The ultimate meaning of the nietzchean philosophy is literally: be yourself

This. Reading all these shallow retards is very frustrating.

enlighten us oh mighty superiority

No one will enlighten you on Nietzsche except the man's books. Read them.

Or don't. And keep posting about Nietzsche with your wikipedia knowledge.

Well, Nietzsche would say you shouldn't be yourself if you're already an untermensch. So it's more like make yourself into something that's worth being and then be that thing regardless of what people think.

I would maybe alter it to: be the best version of yourself

Also, I find it funny how the people in my classes who have a vehement distaste for Nietzsche are the ones who most exemplify the slave morality whereas the ones who think he's speaking directly to them are those who are more successful in their creative and educational endeavors and are generally those who seem more fulfilled in life. It's always the kid with multiple chins and no neck who finds Nietzsche so appalling and I just think it's so fitting because Nietzsche would've felt the same contempt for them that they feel for him.

maybe we just interpret him differently. you know, it happens

e would never tell an untermensch to "be himself". but the problem is that nobody considers themselfe an untermensch.

it's always the people who would need a complete character makeover. they obviously think he can't be serious with "be yourself, regardles of social consequences". they can't understand because in their case that would mean cave in to being an unemployed, fat and perverted vegetable.

>Nietzsche would say you shouldn't be yourself if you're already an untermensch
Nietzsche never used this term to mean what you think it means. You're an uneducated piece of shit. Get out.

>It's always the kid with multiple chins and no neck who finds Nietzsche so appalling and I just think it's so fitting because Nietzsche would've felt the same contempt for them that they feel for him.
Isn't that construction based on a sentence in Rousseau's letters from the mountain?
He says somewhere, speaking as if he were Voltaire, "Philosophy gives back to the common folk all the contempt that they have for her."

Nietzsche doesn't want people, and especially people like you, to improve ; he wants the weak to die.

the problem with that would be that every human is weak in some aspects. show me one that isn't and i'll change my mind.

I was unaware of that passage when I wrote that but it is very fitting. Thank you for bringing it to my attention

found the pathetic brainlets with absolutely no understanding of the concept of nietzchean untermensch and of his philosophy in general. leave this board, go back to r/atheism, read his books, and then kill yourselves

>personal growth and transformation is healthy

Self improvement is masturbation

Look at these buttflustered NEETshcucks, somebody offended their edge god

Have you ever read a single work of Nietzsche?

What if my true self just wants to masturbate while high on drugs all day?

>quoting fight Club
Go the fuck back to r/books

then you are an untermensch. might be that nietzsche's solution for that qould have been to execute you. personally, i'd say it's possible to get more beneficial traits. anyways, nietzsche was a druggie too and if you don't get regular sex, i'd say masturbation isn't THAT bad. ust make sure it's a temporary thing on your way to become desireable enough to secure regular sex.

>implying I care what a kissless virgin who went mad and spent the last 10 years of his life bedridden shitting himself thinks I should do or be

actually I have, unlike you

you can reduce anything to one simple statement. this doesn't mean that you should or that it'll be sufficiently descriptive of the thing.

so yes op you can reduce nietzche to "be yourself", but that leaves it completely open to misunderstanding and opens questions such as: what is your self? and what does it mean to be?

false. nietzche never gave a clear definition of ubermensch, because the ubermensch is he who realizes his true self and stays true to it. therefore if your true self is to be a lazy faggot like the guy you answered to, you are a ubermensch as long as you keep living as a lazy faggot, because that is your own nature.

faggot

Power is a structure of control. Power causes a reaction. The faster and the higher the magnitude of the reaction, the more the power, the more one "controls" life. All of existence is this reaction-control mechanism. It is through it that we understand what existence is made of. In Nietzsche's words, "This world is the will to power—and nothing besides! And you yourselves are also this will to power—and nothing besides!” That is, anyhow, how I've begun to understand it. The goal of power is to extend itself, to become higher, also in the individual. Thus, "be powerful", might be a better statement of his will. I guess.

that's exactly what the untermensch is believing so they don't have to put in any effort. but it's ok. just b urself bb. less competition for those who try if you are content to be your artificially weakened self.

please explain one aspect of either of these posts that is a sign of weakness. If personal growth, introspection, effort, and resilience is weak, every great man who has ever lived has been weak by your definition.

I can also guarantee with about 95% certainty that I am stronger and more stoic irl than you are, without going into details.

The ubermensch is an unattainable metaphysical ideal. Nobody is an ubermensch, it's a horizon that recedes as you approach it

finally one who truly understand the meaning of the word power as he uses it. I used to think as you do now, that "be powerful" would have been a correct sinopsis of his tought, but you must consider this: to be powerful means becoming a higher version of yourself, but to do so you must first find out who you truly are. since nietzche was what I call a constructive nihilist, or what you might call a moral relativist, there is no absolute "higher" and "better", and thus you need a root from which to flourish.

i'm only starting with his works. could you tell me what his definition of power is? if it is what one should strive for, then how would you measure your progress?

Become who you are!

is more accurately attributable to Nietzche.

Know Thyself

is more accurate.

Sure. I think of it like the "Concentrated Effect" jewel in Path of Exile. To flourish, one must be steady in surmising his end-goal, ne? To not spread his interests too thin, and focus on something generally. Something like that, anyway. I think this quote is relevant:

'Where cruelty is needed.— Those who have greatness are cruel to their virtues and to secondary considerations'

The catch is that this is something that regularly happens automatically.

'Is the “goal,” the “purpose” not often enough a beautifying pretext, a self-deception of vanity after the event that does not want to acknowledge that the ship is following the current into which it has entered accidentally? that it “wills” to go that way because it—must? that is has a direction, to be sure, but—no helmsman at all?
We still need a critique of the concept of “purpose.”'

Hence I think it's best to just laugh at the concept of purpose, and to assume fate knows well enough what you are, and will push in that direction. But I dunno.

THERE IS NO "TRUE" SELF YOU FUCKING RETARDS

he does not give a clear definition, but you can understand from context that he uses the word with a different meaning than the one that it is commonly used in.

he usually means power in the truest sense of the word: literally "to be able to". thus his most famous expression, "the will to power" is not "the will to dominate" but rather "the will to evolve/improve"

(this one gets the gold medal for retardation and mis[reading] if he ever read Nietzsche)
Why don't you all stop posting and go read Nietzsche ?

Also this ; read BGE. You cucks still believe too much in grammar ...

in german, the word he uses is "macht". i'm curious on reading how he means this. because my first impulse would be to interpret "Macht" as 'the will to dominate'.

thanks for the explanation

that's a rather intresting idea, really. so much that it might even be true.

you're welcome.

I have not read it so I'm literally just assuming, shouldn't beyond good and evil be about moral relativism? what does it have to do with the concept of true self?

>I have not read it so I'm literally just assuming, shouldn't beyond good and evil be about moral relativism?
no

>what does it have to do with the concept of true self?
"true self" is moral atomism

How did this nigga get paid?

>another thread about a dead white man
ugh can we not?

he got paid in pussy.

how can it be a "moral" anything? it is a concept about identity how is that pertinent to morality- i.e. what is good and bad? pls explain

Are you my bitchy wife, xanthippe?

>how can it be a moral thing
it's the last dwelling place of god, I mean belief in the 'I'. Nietzsche was the first to point out that the belief in a single "I" was also a belief in causa sui, --- thus a belief in a moral world-order.

I cannot comment on the last part, having not read all of his works, but for the first part, that would make sense if taken in a theological key. the nature of a true self does not necessarily imply a decision of god, nor god itself and by extension not even a universal morality

Be a courageous and active version of yourself.

Are the penguin classics translations of his books decent?

Stoicism is for children.

>Not realizing Nietzsche got rekt

>I accept getting rekt. Therefore I am not.
>Remains rekt

Philosophy has no meaning, it's abstract. If you conclude anything practical then you're employing psychology or natural sciences.

This doesn't even make sense. Stoicism is adherence to nature. Read some fucking Epictetus.

I don't see where it doesn't make sense to you. What specifically is the problem?

There's a field around me so your feelings can't affect me lol.

I didn't make the comic.
Nature doesn't exist.
There is no way to 'adhere' to nature.

Stoicism is post-pagan nonsense.

I mostly agree with this. Nietzsche speaks about self-actualization, sure, but particularly for a freeing yourself from the auspices of things taken for granted, especially at the time he wrote: religion and moral adherence.

I also am interested in character revision v. full internal value adherence.

Nietzsche certainly covered topics vaster than self help, like the nature of self vs. nature and how to see with clarity. However, surely you can apply philosophy to better yourself. Wasn't this pretty much the greek philosophic ideal?

We are talking about a dude who said that the concerns of the body were foremost over the mind, and to first look after your health. He recommended cocoa for breakfast instead of coffee, and brisks walks on the mountainsides for personal growth and health - as well as a statement of struggle.

Honestly, in a crude way, I think a lot of self-help movements rediscovering stoicism and Nietzsche are in a way true to the original texts.
Maybe. Possibly. idk

yup, original source > secondary sources. and if OP goes for secondary sources read with a critical eye and read a lot of them, so you don't just assimilate their POV.

that said,

Maybe not completely adhere - but would you agree that there are ways of acting that are more in congruence with how the world is, and more effective in dealing with inevitabilities like pain and suffering?

No, I would not.
>suffering and pain are bad

His friends (two) sent him money and fruit

Fair enough! I think many people's suffering is compounded by further negative emotions, eg. anxiety. "I must not feel this way", the Buddhist concept of the second arrow. Stoicism appears to ask us to deal with it by accepting it - as you have? I think Nietzsche asks us to embrace pain as a means to self-betterment. I may be off, not super educated - this is my impression I got.

...

ffs, I really want to read and understand all his works JUST so I can tell how many of you faggots are pretending to understand him
These threads sicken me, everyone becomes morally bitchy and self righteous in Nietzsche threads, why do I keep coming here?

Then do that. Nietzche is in his own opinion is one of the first 'honest' philosophers. He even btfo Descartes, a founder of modern science AND Philosophy.

The premise of this discussion is utterly beside the point: the metaphysical "meaning" (duhh Nietzsche wanted us to believe *this* guyz!!) of his writings is utterly irrelevant.

Nietzsche's philosophy is simply the expression of his will to power/truth. It is not a matter of us setting up some trans-historical-metaphysical formula for everyone to learn by rote; the weak and the strong, the healthy and sick all together; such an approach is the life-denying, creation-denying enslavement of will to the dead.

If you want to know the meaning of Nietzsche, read him. "Ye shall know them by their fruits". That is all.

As an addendum: if Nietzsche could only write in a way in which his philosophy would be interpreted by all men to hold a single meaning, I do not think he would have written at all.