Uhmm like not doing whatever the fuck you want is life denial because I say so

>Uhmm like not doing whatever the fuck you want is life denial because I say so
>Like Socrates created Nihilism because he asked for reasoning rather than pulling stuff out of your ass.That sounds about right
>Like uhmmm how about like you should just be yourself.Yeah that's right
>There is like uhmm no objective truth so just do your morality and stuff.That will do it
>Like science is stupid because you have to work methodically.It is not as cool as my friend Wagner LARPing as a viking because it doesn't transmit me those marvelous feels
>Like if I use Greek mythology to say something I sound cooler.Right guys?
>Like life is a cycle because like yeah and as such you have to live your life

Is this a new meme?

realizing that Neetchee is a meme that we all fell for

>But like first you definitely have to clean your room (bucko)

>we
fuck off

>like uhm if i add "uhm" and "like" to every statement and like write it in greentext it will invalidate it

tfw Neitchze was wicked, nihilistic and with a wicked sense of humor and so are you

Is reality a meme?

Nietzsche was a great writer of polemic, but don't take his stuff too seriously. He obviously doesn't engage with the major philosophers and dismisses them for shitty reasons, like going on and on about Socrates being ugly. He hits upon important themes but it's up to future philosophers to develop them.

for you

As good of an argument as calling Socrates ugly

Do you understand what calling Socrates ugly means?

Yes, if you can't understand something, it must be the author who is stupid.

Neetche is easy to interpret however the fuck you want to as he contradicts himself all the time.

Test

you sound like quite the level headed guy OP.

Nietzsche being a thinker you "grow out of" is a meme pushed by Academic Left-wingers who never actually read more than one book by Nietzsche lol. I meet these types all the time and no, I do not consider myself Right-wing.

Dude there is a legitimate campaign against Nietzsche here. I always see threada trying to discredit him. Fuck your propaganda, eat shit.

People say they that grow out of Nietzsche but the reality is that their brain can't accept the consequences of what he says so they unconsciously delude themselves into ignoring him.

>we
Who?

>Pull inconsistent shit out of your that resembles more the foundations of a cult than philosophy
>Expect people to take him seriously as a thinker
Neetche is closer to Paul than to Kant from an academic point of view.

>There is an old illusion- it is called good and evil. Around soothsayers and astrologers has thus far revolved the orbit of this illusion. Once did one believe in soothsayers and astrologers; and therefore did one believe, "Everything is fate: you shall, for you must! "Then again did one distrust all soothsayers and astrologers; and therefore did one believe, "Everything is freedom: you can, for you will!"
>In whatever way and through whatever means a cognition may relate to objects, that through which it relates immediately to them, and at which all thought as a means is directed as an end, is intuiton. This, however, takes place only insofar as the object is given to us; but this in turn, is possible only if it affects the mind in a certain way. The capacity (receptivity) to acquire representations through the way in which we are affected by objects is called sensibility. Objects are therefore given to us by means of sensibility, and it alone affords us intuitions; but they are thought through the understanding, and from it arise concepts. But all thought, whether straightaway (directe) or through a detour (indirecte), must ultimately be related to intuitions, thus, in our case, to sensibility, since there is no other way in which objects can be given to us.
>“What shall we say the kingdom of God is like, or what parable shall we use to describe it? It is like a mustard seed, which is the smallest of all seeds on earth. Yet when planted, it grows and becomes the largest of all garden plants, with such big branches that the birds can perch in its shade.”
One of this authors is a philosopher,one an evangelist and the other one a charlatant

So if we rewrite these sentences without the “like”s or “um”s they become smart?
>not doing whatever the fuck you want is life denial
>Socrates created Nihilism because he asked for reasoning rather than pulling stuff out of your ass.
>you should just be yourself
>There is no objective truth so just do your own morality
>science is stupid because you have to work methodically.It is not as cool as Wagner
>if I use Greek mythology to say something I sound cooler.
>life is a cycle and as such you have to live your life
Neetchee was a hack

I mean, Nietzsche is so persuasive and convinced of the fact that he was the only good philosopher ever and the most important human being that ever lived that it's easy as a teenager to actually believe him about those two things, which is definitely something people should grow out of. Posters on here who parrot whatever he says are proof of this/
You're not wrong though. Academic left-wingers are condescending to Nietzsche, even though he's a total genius.

