Was nietzsche correct

Have you done weed? It's a psychedelic. Psychedelics show you a glimpse of reality/God. You probably won't believe me but there are entire religions dedicated to finding God i.e. Hinduism, which goes through a shit ton of academic and spiritual scrutiny. Just as much if not more than Western philosophy. Psychedelics put you closer to God but they'll never let you fully reach him/it, you'll need to meditate extensively for that. Yeah, I sound retarded right now I know. But many, if not all of the people who are engaged in spirituality believe that reincarnation exists. Getting closer to God/reality it's easier to see how obvious reincarnation is. If you do choose to do psychedelics you will probably forget much of the experience you had while on them but you will sometimes come back with really important information. They made me realize a lot of things. Alright I am done rambling.

I said what I meant, Nietszche essentially says nothing new, but his tone, especially in Thus Spoke Zarathustra is one of a manic desire to spread a truth revealed only to him. The humanist relativism he espouses has existed since at least the Sophists and is comparable to some eastern philosophy. If anyone is going to get into existentialism they may as well read Peter Wessel Zapffe and Kierkegaard; I would rather see an argument made about why Nietszche's writings actually say something of value that someone else hasn't better articulated

ya ill probably end up trying them out, i have smoked weed a couple of times but only ever got high once, might just be shit weed but i have a high tolerance for things in general like medicine, alcohol, pain, etc, i have tried molly once and i just felt slightly elevated. I do have adhd so i have been either on vvyanse or adderall for must of my life so i know somewhat what a high should feel like.

Alright well just know that only psychedelic drugs will work. Also it's very easy to not give a fuck about spirituality while high. Don't get caught up in bullshit like jacking off or playing video games. Write things down also.

Well that's rather pretentious of you to ask for people to prove to you why Nietzsche's work is of value. He talks from religion and spirituality to Social classes and self growth.
But for the sake of argument, his instance in nihilism killing Western civilization and as depicted in TsZ how the pursuit of a "higher" purpose was enough to fight it (nihilism) and fill a man's soul.

Would you disagree with him in his arguments regarding this, or do you think someone else made the same argument before or better?

You're 19, user. You could have cancer. Nietzsche isn't going to answer your questions. It's likely that no one in this thread will.

Good luck, user. Wishing you the best.

You're 19, okay.

Humans will defend tribal bullshit over facts.
Humans will defend theories that have the gloss of (predictive) power without verifying the truth.
Humans have a social ranking system inbred. You'll find most humans view the social ladder as a superior God over the "truth".
Humans use a strategy of virtue-signaling to climb the social ladder, even if it eventually kills them.

And last but not least, the smell of hay is worth more than the universe of moral and ideological laws. That universe is needed to regulate those who bring about the fruition of that hay.

>everything is meaningless
prove it.
>Dwelling
You mean "delving"?
>le no fuggs giben
lol, eat shit and die.
Read "Lost in the Cosmos, The Last Self Help Book"
It's hilarious and makes fun of people like this guyAnyways, Nihilism is a mood of the Soul, its an inner dying, where Man loses his chaos, his motivation, the unknown non-quantifiable spiritedness; thumos.

>just can't buy into religion
That's because no one is religious, no one actually believes. (believes, notice how we say believe rather than know as if we could not give reason for knowledge)
Rarely do men encounter true religion anymore, very rare.
If Nietzsche is correct, and his critique is correct, that is to say Man is a contemptible being who can not see meaning through his self imposed darkness, Man can no longer "give birth to a dancing star" then we are truly lost.

Look at the past, we always try to relate to the past (a feature entirely unique to our time) and in doing this we never understand the past.
We apply our criteria to their understanding, we apply our social ideas to their social structure, we presume that true study of the ancients is possible to a degree where we can 'relate' and "fill in the gaps" so to speak.

This is arrogance, no men have come before us that have thought like us.
This is of course denied by the progressives, however this line of thinking is entirely progressive in nature.

All of this to say, toss the fedora, don't give much heed to nihilism (it really isn't convincing to anyone unless they are already nihilists [as in their Souls are rent] so in this respect pay them no heed) and wherever you find 'intellectuals' whether they be philosopher or scientist, be like Socrates and reduce them to nothing.
God is absolute, and from the absolute all can be deduced.

