He has not lost his appeal, completely for ideally, only bi-fulcurated his image. ( the big question is: did he do it intentionally or not , or did He even realize that difference?)
Christ- Superman , from the vantage/advantage of gnosis
Now that is the question.
Why was he afraid of being understood?
A virus evolves when it comes in contact with autoimmune systems that attempt to eradicate it.
Integrating Nietzsche in the same dis-ease Christianity was but an offshoot of, would be an advancement…immune to that sort of attack.
Abrahanism is superior to eastern religion by it’s excelling past mere disassociation of superfluous elements. The basics of superior consciousness do have this minimal analytical possibility of realization. Where as mere dispossession of unnaccessery elements do not structurally simulate to the brain’s conformity.
Now to sensitive out there, the opposite view is also a possible commensurate linkige, with a spateial time difference that is not conceivable in immediate perception
Facts are not commensurate to ideals, there is no pride in an inverted antithesis, but unfortunately the ‘rubble’ need to develop it, as they must.and will .
There is an inverted , parading that is becoming the product of an assymetric 'overcoming"
But real nihilism is neutral and reverse synthetic.
Negating reality because it lacks what the mind fabricates as necessary for it to cope, is nihilism.
A defensive reaction which gradually develops into a school of thought using semiotics to fabricate concepts it then projects into the world to “correct” it.
These “corrective concepts” are impotent to change how the world is, but only serve as a method of collectivizing humans to created an inter-subjective alternate world where the concepts become potent as words referring to shared dogmas/ideologies.
Like all human superstitions they become “real” because they are believed to be real, affecting human behaviours as if they were real.
Negating nihilism is an affirmation of the world as it is, and not as we wish it were.
Right kind of like teviusing various precepts moving toward or away from a collective, never truly figuring functional utility, and what side of the playing field it lands on.
Eternal return is more than a romantic test of our amor fati, it is eternal life offered at a higher cost – where the pretence of choice is altogether eliminated, as are Hinduism’s karmic memories. What’s left is eternal incarceration with no hope of escape – to want to escape would indicate resentment towards your imprisonment. What is demanded is a stoic submission, and it is not up to us if we learn to endure and even come to love our fate.
Christian corruption of Zeus is switched with a corruption of his father, Kronos, who must consume us, time after time, and we must endure it, in the pit of his stomach, and even come to enjoy it, lovingly embracing it because we have no choice.
The diagnostician prescribes swallowing eternal forgetfulness as the only remedy.
Gone are Faustian open-ended spaces, and in their place we return to our enclosure, to carry out the judgement for our crime; infinite life sentences without a hope for parole.
Would it be unfair of me to say that much of Nietzsche’s perspective was as an alternate method of coping, replacing the one he had exposed as slavish?
A more masculine coping to usurp the feminine one he critiqued?
Because much of it sounds like psychological machinations:
“Eternal return” to replace an eternal life in paradise – implying a drive to live the ‘good life’ because it will be for an eternity. Not so different from the method used in Hinduism – only there memories, in the form of karma, is passed on from life to life, whereas in Nietzsche’s narrative it does not; bringing it closer to Abrahamism where sinfulness is punished for an eternity, in Nietzsche living a ‘bad life’ is punished with an eternity of reliving the same.
“Overman” is offered as a replacement for piety, and the communal ambition to transcend sinfulness – primordial sin being primal nature that must be transcended. Human baseness is overcome, i.e., transcended, through an idealized projection of an eternally imminent future man.
“Perspectivism” is offered to cope with man’s inherent limitations – perpetually existing in your own personal world, where reality is determined by your private, subjective desires compensating for a world governed by the will of god, minus intentionality; shifting responsibility and placing the power to create reality in the individual’s mind, which lacks the freedom to will other than what has been determined for it to will.
“Transvaluation” as a way of reaffirming and rewriting god’s commandments, substituting them with man’s laws – personal or communal rules for the new rulers.
“Will to Power" another way of saying will toward god; will towards divine omnipotence, omniscience, absoluteness. The authoritarian one-god of Abraham had to die for man to ascend towards maturity, ambitiously claiming the status of divinity for himself, without a hint of shame. But, with no free-will who wills power?
Nietzsche was a diagnostician writing out prescriptions, in the form of allegories, for the sickly by-products of his bitter pharmakon.
Is this not why recovering Abrahamics seem particularly attracted to his aphorisms – written in a literati style that reminds us of updated Oracle decrees and Biblical sermons from the mound – ironically the one Zarathustra, a Kartēr of Mazdayasna – came down from to discover that the masses were not yet ready for the transvaluation transition to be transmitted successfully?
