and words; this man isn't intended to perhaps be properly understood by esteemed speakers or school-teachers.
There is a curious exception on RUclips . . . See channel 'Ontologistics', and his videos.
The seperate rest I have seen were completely obnoxious and without proper purpose.
They typically tend to include "expected" character attacks versus an objective penetration of the man's thought.
Or more properly put: "blah blah blah"
+Paul R. ...thnx Paul...I'm a home reader (wanna-be-scholar) and find it frustrating with vids that do not get to the meat of the matter. I'll check out that channel.
I find the most useful thing about this video is that is it a more reasonable Christian response to Nietzsche. Nothing beat just reading the original works, rather than someone else' interpretation.
Paul R. I’ll try finding Ontologistics. Thank you.
I used to read a lot of Nietzsche, but now I really have out grown his philosophy and thought, for I as an individual have made my own mind up and view the semantics of life to be more important than the dryness of a scholarly world of theological concepts. Meaning is essential to life, i have chosen to view life as an experience for which we cannot place in tangible and physical concepts solely but in an expanding mind of intelligence.
Syphilis was a terror in those days. Text Books lie, he had paresis cerebral atrophy in late-stage syphilis.which the wrongly label Mental Breakdown .
General paresis, also known as general paralysis of the insane
(GPI) or paralytic dementia, is a severe neuropsychiatric disorder,
classified as an organic mental disorder and caused by the chronic
meningoencephalitis that leads to cerebral atrophy in late-stage syphilis.Signs and symptoms · Prognosis · History
Thank you Nicola Reddwooddforest and Leopard King. I am about to start reading and feel as if I have had a primer in reading your debate. You both raise some excellent points and a few nutty ones. Leopard-King has values closer to my own. Clearly, you are more advanced in understanding Nietzsche than me. I will be thinking about your comments.
Very interesting thought provoking. Fantastic 💯
Nietzsche used his own body as a human shield to protect the horse from being beaten by a carriage driver. Nietzsche saw compassion and responsibility as power. So the power he was talking about is real love.
Yet he didn't see the all powerful God standing in front of His own people to take their whipping as virtuous.
@@jesusistheonlygodamen3406 Religion is blinding you from seeing real love and compassion.
@@jesusistheonlygodamen3406 Whipping an animal or human is Horror, Cruelty and Terror.
That is not true. Nietzsche did not try to get rid of morality. He kept pointing out that the old morality based on Christianity is false. He offered a new morality which is the morality of love, freedom, and full responsibility.
***** As I said before, Nietzsche wanted to get rid of the old Christian based morals. He offered new ones. You need to read Nietzsche's books again and pay close attention to what he says. He tries to educate others on higher morals, on love and kindness for all beings free from dictation, religion, and dogma based ideas like holding the other cheek. That is not utilitarian and not materialistic. He protected a horse once from being beaten by shielding him with his own body. That action proved that he was walking his talk on the ideal of the superhuman. He was only against what other people regarded as responsibility which he rejected. Kant is the philosopher who taught irresponsibility in a very dangerous form giving people permission to do cruel acts. Nietzsche condemned this. Someone might argue that they find it "responsible" to shoot abortion doctors to do "gods" work. I am using a drastic example here, there are many more examples in the Christian religion which would take months to describe. Nietzsche's idea of responsibility is to live a clean life free from alcohol, free from tobacco, free from dishonesty, free from bragging, free from speciecism, racism and bigotry. His teachings are very clear and straightforward. Nietzsche gave his life to teaching and it was indeed rough.
***** I have a problem with the current translations that's why I am translating Thus Spoke Zarathustra and will later on translate his other books if I still have the time to do so since it will take years and years. But I have seen some of the English translations and they are pitiful and even dangerous because they make themselves misunderstood. Nietzsche's work is already subject for misinterpretation enough that's why Hitler and later Nazis hawked his work for themselves to promote something that he was against. His sister Elisabeth has rewritten some of his text! This is a horrific crime because it falsified Nietzsche's important teachings of love, respect and honesty. She made it into something which it was Not. Rudolf Steiner has tried to rescue his work but who knows how much was falsified. How could anybody have found out which was which.
