Why do Post-Modernists like this guy so much...

Why do Post-Modernists like this guy so much? I mean I only am 30 pages into Thus Spoke Zarathustra but it seems as if he is describing them exactly when he talks about the "last men"

>Wants to be edgy Post Modernist
>Hears the God is dead quote and get massive boner not understanding its greater context
>"i love Nietzsche"

So I'm not wrong thinking they're retarded for thinking he would buy into their absolute relativist bullshit? I mean I have barely touched him yet and only started reading his work because Dr. Peterson talked about him so much. Also the reason I read The Gulag archipelago and that was one of the best books I've ever read

I actually found the same thing. Post modernists from their padded ivory towers normalizing comfort as an endgame being the last men.

Who are these postmodernists aka straw men?

As an austrian who reads this fucker almost exclusively for 6 years now, I have to say you are right, although it is not limited to these post-modernists. The last men he meantioned isn't only the majority, but the current rule of necessity for people, regardless of their education. It did lead to this because it kinda had to. Only the exception of exceptions does not have the last man in himself.

...

Nietzsche is not a relativist, because he does not say that everybody is right. He says that he is right. He is wrong because I am right, everybody else is also wrong. This is neither relativism nor solipsism.

He never said he was right, he even said he hoped to be wrong

Wrong.

You give me headache

That's what I call 'thinking with a hammer'!

Ba dum tsssss

Baudrillard is personally my go-to for post-modernist philosophy. the Nietzche fandom is definitely a meme. probably inspired by "classic" Paul Dano's character in Little Miss Sunshine

Thus Spoke Zarathustra is objectively the worst of his books to start with, and imo his overall worst. I've read 5 other books by him and I just couldn't read TSZ.

Read the Genealogy of Morals. A lot shorter, a lot more straightforward.

>this
without understanding Genealogy all you will take from Zarathustra is edgy "muah ubermensh"

He's pretty easy to understand. There is no legitimate foundation of a transcendental ethics, and therefore, man is left alone to construct his or her own values, overcoming obstacles for his own self-fulfillment regardless of its cosmic insignificance. There is also the addition of a Dionysian and Apollonian dynamic.

Nietzsche is, indeed, a moral nihilist, but he is not a nihilist in the sense he wants man to become lethargic and give up. Personally, I am not fond of Nietzsche. It's basically amor fati and encouraging the striving for one's personal ideals without being bogged down by the "slave morality" of the common peoples.

You don't understand Nietzsche. You're reducing him terribly. You aren't fond because you are mistaken.

not that user, but I'm tired of Nietzschefags saying "you just don't get it" to attack an idea without correcting the mistake. say what this user got wrong or don't bother to post.

...

Not him but it sounds like you contextualize philosophers by gathering up a couple basic principles, ideally neatly packaged into a single word "Diyinoain" "nihilism" "amor fati" and discussing those.

I'd say not only do you get him but I'd say you don't get ANY philosophy other than maybe a few micro-aspects.

People get hopped up Nietzsche for a variety of reasons.
1: they're edgelords who want to stick it to their bible thumping parents who drone on incessantly about how much they disagree with the phrase "God is dead", mostly because they're idiots who take things at face value.
2: he's easy to read, especially compared to other philosophers, very often he's babbies first philosopher
3: he's critical of most things and believe systems so it is easy for a layperson to cherry pick a few quotes to get Nietzsche pigeonholed into their particular believe system.
4: He would have fit right in with /r9k/, being a total social autist with fashionably questionable facial hair, Who's only luck with women came from a prostitute who gave him syphilis. The only woman he ever pursued earnestly friendzoned him so hard it made the history books. All of his contemporaries described him as an odd duck so yes, there are quite a large number of people, especially on this website, who can relate to that

Martin Heideggar was a better philosopher in every way, who actually had the balls to come out and say that he supported national socialism, even after the fall of the Nazi regime he refused to renounce it, and to this day he is a well respected member of academia even among left leaning philosophers.

>Martin Heideggar was a better philosopher in every way, who actually had the balls to come out and say that he supported national socialism, even after the fall of the Nazi regime he refused to renounce it, and to this day he is a well respected member of academia even among left leaning philosophers

Yes, but Nietzsche wasn't a "philosopher", he was a poet and anchorite.


:^)

There is nothing to correct because there is no canvas, or semblance of effort.

Nietzsche is somebody you live, not systematize and navel-gaze.

Maybe if you browse reddit lmao.
Right now, there are countless radicals realizing that Nietzsche and a New Christianity work wonderfully together.

Why does that bother you?

The Gulag archipelago is autistic book, read Shalamov instead, he wasnt payed by CIA.