Is this true, Veeky Forums?

Spoken like a true sophon

He's not very psued friendly. I would say Camus is probably the most psued friendly philosopher.

>tfw you realise that Nietzsche was just an edgy and more insecure William James

camus isn't pseud friendly. camus WAS a pseud

is that the guy who wrote the stoner

This. Pseud here, Nietzsche is really hard to understand a lot of times, mainly because I barely know my greeks and because of shitty translations

He was a nihilist, you nerd. Nihilism doesn't mean whatever your dumbo poo-poo pee-pee head thinks it means.

"Whether man recovers from [nihilism], whether he becomes master of this crisis, is a question of his strength!"
-Friedrich Nietzsche

nietzsche pretty much thought nihilism was correct and he wanted us to cover our ears about it and follow his shitty brand of crypto-pragmatism

Nihilism refers to the state of pessimism that arises from the realization that life is without inherent intended meaning. Nietzsche's entire point was that that pessimism only signifies an incomplete departure from notions of inherent meaning, and that complete departure is what will set us free

wasn't he a total freak outcast who was basically blind and spent most of his life hunched over in his bed writing?

yes

sounds like nihilism to me

small brain: nietzsche was a nihilist
medium brain: nietzsche was NOT a nihilist he hated nihilism
big brain: nietzsche actually was a nihilist

Nietszche was a nihilist though. Just not a passive nihilist.

>those things are mutually exclusive

Yeah.

In the very first few pages of The Will to Power he defines nihilism and then argues against it

nietzsche was all about life affirmation in the face of pessimism

>inherent meaning
What the fuck is this supposed to mean? I'm not joking

>conflating existentialism and nihilism this hard

Go home pseuds.
Nihilism isn't the sad memes you see on Facebook.

>Nihilism isn't the sad memes you see on Facebook.
In fact, nihilism isn't anything at all.

he defined it wrong

>Nihilism isn't the sad memes you see on Facebook.
nietzsche is the 19th century equivalent of that plus a dash of pragmatism and "just b urself lol"

What's the right definition?

Snarky quips like that are the reason that most people shouldn't learn how to read. Even speech is too good for you.

in this sense? there are no values whatsoever

basically nietzsche but he wants you to act like you have values for some reason

if nietzsche wasnt good at prose everyone would think he was a total dumbfuck

>in this sense?
In general.
>there are no values whatsoever
What is a value?
>basically nietzsche but he wants you to act like you have values for some reason
Hmmmm

>What is a value
X is good
Y is bad
and so on

So, more often than not ypur claim is false and thefore true?

How is that a definition of anything?

its not a definition

its an illustration

Oh, well, I must not have been clear enough--when I said "in general" I meant that I wanted a definition that could apply to anything that is called 'value'

active nihilism is still nihilism, m8

That sounds like literally me except I'm not a genius philosopher

Woah...

I dont think such a definition is possible without being circular

value is a fundamental notion

Why would it be impossible to define that word?
>fundamental notion
This is even more complicated than 'value' and we haven't even figured out what that means yet, you're moving too fast

I accept that I may be a brainlet but I can't for the life of me understand what the fuck this reply is supposed to mean

If objective values do not exist and there are no general subjective notions of value held in common by all individuals, then nihilism is true, right?

You're missing a premise there
Maybe multiple premises

nihilism is the denial of all objective AND subjective values in themselves

Was he not an existentialist, or am I thinking of existentialism wrong? Where the individual finds their own meaning in life, as there's no higher power, and works toward that goal.

(early) existentialism is less about that and more about "wow FUKKK hegel"

So Nietzsche and Marx and Kierkegaarde? They were all young hegelians, though...

OK, I'm starting to understand now. But, wouldn't this mean that Nietzsche is not a nihilist because of his assertion that we create our own values hence claiming that values may exist and thus contradicting our supposing that he is indeed a nihilist?

>"wow FUKKK hegel"
What's wrong with Hegel?
What about modern existentialism, is it how I described?

not marx obviously

if i had to describe existentialism it would be a focus on the individual and a general, systematic skepticism towards teleology

marx obviously doesnt fall under that

FASCISM

You should read some Marx other than the Communist Manifesto, tbqh

you drew that after that thread yesterday didnt you

piss off, pepe

the thing is, even "create your own values bro" implies that values have objective value in themselves and therefore isnt a nihilist philosophy

its not clear what nietzsche thought though, i think hes trying to tackle things starting from more of a psychological perspective than a philosophical one. I think he, kind of subtextually, believes that nihilism is true and wants us to kind of "shield ourselves" from it

yes. people like us, we know that to nietzsche, nihilism is how each new overman (turning wheel) encounters society. like a blank slate, a white page. the overman is "nihilistic" from his inferiors' point of view because he does not accept their status quo, he creates something new instead. the overman does not see himself as nihilistic, he is life-affirming and he creates something new.

"nietzsche was/wasn't a nihilist" is entirely beside the point. the main point is the revaluation of all values.

The overcoming of the herd instinct is the overcoming of the herd.

