kant says bend ova 2 the front and touch your toes

ok so kant basically says that by reason we cant know if there is a god or aftrlf …neither can we know if there isnt …

why is he hated so much? he’s just stating the obvious… :astonished:

can i have an explanation on why Nietzche hated him so much? when…well, to me they don’t disagree…

maybe when it comes to the ‘‘we ought to behave this way’’ train of thought by kant…which may be kind of sucky…

but i don’t get it… tell me why Kant is so hated… :astonished:
i barely understand him… probably cause he was very smart, or probably cause he was full of $%$

please som Kant fan, answer! :frowning: :astonished:

Nietzsche was very much against the idea of another world-a so-called real world- which existed as the basis for the world or our senses. Kant talks abot the world of our senses as the world or phenomena, and the real world as being the noumenal world. Our senses, being subjective, cannot really experience the noumenal world that transcends our world of senses.

Nietzche’scrtisim of Kant’s world of noumena was somewhat like his problem with the Platonic world of forms of which our degraded reality of experience is based upon. It is a world of perfect being outside of experience, but serves as the the bases of this world.

Now here is his problem with this kind of thinking. His philosophical struggle was against nihilism, in which it is ‘better to be dead than alive, and better still to have never been born at all’. By placing a world transcendant to our own as superior to our own, the various forms of Platonic, and Kantian, and Christian , and Buddhist thought systems conversely place the world of experience as something lesser, something to be denied or renounced, or atoned for. What all these systems have in common then, is placing ultimate value into a world that is transcendant to our senses, and above experience of the only world which is practically available to us.

Now even in his nineteenth century Europe, people who stopped believing in God still maintained the same ethics that would deny this world of experience as giving us the relevant meaning to carry on. Just by ceasing to value a world beyond as being really out there, does not entail that this world will become valued. Indeed as long as the same value system of positing ultimate value in a world beyond our senses leads to this world as being devalued.

But this was precisely what Nietzsche wanted. He wanted European society to re-valuate the world of experience as being the only world worthy of living for. Agnosticism was then just not enough. An active renunciation of such values in a transcendant real world was what was needed, according to his view.

‘Reality has been deprived of it’s value, its meaning, its veracity to the same degree that an ideal world has been fabricated . . . The ‘real world’ and the ‘apparent world’ - in plain terms: the fabricated world and reality . . . The lie of the ideal has hitherto been the curse on reality, through it mankind itself has become mendacious and false down to its deepest instincts - to the point of worshipping the inverse values to those which alone could guarantee it prosperity, future, the exalted right to a future.’ - Nietzsche, Ecce Homo, Forward, 2.

To any intelligent person who’s been through a fair amount of rare experience, German idealists and Christians look like the most gullible species of men.

Edit: missed some italics.

sorry…wrong post

i have a sinthesis of both Kant and Nietzche…but I won’t tell u…
ok…i’ll try to, I’m really tired though…

so, i think the nuomena does exist, and platos form world does too (same crap)…
it is 'more fundamental, and a basis for our world maybe…MAYBE we don’t even know fosho if it exists).

but that world has its problems too, it’s not infallible…it sucks in it’s own way…
yeah the nuomena SUCKS (for impious to put in the hall of shame…i’d be honored… :astonished: )

and so…since the nuomena sucks in its own glorius nuomenaish way…
then our world is the coolest thing, ever
so are life, the will, the senses, pleassure and destructionnnn argg lol…

but i don’t think both disagree too much…i mean, both…agree in the fact that reason is not absolute and 100%certain…

also…about the ingenuity of xtian and german idealist guys,…ok maybe they are naive…
but i think they are not naive… they are just gay hahha…(nothing against homsexuals they r cool)
cause nietzsche aknoqledged some stuff they said… (the cool stuff) but dared to follow through with the true coclusions…whilst the idealists decided to fool themselves…
i need opinions plz :astonished: FEEDBACK
:astonished: :astonished: :astonished:

i wish i could’ve been Nietzsches GF.

In the end, Nietzchean philosphy was a refutation of the pessimistic hedonism of a Schopenhaur too. If satisfaction of ther senses, are the definition of happiness, then true happiness can’t exist as Shopenhaur more or less said. The senses are only at the most only ever temporarily satiated, but never ultimately satisfied. Shopenhaur’s worldview was hence a pessimistic one. (Mick Jagger could likely confirm this).

