Well Veeky Forums

Anglocucks have hated it literally for as long as Nietzsche wrote about it. Kaufmann tried rehabilitating the public perception of it but he only really made headway in the academic circles and even then it was fairly limited. It took me being taught by a literal off the boat German continental philosophy professor to finally begin understanding Nietzsche.

Isn't the point of the Overman to just act as the herald for the doctrine of overcoming and encouraging those of strong character to overcome their nature as men and move on to the next stage of human existence?
I may be confusing my reading of Steppenwolf right now with Nietzsche. I do have a hunger to return to him though halfway through Hesse's work.

Though if I read TSZ properly that seemed to be the point of it, especially with that part after the animals help him through his catatonic state, Zarathustra realized he couldn't just live innawoods and he had to exemplify the doctrine of the Overman, even if the masses wouldn't listen to him.

Also something about Eternal Recurrence in there

I would certainly hope not

...

No video will ever piss me off like the Crash Course Philosophy video that claimed Nietzsche embraced Nihilism.

>Nietzsche embraced Nihilism
???

The Overman is a natural occurrence, a fragile moment in history that happens briefly, like a Cesare Borgia. When Nietzsche says "the Overman is the meaning of the earth" he is making an observation, and yes, positing a goal — but not the goal that you could become the Overman yourself, or that there are many Overmen. Rather, it is an inescapable occurrence in nature, like a storm after much water has been collected in the sky, not just a concept that many can weave in and out of at a time, and the goal is to simply do what you can to usher in this event sooner. You cannot stop it, you can hardly slow it down, but you can service it. The number of readers who do not fit into one of the many fragmentations he identifies in TSZ are zero. So, work towards making yourself whole again, yes, but also do not expect to become the Overman, because you are already too far into your life and too fragmented to become that.

Dude, N love Goethe. He praised him often

Yes I know N was against any large sweeping religion which preached for people to all become equals in glory and greatness, a la Christianity and the doctrine of heaven, but I also do not necessarily agree with any reading in which the Overman is supposed to just be ignored as beyond hope of attaining. Not everyone, indeed most people, won't become the Overman because most people are simply that, people, humans, and the Overman is what will come in time to replace them (biologically, ethically, metaphysically, etc) but in our current time there do arise occasional Overmen who signal the dawning of the new age and by their very presence begin to draw the current population down the path towards the future world of the Overmen.

I'm drawing much of this from Eternal Recurrence in the sense that, as far as I read it, the point of it was that you cannot change your nature nor your past actions. Nor even your future actions. You are what your path has lead you to be and continues to lead you to be in this world. However it is important to no longer fight against yourself, to overcome the desire to fight your desires and rail against that which is in the world. That's at least how I take the section of TGS which deals with the demon whispering the idea of it in your head. That once you embrace the concept of the ER you've come to accept your path and love the decisions of your life because they are what make you you and continue to define you, that any desire to change what happened is an indication of a desire to change yourself, your character, and your being, and that only when you accept who you are can you be content with walking down that same path again and again without resentiment and overcoming the lesser reasoning and harmful doctrines of so-called "slave morality" and its reasoning.

youtube.com/watch?v=YaDvRdLMkHs
About 2:15 in

I disagree that Nietzsche wrote about the Overman as if to provide guidance on how to become him, that's all I'm saying. Which you seem to know. As you say, the Overman will come, and he is not something anyone can aspire to become, but an actual person who is destined to be the Overman since birth and who already knows this. We cannot change our natures and the Overman neither.

All Nietzsche does is hold up a mirror for the Overman to look into so that he can see himself a bit more clearly. He is not providing guidance in any way. The Overman is a near-worthless concept for everyone aside from the Overman himself and the most noble of soldiers who are seeking a purpose (which is to say, it is in fact the most valuable... but worthless to the masses, who are themselves the real worthless ones).

For other readers I would add that if you didn't already know your salt before reading Zarathustra, don't try to interpret the Overman as though it is the "true greater self" and that Nietzsche is outlining steps to become your own. It's like a kid putting on a cape trying to be Superman and then jumping off the roof of his house and injuring himself like a little idiot, or worse (a real concern at one time when the original Superman cartoon aired) — that goes for me, you, and anyone else who is not the Overman. Nietzsche is talking about someone who is out of our league. At best, what we can do is find a passage in Zarathustra that relates to our fragmented stations in life, beckon Nietzsche's advice to our particular group of people, and be the best in our weight class, because it is a collection of the best from many classes that together eventually nurture the Overman who is in a class above them all.

I apologize if I came off as interpreting N portraying the Overman as something to aspire to or as a benevolent teacher to others (although I would argue you could perhaps argue some sort of benign indifference on the part of the Overman with regards to the general populace). I do believe that N does separate what he thinks existence consists of for Man and Overman and offers different descriptions for what he considers a successful (consciously avoiding right or any sort of telos) way of living. I do believe that the lesson of the coming of the Overman does offer useful instruction to the general populace but is, as you say, largely inapplicable to them. However at parts where they intersect (in particular Eternal Recurrence, faith, etc) Man is to look towards the example of the Overman on how to approach such dilemmas.

That being said the Overman overcomes humanity by virtue of his own excellence. Man cannot become Overman, but man can overcome his nature. The assertion of Will to Power over one's desires and conquering them but avoiding the nihilistic drive of death-religions such as Buddhism or Christianity as N wrote seems to strongly indicate this view for Man's goal.

I would also like to say I hope I don't appear hostile or overly aggressive with my interpretation of N. It has been several years since I've read any of his works with any real degree of depth, so if I am very far off the mark in regards to my interpretations please tell me and I'll graciously take that L.