In my view human existence ceased to be existence, and therefore ceased to be good, with the advent of Socratic method. Before that, the deep truth of goodness and being being necessarily one - otherwise, neither would make sense as a concept - held in Greece.
Human existence only rarely amounts to a full existence, thriving, thus, to the good.
“Good” is itself “the good value” - if we take it analytically.
But that would lead to circular definitions, as all not self-valuing based logics do.
I would rather say value is necessarily cognate to health.
Not specifically this or that type of health. But there is no depth for me behind these concepts - rather, health and value are depths, the concepts are measures of depth.
Selfvaluing is not a teleological logic, so health is always only to the end of enjoying and increasing itself.
There is no truth in austerity - the world is excess, and only in health can this be consistent, Being. All the rest is simply debris.
Again, I dont hold a simplistic view of health. Health is most certainly not the absence of pain or discomfort, of struggle. Quite the contrary.
I cant agree there. Nietzsche is a subtle physician if there has been one.
But Nietzsche never takes survival as a signifier value, nor do I - we survive in order to value. N is explicit in referring the will to survive at all cost to slavemorality. But this is in fact precisely what slave-morality is defined as.
So there you have the basic distinction of different healths; what is healthy to the slave is a sickness to the real entity. From there on, it splits open like a rainbow - Maybe all his writing is about health and its different kinds.
I find in N the first philosopher since the Presocratics that actually addresses something at all. It is I who is responsible for making his wisdom into an exact formula. And my work so far already eclipses all the combined philosophy of the 20th century- or devours it rather, like sunlight swallows the moon.