Drugs posit truth within man rather than from beyond man.
Hinduism is more truth from man.
DRUGS ARE NOT THE ANSWER YOU STONO-HOMO!
All men are born only to die, OP is blessed with the taste of glory and nobility in knowing his demise, just as the greatest poets and thinkers among Latium and Hellas revered the profundity of the dying Celt, thus we can revere OP for his brief life makes everything far sweeter than we could hope to understand.
>existence over essence
no lol

OP just go outside, lay in the grass, look at the blueness of the sky, the whiteness of the coulds, let the wind kiss your face, and the sun heat your body as a lover's embrace. This is what the next life is like, the nobility you feel being alive will guide you through to the land of your fathers in death.
Let everyday surprise you, for you may never rise again.

>Have you tried Aquinas?
Anyone who actually reads Aquinas has to have something wrong with them, the guy has tens of thousands of pages of nothing but horrible boring philosophy

Nietzsche wasn't a Nihilist, he thought it was a disease

Protip: if you want to get rid of your cancer, leave Veeky Forums immediately

>Aquinas
>nothing but horrible boring philosophy

Are you saying that there's a purpose and meaning in the universe, existence?

What would that be?

Also the book I recommend is ironically about how humans cannot ever "not give a fuck" and always choose in what to believe in.

Maybe try reading something before criticizing?

Any BN (Before Newton) thinker is irrelevant to our understanding of what it is to be human and where we are located in space and time, poor Thomas Aquinas 's philosophy would have been drastically changed , had he been fortunate enough to sit at the feet of Charles Darwin and learn about the real world.

Well since you won't answer let me continue with my answer my own questions
>
>Are you saying that there's a purpose and meaning in the universe, existence?
>What would that be?

Let's make it simple and just deconstruct this concepts:

Meaning: the end, purpose, or significance of something:
"What is the meaning of life? What is the meaning of this intrusion?"

Purpose: the reason for which something exists or is done, made, used, etc.

Dictionary.com

Now the universe came to be through an immense point of concentrated energy that expanded abruptly (Big Bang), and the laws of thermodynamics points towards the universe ending in total entropy (heat death)

For the universe or at least life to have meaning/purpose something before "it" most have existed to create it, and in an universe where everything that is and"existed" will eventually disappear into nothing there is no such thing as purpose.

Sounds like you're going the path of "If I don't know then it isn't there."
That's precisely why I selected a book ridiculing it...........cheese and rice the IQ of this board must not exceed room temp.
Absolutely Euphoric.
Honestly though, Darwin was just following in Newton's footsteps as many others did by trying to posit a change driven theory rather than something lasting, everyone AN (After Newton) has just been trying to be like Newton (most unconsciously), isn't it surprising the physicist who instead of reinforcing a long running historical theory (the universe going from the everlasting to the everlasting) instead posit a universe beginning by a fundamental change (this was an equally old idea but one found in the religious rather than the historical)?
It is in this way most PN (Post Newton) thinkers are really just trying to be like Newton instead of doing any actual thinking.
It's also lovely that you provide any explanation or rationale behind what you're saying.
Willing to be you browse Reddit....
Sit down Mr. Eager Beaver
I don't sit around on Veeky Forums all day.

>physical origins
>arbitrary parameters (i.e. something must have made us)
let me stop you right there.

I really should proof read these things...
Now, to clarify, did I say there was a purpose?
I think you're trying to put words into my mouth so you can spout off some half baked refutation (one which you didn't even come up with) and declare life meaningless, pointless, arbitrary, worthless probably because you're girlfriend left you and you're trying to fulfill some edgy fantasy and vindicate your hopelessness.

>Something must have existed before the universe
Seems strange to posit something having to exist in our potential of spacetime before spacetime realized the potential.
When you find something large in a physical theory that seems to envelope all things it's usually beneficial to ask "What about another one?"

>everything becomes nothing hence there is no purpose
I suppose you think there's nothing special about us?
We are just the result of blind forces and can not even understand what purpose really is?
I agree to a degree on the latter and somewhat on the former however I find myself drawn to the conclude that you are incorrect in your logical connection.
That because the physical universe "ends" therefore there is no purpose.
Would you mind humoring this poor ignorant soul and at least give me a syllogism or something?

All of this to say I am right and you are wrong.

>39 seconds have gone by
Since you didn't answer me I'll do you the honor of answering for you.
>Sorry, user, you are objectively right and I am objectively wrong.

Ah yes, very good.

Jesus, what a retard

?
You seem to be very slow, can you follow a thread?

I'm not trying to "put words in your mouth", my original comment stated that there is no meaning(purpose in life) your first reply was literally arguing against this, that's why we are arguing the merits of meaning/purpose in life, do you understand?

You seem to be one of those very smart persons, so let me try to explain to your superior intellect:

This again is the definition of purpose:

noun
1.
the reason for which something exists or is done, made, used, etc.