What he praised was not to be a ruthless dictator like Napoleon, but the power from within instead of the submissiveness to dictators. He criticized people for rewarding the pity instead of helping others to empower themselves. Compassion is Not pity. Compassion is feeling the other being's needs and doing something to really help that individual. Not to pity him. Not to feed him and make him dependent. This in regards to humans of course. For animals they can't feed themselves so we have to feed them because we took them out of the wild where they used to be independent. But we can still empower a dog or horse by showing him or her how to do certain simple things and then praise them with love, words and food, that empowers them, that makes them feel like they achieved something. I talk from experience with dogs and horses who I have trained. All beings work on this principle of empowerment.
If you read the books by Rudolf Steiner you will see that Elisabeth was capable of manipulating his statements. And who knows who else has tempered with them. Have you read Thus Spoke Zarathustra yet? This book is a fairy tale about a teacher who had actually lived before the Buddha. His wisdom is free from religion and full of love. Nietzsche most likely did not touch a darker skinned person inappropriately. He was very careful and particular about his conduct. Only when he got sick with a virus which disabled his frontal cortex he began doing weird things, but not aggressive things and not abusive things. His love for the horse has nothing to do with his illness. I would do the same if I encountered a situation like that. He taught deep caring and love and mental freedom therefore he was unhappy with the main agenda on people's minds which is hedonism, wastefulness, and selfishness.
I only have read the German version. In that version the eagle, snake and other animals are only equated with specific good characteristics, I don't remember anything like what you pointed out. They probably translated it poorly. I have seen this before from other translated books. That is very sad. That is the only reason why I translate the book other than that its hard work and would rather be drinking hot carob with whipped cream on it. What he means by favoring sickly over healthy folks is that society in general seems to value a submissiveness over a self empowerment. Those values today have shifted a bit with people like Tony Robbins. They did indeed carry a lot of impotent beliefs in the past which have come from Christianity. The native beliefs before the Roman Empire took over Europe were much more in tune with nature, the animals and with metabolism. They respected their own needs, mental and physical. Christianity was trying to take that natural self respect away from people in order to make them more dependent and submissive. Only this trend is what Nietzsche criticized. He wrote provocatively and loud but one has to put things into perspective. I do appreciate your interest in this historic figure.
***** Just because the dominating factor of survival is the flight syndrome rather than the fight syndrome does not give the concept of submission a glorification status.
"'Do not flatter your benefactor.' Repeat this in a Christian church: right away it clears the air of everything Christian." (FN, "The Gay Science")
I’m new to Nietzsche and don’t follow you. What does this mean??
lol "christian church"
Nietzsche was way ahead of his time...
As he said himself "Some are born posthumously."
and the Nazis were thousands of years ahead of their time
@@ArnoldTohtFan how, retard?
@@SamMoreno970 His point is that Nietzsche's morality was anti-Christian -- evil. The Nazis were even more evil and so if Nietzsche was ahead of his time, then you could say the Nazis were even more ahead of their time.
@@robertbrandywine Nietzsche despised anti semites.
It is a held thought even in psychology that a fully socialized individual needs to maintain proper boundaries between himself and others. It is the basis of the social contract in both sociology and politics. Think what you will of Christianity, but do unto others is so much preferred than do what thou wilt as aliester Crowley would’ve had it. Whatever paths are chosen, there are benefits and consequences. I myself see it’s better to “err” on the side of Christianity. I firmly believe that Neitzsche’s madness stemmed from the struggle he had with God. That’s just my opinion.
Extremely good comment Sir. "What morals do you want", I ask peope.
Nietzsche clearly defined his "human exemplar" (free spirit, ubermensch, philosopher of the future, etc) as someone who was worldly and rejected any supernatural foundations for himself. I am not sure what you mean by "old metaphysical sense", but Nietzsche would clearly be against any such thing as is clear in his attacks on Platonism.
Since we are in a theological context, I think he means metaphysical in the sense of that old german lutheran based subjectivism, as opposed to the catholic materialistic philosophies
To live as a devout Christian is hard but wonderfully rewarding. I believe the best way to experience it is to try to be holy for a few days.
He arose at the crucible and his spirited fire yet burns bright.
