Can we agree that all criticism of Nietzsche is simply a misunderstanding of him?

Can we agree that all criticism of Nietzsche is simply a misunderstanding of him?

Can we also agree no one has ever rebutted Nietzsche's glorious praise of Islam?

>Christianity destroyed for us the whole harvest of ancient civilization, and later it also destroyed for us the whole harvest of Mohammedan civilization. The wonderful culture of the Moors in Spain, which was fundamentally nearer to us and appealed more to our senses and tastes than that of Rome and Greece, was trampled down (—I do not say by what sort of feet—) Why? Because it had to thank noble and manly instincts for its origin—because it said yes to life, even to the rare and refined luxuriousness of Moorish life!… The crusaders later made war on something before which it would have been more fitting for them to have grovelled in the dust—a civilization beside which even that of our nineteenth century seems very poor and very “senile.”—What they wanted, of course, was booty: the orient was rich…. Let us put aside our prejudices! The crusades were a higher form of piracy, nothing more! The German nobility, which is fundamentally a Viking nobility, was in its element there: the church knew only too well how the German nobility was to be won…. The German noble, always the “Swiss guard” of the church, always in the service of every bad instinct of the church—but well paid…. Consider the fact that it is precisely the aid of German swords and German blood and valour that has enabled the church to carry through its war to the death upon everything noble on earth! At this point a host of painful questions suggest themselves. The German nobility stands outside the history of the higher civilization: the reason is obvious…. Christianity, alcohol—the two great means of corruption

None of the popular atheists know Scripture well enouh to settle debates; neither do I follow the popular nor do your deluded retarded memes apply to me. My post was antitheist. I somewhat doubt your kind can learn new proper words.

Is this some kind of new meme?

>"German" """people""

>Can we also agree no one has ever rebutted Nietzsche's glorious praise of Islam?
Islam was the Buddhism of the Germans. Widely popular yet everyone got it wrong.

What a retarded quote. Nietzsche was a Satan-worshiping fedora edgelord, no wonder he ended up talking to horses.

Europeans that praised Islam, based their views on highly secular nations. In an age before electronic communications making so much information readily available.

>The wonderful culture of the Moors in Spain, which was fundamentally nearer to us and appealed more to our senses and tastes than that of Rome and Greece
>was fundamentally nearer to us and appealed more to our senses and tastes than that of Rome and Greece
what did he mean by this?

Nietzsche rarely offered any arguments, instead opting to simply state his conclusions and opinions.

So all one can do if they disagree is "misunderstand".

There's nothing to refute.

He means Islam > Greeks or Romans. The latter literally had a god of alcohol who was worshiped with drunken revelry, and Nietzsche knew alcohol to be poison.

I assumed he meant that we had fallen so far from the Greeks and their values that even on our own, new terms. The Moors were superior.

Also Nietzsche never took issue with Dionysus what the fuck. The Dionysian being the second aspect of our creative drive. I don't recall him every really commenting on the fact that he was worshiped with alcohol in a negative way. More that this irrational debauchery was closer to the Greeks than they would like to admit.

Everyone on Veeky Forums is a fucking edgelord fedora, especially the people who talk about why they can give a sweeping dismissal of Nietzsche.

He means that people reconstruct and reimagine what the Greeks and Romans were like, because the reality was disgusting. The Moors are closer because they have similar repressed urges and other religious fuckery going on.

People like the idea of the Greeks more than the actual Greeks.

*tips*

>The latter literally had a god of alcohol who was worshiped with drunken revelry, and Nietzsche knew alcohol to be poison.
Not for all people. Nietzsche knew alcohol was bad for him because he was weakly constituted and lived a philosopher's life. He makes it very clear that not everyone should live like an ascetic philosopher.

Wow, Germans are the worst!

Nietzsche loved Dionysus as an *artistic impulse*, drama came out of Dionysian mysteries. Dionysus as in wine, Nietzsche loathed. He considered alcohol to be the greatest bane of Western civilization along with Christian morality, and he says that in more places than here, he says it in Genealogy of Morals.