>tfw Nietzsche is unironically a pleb/brainlet filter
laugh all you want

>even though he's a total genius.
Lol

>predicts the future with 100% accuracy
>completely solves the problems of modernity before they even came to be
>not the greatest philosopher who ever lived

Leave them, they are too focused in trying to appear above-the-polpular-non-popular-thought

>predicts the future with 100% accuracy
If you are ambiguous as fuck you can predict pretty much anything.Neetche was more of a false prophet than a philosopher as you can see here

>I post shit memes on a nippon picture site
>I can’t derive value from a man who spend a great deal of time thinking about how to find moral standing in an increasingly secular Europe.
>Nietzsche wasn’t on my level, I’ll go read some Ulysses even though I don’t enjoy or quite understand it so I can impress my anonymous friends

wtf I hate neechee now

I am a last man.

>There is an old illusion- it is called good and evil. Around soothsayers and astrologers has thus far revolved the orbit of this illusion. Once did one believe in soothsayers and astrologers; and therefore did one believe, "Everything is fate: you shall, for you must! "Then again did one distrust all soothsayers and astrologers; and therefore did one believe, "Everything is freedom: you can, for you will!"
Neetche is not a thinker.He is closer to Joseph Smith or a random preacher than a philosopher.He doesn't do philosophy he just wrote his feelings in an extremelly autistic and prophetic way

Untermensch detected

>Le buzzword
Neetche was a frustrated virgin that got rejected by an ugly dumb whore.His classification of greatness is as valid as Dani Devito's classification of tall people

>Neetche was a frustrated virgin that got rejected by an ugly dumb whore
Projecting a little

>Dude le Socrates was ugly that's why he created about reason and stuff LMAO XD
>Oh please Lou don't reject me again I am a virgin we should marry that is totally what an übermansch would do!
>Muaaaah the winds of Apollo have turn on me! I will spend the rest of my life criticizing christianity and women!
Neetche was r9k before personified

That he wouldn't sleep with him?

Is the lack of space after the periods part of the irony? I’ve seen a few posts around here lately that don’t space after punctuation, and i don’t know if they’re all memeing or if it’s all one guy who just has a typographical quirk.

embarrassing

>Neetchean argumentation

> Like Socrates created Nihilism because he asked for reasoning rather than pulling stuff out of your ass.That sounds about right

With the current knowledge that humanity has our reasoning doesn't lead to anything concrete. When it comes to all the big questions we don't know anything for certain. The most reasonable position to take is having no opinions whatsoever, but humans aren't that great at that. "All I know is that I know nothing" is even touted as Socrate's mantra of sorts. Eventually logically overanalyzing everything led to a dead end where nothing can be proven, but people still have to live their lives somehow. Some people felt that Nihilism was the only appropriate response to this conundrum. The only way to avoid this meaninglessness is to use axioms, which is pretty much just "pulling stuff out of your ass".

>There is like uhmm no objective truth so just do your morality and stuff.That will do it

That's true doe. No one has been able to logically prove that there is such a thing as an objective system of morality. It's all based on presuppositions and axioms that one has no reason to logically accept. When faced with such a dilemma why shouldn't a person go with their gut and do what they think is right at any given moment? Why shouldn't one live by their own morality when all other systems are equally baseless.