; )
The idea that taste is what will drive people to abandon Christian morality is very true, and reveals what's really going on with Neitsche, what he was rationalising and what had alienated Christian morality, and continues to alienate people from Christianity and Judaism in western society, which is capitalist consumerism, and the false values inculcated by advertising and by commodity exchange in itself. The power of advertising should hardly need explaining, but it is remarkable how much intellectuals tend to ignore it as a cultural force influencing public mores, especially those who like to blame all moral decline on the presence of religious or skin-colour minorities, or so-called "cultural marxism" (which doesn't exist, and actually turns out to be traditional Christian humanism on inpection). That was the force driving atheism during Neitsche's lifetime, and remains the case, both by the implicit and explicit denigration of all means of joy, wonder, fulfilment and hope not available for sale in shiny packaging, on the same basis as the implicit denigration of all things not for sale, such as the home-made, homecooked and home grown. The broader commecial necessity is of destroying popular capacity to resist advertising pressures, such as fulfilment and inner peace and joy through relationship with God, by the inculcation of false values which facilitate consumerism such as greed, selfishness, gluttony and egotism in general ("you're worth it"), as well as the corrolaries of low self-esteem, social anxiety, body dismorphia and addictional consumption of all kinds, and the squeezing of Christian expression and self-representation out of popular culture, primarily just by incessant barrage of entertainment commodities. Tastes are manufactured with the invention of new products and lifestyles, as well as the advertising of the same, as Marx noted. Thus Nietsche was just another fashion victim, another unconscious object of capitalist cultural dissolving and corrupting.
Superb intellectual and teacher
It's interesting that the story of Christ as portrayed in the gospels is a great example of Greek tragedy.
Such a precise analysis. Well done, Sir.
Correction…his critique of Catholicism…He was heavily influenced by Dostoyevsky….another guy who criticized Catholics for becoming superstitious….Christian god is a moral god.
Early Greek Christian’s we’re all about following morality,free will and study of psychology
the problem we have is that most people want to interpret the bible literally, that's when it becomes an absurd mess of hypocrisy and misconceptions, not all of us have the intellectual capability to understand it metaphorically, as it was intended, it took a long time for me to gain this perception,
Different denominations view the Bible more metaphorically than literal.
Tell me about Nietzsche: prove his thoughts on the Golden Rule.
Jim Adams this is a later response but he was against the categorical imperative, which was devised but Immanuel Kant and which is in essence a highly intellectual golden rule. Read Twilight of the idols by Nietzsche for more.
At about 11:23... which Greek amphitheater is it? There is a beautiful backdrop of the mountains, a picturesque scene.
Jerad Clark-----Sounds GOOD to me. I have nothing against self-confidence or autoreliance. However I know no one is "Superman". I almost died in ER from blood infection. My life was in the hands of the nurses.
This was fascinating. Thanks
I love Friedrich Nietzsche, he inspires me to be a better a better Christian (person.) Well, he absolutely does, it is in his core.
I'm surprised that you are not interested, especially with your obvious opinions, but it is just as well....we both agree that neither of us really know, that's a great accomplishment for me.
He never proposed getting rid of God. This lost me in the first minute.
I like what Zizek said about this: Christianity IS, in a literal sense, faith in the shadow of the death of god, of an absolute beyond or transcendent certainty
What exactly does that mean?
Explain please
@@NogGonnaMakeIt the first thing you see when you enter most churches is a crucifix
17:06 Is that face in the clouds in the upper right corner of the painting intentionally painted by the artist? What Nietzsche means is that humans have "killed" or a better term is disconnected themselves from the infinite cosmos through their religiousness. That's why he said in his books that humans need to yet be saved from their savior. The infinite cosmos can not die because it is eternal.
Bravo! This guy is the real deal.
No he is not, he is in the manic phase of bipolar disorder
Belief in the transforming power of love is a belief in magic, and is therefore an otherworldly belief.
Thanks this is gold.
The person you show as Plato, is actually Aristotle.
The personification of talking a good fight. That in a nutshell is Nietzsche.
"The Christian theological division of agent and action itself is artificial for Nietzsche, if not all out false. For him, it is impossible for a person not to be equal to their actions or for their worth not to be defined by their actions. Further, by affirming the division between agent and action in ideology we... we perpetuate the system of masters and slaves."
