Ohh and there it is. Society seems structured like a pyramid which is apropo to monotheism.
Is it only an accident?
Or is only fitting and apropo to our human design?
Oh my structuralism is tingling…
Settle down, Beavis.
Here (in his racism, which is about half of his philosophy) Nietzsche was simply Beavis - not the great Cornholio. He was not enough for himself - he did not write from within - but was determined by external factors - other people. Hence, his odium, his rejection.
In his love, his affirmation, he was the Great Cornholio - too much for himself. The bestowing virtue. Zarathustra in his prologue. The north wind to ripe figs. Cornholio-Nietzsche could even affirm the spirituality of the Jewsh-priest caste. He could see ascending life in everything.
That’s because a Christian “anti-Semite” (anti-Jew) is really a pot calling the kettle black.
Uniqor, are you the resident ILP Nietzsche specialist, and I forgot? My apologies.
With regards,
aspacia 
In this case, though, it is sufficient to see that both Jesus and Nietzsche were exaggerating. They went too far with their convictions, resulting in negation of these convictions. That, at least, was my point. There is no need to forge a fusion of the two - one can simply be moderate and take from both what is healthy, sane - and reject the other half.
I have never really thought through the fact that the Greeks were essential in the conception of Christianity. But of course they were.
—What Greek ethics do you see in Christianity?—
I’ve ‘learned’, so far, that Christianity was the antithesis to the classical world. But this brings back to mind the idea that Rome was an antithesis to Greece as well.
Rome has no Dionysos - The drunk Bacchus has nothing to do with the fluxgod - and there is a very distinct Dionysian quality to the effects of the Holy Ghost. But these aren’t the Greek ethics you talk of, I presume.
It remains amazing how many unfounded assertions you can make in a row.
My remark about Cornholio was a joke - nothing more. At most, it was autobiographical: I told Snadert I did not want to see him for fear of him turning me from a Cornholio into a Beavis.
Ah, the mindreader.
I missed the quote where Nietzsche calls for all Jews to be exterminated. Perhaps the Nietzschean quote master will come up with that one.
aspacia ma’m, I am flattered that you recall my humble existence from a couple of month ago. What it matters that you totally confused my name with somebody else’? 
I missed you among many others as well. By the way, I have just checked out the photo thread, to my disappointment, what I saw was only yet one more detrop. It’s just that I wish girls here would be that open. When therefore, are you going to post a photograph of yourself?
That was a joke.
I understand all that perfectly. And what I say is perfectly justified and founded on solid understanding of Nietzsche, Beavis and Cornholio.
You said earlier I had no sense of your childlikeness - I often think I have a better sense of it than you.
[edited]I often think I am more appreciative of it than you.
I reject your severe camel-thinking. I affirm your playful child thinking.
Sauwelios - it is amazing to me how you can think of what I wrote here as unfounded assertions. Please indicate which parts are unfounded. I will show you that you are wrong.
=D>
No, it’s not.
You are free to think that.
Yes, yes, you affirm the bright side and reject the dark side. How typical.
Oh come on man. I’ve posted like three pictures the whole time I’ve been at this godless forum. You just happened to show up when I posted the last.
And where the hell have you been, anyway? I (the only one) asked about you twice and nobody said a word.
Settle down Beavis. This suggests I was not settled down. That’s 1.
------I was talking to the hysterical Nietzsche, not you, I appreciate the evidence you gave of Nietzsche’s racism.
Here (in his racism, which is about half of his philosophy) Nietzsche was simply Beavis - not the great Cornholio. This sentence contains several. One, that racism is about half of his philosophy (half[? How have you counted that? I would say that it was essential to it) -
------In Zarathustra, race does not play a significant part, at best very marginal. It is not essential at all to his Highest works. You can no doubt assert otherwise, but prove it with sufficient quotes, not with your own very lax interpretation of what ‘racism’ encompasses.
that’s 2. Two, that Nietzsche was ever Beavis - that’s 3.
------That was your assertion. That you reject it now doesn’t make it mine.
Three, that he was ever the great Cornholio - that’s 4.
------Again, your assertion. So far; zero unfounded assertions on my part.
He was not enough for himself - he did not write from within - but was determined by external factors. This I will count as one - count yourself lucky!
-------He was not determined by external factors? You seem to have yet to understand the very first principle of Nietzschean philosophy - even the Birth of Tragedy begins with the explanation that the creation of the Olymos results from external factors.
--------other people. Hence, his odium, his rejection. That odium (as in “odi profanum vulgus et arceo”) is of the essence of his philosophy! It is essential to his conception of the Superman - as I have recently shown.
--------What you manage to ‘show’ is mostly a kind of rubicks magic - you twist and turn until you get the desired result. Yes, Aodium plays a big role in his writing - but only where it is present. The conception of the overman is born from the will to create, the love of the creative will, as Nietzsche says himself in Zarathustra. Odium isn’t mentioned.
And the distinction you make! Have you suddenly become a follower of Spinoza’s, like Dunamis? Nietzsche always wrote from within: he was a philosopher, i.e., one “whose soul is the world”.
-------I am follower of noone, and yes, I am interested in Spinoza. Nietzsche isn’t the only thinker worth taking notice of. Spinoza is helpful in understanding Nietzsche and vice versa.