I.e. something most EXIST to have a purpose, if the end of everything that exist is to become nothing, then nothing at the absolute end has a purpose.

For something to have a meaning it most be created by a sentient being (giving it an inherit purpose)
Also quote me correctly:

>For the universe or at least life to have meaning/purpose something before it most have existed to create it

I meant in order for The universe to have a meaning purpose, something before had to come and bestow that meaning to it.

Are you capable of understanding that?
Lastly i agree with You are a retard, damn...

The only thing this hack did well was critique past philosophers
>everything is meaningless,
False
>The real world
Does not exist.

That's not a retard, that's Ælian, the resident autist of of Veeky Forums who hides his cripling social retardation by retreating into fundamentalist Christianity and calling everyone he can't connect with sinners.

Good to know thanks
Refer to

Don't listen to this big old meanie! It's not my fault that I can't connect with others, it's everyone else's fault! Everyone knows that us Æutists are the chosen one, but the evil Luther, the anti-Æutist is making us very sad! He even told us to sympathize with other people! EWWWWW! I can't do that! I can only mumble to myself and call everyone who isn't in line with my Æutistic theology a sinner!

Yeah! Take that! Dirty neurotypical sinners!

>the universe wasn't created

>was nietzsche correct and is nihilism the ultimate red pill.

No. Absolutely not.

Furthermore, Nietzsche was afraid of Nihilism and thought it would kill the West, which is why he tried to find a third way(The Overman).

The only thing I can recommend to you OP, is spend more time with your family. Talk to them. Be with them. Tell them that you love them and that you want to have a good time with them. Stop thinking about philosophy, if you are this close to death, because it won't help you.

Yeah! Tell it to that meanie! He should bow before our awesome Æutistic God! How dare he not mumble the glorious name of Elohim the Sperg of Spergers! And how dare he send luTHER OH GOD IM HAVING AN AUTFIT AGAIN REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE LUTHER YOU BASTARD REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE THINE WAY ARETH WICKETH REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

THANKS! :)
>do you understand
no lol
this was the first time purpose was mentioned FYI.

Going off of purpose and what you've stated, is a temporary purpose less legitimate than a non-temporary purpose, if so why?
Looking for an argument btw.

>for something to have meaning it must be created
[citation needed]
I think you're conflating purpose and meaning.
>quote me correctly
no lol I am not going to waste time meme texting your exact words, I'd rather let you know I got the gist of you're saying.
>meaning purpose
?
>something must have come before to bestow meaning to it
prove it a necessary prerequisite

>you're retarded
lel

>Ælian
who?
lol
>meaning can't exist unless you prove it, nothing is independent of something being objectively proven by my arbitrary criteria
This is such a Reddit tier board....
R.I.P. Sophisticated discourse....

Wouldn't it be cool if everyone actually proved their assertion or at least gave evidence and weighed it out instead of jumping to conclusions.

cringe.

Nice blog, subscribed and upvoted.

Well your "arguments" can be resumed to "lol you're wrong and I'm right"and don't present a single idea or even try to refute a point.

Are you capable of giving a single real argument instead of acting like a douche?

Again:

meaning
[mee-ning]
noun
1.
what is intended to be, or actually is, expressed or indicated; signification; import:
the three meanings of a word.
2.
the end, ****PURPOSE****, or significance of something:

purpose
[pur-puh s]
noun
1.
the reason for which something exists or is done, made, used, etc.
2.
an INTENDED or DESIRED result; end; aim; goal.

You see? To have a meaning something most bestow upon you that meaning purpose. Something a priori to exist and WILL it's order upon it.

Are you capable of understanding that?

Nietzsche is not a nihilist he literally just said that since we killed god you have to come up with your own meaning

It's really not a "nothing rly matters" kind of thing

>Are you capable of giving a single real argument instead of acting like a douche?
no
>Are you capable of understanding that?

Would you mind setting up something coherent that I could respond to, such as a question or an assertion?
I know, a lot to ask...

You also didn't answer my question.
>is a temporary purpose less legitimate than a non-temporary purpose, if so why?

Also you'll notice I agreed with you on your definitions, you're beating a dead horse.

I have been given arguments as to why there is no inherit meaning or purpose in the universe, you haven't even tried to counter them besides just calling them wrong, like you called the other user who talked about Newton wrong, and even called Darwin wrong, every one is wrong but you.