Please read the last sentence of the OP

>>He means that people reconstruct and reimagine what the Greeks and Romans were like, because the reality was disgusting.

Speak for yourself, I consider the polytheist greco-roman civilization to be one of the best thing going in the western world before the modern times.

Oh really? Alcohol is a great means to corruption. Where does that say nobody at all should drink alcohol ever?

I'm speaking for Nietzsche who's speaking to popular currents of his day, don't be so defensive.

Spartan civilization and values (which were more in line with Nietzsche's), were nothing like Athenian.

As for Rome, their culture was awful. Greek culture adhered to by the elites was in *contrast* with the plebs. They were a bunch of rowdy, demanding, lewd, rude, animals. In Elizabethan culture, the masses watched Shakespeare for entertainment, in ancient Rome they watched bloodsport.

>Where does one not find that bland degeneration that beer produces in the spirit!

He talks about alcohol in the same terms as Christianity.

So is this whole thread some pseudo-intellectual bullshit to support Islam?

Can I just say "fuck Islam, its anti western" and be done with it like with everyone else who supports that shit?

>I've never read Nietzsche
Then why are you posting in this thread?

>You have to be thoroughly read up on Nietzsche to call out Islam
Whew lad. I don't give a fuck what else he did/said.
But op is clearly focused on the Islam part.

"Here it is not a "prophet" who speaks, not one of those horrible hybrid of sickness and will to power people call founder of religions"

What did he mean by this? really makes you think

Nietzsche obviously considered atheism more enlightened than any religion, that's not really the point here though. Of all the cultures that incorporated religion, Nietzsche considered Islam the greatest.

Where does he say no one should follow Christianity?

>Spartan civilization and values (which were more in line with Nietzsche's), were nothing like Athenian.
Are you fucking retarded? Nietzsche had mostly disdain for the eternal lacon. Try earlier Athenian society for something Nietzsche liked.

>Nietzsche obviously considered atheism more enlightened than any religion, that's not really the point here though.
Not at fucking all, why is Zarathustra, a religious prophet, his spokesperson? Nietzsche sees religiosity/spirituality as a very important, intrinsic part of being human, but he thinks Christianity and Buddhism are specifically very bad organizations of this drive.

Confer the fact that Nietzsche hardly ever speaks about Christ, and even then hardly says anything negative, compared to what he says about Christians.

>Of all the cultures that incorporated religion, Nietzsche considered Islam the greatest.
This is probably more true, though the Romans were an extremely superstitious and pseudo-religious society, and Nietzsche knew that.

People really need to get past saying "Nietzsche loves/hates x", Nietzsche rarely has an emotion so simple as like/dislike, and virtually everything he says is contextual.

The drive to give Nietzsche absolute, unchanging, noncontextual preferences about things is one driven from a fear of the contingencies of life. Nietzsche is never so basic. He's always speaking from a frame of mind. He must be read carefully and with consideration. You can never cite just one passage and say "ergo, Nietzsche x".

>Try earlier Athenian society for something Nietzsche liked.
This.

People try to play Nietzsche as edgy, but in fact he was a proponent of democracy, as The Dawn shows.

Nietzsche's Zarathustra is a disillusioned Zarathustra who rejects the religion he was a prophet for

Nietzsche believed if Christ lived a little longer, he too would have rejected what he was a prophet of, as Zarathustra.

I agree with you, but that doesn't negate my assertion.

Which section? Nietzsche has a complicated relationship with democracy

I essentially agree with this. Neitzche is constantly making assertions which could fall another way. As seductive as his views can be, they only take place in the story he tells.

>Which section? Nietzsche has a complicated relationship with democracy
The part on the worker's exodus, he clearly is disgusted by tyranny and wishes the workers of the world to rule themselves, inspired by Moses and all that, says they should all just leave and form their own sovereign nation somewhere where they won't be made into human screws

>I agree with you, but that doesn't negate my assertion.
It sure does. Zarathustra here is used to represent a *turning away* from religion, a growing out of it, not a glorification of it.