A gifted linguist discovering in language the mode of transmitting a dominant disease. But, as I’ve noted, the transmission fails if the receiver has not been sufficiently updated and readied to receive the new software.
Replacing Abrahamism with another version requires linguistic priming, and this takes time and artistry.
Nietzsche has become a modern day bogeyman.
Most infantile minds can only associate certain ideas with him, because he popularized them and made them sexy, particularly among generations brought-up on a steady diet of milk-and-cookies.
His polemic against realism reminds me of the methods Christians use, because they too belong to that same camp, albeit they occupy the opposite pole. With them anything honest concerning their ‘psychological crutches’ must be shamed and degraded, using the imagery and symbolisms they used to manufacture their absolutist binaries. Who would reject a loving god, after all, but a demon, or a dæmon?
Nietzsche, being an eloquent conduit returning us back to the ancient-Greeks, and further still to the pre-Socratic philosophers, is the favoured personification of the ‘monster’ of ‘human cruelty’ among crowds of stunted intellects who, having been retained in a state of youthful innocence, have never developed the stomach for anything too spicy or harsh. What they can digest must be delivered to them with a silver spoon; puréed so they do not have to suffer indigestion.
A chosen proxy usually indicates and pinpoints the source of an individual’s anxiety. For example, if power is sought through a proxy, via god, Nietzsche, or some other icon/idol promising it, then power is the source of anxiety to be exploited and manipulated. The degree usually directs the approach. God, as absolute, omnipotence, indicates a severe anxiety concerning personal power; Nietzsche, with his allusion to Will to Power, indicates a lower grade anxiety identifying those remaining uncertain about their own agency.
Secular Saviour, or prophet of an upgraded Modern Messiah
For those born and raised in the western traditions Nietzsche has become a substitute saviour, i.e., a Jesus-figure, coming to earth to liberate them from their Abrahamic shame & guilt, replacing it with a proud surrender to universal order; a depersonalization of shame, through the abstraction of a Divine absolute – identified as ‘will’ – converting it from a figurehead, an idol, to an ideology; the powerless spirit – released from its more submissive label, i.e., sinful – found worldly salvation in its participation within the supreme Will to Power. Grateful true-believers could sacrifice their feeble, untrustworthy, personal will to a universal Will, without feeling ashamed of it; they could cleanse themselves of all responsibility, proud of their acceptance of the Universal Will’s decrees, renamed determinations, without an ego-shattering anthropomorphism embarrassing them.
Ever since Nietzsche philosophy has become a source of psychological interventionism, attempting to rid human psychology from linguistically carried psychosis, i.e., self-abnegating metaphors.
Nietzsche was to Nazism what Marx was to Communism, and Jesus was to Christianity, which would make Hitler, a Lenin, or a kind of Saul.
[size=50][ Doc: Nietzsche, Prophet of Nazism – The Cult of the Superman][/size]
What men resent is not only their fate but their own participation in its determination; their powerlessness to alter courses that impose upon them limits and undesired dilemmas. They resent their own inability to correctly judge and foresee the circumstances created by an-other’s judgements, choices, and actions, thwarting their already laid-out course towards a desired destination.
Unable to find satisfaction in accusing lifeless energies, and lacking the psychological fortitude to accept full responsibility for what they are but partly responsible, they choose to accuse other living beings, as a general abstract faceless category that can be given any countenance they find convenient. They unburden themselves by blaming an identifiable, if vague, otherness, half-heartedly accepting their fate {amor fati} so as to overcome their resentments – in love they find a fleeting balance between repulsion and attraction; a madness, helping them cope with what troubles them all the way to their grave.
In this way men can pretend to recover from resentiment, or cast themselves in the role of innocent victim of unimaginable omnipotent powers, justifying their futile resistance and inevitable submissions.
The noble master, of human psychology, prescribes this as the only remedy his genius could formulate. For, if the master did indeed reject choice, as an expression of free-will, then he contradicted himself by finding Christianity to accuse for what befell his father, and his German people.
A contradiction his followers repeated, being mindless in their worship of prophets and idols.
To be clear, if men have no will that can liberate itself from what imposes limits and rules upon it, then in what way did Christianity and Christians bear the burden of culpability for their own herd psychosis?
One is left to wonder if he truly believed what he wrote about the absence of free-will, expressing his resentment towards what he then believed had no choice but to be what it was and is, and his method of overcoming resentment in impotence failed to fully sway his spirit, urging us to posthumously compel him with respect, doctor heal thyself!!!