The Journal of Magnus Opium
The Chaotic Impulse of Philosophy
A Wordpress Blog
One thing people should know is that Nietzsche's criticism of Christianity is mostly about German Christianity, which is all he knew, though he traveled to Italy a few times it seems he had little interactions with the Italians. German Christianity was perhaps one of the most dour forms of Christianity, and so speaks more perhaps of the Germans than of Christianity. How Germans went from being barbarians in the Roman times to freaks about precision and punctuality is impossible to explain, but they did, and the German dourness may have been present in Roman times as well, but I don't think anyone really knows. Few people seem to know that shortly (a few decades) after the murder of Yeshua of Nazareth, Christianity spread to Southwest India where it barely spread, but it did a little, and did not have any of the German dourness in it's character. And those who took up Christianity initially in S. West India formed a lasting community which came to be more pleasant and sane in many ways than life in the rest of India. Even today, Kerala, India, which is I think a majority Christian state, has one of the highest, if not the highest literacy rates in India. Life is laid back in Kerala and nothing at all like Germany. So I think it makes sense to look around a bit and see if Christianity really is the poison claimed by Nietzsche.
Huh? Kerala is much different than Germany, and Christianity in Kerala never acquired the Lutheran dourness or bitterness that N. disliked. So reaction to Christianity actually did change people differently in these two widely separated places. One can hardly call the difference between Kerala and Germany "nothing". Another example of a very different cultural feel brought about by Christianity is in the Indian state of Meghalaya, which is generally considered a Christian state in India though there are still many tribals on the outskirts. Like Kerala, Meghalaya is very laid back, except that the tribals often have squabbles over land rights and government handouts, but those flare up and then extiquish again without much of significant effect on the overall laidbackness. The largest golf course in the world is in Meghalaya. Meghalaya is somtimes called the Scotland of India due to similar weather.
+rh001YT
why does Wikipedia say Kerala's population is 50% Hindu the other 50% Christians and Muslim ? It seems Christianity is not reason for the area's high standard of living conditions.
Huh? 50% Christian is incredibly significant for India where Christians make up only about 10% or less of the population. It is the significant % of Christians in Kerala that tip the culture into the more pleasant environment. That comes about for several reasons, one notable reason being the large number of Christian schools which have spurred that state towards something close to 100% literacy which is quite impressive for India. Within Christianity in Kerala women have enjoyed good status, higher than that of Hindu women in HIndu culutre who are typically considered second to men. In fact Hindus have a holiday known as Bhai Phonta, which means "brother gratitude/celebration" when boys put on their finest clothing and sisters give them presents and serve them a special holiday meal. There is no similar holiday for the girls.
Meghalaya, the other state in India with a large percent of Christians, is the only state not connected to the rail grid. It's not that the govt in Delhi does not want to pay for the connection, it's that the people of Meghalaya oppose the connection! Meghalaya is fairly sedate with a low crime rate, but there are somewhat frequent agitations and sometimes political murders by indigineous/animist groups that can't get along with each other and want more government sops.
None of this would be a surprise to Nietzsche who sometimes praised Christianity and only sometimes disparaged her on the mere grounds of having a dim view of some strong pleasures, and on the claim that all people are politically equal which can lead to a dumbing down of society. However Christianities significant effort to educate has sort of dispelled the dumbing down hypothesis.
rh001YT so, you're saying that all the Hindus are taught at Christian schools and this makes them better citizens ?
rh001YT btw, Nietzsche also critiqued the supposed life of Jesus as described in the Bible. That is central to all Christianity, not just in Germany.
I found the opening remarks unfathomable. All thoughts comes from someone somewhere. Why wouldn't someone be inclined to think critically and independently?! Did I detect a hint of chauvinism?! Interesting.
This is one of my favorite youtube channels.
The idea of a supreme being is man's creation. Someone we humans can look up to emulate and regard as a model and a good example. But God or whatever we want to call it has a life independently of us humans. God doesn't need us. It is the other way around.
It is amazing that a popular person like Stephen does not understand Nietzsche. I am starting to think I am a genius.
Me Too.