In his love, his affirmation, he was the Great Cornholio - too much for himself. The great Cornholio is not too much for Beavis: he enjoys himself, he does not suffer from it.
---------Where did I say that he suffers? Too much joy for solitude, the joy must be shared. Still; zero unfounded assertions on my part, some very questionable turns of mind on yours.
The bestowing virtue. Zarathustra in his prologue. The north wind to ripe figs. Yes, squandering. But this has nothing to do with Cornholio. One may have too much, one may have overfulness, and this is then succeeded by torpor. It is not only the summit that one must affirm; it is also the lows - the Superman at his low point is not lower in value than the herd animal! Profound misunderstanding.
--------- Nowhere did I assert that. Nietzsche is not the superman, nor did I say that his lows were lower than the herd animal.
In his “emptiness”, Nietzsche wrote Beyond Good and Evil! The full moon may not be a sun, but it’s still brighter than the earth.
---------Both the Earth and the moon reflect sunlight. But the Earth generates some heat, whereas the moon does not. The Earth is brighter than the moon.
I was not speaking of emptiness, but of reaction to outward factors. Beyond good and evil is pure scepticism, if he was empty, he wrote from his emptiness. He did not primarily reflect the impurities of the people around him, as he did in his racist tirades, which are largely unfounded assertions. He is very sloppy in them - Japanese as blond beasts, for example.
He who hath ears, let him hear. Cornholio-Nietzsche could even affirm the spirituality of the Jewsh-priest caste. Yes, the cleverness of the fox (or serpent). Likewise, the Emperor Julian collaborated with the Jewish priests - against the Christians! The Jewish priestly caste at least represented relative nobility. But the real Jewish nobility had gone extinct - its warrior caste, the House of King David. The Jews, though not beheaded, had been castrated. Now the neutered body rebelled against the head - it wanted to behead itself, its organs wanted to become free…
---------I was referring to the passage where he speaks of the spirituality that Jews must possess as a result of the cultivation of religion. You’ll know where to find it, you quoted it on the Nietzscheforum.
He could see ascending life in everything.Indeed, he even beheld affirmation in the attained human herd animal - relatively ascending life. For the relativist, everything is relatively positive (“by the very fact that they are” - Dionysius Areopagitus). This position is called Pantheism. Even the chandala is part of this perfection.
--------Zero unfounded assertions on my part, too much to count on yours.
Your darkness is a foggy shade to me.
“Hysterical”… You have become a Dunamite!
His “Highest” works… Is the Genealogy not one of his highest works?
Is racism not simply the notion that there is such a thing as race?
Yes, it does, because it was never my assertion, but has always been a joke. You first made it into an assertion by taking it seriously.
See above.
When is one ever not determined by “external” factors?
Nonsense; those quotes do not leave room for doubt. And I’m getting enough of your disrespectful metaphors.
Here we go again.
“Did my loathing itself create for me wings and fountain-divining powers? Verily, to the loftiest height had I to fly, to find again the well of delight!”
[TSZ, Of the Rabble.]
See also my conclusive reply to ChimneySweep’s Nietzsche: Image over Substance thread (third post, my first reply) - especially this passage:
“Zarathustra leaves no doubt at this point: he says that it was his insight precisely into the good, the “best,” that made him shudder at man in general; that it was from this aversion that he grew wings “to soar off into distant futures[.]””
[Ecce Homo, Why I Am a Destiny, section 5.]
Granted.
So then, he suffers from the overfulness of his joy. Beavis does not.
Yes, yes. Point them out, please. Give some ground for your assertions.
Well, then I must have got that idea from nowhere!
I was talking from the perspective of one who dwells on earth.
There the term “blond beast” has become a metaphor.
I am not so sure you have rendered it right here - in any case, I can’t recall the passage in question. But then that is probably due to my memory, which - in contradistinction to some, it has been implied - is selective…
Thus spake Asserthustra.
Stand back. Watch how it explodes.
I have been doing Heidegger, I hesitate to say this, because I am not sure if I really did him or just thought I did.
Initially I thought what a wasit of time Heidegger was, that was when I missed ILP the most. But the more I read into him, the more I realised that my conceptiion or perspectival was simply not powerful enough for Heidegger’s rants. Deleuze, I think, remarked that Heidegger’s lectures on Nietzsche had been underrated. I agree and I would highly reconmmand them. I also developed a connection with Heidegger on the pure basis of his communication style: to me Heideggerian prose comes naturally; the phenomenological and hermeneutical approach struck me as perspectival-enpowering in a familar way. But I see many rough waters ahead, including that I may have to chew German and Greek thoroughly.
James, would you recommand Australia for my intension to convert from Economics to Philosophy as an MA course? My intension will be taken seriously if I shall be proven as a non investment banker nor cooperate solicitor material - which will be likely. But who can resist a £35.000 starting salary for working in the City? I suppose Schumann did. Brahms’ graduation sonata ends in a way that demonstrated his determination and commitment in leading a future life that is devoid of limelight. Perhaps too heroic and lofty for me.
Yo detrop, as far as I can see, you’ve got what it takes to make a helluva fortune in Wall Street or in the law court. In sales and marketing as well.
Topsey turvy world this is… Yo Dunamis, whad hell do you dive in the caves for? Shouldn’t you be gunning down Rorty already?