The Lion tears up the Child (and eats himself)

… Double post sorry

There I would have to differ from you!
Dancing/socialising - definetely peak experiences in the whole ‘being human’ trip.

I do very much second your view of not necessarily reading Nietzsche as Nietzsche commands - surely N- Dawg in some ways or some works does seem to call for a sort of philosophical appropriation of his or any philosophers work to make it fit for life - to enhance life - would that not be a sort of will to power - those truths you are fit for or what ever.
Any how it’s good to see independent Nietzsche influenced thinking!

Does a man of dynamite lock himself into a room or explode into the real inter subjective world - overflowing in high spirits -ethically super abundant - generous of himself because he has so much extra but not rule bound by penny pinching rules of utilitarians or deontologists.
An ethics of excess?

Oh good afternoon Mrs Zarathustra can you fetch himself down from the mountain to dance and play?

I’m raving! (as ever)
:banana-dance:
kp

Within what context - my interpretation of de Montaigne’s quote? It makes sense to me.

“Supposed to”? If the lion represents “self-respect” why then does he have an issue with the child within himself? Wouldn’t self-respect include seeing and accepting and merging all aspects of who we are within?

Our personal experiences do muddy the vision for us, don’t they?

Now that is something that all lions must strive for. :laughing: Perfect freedom of self.

If the child rode upon the camel’s back, that desert experience would be different.

:evilfun: :wink:

The smiley is the sun of the baby faced innocence of becoming, and she who posts it shines forth her brilliant radiance for the greater peace of all of us innocent sinners. Ahhhh sigh. I am so moved. The heart is infinitely good and its treasure is everywhere.
[/quote]

By your tone, I would say that you don’t really believe that.
So, tell me, Jakob, what’s your raison de etre?
:astonished: :confused: :sunglasses:

Dancing, yes - waltzing, not necessarily. Nietzsche greatly valued dancing, but not bound to a social context.

Exactly. Now the question is: is the Nietzschean drawn to this systematic, “holistic” approach to Nietzsches body of work because of a greater power? I put a questionmark to the idea that this is necessarily the case, but I dont deny that it can be. What I criticize is the attitude that suggests that to approach Nietzsches work as a homogenous system automatically guarantees a superior understanding of the work, or a superior will to power.

In as far as I am influenced by him, Nietzsche is the soil, not the seed.

Even though one cannot overestimate the joys of what you describe, I think that you underestimate the depth and heights of Nietzsches joy, the joy of the solitary creator in general.

If you would slow down, you would be dancing.

Yes, but it was you who brought in de Montaigne in the first place. That doesn’t make sense to me unless his quote is logically connected to Nietzsche. You failed to do adequately that, even though it was a praiseworthy attempt.

As I read it, the Lion of the OP doesn’t have issue with the child, he destroys him as a result of out of a lack of lightness, in very general terms, of health.

Good God, no! Well, sometimes, unfortunately, and that was probably a a bad sentence… but any vision is a reflection of (personal) experiences. Experience is the personal in “personal”, the vision is personal thought.

The Lions striving is very Yang. It destroys in the end the fertile Earth. Strive (also) softly. Yin.

Good one! The burden the camel carries is what ultimately must become the child.

The Child.

If you do not break under love it is not true. -Christ.

Is that a quote from the Bible?

You think the Christ speaks only through the Bible? You ought to read the Bible.

“Stop attributing made-up quotes to me”

  • Christ

I can see you’re clever. Probably a mathematician.

I’m an awful dancer tho’ I do enjoy it.

That Nietzsche who wrote ‘without music life would be error’ is the one I’m after!

kp

jonquil absolutely a d o r e s the idea of taking life and philosophy v e r y seriously, to the exponential nth degree so that a life spent without worrying out heavily and gravely the distinctions between the lion, camel and child in Nietzsche’s extremely weighty, extremely significant allegory would hardly be worth living. Most def, Nietzsche stands on a par with my favorite author for heavy, important symbology and absolute truth without irony or ambiguity: Nathaniel Hawthorne.

HTH, jonquil the unsmiling

No… You are Helptheherd?

Never took notice of him but I had the feeling googling this Hawthorne would result in a fitting quote, and surely:

“A pure hand needs no glove to cover it.”

Now, since I have about 5 aliases on this site, what does that say about me?
I guess that Im no fan of Hawthorne either.

But what you may interpret as worry, others refer to as thought. It can be a heady wine, surely.

Drifting way of topic I guess but Hawthorne is a great writer second only to Melville for me!

kp

Okay. Since I don’t know about either of them, I move back to the topic: did or did Nietzsche not eat himself in his own terms?

Dunno - but in the mean time I’m writing a play called ‘waiting for sauwelios’ whilst painting a picture…

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4WM-0ZlgDo[/youtube]

Was krossie’s comment

A. Unhelpful

B. Lazy

C. Not all that funny

D. All of the above

kp

I enjoyed it krossie O:)

Now I think I’m going to revisit “What is Called Thinking?”.

Krossies comment gave me the first laugh of the day… and I love that video.
I don’t think Sauwelios is coming back here, I pissed him off by calling him Talmudic because he didn’t fall for my interpretation and let his analytical method loose on me.

I see he has his own high powered Nietzsche forum - ah well pity though - the debate above was quality!

kp

That forum is like a fortress.

If you ever finish that play, or painting, I must see it.