>With the current knowledge that humanity has our reasoning doesn't lead to anything concrete. When it comes to all the big questions we don't know anything for certain. The most reasonable position to take is having no opinions whatsoever, but humans aren't that great at that. "All I know is that I know nothing" is even touted as Socrate's mantra of sorts. Eventually logically overanalyzing everything led to a dead end where nothing can be proven, but people still have to live their lives somehow. Some people felt that Nihilism was the only appropriate response to this conundrum. The only way to avoid this meaninglessness is to use axioms, which is pretty much just "pulling stuff out of your ass".
>You shouldn't seek knowledge because it's hard. It is better to make things up and rebrand it as factual
>That's true doe
Only if you use the circular logic that NEETche used or just denying something because you don't understand it

its bait you dumb aphids

>You shouldn't seek knowledge because it's hard. It is better to make things up and rebrand it as factual

That's a terrible strawman. Being honest and admitting you don't know shit isn't antithetical to scientific inquiry. It's actually kinda good for it. You also don't seem to understand what I originally said.

1. There is currently no proven objective system of morality
2. Despite striving towards this goal humanity has to live without it in the meantime
3. When one lives their actions have moral repercussions
4. When one doesn't know what is true one might as well go with their gut

Don't you see the reasoning? No one is rebranding their subjective morality as fact, it's just that people are forced to take moral stabs in the dark in a world where we don't know what's objectively right.

>Being honest and admitting you don't know shit isn't antithetical to scientific inquiry. It
Not knowing shit doesn't mean that you can't know.In fact it is factual that we can fully understand and predict nature.
>1. There is currently no proven objective system of morality
Morality can't be proven.It is natural.You can try to justify it but at the end of the day there is a collective ethos that all human share
>2. Despite striving towards this goal humanity has to live without it in the meantime
But we have a morality.It is an apriori knowledge.Only through extreme alianation a person can hide it
>3. When one lives their actions have moral repercussions
Yes
>4. When one doesn't know what is true one might as well go with their gut
Why? Taking a decission can be rationalize in most cases.
Neetche's whole philosophy is made on the assumption that everything is material and that everything is a social construct without giving much prove for this other than his opinion.That's why he is not a philosopher he just gives an opinion and rebrands it with poetic language.If his books were written to transmit an information rather than rhetoric they would read as extremelly childish for example if instead of saying
>>There is an old illusion- it is called good and evil. Around soothsayers and astrologers has thus far revolved the orbit of this illusion. Once did one believe in soothsayers and astrologers; and therefore did one believe, "Everything is fate: you shall, for you must! "Then again did one distrust all soothsayers and astrologers; and therefore did one believe, "Everything is freedom: you can, for you will!"
He said
>There is no good an evil.So you are free
Just reads like the conclusion that a 13 year old has when his knowledge is extremelly limited

>The prime anti-Western fantasy for our age, however, was expressed by Nietzsche. Two years after hearing the piano score of Wagner's epoch-making opera Tristan and Isolde, Nietzsche made a lifelong commitment to sexual revolution by deliberately infecting himself with syphilis in a Leipzig brothel. Thomas Mann saw in that gesture an act of "demonic consecration." Whatever the motivation, Nietzsche was outraged when Wagner had second thoughts. When Wagner "prostrated himself before the cross" by writing Parsifal, Nietzsche flew into a rage not only against Wagner but against German music and all of Europe as well. Turning his disease-damaged eyes southward, he began to discern what he termed the "lewd melancholy" across the Mediterranean. As an antidote to Wagner's prostration before the cross, Nietzsche discovered Africa. "This music," Nietzsche writes, describing his impression of Bizet's Carmen, "is lively, but its liveliness is neither French nor German. Its liveliness is African. It has this destiny; its happiness is short, sudden, and without pardon. I envy Bizet, therefore, because he has the courage to give impression to this sensibility, a sensibility which up 'til this time had no expression in European music, a more southern, browner, more burned sensibility. ... How the yellow afternoons of this happiness give us pleasure! We look out and believe that we have never seen the sea calmer. And how this moorish dance speaks to us so tranquilly! How even our insatiability learns satiety from its lewd melancholy! Finally we have a love that has been transposed back to nature. Not the love for of some "higher virgin"! No Senta sentimentality! Rather love as fate, as fatality, cynical, without guilt, cruel - and as a result just like nature. That love which is war in its means, and at its basis the deadly hatred of the sexes [my translation]"

-E. Michael Jones "Degenerate Moderns"

> Not knowing shit doesn't mean that you can't know.In fact it is factual that we can fully understand and predict nature.