Cause most geniuses like to regard themselves as geniuses. And boast on a RUclips comment section. You have genius written all over this !!
It's really too bad Nietzsche never came across the esoteric aspects of Torah. He derived much of the dogma on his own, but only the questions never reaching over to grasp even a single answer. We can all learn from this. What a noble and brave soul.
Which esoteric aspects do you mean? Years ago, I read Nietzsche alot, and some of the Kabbalah. A lot of passages in Zarathustra seemed to echo the Zohar
Nietzsche's success in spreading his view was heavily infuenced by timing principally. Mid to late 19th century was simmering in the psychological understanding of the human being.
"and he never reached a point of sanity again".. Insanity is a social construct. His thoughts were probably evolving and accelerating, breaking his thoughts out of the prison frameworks of society. Definitely the most misunderstood thinker of all time.
No, he had syphilis and it damaged his brain. I adore Nietzsche, but that's the truth
Correction: At about 12:50, you display a well known image of Aristotle when Williams is talking about Plato and Plato's name and dates are displayed with the photo.
This video and all of the sample videos I've previewed are excellent. Thank you for doing this.
Francis William Edwards - thanks for that. I seriously actually had said to myself “wow - Plato sure looked like Aristotle when he was younger! When did he lose all that hair?” 🤣🤣🤣
Nietzche's brother in law could not have been properly fascist before Mussolini, as the syndicalist anarchism/socialism movement had not splitted yet from the internationalism. The germans have carried the supermacist vice for centuries
The Gnostic ideology is quite interesting. While most enjoy learning, if it is taken to its end though an abnormal reasoning process the consequences appear profound. The more you know should demonstrate that you may not know much at all. As an old man, that's where I am ending up and it's not a bad thing at all.
At 12:37 it talks about Plato, however, it actually shows a photo of Aristotle
Intellect, thoughts, reasoning, brilliance; a curse I bear. A judgement against my imprisoned soul, sentenced to a thousand years.
In a human form wired to the terrestrial god of pain, I live my life, in thoughts, in my head, through my intellect, and all my days go up like smoke and perishes in vain. This brilliance that men worship has caused sleep to become an enemy to my eyes. Eyes bloodshot with hatred for men of a certain sort, men I have come to despise. Untransformed caterpillars revelling in their subsistence lives, refusing to be cocooned, taking on wings and learning to fly. But I, I have fully embraced the sarcophagus of death, transforming my insignificant drab existence into a glorious being that takes flight. My intellect has lifted me up in a cloud of arrogance that causes me to look down on my brethren. A superman I have become, wise unto myself. But in my wisdom, the knowledge of birth pain eludes me, and I am mocked in my reasoning, in my thoughts, in my intellect, in my brilliance because I will never know what it feels like to be a creator. I will never know how it feels to have life come forth from my body. And in the pain of my displeasure, I belittle her for giving suckle to the young. Oh of the beast she reminds me, raw, natural, unsophisticated. I become oppressive in my disdain, for in the leisure of my laziness, I have become a thinker, a true enemy of life that has attained enlightenment by means of disparaging others. My seed is sown in pleasure, and my short intellectual orgasm is my only reward. My boast in the excellency of my mind is my shame. A shame I have craftily persuaded a world locked in the pleasures of dark follies to celebrate. And drunk, they all agree to make my shame my Glory; pretending that it is also theirs. But this glory is temporary until something else comes along that can give them hope, making them sober again. Something distracting, perhaps a smartphone. And when that moment comes my glory will vanish in the amnesic bowls of tomorrow. I have risen up early, stayed up late just to feast on the bread of sorrow. And now my moment has come, it was a blink, a fruit fly like existence, and I reconsider, I would have fared better being a dog. My intellect has deceived me, and all my life lived, was in disillusionment.
Who wrote this?
Please answer
As someone with great respect for Nietzsche, I think it is really cool that Christians are able to present his life and philosophy in a fair and respectable manner. Especially not giving any heed to the accusations of fascism that are common. I would agree that Christianity is not just otherworldly in its outlook, and I think in a sense N. would agree too. I think the real problem here is that Christians use the otherworldly as a foundation for their values. This is was N. was attacking.
Brilliant, thanks so much for sharing your insights.
