i dont know but i can tell u i’m not learning much.
Again I’ll ask: Do you have any inkling at all about the plan of each of Nietzsche’s books—Beyond Good and Evil , for example?
About the latter, you said: “[H]is focus is pretty limited and he doesn’t bother trying to build much with his ideas, mostly just complaining about various errors he notices.”
Against this, I pit: “With study, each of the chapters of Beyond Good and Evil comes to seem in its own movement and trajectory—absurdly exciting. The individual sections within the chapters receive their specific gravity from their location in the unfolding argument and from their contribution to it. But not only the chapters unfold as coherent arguments; so too do the two divisions: chapters 1-3 offer a coherent argument about philosophy [1-2] and religion [3] and the profound relation between them; chapters 5-9 offer a coherent argument about morality [5-7] and politics [8-9] culminating in the new nobility. And finally, the whole book is a coherent argument that never lets up: what is discovered about philosophy and religion, about what can be known and what might be believed, necessarily assigns the philosopher a monumental task or responsibility with respect to morals and politics.” (Lampert, Nietzsche’s Task, page 7.)
With study… But such a study requires a Strauss, a Lampert or a Meier, i.e. someone of the caliber of Kant and Hegel (BGE 211).
The great philosophers dwarf dilettantes like the OP and even, er, energetic male adolescents like AnimeHuz and my former self:
Well, you could go here
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nietzsche/
and then if you’re interested, read Nietzche. Or you could go to a bookstore or library, look at a copy of Nietzsche’s Beyond Good and Evil and look at the aphorisms. I think there are a couple of sections of short philosophical ideas, printed as separate sentences. If you find those intriguing, them you could buy or borrow the book and read it.
You can even do this from bed, should you be ill and that’s why you want other people to do the work for you,
1 Like
that was an awsome link on Nietzsche. i’m sorry i havent done it justice but at least now i know what his philosophy was about.
oh, really?
Do tell.
He is famous for his criticisms of traditional European morality and religion, as well as of conventional philosophical ideas.
that kind of explains ’ God is dead’ if he is trying to take apart traditional religion. it looks like i cannot even find out if he was an atheist or not.not easily.
in conclusion i do not find Nietzsche compelling enough to research. no one around here has really made him interesting.
Hitler took him seriously.
Hitler sort of took some of Nietszche seriously, perhaps N’s sister’s version. N opposed anti-semitism and also German nationalism. That’s kinda poopy from Hitler’s perspective.
1 Like
To you, my dear, to you—some dilettante who’s apparently had an interest in “philosophy” for almost 20 years at the least, yet whose interest apparently already waned after 2 years, stayed dormant for over 15 years, and only started waxing again about 2 weeks ago; and who still doesn’t know anything about Nietzsche, really…
It doesn’t matter in the slightest if you do not find Nietzsche compelling enough to research. And yes, of course he was an atheist. All actual philosophers are atheists:
“Since no demonstration can presuppose the demonstrandum, philosophy is radically atheistic. The difference between Plato and a materialist like Democritus fades into insignificance if compared with the difference between Plato and any doctrine based on religious experience.” (Strauss, “Reason and Revelation”.)
Goodbye and good riddance!
IF i’m never heard from ever again on ILP, this will be the reason.
2 Likes
Zoiks.
You didn’t think you were an actual philosopher, did you? what with your little epiphany almost 19 years ago…
I know you’re not talking to me because I am not doing math.
9/22.
So why are you spouting nonsense.
Have you seriously forgotten your conversion, your being born again in Christ Jesus the Lord of Creation?…
Why are you assuming that?
I’m not assuming that, you’re making an ass out of me, so to say, with your (pretended) ignorance.
19 years ago, 9/22, your epiphanic conversion. Your doctrine, based on religious experience. Quod erat demonstrandum.
You’re using a very loaded version of Epiphany.
I have nothing to say at this time.
You seemed pretty loaded to me. 
1 Like