>Nietzsche considered Islam the greatest.

>wishes the workers of the world to rule themselves


wow the shills are in full force, don't forget about how much nietzsche love multiculturalism and rap music

"Where races are mixed, there is the source of great cultures."

Neitzche admits his limited perspective. Take that and how his priest dad died at a young age. It seems like he might indeed have a limited perspective, especially when he ends up explaining how the church has tricked everyone into self flagellating.

I think Neitche would love to hear challenges.

I don't think so, every criticism seriously made against Nietzsche has been a misunderstanding of him. But Nietzsche anticipated it, he said his work was not intended to be understood by everyone, but only the select few who were kindred spirits.

Nietzsche doesn't glorify very much. His Zarathustra isn't becoming "areligious", he's adapting religion to be unlike itself. He's an evolution, not a negation.

Nietzsche himself says that, if you take what Zarathustra (aka himself) says seriously, you will rip it all up and go do your own thing. He doesn't want you accepting him wholly or using him as a religious figure.

The problem with most criticism of Nietzsche is, they criticize him because they want to return to their vices, religion and Truth. I have plenty of problems with Nietzsche, but your problems with Nietzsche have to be forward-moving, not regressive.

Constantine (thank fucking God he took off his trip) was the sort of regressive critic.

Not to be a dick, but isn't that basically saying that his criticisms should agree with him?

When put like that, every criticism has to be a misunderstanding. Maybe that was Neitzches views, that to understand him required total alignment with his perspective, and to disagree shows a misalignment shows a misunderstanding.

Still, all this is acknowledging he is but a single perspective. I'm sure he would not state his perspective to be anything but another varient of truth. True to those "kindred spirits" and only partially true or totally false to everyone else.

Perhaps he would not appreciate a challenge, but perhaps a challenge would open his eyes or shed light somewhere new. Certainly he would appreciate that, and I don't think he would consider himself infallible

Don't disagree, go further.

>our problems with Nietzsche have to be forward-moving, not regressive.
This too. Nietzsche believed very strongly in progress, if you don't support progress, you probably don't even have any business mentioning Nietzsche.

In a way, but it's about your motivations in moving past him.

>Dat blatant misinterpretation of history to make Germans seem important

I'm guessing that when he wrote this the syphilis had already liquefied most of his frontal lobe.

>he fell for the dialectical meme

You didn't reach much or any nietzsche don't you? He pretty much had a hardon for the Dionysian aspect of culture, and consequently priased pre-classic Greeks, and Romans at their prime.

..what? he's not trying to make germans seem important

You started this same thread on Veeky Forums a few days ago and got btfo.

Islam is shit but it's easily the most Western religion besides Christianity and Judaism

He's talking about races as nations and he's only talking about Europeans. He saw Africans as uncivilized and the Chinese as civilized too much.

No isn't, that sentence is prefaced "Contra Jews vs. Aryans, it'[s addressed the the antisemitism of his time. He then goes on to say that the "race question" is nonsense.

this nietzsche thought the idea of race was hogwash for retards

Progress in what sense?

>He means Islam > Greeks or Romans. The latter literally had a god of alcohol who was worshiped with drunken revelry, and Nietzsche knew alcohol to be poison.
Are you fucking retarded? Neitzsche loved Dionysus

...

what is there to rebut? Nietzsche was a philosopher not a historian, his understanding of history is retarded. It's his ideas that are important.

Nietzsche's philosophy is very tied up with the history of ideas and their historical causes and their historical consequences

Sorry my dude should have read the whole thread.

I agree with Nietzsche on a lot of thinks but he should have drank more wine.

>his understanding of history is retarded.
one of the world's best philologists vs. a Veeky Forums autist

hmmmmm

>None of the popular atheists know scripture enough
>Fair number of popular Atheists became Atheist after reading the bible cover to cover

He doesn't speak about Christ as much, because he considered Paul to be the most important christian figure.