Where's part 2?
Stop trying to explain Nietzsche's philosophy on basis of the experiences of his own life. His life does not prove at all his reasonings are valid or not
Well as a person who is a huge fan of Nietzsche, his life does explain his philosophy. For Nietzsche you have to have certain experiences, you must "hit the ground" to see what you have to overcome. Despite Nietzsche being ill most of his live his point was to affirm his own life, regardless whether he would reach his highest goals or not. When you examine one's philosophy you must look at the thinker themselves. Nietzsche was certainly an advocate of that, you can certainly see this in his critique of Rousseau, Wagner, Schopenhauer, Kant, Machiavelli, Hegel, Paul of tarsus but also in his praises for Goethe, Emerson and Jesus the man. Nietzsche is the Father figure that led to modern day psychology and in psychology you always take into account one's conditioning and background in explaining one's thought pattern. I mean even when you examine his metaphysical claims of the will to power and his method of examining history, all experiences are a part of his view of "becoming". We could not come to our own views without going through our own experiences. We must suffer and feel joy in order to see an understanding of the world. This is a Dionysian man
Casual Philosopher Thank you. If you want to give an explanation to yourself of how somebody came to a particular idea, you are free to do it. In the case of Nietzsche, he lived such an average life of anybody on the XIX or XX centuries, that to understand his philosophy I'd rather examine my own experiences, not his. That what I'm concerned of, is people (mostly christians) trying to diminish the validity of his reasoning by saying that he was a bad man in short words. In that case you must be blind with respect of the person who writes the book, to avoid prejudice.
Camilo Cuesta Yet you can't help but see the person through their writing. Everything is perspective of course, but I think you can't take a blind eye when it comes to Nietzsche. Actually looking at the life of Nietzsche helps us avoid negative outlooks on him, like clearing the image of him as a sort of proto-nazi. Plus it allows us to understand some of his parables better as well. I don't think Nietzsche would have cared if Christians were judging him badly or calling him evil. He probably would have taken it as a badge of honor and would have knew that the fact his philosophy unsettles them exposes the insecurity in their morality. Nietzsche is credited with saying that great despisers are great admirers
There we disagree. I do think we must take a blind eye on Nietzsche. Maybe he was a racist indeed. Maybe he was a bad person. But the point is that even if he was cruel, that wouldn't mean his ideas about all subjects are automatically wrong. He said "the weak shall perish and one should help them to do so". There is little room for interpretation there, it is at least clear he wasn't nice to "weaks". And it is a terrifying idea, yet it describes perfectly how things have worked in modern human history
Nietzsche himself observed: all philosophy can be sourced to the lives of those men who philosophize. Nietzsche is no exception to this rule.
Yes, indeed. There must be a better world than this. But where? Maybe in the afterlife. Thank you ☺️
'Thus Spake Zarathustra - audiobook - Friedrich Nietzsche - Midwinter Update'. (english.) RUclips.
Personal spirituality does not necessitate religious dogma...
It seems to me that Nietzsche derived his understanding of Christian anthropology from a particular tradition- namely, the tradition in which he was raised, Lutheranism- that isn't actually representative of Christian thought more generally. The Reformers (Luther and Calvin, etc) had a bleak and pessimistic understanding of human nature; whereas thinkers such as Thomas Aquinas and the Eastern Fathers were far more balanced. I would also add that the OT & NT give the lie to the Reformers, I think
for whatever it is worth . i truly believe Nietzsche thought himself to death.
I love the narrator.
Why does talk about philosophy always fall into gossip about the person’s life?
because it shapes there philosophy ?
Do an episode on Liberation Theology Please!
Very interesting, thanks!
16:03 "In Human, All Too Human, Nietzsche talks about the way in which Christian's, barely humans as it were, in mud. [Christians] regard humans as miserable little worms, and then humans cry out gratefully to God because of all his grace. And Nietzsche hates that." Sounds like Nietzsche was of sound mind to reject that version of Christian anthropology which comes from Luther and Calvin.