That was actually my point as well. I was just pointing out that pretending you know something is a hindrance to the truth-seeking process. Everyone who pretends their reasoning is logically sound when it isn't is obstructing this process. In this case it can be people who peddle their own version of subjective morality as an objective universal truth. I think we can easily agree on that.

> Morality can't be proven.It is natural. You can try to justify it but at the end of the day there is a collective ethos that all human share

I don't think so. First of all a large portion of humanity obviously doesn't share this sentiment. The world is filled to the brim with criminals, frauds, murderers, sociopaths and self-centered narcissist. People obviously have very varied and contradictory ideas when it comes to how one should ethically conduct themselves (if at all). This is why we're having this conversation in the first place. Humans cannot reach a consensus on morality. Secondly, your statement that morality is "natural" actually goes along with my point of "going with your gut". You're not using reason, you're going with what intuitively feels right to you, which is what I suggested in the first place.

> Neetche's whole philosophy is made on the assumption that everything is material and that everything is a social construct without giving much prove for this other than his opinion.

I wasn't really defending Nietzsche. I was just adressing your point. I don't actually agree with him on most things.

>First of all a large portion of humanity obviously doesn't share this sentiment. The world is filled to the brim with criminals, frauds, murderers, sociopaths and self-centered narcissists
Those people know that they are doing wrong.They just don't care.Morality should not be studied by how much people care about it.
>Secondly, your statement that morality is "natural" actually goes along with my point of "going with your gut". You're not using reason, you're going with what intuitively feels right to you, which is what I suggested in the first place.
There is a distorsion between doing what you know is right vs what you feel like doing.Doing what your gut tells you is usually center about selfpreservation but in a lot of cases we know that it was something wrong.

> Those people know that they are doing wrong. They just don't care. Morality should not be studied by how much people care about it.

I think it's fair to say that there are people like that out there, but I also think there is a secondary category of people who will do the opposite of what you precieve to be the right thing while also thinking they're in the right ethnically and you're wrong. This is why we have different schools of thought concerning morality. If morality was so obvious and inherent to human nature we wouldn't have philosophers aruging over it.

> There is a distorsion between doing what you know is right vs what you feel like doing.Doing what your gut tells you is usually center about selfpreservation but in a lot of cases we know that it was something wrong.

This was just a misunderstanding due to terminology and me using an unnecessarily nebulous term. By "gut" I was referring to intuition which I view as a seperate thing from primitive self-preservation impulses or even emotions. I should've used intuition from the start, my bad.

Yes, he was wrong about quite a bit; for instance Goethe is a hack, Schiller is a faggot, the Vikings are irredeemable and don't deserve even the scantest of praise, Rome is inferior to Greece, the native europeans are the reason for Christianity not the Jews, warfare is basically degenerate and there is more than just the Eternal Return, thus vitalism is incomplete and leads to a kind of occulted nihilism. But he is still a genius and Heidegger is his only peer in my mind. A type we will never see on this Earth again
I see Nietzsche, a grasping retarded little rat of an idealist who was soundly annihilated by N and again by Heidegger and a christfag. No philosophers though
So, did he actually fuck a prostitute? Can we lay to rest the virgin canard once and for all?

>, but I also think there is a secondary category of people who will do the opposite of what you precieve to be the right thing while also thinking they're in the right ethnically and you're wrong
A person can get alienated to believe something is right,like human sacrifices,but once that spciety collapses the ritual would be lost as in the state of nature killing is not seen positevely

Very funny OP