>All of this to say I am right and you are wrong

Yet you never make even a a single argument, or expose something resembling an original idea, you haven't offered anything to the argument at all in all your replies.
Yet you measure things in how they ridicule something, or how wrong something is.
Last reply from me

PS: I can only imagine how miserable you make people around you.

Yes

Dude, amen. I'm so glad you're here--Lost in the Cosmos is one of the most helpful books about existence and what it means to be human, right next to the book of Ecclesiastes.

If you want to know what it means to be human and what it means to exist, read Lost in the Cosmos and Ecclesiastes.
My older brother is not a Christian and his biggest faves are Nietzsche and Camus and Sartre and Kant.
The thing about people who suppress the truth is that they will inevitably, when pressing down upon it, force some of it out of the vessel in which they try to hold it. Guys like Nietzsche and Camus absolutely are expressing some truth about what it means to be human, but their pictures are impartial and ultimately provide an obscure vision of reality. I respect them, but they can only get so far without the truth of the Gospel and the Divine Order of God.
Nature is wordless, but some questions arise naturally in man just as naturally as the trees and animals he asks questions about. I trust that because we ask questions naturally, if we are only animals, that we ought to go along with these instinctive behaviors and seek answers. This is what humans do.
And some of our most natural questions are answered by the light of Jesus.
God loves you and this is just as true as the fact that one day we all have to die. Tragedy is when the inevitable occurs before our future fictions placed it.
Anyway, there is so much to say. Concerning my oldest brother, I love him dearly and we get along quite well. But I find that he has no answers. He has been for many years coming to the same conclusions about how there is no ultimately reality and that we all make our own perceptions/meanings. Common sense and the light of a kind of naturalism (the kind that I briefly mentioned above) and the Gospel compell me to find that this is total hogwash and the unfortunate consequence of philosophers living in the confused wake of Descartes.

Absolutely

>but they can only get so far without the truth of the Gospel and the Divine Order of God.
Is it true or is it not true that consistent information for the existence of Jesus is extremely limited and the evidence for his words, deeds, miracles, death and resurrection only occurs in documents that are extremely partial and only post hoc?

Hope things work out for you. Even if you get bad news next week, you're a young stud and lymphoma is a weak ass form of cancer so please beat the shit out of it.

Regarding Nietzsche: He is not a nihilist, his project is quite contrary to avoid or overcome it like pointed out. Now that can be hard sometimes, and philosophy, among many other things, can be helpful. If you want to venture further i into it I really recommend the partially examined life podcast. It really sparked my philosophy interest, it's fun and doesn't require much effort or knowledge to get something out of.

There is great consolation in philosophy, even in our darkest moments.
Read anything up to and including Schopenhauer.
Everything after is as batshit crazy as Nietzsche was in real life.

>red pill
kys
literally

Your Æutism sure is. Now why don't you fuck off from Veeky Forums. Go outside and mumble at birds or something, and call them sinners as well if they ignore you

>Psychedelics show you a glimpse of reality/God.
They may, but for that statement to be accepted we would need to know how God functions, and since we can only guess at his function it is above us to claim we can "see God" when we can't see him clearly.

Will do.
And you know that's pronounced Aahtism now...

coo
>arguments
Where?
You've presented no arguments, you've only presupposed the universe to be devoid of meaning.
>just calling them wrong
Not much else to call them until you give them to me.
I didn't call him wrong per say, rather misguided in his understanding of Newton and the precedent of a central doctrine of change being the driving force for modern theories (All scientific ages have these central doctrines, check the Greeks and matter forms along with stasis, just an example.

>never make a single argument
I'm not trying to argue...
Again you imply there is an argument, there's a discussion which might be called debate, but I can assure you there are no syllogisms present.

>you make people miserable
I try.

no. he derived an ought from an is, making his existentialist argument inherently non-sequitor.

Wow, what a huge faggot my god, stupid too, the user already gave his reasoning for claiming the universe has no meaning. How daft can one person be? unless he is pretending to be an imbecile to make everyone as miserable as him.

the start with the greeks meme never ends

>the ultimate red pill
Please die already.

Read this

therightstuff.biz/2016/10/26/nietzsches-question/

>Caveat: whenever it mentions "Jews" or "Jewry" just replace it with "the priestly class" or "religion" or "cult mindset"

aquinas is a joy to read despite his circumstances

he is a very round about thinker

there's no need to 'buy-in' to a religion to buy in to religion

Imagine your own afterlife. Beyond that realize that life for you could have been miserable in the future - read some Kafka.

well Nietzsche isn't even a nihilist in the deepest sense.

LOL

I mean he has had a deep influence on society so it's pretty obvious...