Did philosophy peak with this man?

Did philosophy peak with this man?

Depends on what kind of philosophy you're referring to.

Retard philosophy, yes

Nietzsche bottomed it out.

Pop philosophy started with this man. I am willing to claim that this man literally looked into the future, saw a bunch of pseuds reading Alain de Botton and smirking at their own presumed intelligence, and decided to jump on that train decades before it started. Now that his time has come, his ""deep"" """""ideas""""" are lauded and protected, and those wanting to know if concepts like the "death of god" are to be taken in a literal, historical, fictional, or otherwise sense are told that they are merely misinterpreting Neechee & that he probably meant something extremely specific and groundbreaking that is too deep for the common man to understand. He must have meant something, otherwise we would not be talking about him so much

Every time I see an interpretation of Nietzsche, someone else says "you're interpreting it wrong". Does anyone actually know what he meant?

He meant that Christian morality is the best morality. Anyone who claims otherwise is simply misinterpreting the text.

i think some of what he's saying is fairly clear, but other topics there may be more room for misinterpretation

He wasn't even really a philosopher. More of an unstructured essayist and aphorist.

Nietzsche isn't actually that vague, he leaves a decent amount of room for interpretation especially in his later works where he's off his rocker but it's not as bad as you'd think from the internet. Online it's just massively exacerbated by the amount of people that haven't read Nietzsche dropping their hot takes gathered from other people who haven't read Nietzsche.

yep

this, nietzche was a christian

nietzsche and marx

>Behold, I Zarathustra am the prophet of the overman, he who will reject all values but those he creates for himself
>but first, here's a 350 page book of values that the overman should posses
he was a hack

lel fuck off, he spoke about knowledge, morality, politics occasionally, esthetics and metaphysics when he talks about free will. what more do you need for someone to be a philosopher

When Zarathustra had spoken these words, he paused, like one who had not said his last word; and long did he balance the staff doubtfully in his hand. At last he spake thus—and his voice had changed:
I now go alone, my disciples! Ye also now go away, and alone! So will I have it.
Verily, I advise you: depart from me, and guard yourselves against Zarathustra! And better still: be ashamed of him! Perhaps he hath deceived you.
The man of knowledge must be able not only to love his enemies, but also to hate his friends.
One requiteth a teacher badly if one remain merely a scholar. And why will ye not pluck at my wreath?
Ye venerate me; but what if your veneration should some day collapse? Take heed lest a statue crush you!
Ye say, ye believe in Zarathustra? But of what account is Zarathustra! Ye are my believers: but of what account are all believers!
Ye had not yet sought yourselves: then did ye find me. So do all believers; therefore all belief is of so little account.
Now do I bid you lose me and find yourselves; and only when ye have all denied me, will I return unto you.
Verily, with other eyes, my brethren, shall I then seek my lost ones; with another love shall I then love you.
And once again shall ye have become friends unto me, and children of one hope: then will I be with you for the third time, to celebrate the great noontide with you.
And it is the great noontide, when man is in the middle of his course between animal and Superman, and celebrateth his advance to the evening as his highest hope: for it is the advance to a new morning.
At such time will the down-goer bless himself, that he should be an over-goer; and the sun of his knowledge will be at noontide.
“DEAD ARE ALL THE GODS: NOW DO WE DESIRE THE SUPERMAN TO LIVE.”—Let this be our final will at the great noontide!—
Thus spake Zarathustra.

- Book 1, Ch. XXII

lmao

those were his values, which he created for himself in an effort to overcome HIMSELF

if you want to overcome youll most likely have some crossover with his values, no pressure though. Hes not threatening you for justification like some other value systems, hes telling you this is what joy looks like, and that needs no justification.

No but it did with this one

I have a question about that. I saw an article recently that said "White supremeacists love Nietzsche, but Nietzsche would hate white supremacists". Is that true?

He wasn't an individualist in the way you are presenting it, fag

No, Nietzsche was not a SJW. If he would pass negative judgements on their movements, it would be for nuanced reasons.

No but it did with this one

unironically this
nietzsche's whole work is a reductio ad absurdum of post-enlightenment materialistic atheism, only brainlets read him as a critic of classical philosophy

>if you don't like white supremacists, you're an sjw

He was advocating nihilism

decent pasta potential

...

Pretty much with this one.

That user was interpreting it wrong

>nietzsche caring about human existence
lul

Is the Kaufman translations the best

...

no it peaked with Alan Watts

there are many peaks on the moral landscape though

>Nietzsche would
It's depressing...

My thread gets purged but this piece of shit flourishes.

His brother David was always better

Philosophy started with that man.

I genuinely cannot which statement is more stupid, each one has achieved its own unique vanishing point or event horizon of retardation. It's like trying to figure out what is more tremendous, nothing or infinity, the alpha or the omega, such are the two extremes of human stupidity currently in maximum dissolution right here in this very thread.

being this wrong

I think baudrillard will widely be seen as the GOAT philosopher within ten years (which will feel like 100).

ITT: huuuuuuuuuurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrurrururrrrrrrrrrrrrriamthegreatesthuuuuuuuurrrrrrrrrrr|rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

>does anyone know what he meant
LITERALLY ABOUT WHAT? What is it with people wanting to summarise a lifetime of thought and communication with a fucking soundbyte that is small enough to cram into a Twitter post? Great thinkers liked to THINK, not provide a 40-character message that will act as the end of conversation.

This mix up is the fault of the left, though there are some ambiguous messages. For example, "god is dead" was a good, simple mantra for jewish leftists trying undermine white Christian society. Also, when you talk bring up Nietzsche and jews, the jews you're arguing with will mention "ressentiment." But Nietzsche actually referred to jews as the main group guilty of it. The understanding of Nietzsche has been tainted by the jewish left so people get confused.

Daily reminder that explaining away all issues with ((((((Jews))))))) is intellectual laziness of the highest calibre.

Quite the opposite, blattberg. Nietzsche had a very strong grasp of how jews were the root of the problem as well.

Op you need to read my diary desu