Nietzsche: a weakling

I’ll begin this with a very short explanation: Nietzsche’s philosophy is the result of his reaction to life’s evils on account of Schopenhauer’s logic convincing him utterly. Most of his books contain childish attacks on Schopenhauer, eager to prove his once beloved master an idiot ala “Schopenhauer’s unintelligent ranting at Hegel”.

He also was drummed into the head from fellow Schopenhaurian Wagner about the nihilism of life, and in turn attempts to belittle Wagner in books as well. Both men were the turning point in the weakling that was Friedrich, who collapsed from the strain of reality on his psyche (and no, I am not suggesting that was to do from his syphilis)

Why couldn’t Nietzsche point the finger at the real enemy? The world. Nothing could be more viler than saying “yes” to life, and anyone who reads Schopenhauer with a brain will realise that he is correct about unhappiness being unobtainable. What was the point? Like the vast majority of humanity, he hated life and knew he was nothing, but couldn’t just admit that and in turn, pit himself against the world that gave him nothing.

And Nietzscheans today are the worst kind of “decadents” that Nietzsche described. They use their hero as some kind of blanket for life, not as a spring to transform into the Ãœbermensch… like there could even be one!

An Ãœbermensch is the same as being a “last man” except convincing yourself that you are a god in your dreamworld. What difference is there? Nihilism is inevitable, there is no right way to live, only slavery from life’s infectious illusions and the realisation of death.

Let the arguing begin.

I would argue but I think that I agree with most of that.

Doesn’t matter, just thought I get it off my chest. Nietzsche is overrated.

Nice post and I’ve always thought that Nietzsche was overly submissive in regard to other people’s requests including his sister’s request to break relations off with Salome. Also Wagner requested Nietzsche to write something up bashing a critic (the critique of Wagner’s critic is rumored to have killed him(critic) shortly after reading it) of Wagner, to which he complied but later regretted which showed his need for approval. It seemed to me at least early on that he was controlled by others and their demands of him.
I do find it amusing that he joined a fraternity for a year and then left after he was considered to be too lonesome only to be bossed around by Wagner and the females in his life.

But who wouldn’t be enamored with a Wagner?

I think Nietzsche is ‘overrated’ because he’s met with youthful eyes and they tend to take Nietzsche’s word as some life anthem.

I think Nietzsche was bitter, lonely, yet madly curious.

Nietzsche is overrated simply for the fact Nietzsche doesn’t really say anything much…

That’s your interpretation. Having read several recent diagnoses and his letters from his final sane years - in which he describes his condition to friends and family -, I concur with the diagnosis of him having suffered from a brain tumor.

He understood that negating life - saying Nay to it - also means saying Nay to oneself and to one’s Nay - resulting in a Yea; whereas affirming life - saying Yea to it - also means saying Yea to oneself and to one’s Yea. So the result is always a Yea - whether one wants it or not. Compare the following:

“What does “underprivileged” mean? Above all, physiologically–no longer politically. The unhealthiest kind of man in Europe (in all classes) furnishes the soil for this nihilism: they will experience the belief in the eternal recurrence as a curse, struck by which one no longer shrinks from any action; not to be extinguished passively but to extinguish everything that is so aim- and meaningless, although this is a mere convulsion, a blind rage at the insight that everything has been for eternities–even this moment of nihilism and lust for destruction.
[Nietzsche, The Will to Power, section 55.]

Both “nay” and “no” literally mean “not ever”. So saying Nay or No is to say “not ever not ever”. One might say that it does not end here, that it means “not ever not ever not ever” etc., resulting in an infinite sequence of “not evers”; but if infinity were a number, it would be even - for it could be divided in two. So the result is always Yes, always “so be it for ever and ever”.

The Overman embodies this terrible character of existence. As you said to Satyr: “You are life!” … p?t=159069

As overrated as Nietzsche is, which I must agree, I still find his philosophy to be important.

Although, personally, I like Kierkegaard better. Not a religious man myself, but hey, Ayn Rand adored St. Thomas Aquinas.

