Was Nietzsche a panpsychic?

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

Re: Was Nietzsche a panpsychic?

Postby James S Saint » Wed Apr 16, 2014 11:06 am

You seriously can't go by what people say about people during that era who were involved in any political activity. Documents get faked, lies get told, lies get told about the lies, and it just becomes no more than rumor and childish gossip.

The writings that are attributed to him display someone under serious stress. No one at this point can count on any rumors concerning the cause. His sister supposedly changed some of his writings to be more anti-Jewish, but it is just as likely to be the other way around. You can't believe anything you hear and only half of what you directly see (unless it is on TV, then maybe 10%). Rewriting history has become the art of the age, shifting blame. Hitler was complaining about that same thing at the time.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Was Nietzsche a panpsychic?

Postby Arminius » Wed Apr 16, 2014 6:46 pm

lizbethrose wrote:But, of course, to accept that means a person would have to accept that languages started with sound rather than (flag) semaphores.

No.

Languages started with signs (cp. semiotic), the transition of semiotic signs to the first lingusitic signs was the beginning of the language in that sense we can use the word „language“ very generally. The sound started later. Sound is not necessary for language, but an advantage, as all human languages indicate. Primitive animals do not need any sound for their language, they use a very primitive language, a chemical language.

lizbethrose wrote:
Arminius wrote:What did Nietzsche's sister when, where, and why say?

....

Excuse me, but you did NOT answer my question. All what you said is known!

In addition: Whether Elisabeth Förster-Nietzsche was in Paraguay or not, whether she or her brother were antisemitic or not, and other whether ... or not ... - all that has nothing to do with my question.

lizbethrose wrote:Nietzsche studied and lectured on philology ....

That's all known.

So you can NOT answer my question.

Okay. It doesn't matter.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Was Nietzsche a panpsychic?

Postby lizbethrose » Thu Apr 17, 2014 8:16 am

Arminius,

Are you assuming I know something about Elisabeth Forster-Nietzsche no one else knows? How could that be?

As for unanswered questions, you haven't answered mine, either. As a matter of fact, we don't seem to even be on the same page! When I say language is sound, it's because, to me, that's how it began. I imagine a small group of hominids walking along when one turns to another and sees the second is about to be attacked from the rear. The first yells out a warning--possibly jumping up and down while yelling. Tone of voice and inflection are also a part of language--a part of communicating, which is the purpose of language, isn't it?

Karl Jaspers attempted a psychological study of Nietzsche using Nietzsche's letters to friends written in the months leading up to his collapse. There were no contemporary psychiatric records, even medical records were spotty. But could even a celebrated psychiatrist such as Jaspers reach any definitive conclusions based only on correspondence?

It's accepted that Nietzsche used drugs--including chloral hydrate and morphine. Could that have caused his bi-polarism--if he suffered from bi-polar disorder? I think it's safe to say that he was mad, which is not to say his madness detracted from his creativity. His madness may have heightened his creativity--or vice versa.

My questions hint at this when I ask, "Will Nietzsche's philosophy, assuming it can be defined, endure for 500 or more years? Will it have changed the way the world thinks in that time?"

Can you answer my questions?
"Be what you would seem to be - or, if you'd like it put more simply - never imagine yourself not to be otherwise than what it might appear to others that what you were or might have been was not otherwise than what you had been would have appeared to them to be otherwise."
— Lewis Carroll
lizbethrose
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3556
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2011 6:55 am
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: Was Nietzsche a panpsychic?

Postby Arminius » Thu Apr 17, 2014 8:14 pm

lizbethrose wrote:Are you assuming I know something about Elisabeth Forster-Nietzsche ...?

No.

lizbethrose wrote:As for unanswered questions, you haven't answered mine, either.

Which question you mean?

lizbethrose wrote:As a matter of fact, we don't seem to even be on the same page!

Which page you mean?

lizbethrose wrote:When I say language is sound, it's because, to me, that's how it began.

But it did NOT begin with sound, it began with soundless signs, with chemical signs (cp. my posts here and here and here).

One of my fields of study has been linguistics (degree: Magister) and language acquisition and language development - both are not the same (!) - was the theme of my diploma thesis. Sound is one of the high leveled kinds of language, thus it was NOT the beginnig kind of language.

lizbethrose wrote: I imagine a small group of hominids ....

Language (in general!) did NOT begin with hominids, but with primitive living beings!

If we want to talk about language seriously, we have to define the word "language" in order to prevent misunderstandings and unnecessary disputes. Language in general is very much more than human language, but human language is the greatest one. All the so called "progress" of human beings is based on the language of human beings. It's just the human language which led to the difference between the ancestors of the human beings and the human beings. That was the beginning of human language, the larynge sank which caused a very complex phonetic sound, the brain grew in an exponential degree. So one can say that the phonetical sound was important for human beings (=> their language development) and for their very young childs (=> their language acquisition) and also has been being important for very young childs (=> their language acquisition). But phonetical sound was NOT important for the general language, because in the beginning of general language there were only chemical signs - at that time there was NO possibility for any development of sound.

lizbethrose wrote:My questions hint at this when I ask, "Will Nietzsche's philosophy, assuming it can be defined, endure for 500 or more years? Will it have changed the way the world thinks in that time?"

Can you answer my questions?

Yes I can, Lisbeth.

Nietzsche's philosophy will perhaps endure for 500 or more years, but perhaps there will be NO human being then.
Assuming there will be some human beings at that time it probably will have changed.

Remember: Your questions refer to the future, so I can merely answer with probability.
Last edited by Arminius on Fri Apr 18, 2014 12:05 am, edited 3 times in total.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Was Nietzsche a panpsychic?

Postby Orbie » Thu Apr 17, 2014 8:40 pm

but semiotics does relate within the context of the debated panpsychism, and animal communication as exemplified by human attachment to animals, give further credence to this idea. So we are really not that far afield.
[size=50][/size]Allone's Obe issance



In answer to your prayer
sincere, the centre of
your circle here,
i stand ; and , without
taking thought,-
i know nothing. But i can

Full well your need-as
you be men
This: Re-Creation. With a
bow,
Then, your obedient

servant now.
One gift is all i find in me,
And that is faithful
memory
Orbie
partly cloudy, with a few showers
 
Posts: 7596
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:34 pm
Location: Night of infinite faith

Re: Was Nietzsche a panpsychic?

Postby Arminius » Fri Apr 18, 2014 3:19 pm

James S Saint wrote:Oh... I thought he was asking if Nietzsche was a "pan-psychotic"... :-? :oops:

Contra-Nietzsche wrote:A Pan-Psychotic Libertine of de Sade's tradition.

Wasn't what the op wanted, but it most certainly fits.

So Nietzsche was a panpsychotic, wasn't he?
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Was Nietzsche a panpsychic?

Postby lizbethrose » Sat Apr 19, 2014 10:18 am

Dear Arminius,

Yes, your answers can only be based on probability because that's how I phrased my main, but secondary, questions. My basic question is how much of the current interest in Nietzsche, as a philosopher, is the result of his basic philosophy (nihilism ? existentialism ? ), how much is due to the difficulty in understanding the man and his words, and how much is the Romanticising of his madness and ultimate death? What's most important, the man or his philosophy?

Any other discussion is tangential and superfluous to my main question(s).

:D
"Be what you would seem to be - or, if you'd like it put more simply - never imagine yourself not to be otherwise than what it might appear to others that what you were or might have been was not otherwise than what you had been would have appeared to them to be otherwise."
— Lewis Carroll
lizbethrose
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3556
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2011 6:55 am
Location: Pacific Northwest

Previous

Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot]