Nietzsche's Higher Man

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

Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Sun May 17, 2020 10:28 pm



The question is then: how far along are we?
What is possible in this time?

What are the limits that still exist, what moralities does the world de facto still impose on the growth of a high man and stunt it, ---
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Before the Light forum - The Magical Tree of Life Academy - The Huuluguns
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10166
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Tue May 19, 2020 6:44 pm

We are on our way.

Under my leadership, philosophy has become warlike. It is in the process of forming an army, and this army can not be stopped. It is the nature of the Sun on Earth.

In order to advance beyond where I have led us so far, I have, today, also in honour of restoring contact with an old ally, erected the proper Temple to the order of the Sun on Earth.
I will not reveal its name here, those who belong to this emerging army of philosophy will find it out on their way soon, or already have.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Before the Light forum - The Magical Tree of Life Academy - The Huuluguns
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10166
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Wed May 20, 2020 10:08 pm

"All that matters is the quantum of power that one is. All else is cowardice."

If you ask me what I mean with "value", it is this; the quantum.
A quantum is a value.
A quantum of power is a valuing.

Any valuing that can be recognized as a value is a self-valuing.
A quantum which discharges into oblivion is "merely" a valuing; it does not discharge into an absolute void, as long as it isn't met with something it perpetuates, like a photon, which values itself in terms only of its frequency, as Quetzalcoatl (the poster) once pointed out; it has no consistency other than that it has potency ("I am that I am"). It has no nature, no particularity. Therefore it is the substance of an abstract mathematics.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Before the Light forum - The Magical Tree of Life Academy - The Huuluguns
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10166
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Meno_ » Wed May 20, 2020 10:23 pm

Agreed. It is a meta-mathematics consisting of the most reduced forms cogency, as is that which pre-figured it in geometry, with the most basic figure is that of the triangle.


'theoretical physics, quantum geometry is the set of mathematical concepts generalizing the concepts of geometry whose understanding is necessary to describe the physical phenomena at distance scales comparable to the Planck length. At these distances, quantum mechanics has a profound effect on physical phenomena.'

Quantum geometry -
Meno_
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6448
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Fri May 22, 2020 12:47 am

Metaphysically, the monad reflecting on itself brings forth the triad.
What is the Dyad doing?
It is merely a function within the triad. The triad has three dyads, which are its tensions, its contradictions.

When all of physics is resolved, it will appear as three contradictions standing in equal-angled contradistinction.

In the center of the triad thus appears the all-seeing eye.
The triad is all, the eye is one.

We are created in His image - as perspectives.
What we see is alway three.
But we are taught to look for the two's inside the threes without even noticing the pattern they make out!
We are so easily fooled because the tension in a two is enormous, all-like.
But its meaning is to he had in concert with other tensions. This is dance, the whirling helix rebirthing the phoenix, still reflection is engine of the storm. God of bad weather, one eyed god, teaches the three-times-three: I see what you see!
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Before the Light forum - The Magical Tree of Life Academy - The Huuluguns
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10166
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Fri May 22, 2020 1:19 am

what a bunch of crap...….

reread Nietzsche... what exactly does his "Ubermensch" mean?

it doesn't mean superman.... Uber in German can have several different
meanings....."over" "above" "across".. but what does N. say?

his idea was not a superman... but his was "overcoming man"...
his idea was that the Ubermensch was someone who overcome
their values.....Goethe was an Ubermensch, not as a superman,
but as someone who was more human then other humans.....

the idea about a human being and their "revaluation" of values is
what makes them a Ubermensch…they overcame and became who they were.....

it is an internal struggle that makes them the Ubermensch, not some outward
superiority over other human beings.....the struggle is to become something
more then animals.. most people, to Nietzsche anyway, were animals.....
but those who overcame, they were the true human beings because they
reached what is possible for human beings.....

it is the internal struggle, within ourselves,
that is what makes us a "Ubermensch", not any supposed
superiority...…

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7835
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby surreptitious75 » Fri May 22, 2020 3:46 am

Ubermensch was superman as in overcoming ones nature not being superior to other men
An internal mechanism for becoming the best you can be not being the best race there is

For Nietzsche it was on an individual level where any one could overcome their demons
So nothing whatsoever to do with creating the Aryan master race that Hitler believed in

In Islam the same concept is known as jihad but that also is one subject to misinterpretation
It is about overcoming the struggle within oneself not fighting a holy war against non Muslims

Everyone in their own individual way is striving to be an ubermensch or overcome jihad
So you do not have to be a Nietzschean or a Muslim because this is the human condition

Plato said for a man to conquer himself is the first and noblest of all victories
Buddha said one who conquers himself is indeed the greatest of conquerors
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1377
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Fri May 22, 2020 2:15 pm

Peter Kropotkin wrote:what a bunch of crap...….

reread Nietzsche... what exactly does his "Ubermensch" mean?

it doesn't mean superman.... Uber in German can have several different
meanings....."over" "above" "across".. but what does N. say?

his idea was not a superman... but his was "overcoming man"...
his idea was that the Ubermensch was someone who overcome
their values.....Goethe was an Ubermensch, not as a superman,
but as someone who was more human then other humans.....

the idea about a human being and their "revaluation" of values is
what makes them a Ubermensch…they overcame and became who they were.....

it is an internal struggle that makes them the Ubermensch, not some outward
superiority over other human beings.....the struggle is to become something
more then animals.. most people, to Nietzsche anyway, were animals.....
but those who overcame, they were the true human beings because they
reached what is possible for human beings.....

it is the internal struggle, within ourselves,
that is what makes us a "Ubermensch", not any supposed
superiority...…

Kropotkin


I suggest you read Nietzsche's books, not books or texts about him by other authors.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Before the Light forum - The Magical Tree of Life Academy - The Huuluguns
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10166
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Fri May 22, 2020 2:15 pm

surreptitious75 wrote:Ubermensch was superman as in overcoming ones nature not being superior to other men
An internal mechanism for becoming the best you can be not being the best race there is

For Nietzsche it was on an individual level where any one could overcome their demons
So nothing whatsoever to do with creating the Aryan master race that Hitler believed in

In Islam the same concept is known as jihad but that also is one subject to misinterpretation
It is about overcoming the struggle within oneself not fighting a holy war against non Muslims

Everyone in their own individual way is striving to be an ubermensch or overcome jihad
So you do not have to be a Nietzschean or a Muslim because this is the human condition

Plato said for a man to conquer himself is the first and noblest of all victories
Buddha said one who conquers himself is indeed the greatest of conquerors

To you too, I recommend reading the actual texts written by Nietzsche.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Before the Light forum - The Magical Tree of Life Academy - The Huuluguns
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10166
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Sat May 23, 2020 11:43 pm

On slaves:

Thrasymachus wrote:I am wondering if we need to create a new category, for things/entities/beings that exist only because they are valued by something other than themselves.

Could it be the case that something could exist and persist merely and only because another thing values it, and by valuing it so intensely or consistently basically gives existence to it? Or would this 'something' still need to actively self-value?


Yes, I think there is a lot that operates like this - it selfvalues passively. It absorbs enough that it can continue its function, but it has no power to influence its environment, except to die or malfunction. From malfunction some new active selfvaluings could occur, as chaos allows for both types. And I would say the active type requires chaos to emerge. Dancing stars.

Or perhaps we might say that the fact that this 'something' has another thing that values it so intensely-consistently, and therefore gives existence to it,


Yes = but this would be an active selfvaluing. Value-creating, meaning allowing for coherence and 'the universe' - such value-creations must always involve other selfvaluing particles. It is inadvertently interaction, any creation Nietzsches conception of master morality is what Ive takento mean active self-valuing, value creating.

A table is such a value creation.
It is also a passive self-valuing. It allows people to use it in its capacity more than in another capacity, thus it values its users in its terms. But it exists not because users are ofv alue to it, but because it has use-value.

is precisely the fact of the 'something's' own self-valuing already, namely that it values itself solely in terms of the fact that something else values it. Namely, that it self-values precisely, primarily and perhaps even only in the way that it has managed to get something else to value it so intensely-consistently.

Does this make sense?


Yes, exactly, Interestingly, this relates to Darwins peacocks tail paradox, where reproduction evidently involves a making-passive-to, anexpense of energy in order to be valued - as an object, essentially.

We can already create two basic categories, more or less: simple and complex self-valuings. Obviously not a perfect categorization, but I would say something like a rock is a simple self-valuing, whereas something like a human is a complex self-valuing.


I would disagree to that - simplicity and integrity relate stronger than simplicity and weakness - a rock is not essentially a selfvaluing, as it can break into two and is then two rocks - nothing has changed. A human or a atom can not break into two anwithout release of gigantic turmoil and remain structurally the same  despite having split mass. In that sense a worm is not really a self valuing.

Lets use strong and weak integrity. We can categorize at least 3 levels of this and remain exact and precise.

Of course there are plenty more categories, and ways to parse them. And of course it can be argued that even rocks are fairly complex. But admitting that in a vague sense such categories do exist basically, we might try to find a necessary logical differentiation between them; namely, this one self-values like this, and another self-values like that.

Or is all self-valuing universally the same? Indeed by the very meaning of self-valuing, it is the case that all self-valuing is universally the same, namely is (a) self-valuing. Self is understood in terms of self-valuing, value is understood as self-valuing.  Two sides of one coin.


The logic becomes more apparent when you reverse it: what is not entirely selfvaluing does not entirely exist.

Gold is perfect self valuing.
Its history of creation points to why that is. It has taken the maximal process that this universe has to offer, and is elite-outcome of that.

There are many levels of structural integrity systems, gold is the atomic level.
Humans tried to transform their consciousness to gold for ages. Religions are their posthumous dreams.

Sauwelios said that will = power. Perhaps we might say that self = valuing? I am not too comfortable with these equations.


It is quite accurate in as far as there is a self-
selfvaluing is not itself a self that values, it is the valuing that is so consistent and 'lucky' that it refers back to itself.
A self would definitely relate most to itself through its valuing.
I do not see an atom as having a self - it is a self-valuing, it has some inner mechanism that we may compare to a self, but a self is a quite human and strange concept- is it the life, the moment, the experience, the actions, the values? Whatever it is, when it is active, and noticeable, thus [font=Courier New]when we can say that it exists[/font]
[onto-epistemic entity], it is in the process of strongly valuing. It 'appears out of nothing', it becomes 'part of the equation' when it is stirred to value. Ultimately it overcomes its 'self' which is a static image and becomes - power. Dionysos or rogue variable. Its actions cause the truth that its inner image represented and willed. (Only it looks different from the outside, like an animal)

Basic certainty: self-valuing is a "metaphysical" (logical) postulate and principle that holds for anything and everything, necessarily, since it has already been defined/determined that if it did not hold for something then that something could not be.


The degrees of integrity determine the structures of the interactions: the golden rule - he who has the gold, rules - or simply, gold rules --
that is the most simple form of understanding how selfvaluing integrity reverberates rankingly throughout the entire tectonic cosmos. It is integirty that binds paradigms - all lack of integrity is stuck in and  suspended between paradigms, all great integrity has several paradigms revolving around it, trying to synthesize themselves to each other in the central stars terms and thus explicating it into a general selfvaluing paradigm.

difference in:
1/ integrity
2/ content
3/ size

1: principle of logic, valuing-recurrence, consistency.
2: value, quality
3: significance, quantity.

This approaches a truth-standard, but is not synonymous with truth itself, at least not in how I understand the meaning of truth. And yet this one truth is indeed certainly the case. Yes-- I see now that in answer to my first question here, if a thing existed that did not self-value but were valued highly by something else, this might theoretically-speaking grant existence to that thing, but in a practical or real sense it is not possible for this situation to arise, quite simply because there is no way that something could exist already in order to become valued like that by something else, nor could a self-valuing create something else that has no self-valuing of its own in order to then value-add it back to itself, attaching it to own value-sphere.


This is indeed how much of the universe would have come into being. Much that is not merely atomic, and much that is in weaker atoms as well. In the human realm, perhaps almost all content, cultural identity has come about this way. This is what Ive meant when I said that when I looked outside of my window in Amsterdam and saw people passing by, I had the distinct impression that they were not in the process of existing, but being-existed. In Montreal most people appear to have the innocence of existence about them- meaning men are more animal than cultural, and thus mostly withdrawn.

It is a big challenge for something as vulnerable as a living organism to be a pure self-valuing - and yet precisely because of this vulnerability, it is also highly necessary.
The problem of the Greeks.

And even furthermore, it would not be possible for a self-valuing to value something else that, itself, had no self-valuing to speak of. This is indeed a matter of taste, and also of necessary ontology.


No, every thing that is valued must have the basics of self-valuing, it must be able to respond consistently, exist.
So what accounts for weakness and strength of integrity is whether the entity forces its valuer to value it as a whole, or for its parts.... !

Ill be damned
that's formula
We're trying to look at the parts - but the whole observed paradigms structural integrity dissolves before us because of it.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Before the Light forum - The Magical Tree of Life Academy - The Huuluguns
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10166
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby surreptitious75 » Sun May 24, 2020 2:40 am

I would say that everything in Nature that exists either has self value or is valued by something else because nothing in it is ever really wasted
And so Nature is therefore the ultimate valuer not only because of everything within it but also everything artificial that comes from it as well

A thing will not know it has any value if it is non organic but it will still be useful to some thing else for whatever reason
Oxygen for example is just an element but it is absolutely necessary for our existence though it has no awareness of this

Would self value in Nature cease to be with the death of the Universe ? Not if a new Universe came into existence after the old one died
For absolute nothing cannot exist then logically there must always be something and that something will serve some function or purpose
Even if that function or purpose is not actually known or understood simply because there is an explanation for all phenomena in Nature

The human being may want to claim that they represent the absolute peak of self valuing but all value ultimately comes from Nature
For it had value long before the human being ever existed and will carry on having value long after the human being no longer exists
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1377
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Sun May 24, 2020 2:47 pm

surreptitious75 wrote:I would say that everything in Nature that exists either has self value or is valued by something else because nothing in it is ever really wasted
And so Nature is therefore the ultimate valuer not only because of everything within it but also everything artificial that comes from it as well

Well said.

A thing will not know it has any value if it is non organic but it will still be useful to some thing else for whatever reason
Oxygen for example is just an element but it is absolutely necessary for our existence though it has no awareness of this

It has no awareness as we know it and yet it has a response system.
I consider all responses a form of valuing, as there are no universal responses, only responses particular to the thing which responds.
A response can be called a valuing because it is particular, a "choice" though one of those choices we are forced to make.

Would self value in Nature cease to be with the death of the Universe ? Not if a new Universe came into existence after the old one died
For absolute nothing cannot exist then logically there must always be something and that something will serve some function or purpose
Even if that function or purpose is not actually known or understood simply because there is an explanation for all phenomena in Nature

Yes, thats right.

The human being may want to claim that they represent the absolute peak of self valuing but all value ultimately comes from Nature
For it had value long before the human being ever existed and will carry on having value long after the human being no longer exists

Hence, why Nietzsche posits the Uebermensch, the beyond-man. The idea that man is the summit of existence was absurd to him.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Before the Light forum - The Magical Tree of Life Academy - The Huuluguns
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10166
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby surreptitious75 » Sun May 24, 2020 3:58 pm

Also the value system for human beings is basically two fold as there are things such as oxygen and water and food and heat which are essential for our survival
But there are other things too such as technology or literature or sport for example which may be less essential but nevertheless improve the quality of our life
Yet if these things were actually absent we would not be living but just existing so on a psychological or philosophical level they are arguably just as necessary
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1377
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Sun May 24, 2020 5:02 pm

Indeed.

Maslovs pyramid is refuted by the fact that people sacrifice their comfort and even lives for some higher, so called "unnecessary" values such as love and certain political rulerships, ideals, etc.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Before the Light forum - The Magical Tree of Life Academy - The Huuluguns
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10166
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Sun May 24, 2020 5:11 pm

fixed cross, two things, first of all, I have read Nietzsche,
virtually all of his writings....and as part of my going from
past to present study of philosophy, I shall be reviewing his
works.. I won't even need to buy his books as I already have them.....

second, you suffer from a common disease, thinking that
YOUR interpretation is the ONLY interpretation possible.....

that is part of the greatness of Nietzsche, you can create
several interpretations of his writings and different people
do come away with their own Nietzsche.... based upon
their own thinking about the world...…..
100 people can come up with 110 different interpretations of Nietzsche

I submit you are wrong based on MY interpretation of Nietzsche
and you submit I am wrong based upon YOUR interpretation
of Nietzsche....

and who is right? we both are.... and we are both wrong.....

depending upon how we grade this thing...…

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7835
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Sun May 24, 2020 5:18 pm

Peter Kropotkin wrote:second, you suffer from a common disease, thinking that
YOUR interpretation is the ONLY interpretation possible.....

Look in the mirror Peter.
I made a thread about my own personal view. You came in here unilaterally denouncing it without giving any reasons or arguments. You were very impolite and crude, and not referring to Nietzsche to back your position. It seemed like you were jus giving your personal opinion as if it is Nietzsche's position, and being very angry that I do not share your opinion. But I have read Nietzsche very extensively, and have focussed on this particular problem for 20 years, and never deviated from Nietzsche's writing.

that is part of the greatness of Nietzsche, you can create
several interpretations of his writings and different people
do come away with their own Nietzsche.... based upon
their own thinking about the world...…..
100 people can come up with 110 different interpretations of Nietzsche

But there is such a thing as what Nietzsche did write, and then there is what he didn't write.
I prefer to take what Nietzsche writes to be what he meant to say.

I submit you are wrong based on MY interpretation of Nietzsche
and you submit I am wrong based upon YOUR interpretation
of Nietzsche....

and who is right? we both are.... and we are both wrong.....

depending upon how we grade this thing...…

Kropotkin

The point is, how does Nietzsche's philosophy help overcome those all too human weaknesses, that disgrace the Earth and nature?
Right and wrong isn't where the argument ends.