Oh my eyes… they’re bleeding, bleeding I say!! :slight_smile:

Yes, Nietzscheans are closet nihilists. They cling to romanticism yet they know deep down its nothing. You don’t need an excuse to be an asshole. However I will still say, you don’t need magnificent results as long as you can wholly and completely gain ‘power’ consistently. That is Nietzschean, and it is heroic if you define heroism as embodying an ideal. You have to win though, and never ever lose.
Its not easy, its near impossible. But it is possible.

Actually it is impossible, for you. But it might be possible to ensure your child (son) is.

Both of them in the same sentence!!

I wrote about Nietzsche in another thread. What it comes down to is cognition. He is non-cognitive, which means his “superman” is really just a “superanimal”. He is brilliantly non-cognitive, the truest voice I know for the flesh, but in the beginning and the end he is not human and therefore absolutely no basis for human action.

Beauty, Truth, Goodness–notes one cannot play with a Nietzschean hammer!


Truly, he is not even an superanimal, just a super-denialist.

Sauwelious…you know I wasn’t talking about the end of his life. This is the Nietzsche embodied around the time of “Beyond Good and Evil”.

I don’t see how he collapsed around the time of BG&E.

Nieztsche is perhaps over-stated and over-quoted these days, so much so, that there was bound to be a reaction against him. He has become such a POPULAR philosopher, that he has always become, ANY philospher.

I think he is primarily, a philosopher of LANGUAGE; you’ll find more poetry and prose in his writing, than ice cold rationality or logic that is systematic over the course of a whole book.

Many people love Nietzsches writing, not because he didn’t say anything, but because has said SO MUCH! You can read his books, in translation, and sit for hours mulling over the particulars of his cosmic understanding. And I think this is part of the attraction to Nietzsche: his kaleidoscopic turning of all the angles of ideas and ideologies.

Nietzsche was no grand systemiser: he is a poet/philosopher more than anything. And a philosopher of language, more than many of the previous philosophers. Nieztsche is for a very few readers, great because: he revelled in complexity! He eshewed simplicity, he offered many alternatives within one idea: he offered a variety of CONCLUSIONS, but never made a SOLID CONCLUSION.

This kind of philosopher - is great because he allows an unyielding growth of ideas, from the seeds of his own thoughts! He is one of the most readable philosophers as far as I am considered, one of the most creative imaginations, a lover of polymorphous ideas, of ‘the extreme-counter-point’. He is the maverick philosopher…a trickster…a gift…a challenge!


And yes, he was quite weak, both physically and mentally! He was no weight lifter, haha! But, then his mind, could hand some lofty heights! I’m sure he could well be a weak snivelling runt of an emotionally volatile weirdo.

Sometimes from rank corners come the most unexpectedly beautiful smells!

Okay, we’ve successfully kicked his ass. Nietzsche is now our bitch. Now, what use is he to society? I don’t mean in a wishy washy clinical dissection of insanity way, or an even wishier and washier “share what Nietzsche means to you” way, I mean in the fact that this character delved too greedily and too deeply into the darkness within, and told us of what he found there. How can this be put to use in the service of salvaging Western Civilisation from its ongoing and accelerating collapse?


I didn’t imply he collapsed around that time, I’m implying around that time he “ran off” from reality.

Just the archtype of humanity’s denial of pessimism and nihilism.

Yeah I think Colinsign has it down to a “T” - Nietzsche is sort of a “gateway” drug to philosophy

  • I know he’s what got me into it - He says an awful lot and in the most seductive and beautiful fast moving prose.
    Like many thinkers its the over “fidelity” of some of his more ardent his “disciples” that can sometimes weary ones head…

Well thats the old ad hom in many ways - all of us have a range of human all too human foibles and no one let alone N-dawg himself could be faithful to the overman concept - maybe we occasionally reach (in out dreams, success, good orgasms!!) the sort of intermediate status of what he termed “higher man” in those spake Zara - anyhow it’s the stretching yourself for the goal - being the taut string in the drawn bow- thats important… there’s more to philosophy then Nietzsche but he was pretty damn fine!