My quick version.

Nietzsche didn't think life was meaningless, so how was he a nihilist?

No, the most familiar of us recognize him as Christian.
No, not at all. James was a weak subjectivist. Go back to your petersonshit threads.

>Christian
As in Christ, not the institutionalized form of him. Yes, he is close to him. He is more mature than Christ though, and consequently very Antichrist.

He didn't believe in objective morality which is exactly what moral nihilism is. Whenever Nietzsche uses the term nihilist he means life denying otherwise his claim that Christianity is nihilistic makes no sense.

philistine

Nietzsche was an active nihilist though.
The claim that he wasn't stems from his hate of what he terms passive nihilism, which he associates with "western buddhism" or denial of will and ego.

Better desu.

No one in this thread has yet been precise enough with their language to approach OP's question in any meaningful manner.

Why do people obsess over Nietzsche so much? He was a complete hack who never even managed to build a coherent philosophical system. He was spouting aphorisms which never amounted to anything and Zarathustra is full of contradictions

>Nietzsche
>a genius philosopher

'no'

because he has good banter, memorable quotes, and dismantled the hegemony of Christian morality.
He's also popular because his bitch sister whored out his works to whatever edgy political system wanted them

no it's the guy who composed hedwig's theme

>implying aporia is invalidated as a method even though the foundation of life is aporia

He understood that most philosophy was going to be outdated logic systems in a few decades, so he transcended it.

Nietzsche was an excellent prosaist, but he was a terrible philosopher, since he couldn't pin down a solid ethos or the epistemology of how he got there.

His personal view on life can be described as pic related.

dunno lol readings for nerds

That reality has an objective purpose. The people who fret over it not existing essentially wish they were in a video game/movie.

Nihilism and moral nihilism sound significantly different. A person could be a moral nihilist and simultaneously not a nihilist if I'm understanding this correctly.

>Zarathustra is full of contradictions
Name some and I'll put each one down.

Dude, Nietzsche w𝔞s fuckin' wicked, but some of you we𝔞k bet𝔞 nihilist cucks need to get out. I me𝔞n, he w𝔞s just 𝔞bout destroying feminists with peer-reviewed YouTube videos.

Absolutely true. He destroyed Foucault before he was even born.
youtube.com/watch?v=JNkh4pEQDLw

>He just tried to overcome it (and failed).

This.

Extrapolate the chart, maximum familiarity = Nietzsche failed and thus ushered in more nihilism

You don't understand logic at all of you think it's possible to be a moral nihilist while not being a nihilist.
Anyone who claims Nietzsche endorsed a form of nihilism should come forward with a source. Any day now. We're all waiting.

Active nihilism is a stupid meme that I've yet to see explained properly. From what I gather, it's when you don't see inherent meaning yet act as if there is, which no one ever seems to point out how contradictory that is.

yes that's basically nietzsche's idea

That's some shitty Anglo-Saxon interpretation of his idea that is divorcing logic from reality once again like those fags always seem to do.

The entire point of neetchee was his non systematic method since he has very valid criticisms of reason itself. A thinker doesn't have to have a system to have valid insights and it would be ridiculous to assert so. If you want to seriously engage with him I'd first engage with 20th century philosophers who took him as inspiration.

Its like how you're actually a faggot even though you tell yourself you aren't. Perfectly valid in reality.

Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster

the other alternative would be to cloud your mind with some sort of false meaning, which would impede the fullest application of the will and which Nietzsche fucking hated. The whole concept of the overman is someone who still lives despite accepting nihilism, as he will essentially be directly applying his will unmitigated by an interruptive system of meaning.

This is exactly what Anglo-Saxons do though. They divorce logic from reality and think absurd shit like "Nietzsche didn't see inherent value in the world even though he did!!! We shall call this contradictory phenomenon only our dumbasses can see ACTIVE nihilism!"

If you actually read Nietzsche and Will to Power you might grasp how your line of thinking is baffling tier stupidity. Anyone who goes on about the "plurality of Nietzsche" or "paradox of Nietzsche's thought" is failing to grasp it at its core, and interpreting it in a shitty Anglo-Saxon weaved duality that stems from divorcing your analysis of the world from the world.

I can't decide whether this is correct or not.

I have yet to see anyone explain how he isn't a nihilist, or how he "overcame" nihilism other than retards saying it like its an axiom. He devised a non-self destructive nihilism as the solution to the perceived problem, how is that not still nihilism?

>false meaning
But see, VALUE (which is what nihilism is concerned with) HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH TRUTH, therefore nihilism is not a function of truth AT ALL, and there is no "true vs. false meaning" or "true vs. false interpretation". There are just MANY INTERPRETATIONS, and some are no longer convincing once we have thought them through long enough, which makes some "truer" than others, but which is still a function of value and not truth!

READ MORE NIETZSCHE

If we create our own values, doesn't that imply that the previous values have no value? And doesn't that imply that our new values don't truly have value because future values will just replace them?

Then why do you see a self-assigned meaning contradictory, faggot?