Very nicely done! Thank you
Like thousands of journalists and economists mostly speculate over contemporary issues; do modern philosophers and teachers do the same (needless thing) ? About these by-gone greats and personas important? Almost every major post-modern philosopher disagrees about the definitions we can draw about Nietzche's discourse and text - or for that matter Spinoza, Kant and XYZ
I would have loved to hear Nietzsche insight on consciousness and reality after having taken a high dose of DMT
_"Mystical explanations are thought to be deep; the truth is that they are not even shallow."_
Thank you for this synopsis.
This was interesting. Thanks
This was very interesting and helpful.
I will write about the first two minutes of this video, and it is no good:
He says,
"...it's hard to say why N. is so influential in some ways, because it's been pointed out that his thought is idiosyncratic [0:15]....."
Why is that a bad or a good thing?? He is of course idiosyncratic, he is an individual. And to say he doesn't KNOW why, and then make a video telling us why... well, that's just dishonest, not to mention he is most probably wrong.
"... and there's always an element that's incalculable here I think,... but N. I think, spoke for things that were already going on, articulated things going on... christianity has come to an end in terms of intellectual respectability... and I think one reason he is so influential is that N. pushes hard to get us to understand the implications of what he called the death of god... now lets get rid of morality..."
Incalculable?? well tell me something that is not so damn obvious!! Anything that lends itself to interpretation by so much a wide range of "intellectuals" has to have an "incalculable" element, or ten.
The whole damn video is like that. A dwarf disguisedly hating on a giant, in the form of "criticism".
I mean, "... it caught something in the atmosphere in his day, and has caught something in the atmosphere since then as well..."
Christianity is Plato for the masses. It is the metaphysics of the hangman.
Jim Adams, truth is what you make it. It is NOT absolute but personal and diverse. Why do you think there are so many paths to heaven-man's perception/s. The creators spirit lives in all things organic. Love and respect of others is the ultimate act and conquest. That's my perspective.
So when he said, "God is dead.", he was referring to his father, who died when he was 4. Or he was angry at God for taking his father away when he was so young.
No, he meant that modern thought had made the historical conception of a purpose-giving God obsolete, and that humanity was both free and cursed to find their own reason to live on Earth.
when someone knows a subject so well any expression will become deep erudition by default.
thank you! great post
The tea most sought after is the flavorless flavor.
No shirty; No ticky. Oblivion ensues..
Grasping this tension in the mind of Nietzsche, would be odd . . . people are a perception between the distraught and open dialect. Change the adjective to a noun and see what it means; grasping notions upon this is a point of logic, if it was to say a point in time it would mean some new definition, as i say this, it seems to be a point of a direct path with conceptual motivation directing to a bold solution. (We are) to become a surging of emotion and feeling. Nietzsche is talking about the nerve and the culture surrounding this so called Christianity in no appointment for any nerve, yet they try to define it, and as I can say is always there. A solution decays in a universe where the mind is apart of the antenna's dimension.
Simple, he made it personal.
How many devils are on the head of Nietzsche's pin?
Advanced intellect with no fear of God is a pathway to madness.
He didn`t become " mad " because of his high intellect. And one more thing, he didn`t believe in demons and angels.
@@eagleeye182 maybe he believed in angels and demons during his final illness, or before or just after his death. We'll never know.
@@davidstokes5905 As far as I know, he had an advanced stage of syphilis, hence the mental illness.
@@eagleeye182 his apparent intellect lead him to sleep with prostitutes which of course lead to his syphilitic downfall. Which life was superior, Christ's or Nietzsche's?
Thank you sir !!
Very limited views of the work of Nietzsche. I could easily say this guy is a Christian Apologist. It hurts to say "dead is god", hun? I saw your pain. I am on the wrong channel.
Humorous hubris would be a scientist attempting to disprove God using logic which we now know is either inconsistent or incomplete.
I was hoping to hear what Nietzsche's arguments were. I did not hear any arguments against Christianity. Very disappointed.
What do you expect from a Christian apologist?
By what will Nietzsche supercede Christ at the resurrection when Christ raises all of the dead?
How tragic, how pathetic that so many people still cling to ancient fantasies like the return of christ & the resurrection of all souls. We should have done with all that centuries ago. Jim, if it was going to happen as Jesus predicted, it should have happened in the lifetime of the people he was talking to, as he predicted. Give it up. Get a life. Or at least get out of everybody's faces about it.