Work is the issue. Does your interpretation work? Does it help people? Does it invigorate life?
If so, you are justified.

My work is always for the Earth, animals, and for those humans that long to live natural lives. This work makes me many enemies, I am not often appreciated, as most people do not like nature. But when I am appreciated, I am able to cure many mental as well as physical diseases and improve conditions of life greatly. Ive done this quite a lot now. I know why I am in this line of philosophical work; love. I have to deal with a great deal of hatred, as a result. People are not very advanced beings at this point. And that is precisely the meaning of the Uebermensch.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Before the Light forum - The Magical Tree of Life Academy - The Huuluguns
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10166
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Sun May 24, 2020 6:26 pm

Let us grab this bunny by the ears.

ZV.jpg
ZV.jpg (177.27 KiB) Viewed 567 times


The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Before the Light forum - The Magical Tree of Life Academy - The Huuluguns
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10166
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby promethean75 » Sun May 24, 2020 11:53 pm

promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2734
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby iambiguous » Mon May 25, 2020 12:23 am

promethean75 wrote:https://streamable.com/oe4y7i


What he said. Only intelligible. 8)
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 35750
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Mon May 25, 2020 6:09 pm

Well, yes, and no. I do think there is probably some significance in the detail.

Onward! Premieres soon.
(Ill never get the views Zoot gets :cry: but hey. )

The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Before the Light forum - The Magical Tree of Life Academy - The Huuluguns
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10166
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Tue May 26, 2020 4:19 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hi-Fy_zQD7Q
Reading Zarathustra part 3




(edit: Endlich aber verwandelte sich sein Herz means: But finally his heart changed. (Not, his heart moved))
Last edited by Fixed Cross on Tue May 26, 2020 4:31 pm, edited 2 times in total.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Before the Light forum - The Magical Tree of Life Academy - The Huuluguns
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10166
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Tue May 26, 2020 4:30 pm



this is a nice feminine reading.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Before the Light forum - The Magical Tree of Life Academy - The Huuluguns
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10166
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Tue May 26, 2020 5:20 pm



This excellent scholar provides a very succinct illustration of Aristotle's completely useless mind.


His three categories of good:

Pleasure, political life, and contemplation.



First of all, there can be an infinite amount of categorizations like this.
Such categories are the ruin of thought. They caused European thought to be entirely fruitless for a millennium and change.

The categories furthermore, as categories of Being always do, overlap.

Is political life not pleasurable? Is contemplation not pleasurable? Doesn't contemplation aid in political life? As well as: doesn't political life interfere with contemplation? Doesn't pleasure interfere with contemplation?
Etcetera etcetera,

Further, who can honestly believe that political life ennobles by definition?
Aristotle seems to have believed it. I actually sincerely doubt that he really thought this; and this is perhaps what some people consider "esoteric" - to lie, to mean something other than what one says.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Before the Light forum - The Magical Tree of Life Academy - The Huuluguns
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10166
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Thu May 28, 2020 11:32 pm

Beings are self-valuings, and Being is beings -

this is what we know.

What we infer directly from experience on the other hand, i.e. consciousness, tells us that there is a One, namely our own Being, which is all and radiates forth from its own inevitable existence, because there can not be non-existence.

This was never in dispute.
The question that existed was: from what do beings draw their Being, while being not One but Many?

a technical question. with a technical answer.
the pure radiance of being is not a technical Logick, but an inspiration. One may call it will to power but more accurately, vigor. Will to power is also a technical term, though not quite a method.
Inspiration must come well before method. WtP is a self- transforming inspiration, with a method as its final form.

I know that Logic is not the first form of the WtP, and thus not the only form. It is the form in which one can analyze and produce, it is the scientific formula.
The inspiration of breaking-forth is far more ancient than Amen, and very holy of course - and I understand the attempt to ontologize it. But such attempts must fail; it can only be demonstrated.

Such as in, the development of a full function Logos hewn out of the brilliance of "will to power".
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Before the Light forum - The Magical Tree of Life Academy - The Huuluguns
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10166
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Thu May 28, 2020 11:36 pm

In as far as consciousness is a reflection or circumference to being, its stands in a sense as its opposite.

From this fact philosophers have drawn the idea that consciousness is negative existence. This is a fertile idea, and proves accurate at least in the allegorical and practical sense of things always happening their own way and not as planned, often the plans obscure the way things really work, -- the Ego, as the construct of negative existence.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Before the Light forum - The Magical Tree of Life Academy - The Huuluguns
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10166
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Next

Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot]