Why did he like solitude so much?

/thread

most losers pretend to actually enjoy their solitude, it's basically a protection mechanism

effective but not satisfying

Checked

...

Inherently unsatisfactory desu.

kinda big ears desu

what would be needed to make it effective AND satisfying?

>what would be needed to make it effective AND satisfying?
I don't think that's possible because lack of satisfaction is what drives our propagation and adaptation as a species.

Why do anything if you're satisfied?

>Why do anything if you're satisfied?
Is the sea hungry? Are the clouds afraid?

Why do you think...

he didnt. He talks about how solitude makes one profound but also miserable in beyond good and evil.

But it's also one of the 4 cardinal virtues listed in the same book.

hey no one said that virtues are without suffering. Nietzsche was basically a suffering advocate.

true. now that i think about it, for nietzsche, like you say, a virtue would not be a virtue if it didn't entail suffering. he was a bit of a masochist, in a healthy way

he suffered from loneliness but he enjoyed suffering so essentially he liked loneliness
this

Probably didn't. He was ostracised because he didn't have the natural authority/charisma to assert his ideals.

you're a fucking retard, he's not a masoschist

Deep down, he hated everybody.

Why do YOU enjoy solitude so much?

everyone here feels like they have the authority to speak on nietzsche's behalf. A social life is a life of ressentiment and bad conscience, which are expressions of reactive forces: slave-morality.

resentment

I'm just giving one perspective of why neitzsche was such a school shooter.

>A social life is a life of ressentiment and bad conscience, which are expressions of reactive forces: slave-morality.
Then build a different type of social life, you quitter. Such übermensch, can't even learn how to manipulate others and has to pout alone in his room like a 10yo. It's funny how the "sheep" are "superficial" enough that you get your panties in a knot whenever they put a word on your great projects but you're still completely powerless against their "basicness".

>Swimming is an activity of drowning and getting wet, which are expressions of reactive forces: fish-morality. It's not apt for Real Humans.

I dont know, but I like it too. I can only read and get creative when I'm alone, when I'm not alone I feel like I'm acting and I'm not really free to be myself.
But he did have a social life, just not a really big and active one

Why does this place care so much about Freddy's personal life instead of his work?

Maybe because he was secretly black?

I wish he liked me instead.

Are you the antifa girl?

>Why does this place care so much about Freddy's personal life instead of his work?
Because the zeitgeist is obsessed with personal life and this place has none, so they look up to great writers to validate themselves. Alternatively, the discourse habits on this place are terrible and most people can't bother to change them because they feel they'd rather be somewhere else. moot should have put on a character requirement not a character limit.

rofl what are you talking about? "build a different type of social life", he percieved the vast majority of people as slaves, why would he want to "manipulate" them, ,and btw, it seems like you've misunderstood his doctrine of the will to power, like so many other people on this board. He's not powerless against their "basicness", he doesn't care for them. there's a difference here.

I'm not talking about Nietzsche.

>He's not powerless against their "basicness", he doesn't care for them. there's a difference here.
Mm-hmm.

fpbp

A social life most of the time involves people where you do social activities with them such as conversing, drinking and other leisure activities which instead of actually energizing us leaves us drained (incessant chatter, gossip etc.).

Rarely it is what you actually are interested in. Building a social life of your taste doesn't always work out. If someone's style of socializing is not the same as people they live with, there's nothing you can do (unless you want to change the order of your life, which you don't want to change).

This is where one enjoys solitude the most; acceptance. Nobody cares about other's opinions anyway. At the end of the day you are what you have.

Society isn't an unmovable, stupid object; it's made of people just like you and me, and if it weren't, then what are you trying to do here? Social custom is changing all the time, and if it can change unconsciously, there's no reason why it can't change consciously. Thinking one's way of socializing can't change (which is not the same as saying it shall change in some way in particular) is like thinking any other part of them will not change--which is ridiculous because everything about and around them is changing all the time.

>conversing, drinking and other leisure activities which instead of actually energizing us leaves us drained
All "activities" leave us "drained". Why you think this is bad, when it's what activities are, is beyond me.

>Nobody cares about other's opinions anyway.
Why are you talking to me then? Please don't appeal to some third party "idea" or something, that's no different.

>This is where one enjoys solitude the most; acceptance.
Rocks, books and trees can't "accept" you. The neurosis you have when you're among others is mostly your own.

time is a belgian waffle

Hah, I should see it no surprise to see this reply here. Is this Sebastian?

You really are a kid you know that? A weak little pussy faggot dilettante who likes to hear himself speak, who knows nothing about anything, and who first and for most would like to be respected and regarded as a well read intellectual without actually being a well read intellectual.

In all honesty, as I have pointed out, I really am not [i]that[/i] intellectual. It is only that the masses, even on this board, are, in a word, idiots. If you read the complete works of the following you should be well on your way to becoming an intellectual. Yes, even you if it is you, Sebastian.

Epic of Gilgamesh
Homer
Plato
Virgil
The Bible (I almost wanted to not put this on the list, but it is important to know what's wrong to know what's right - see what Derrida says about Blue and Red, et al)
Dante
Kant
Schopenhauer
Kierkegaard
Nietzsche (also an underrated composer)
Dostoyevsky (the greatest writer since Socrates)
Joyce
Proust
Camus
Sartre
Barthes
Derrida
Wallace

I hardly think that any of these names need introducing or explaining. As for the rest of you imbeciles, it is your prerogative not mine to expand your narrow vocabularies. I'm going to go read now and you nimrods should too. You're a literary weakling, you don't know who you're up against.

-A

>The greatest writer since Socrates