2,000 years overdue. I think you've been stood up. "Some of the present generation will not taste death......" yadda yadda yadda. Obviously billions have tasted death since including 100% of the Jesus generation. To think that people today are awaiting a magician to return after 2,000 years and wave a magic wand to get all the zombies to rise up. As if!
You have been standing for 2,000 years and your date still has not showed but still you KNOW they will. If you're that gullible I have a bridge you might like to buy.
When you only have been exposed to the western form of christianity that lacks all true mysticism and understanding of the mysteries, this is what happens. Orthodoxy had the answers.
Quite informative.
Christianity is no system but rather its a process, a process with an end game which is directly connected to the nature of the ubermensche. So what really did Nierzsche actually believe??
How very interesting! I wonder if Neitsche considered all religions similarly when he referred to God being dead. If a god is dead or never existent then it is true for all the world.
Why could he not accept morality as good because all people publicly profess it? Our actions indicate we do not always achieve our professed morality but we do pronounce it as a Good goal for which to strive. Good would be literally a god in itself, an ideal to which most of humanity strives.
He probably would consider God to be dead for all the world, since Christianity was the tradition he was raised in and proclaims itself to have the one true God.
Thomas Aquinas tried to define God as the supernatural sum of all humanities beatitudes (blessings) which seems to be similar to what you are aiming at here. I can't speak for Nietzsche but not all people do publicly profess morality. Honestly, I think the majority of people who talk about morality publicly are politicians trying to manipulate the public, journalists looking to create scandal and outrage to sell their products and religious people who take pleasure in telling the rest of us how degenerate we are. The average person in the street is more concerned with football and day to day survival than morality. They might give the occasional thought to charity but otherwise it's not that high a priority. I think that describing good as a God or morality as good is to confuse the issue. Good is a relative term, after all if I enslaved you then you would think me evil, but I might consider it good. Some Catholic clergymen seem to find paedophilia morally acceptable (probably on account of the Roman public's dismissal of the excesses of the Emperor Justinian on Capri as just something tyrants do). By what standard do you set morality? The Bible considers it acceptable to stone people who work on the Sabbath or disobedient children which most modern people would consider abhorrent. Is the UN convention on Human Rights the starting point? If so I consider freedom of religion to be immoral because it allows you to preach to me about a Religion I have already dismissed as a waste of my and everyone else's time and you can't give me my time back. Morality can only ever be something personal to oneself within the bounds of the laws of the country you inhabit so you don't end up on the receiving end of criminal penalty.
Bless his heart, Nietzsche is sleeping. If he should wake up, tell him I hope his dreams were pleasant. Seems he had a bad day I hear. I'll leave you alone with him, poor dear. If you see Sigmund Freud coming around to play with him, keep an eye on that one. He likes bad cocaine, they say. If you need me, I'll be playing my guitar, but not so loud so as to wake him up.Young Charles Darwin is resting, too, and has school in the morning, I think. There may be a pop exam. If it happens to be raining, make sure they all have their galoshes. We needn't let them at all catch cold.
....sounds like you forgot to take your meds. believing in zombies is in these days, but only on the xbox.
the message of Jesus is the same as the message of Nietzche, which is : Struggle to survive and triumph in the world of lies by being the truth.
Neitzche is not Anti Jesus, but anti christian organization and anti interpretation of Jesus's ministry by imaginitive authors of scriptures. The narrator incorrectly interprets the signature of Nietzche.
Nietzsche realised that morality was inherent...not dependent on a fear if punishment by God. He has been misinterpreted by those who choose to choose to use his philosophy for justification of far right sociopathy. Like Christians who follow JC (do unto others...) Use parts of the bible elsewhere to condemn homosexuality (eg) as abominable to justify their hatred of the different.
and what is your point?
Life: We are born. The average life is 85 years. We suffer 83 years. We are happy 2 years. We are use delusional 1 1/2 years. Welcome to life.
Was listening while playing a TCG. Had to keep Alt+tabbing to make sure it wasn't Anthony Hopkins. haha
So you noticed that too? A slight Welsh lilt to the voice.
Nietzche was a zealot confounded by his own searing criticism of Christianity descended into madness