I’m the teacher now; you’re the student

Philosophy Forums Society, Government, and Economics
,
1

Kant distinguished between practical reason/desire for the ought, and (what Camus refers to as passion) aesthetic judgment.

He also distinguished between selfish impulses and social impulses, saying it is to the benefit of the development of character that those impulses fight each other in us, forcing us to order them, or deal with the disordered consequences.

Introverts must order them back to balance self=other by correcting back to other (without leaving out self=other), whereas extroverts balance/correct them back to self. Not self in isolation, mind you, but self=other.

Ambiverts are in balance, or they/others should stop calling themselves ambiverts.

But here is the question, assuming you’re with me so far. I know that’s assuming A LOT, but anyway.

Question: Did Nietzsche correctly prioritize greater/lesser passions/desires? How do you know? Assignment: Use actual quotes from Nietzsche before giving your (trigger warning) analysis (automatic F if you don’t).

image
image1574×2100 601 KB

Kant doing Hegel/Nietzsche B4 it wuz kewl ;)
Project: Happy ILove(d)P: Graded Absolute Virtue!
My knowledge of Nietzsche
Accepting evil is rejecting good?
2

Wild guess: Sartre was known to prefer William James before contemporising analogicality between Nietzche and Heidegger, ,
the answer surprised the hell out of me , recently.

3

Sounds like an automatic F. Start your own thread foo.

4

You Isht this are a weirdo kind of Christian I’ve seen, not that I have not been raised as one. But let that suggestion pass. Thanks for the memories.

5

Same foo dog.

6

Course lost it me though
Cubism now to find the content
Within the frame.

7

I’m mad at you, Meno.

@Zeroeth_Nature, @Jakob, @Kallikantzaros (kazoo) please answer.

Is the Will to Power also a Feeling (like the "feeling of free will")?
8

I leave this to Nietzsche’s Bitches.
I’m no concubine.

2 Likes
9

Well, well, well, if it isn’t the green-eyed monster!

If I ever get a Christian cat lady, I’ll name her Kazoo.

1 Like
10

Call me a Bitch and give me an F, I don’t mind.

I think that, for Nietzsche as for myself, “greater/lesser passions/desires” would simply mean stronger/weaker passions/desires. So there is no need to “prioritize” passions/desires; the stronger passion/desire simply has priority over the weaker.

Now of course passions/desires may be influenced by the notion that it would be correct or incorrect for them to have priority over others. But in order to seek to influence them, one must to a higher degree possess the passion/desire to influence them than incompatible passions/desires…

1 Like
11

Of course you don’t.
You have no shame.
An excellent bitch trait.
And essential to being a deceiver.

I guess whatever passion has been determined, right?
Something’s will, to something’s power.

Let’s hope the determinations have been favorable.

2 Likes
12

Wrong. F.

For someone who quotes Nietzsche more than anyone on this board, I can only assume you have a problem with authority. Report to the principal’s office.

13

No hint that you’ve understood anything I just said.

I think that, for Nietzsche as for myself, the key problem is in the phrase “forcing us to order them”. For, even though the fight between those impulses then forces us—suggesting we’re not free to do so—, there’s then still an us to order them, a self beyond (those) impulses!

For myself, at least, “selfish impulses” are simply impulses which have preserved our selfish genes through our own self-preservation, whereas “social impulses” are simply impulses which have preserved our selfish genes in a more roundabout way, e.g. through our own procreation or the preservation and/or procreation of other individuals carrying at least one of those genes.

14

It is that we cannot get out of choosing that gives us the freedom to choose.

I like the way that you frame selfish as survival. Don’t you think that some would also frame social as survival — in other words they would reframe it as selfish (Ayn Rand)? I think that they are morally neutral (animal impulses) until we are forced to order them (choose according to priority) because they come in conflict. I didn’t directly quote Kant there, but I’m pretty sure the things he has written would agree with that.

So would be true about the passions/desires ordered (prioritized—reevaluated…rated) by Nietzsche. Morally neutral until in a conflict where you must make a choice. Did he see it that way, or prioritize and rate them prior to the choice? Rating some stronger within his value system would seem to grant them a higher moral (noble) status, would it not?

You’re still not using quotes. That’s 5000 demerits.

15

That doesn’t follow. The fact that we have to make a choice does not make that choice free.

Yes, but they would be wrong, since the unit of evolution is the gene, not the carrier of the gene.

16

Ollie can teach you one thing, pussy galore…how to use words, like ‘esoteric’ to allude to occult powers and profound wisdom, when you have nothing to offer but those same allusions.

“Esoteric” for instance means…I have no evidence, no argument, no reason, other than a feeling. Find in yourself (subjective) a reason, no matter how unreasonable, to believe any nonsense fills you with joy, or makes you feel powerful.

Esoteric…reading between the lines (Straussean), and finding there whatever you’ve projected.
Like in modern fART…a white canvas with a blue streak, can sell for millions…why?
Esoteric meaning concealed in the painting - only a few can appreciate. The few chosen ones (determined).

Same as their ‘philosophical musing’ full of obscurantist word-games…replace a few words, using them “artistically” (full of vague allegorical jargon) allude to deep meanings concealed there, for the initiated, the worthy, the ones with the right stuff, the special ones, and then let the needy mind do the rest.

Will to Power.
If lies give you power…they are profound esoteric truths.

A circumcised psyche covets what makes it feel insecure…what they come to admire because of its effect on them. This is what they wish to harness, and use to reproduce the effect in others.
Magic requires an audience to be affected. It requires a polis…because it is useless, impotent, outside man-made environments.

Try this…
Are astrological insights applicable to plants and animals?
Nope.
They only apply to humans because only humans can be affected by symbols/words.
Are they applicable to non-life?
Nope.
Rocks don’t give a shit what the star arrangement were when they emerged from the lava pits, and congealed into their solid form.

17

Alright, I’ve put Satyr on Ignored now, for the record.

I suppose you might argue that, if we have a choice to make, that choice is by definition free because a choice is by definition free… But then of course I’ll just counter that we never really have a choice to make.

18

Herd psychology on display.
The slave can be freed, but it cannot deal with it…it needs a master. It will find a master.
Ollie has always found a master.
Nietzsche, Iakob, the Jew non-Jew, Crowley, Strauss…and the list goes on…
A feminine spirit.
He, she, it only wants to be loved…appreciated, acknowledged…wants to feel special.

Oh Ollie…you can put me on ignore, but will this make you immune to the cosmos?

It’s all so…so…what’s the word?
Esoteric.
:grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:

19

How so, if I may ask?

20

Well, if a choice is by definition free—which is the premise here—, I’ll argue that we’re never really free to do what we do, and therefore never really have a choice to make.