For Nietzche though, suffering had to be a supreme value too, for it is only through suffering, and through the related overcoming of resistance, that man’s nature of willing oneself into power can be set forth. The greater the resistance to one’s will to power, the greater the suffering.

And the greater the suffering the greater the realization of power.
This for Nietzche was the veritable happiness that remained true to life.

Rather than greater pleasure then, the ideal human for Neitzsche seeks just the opposite-greater suffering! For it is only in overcoming the source of suffering that man’s powerful nature becomes realized. The existence of suffering then is not a source of nihilism, but is the source of meaning to life. It is through suffering, than man’s nature becomes realized.

Going further, because Nietzche rejects the reality of the ideal world of Perfect Forms, or Noumena, he follows the example of the ancient Greek philospher Heraclitus in valuating the world of becoming as the true nature of the world. Man’s nature lies in a perpetual becoming, rather than in a Perfect Being, as suggested by Plato’s Forms or Kant’s ‘Real World’.

In this way, even Shopenhaur’s pessimism is overcome. Even if a perfect state of satisfaction of all desire is unrealizable, by placing highest valueon the world as it is experienced, by valueing struggling, striving, suffering, and perpetual becoming, Nietzsche again affirms life as it is, and thereby refutes nihilism.

:astonished:
go Nietzche!

I think Nietzsche calls Kant somewhere along the way a ‘catastrophic spider’.

Nietzsche dislikes the noumenons not because they’re metaphysically incorrect or logically insufficient but because they perpetuate a faulty tradition that negates basic life values instead of affirming them. N is essentially upset with Kant’s ethical system. It integrates (according to N, at least) the sort of transcendence which quickly translates into tyrannical, oppressive, binding moral codes that are ultimately useless or even detrimental to human creativity.

Here’s an idea for a nifty essay:

drury.edu/ess/history/modern/finalwrt.html

word up!

i think Nietzsche would’ve been a metal head…
not leaving rock and some good hip hop behind either.

Dionysian Nation

In our sun-drenched land of the South we be working this shit out,
Becoming the best and our test is without doubt
Near the top of the West, we embarrass the rest-
We’re in ascent, and Dionysus is impressed.
Philosophical, yeah that’s how I am,
And critical though is what we need on the program
So show them it’s the state we’re awaitin’,
And we’re gonna make it happen- Dionysian nation!
Impious brings a transposition-
Between valley and mountain with these rhymes I have written
Fresh style in the way that I spit,
The old ideals need tearing apart and I’m born to rip.
So open your ears up and listen,
These words are ripe so you don’t want to miss them,
Written with blood bled in awareness and schiz,
Mapping out this archetype that’s arisen.

Below the Ubermensch stands the Warrior, Blond Beast at heart,
Unmoderated noblesse be his instinctual art.
Whilst the spectre of the Last Man haunts us,
A fragment of the future that tortures and taunts us;
Mediocre and modern but thinkin’ he knows best,
He’s loathsome, and he fails the test.
The Good and the Just are the last
Below all else in the chandala class,
Stripped of the power they’ve enjoyed thus far,
They’re sick to the core and their time must pass.
So keep crankin’ it up 'til the speakers burn,
Hear Impious teach the eternal return.
Dionysian destruction is the first task,
Then we create in grand style from the first to the last.
And when it’s time for us to depart,
We’ll go out blessing the world and laughing the last laugh.

The cream of the Eternal Return is where you’ll find us,
And we hope that one day you’ll be right there beside us-
Everything recurs including that which denies us
As we drift through the archetypes that define us.
And to believers thinkin’ we’re your Messiah,
Best seek yourselves and we’ll return when you deny us.
The decadent man is our pariah,
And we’ll attack his idols 'til the day that we die.
'Cos we agree with Zarathustra and got eyes for a bright future,
And if you don’t then you’d better get used to
Bridges like this 'cos the Ubermensch is coming to you.
…Yeah, that’s right
And to those of you who don’t respect this,
Why don’t you dream a dream and try reversing perspectives-
Respect this, and we won’t pass you by
Like we do with those who repose on the lie.

2007 Impious

You should write a book.

DAAAMN hommie, is that shit fo real?

:sunglasses:

thank u! i know! :sunglasses: