At what point does one give up Nietzsche? That is, at what point, would Nietzsche say, “You should give this up.” But then again, to give up Nietzsche means that you don’t understand Nietzsche. But to never give Nietzsche up means that you must not understand him, either. When faced with circle jerking on a forum for years of your life, or not and doing something else, posts like this begin to form.
You give up Nietzsche when you no longer care about being cool.
If you give him up because he says you should give him up, you’re really doing the contrary of giving him up. The first step in giving him up is therefore to not give him up even though he says you should give him up.
I suggest that you read Lampert’s Nietzsche’s Teaching if you haven’t already done so; and if or when you have, Seung’s Nietzsche’s Epic of the Soul. The last obstacle on the way to moksha is the desire for it.—
Understand him, and then stop reading him.
This gives you time to remember who you were before you read him. This means a lot more than what you became, but does not include forgetting what you became. Instead it gives you a chance to consider what you have learned - in light of who you are.
Be incited by his words by all means, but you are acting on the words of a dead man. Do what I recommend and you can be assured that you are acting through and of yourself.
I believe that this is the correct answer. N doesn’t really say much that an average person wont learn through the course of regular social interaction.
I’d say you give him up when you realize that if you think understanding him is really hard, that you’re probably not cut out for philosophy.
Ironically, this has become the “cool” answer.
In fact, the whole cool/uncool thing is just an absurd “anti-” game. It is a long long way from the correct answer.
Understanding him isn’t so much “hard”, though perhaps some people do like him for that reason - in which case yes, they are douches - but that never even occurred to me. His words are extremely insightful either way.
I do believe I am not the only one who has yet to hear any remnant of understanding, by you, of him. I have however heard much insubstantial bluster against him, by you - though not for a while, which is a relief.
Perhaps it never occurred to you that you saw such little significance in his words exactly because you never understood their significance. Or perhaps you did consider this, but disregarded it for, ultimately what is much the same reason.
I just read him at the same time that I was reading like ten other guys and I sort the bullshit without looking at which book I’m reading.
I mean, the will to power the love of fate the appolonian dyonesian and so on and so on. Gotta make your own morals don’t follow the slave rules be a master ubermench and yeah all that stuff.
It just seems like a narrow minded stuffing of the world into a framework he devised and into which the world doesn’t really fit. It’s really poetic and all, and he loves the flowery language and emotional appeals, but substantively, I just don’t think there was a whole lot there barring these debates people have over the most insignificant details of what he may or may not have meant when he chose to use one word over another…I mean…you can do that with any philosopher. Digging and digging and digging until you collapse doesn’t make him deep. It’s just a big hole. Empty, vacuous, feel good nonsense that distracts people from better ways of thinking.
This is the reader. Not the writer.
A writer does not cause his readers to obsess over word choice.
Your dismissive summary of his works only confirms your lack of real understanding. Spouting off a couple of the guy’s concepts doesn’t demonstrate an understanding of him. Come on, your claim (on another thread) of quantity really isn’t demonstrating the slightest quality of understanding here.
I really am beginning to think that your most defining “laid back” attribute has chronically clouded your philosophical understanding - about Nietzsche and others. You just “read him at the same time as you were reading like ten other guys”? Way to go…
Reference “some random sentence” that proves me wrong, rather than simply claiming you can, huh?
That answers your question.
That is the point when you give something up as pointless.
And I don’t care.
See how easy that is?
Sil, are you trying to force me to give some exposition of N’s work? It’s all on wikipedia. What’s the point?
Lol, you too cool for school.
My point exactly.
Ah, so that’s your level of understanding.
Now I understand, thanks 
Way to dodge. Now that’s the kind of rhetorical skill I can get behind.
Hello Good Sirs,
Consider yourself a man with a toolbox. Once you understand Nietzsche, then you can add those ideas to your toolbox. After that, broaden your mind with others ideas and watch how your perspective grows. Nietzsche is brilliant, however, many philosophers are, too. Read some Goethe, Plato, Aristotle, William James, and you watch yourself grow.
You’re right Stephen. Welcome to the site.
I was going to say that earlier, but couldn’t quite figure out how to say it right, so I got half way through my post and canned it. Luckily you came along. Welcome indeed to this site. Never abandon anything, if it agrees with you or not, philosophy is of course about being plural. Mind you you never have enough time.
What specifically would it mean to give up Nietsczhe. And I am not looking for a paraphrase of ‘giving up’, but rather what it would mean in practical terms to give up N. Would one not Think certain things? Not analyze certain things in certain ways (anymore)? Would it change in some other way how one acted or communicated? How, and with specifics?
It would look something like this:
Where you always talk about Neizsche, but, you know, it’s clear that you have given him up. It’s like a knowing thing. Nietzsche would know.
“The hero is the Faustian superman; the superhero is the Spinozan superman. The former has the audacity to assert his power against the whole world; the latter has the wisdom to see the whole world as the matrix of his power.” (Source: Seung, op.cit., page 191.)
When does one give up on science? When it’s no longer cool?
I have no idea how one could give up on Nietzsche except if you never understood him.