»
Discussion
»
Philosophy 101
»
Neitzsche - On Death
| Philosophy 101 |
|
Neitzsche - On Death |
|
|
littlewing Member Rara Avis
since 2003-03-02
Posts 9655New York 
|
I have been finishing Neitzsche's Writings and came across this which I adore. Wanted to share and see what views are generated from this. Three years ago, I disagreed with the man. Today, I read him religously. Quoted from, " Basic Writings of Neitzsche": Aphorisms #322 pg. 165 "Death. - The certain prospect of death could sweeten every life with a precious and fragrant drop of levity - and now you strange apothecary souls have turned it into an ill-tasting drop of poison that makes the whole of life repulsive." This is brilliant . . . [This message has been edited by littlewing (07-14-2003 03:52 PM).] |
||
| © Copyright 2003 Sue Eckam - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
....imagine all the people, living for today, you may say I'm a dreamer... but I'm not the only one.... if there's an afterlife who wants to live forever? if there's no afterlife -- who wants to live forever? |
||
|
littlewing Member Rara Avis
since 2003-03-02
Posts 9655New York |
a double edged sword indeed . . . me? I am for the afterlife rather than living forever - God what an awful curse! Thanks LR - nice addition xxoo |
||
timothysangel1973
since 2001-12-03
Posts 1725Never close enough |
I have read some of his writings, and I have to honestly say that some of them just appalled me right off. I do like the quote above however, and maybe I was being somewhat closed minded. I agree with both of you about living forever...at some point I want a little peace! And as far as afterlifes go...I don't know...one time around was enough for me! Great Topic! |
||
Local Parasite
since 2001-11-05
Posts 2527Transylconia, Winnipeg |
quote: LOL... I like the irony of reading Nietzsche "religiously." Think he'd go for that?  |
||
|
timothysangel1973
since 2001-12-03
Posts 1725Never close enough |
 I'm walking with Parasite on that one...hehe |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
It might help if you understood his concept of "eternal recurrence" a little better. |
||
|
Local Parasite
since 2001-11-05
Posts 2527Transylconia, Winnipeg |
So, Brad? Enlighten us. |
||
|
jbouder Member Elite
since 1999-09-18
Posts 2534Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash |
I'll take a shot at this one. "Eternal Recurrence," as I understand it, is very similar to the classic Stoic teaching and the Eastern thoughts on Karmic repetition. With it, I think Nietzsche intended to underscore the importance of what we do today. To Nietzsche, everthing we live in our life today will return to us again and again. We are personally responsible for our actions and therefore, should strive to better ourselves, to rise above our circumstances, and to recognize that our present actions are of consequence. Otherwise, we will be doomed to repeat our mediocrity and, worse, failures of previous lives without end. Although I disagree with Nietzsche's thoughts on eternal recurrence, I think he was right on target with what the result should be in this present life. Jim [This message has been edited by jbouder (07-14-2003 03:35 PM).] |
||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
the seal placed in hot wax leaves it's mark but is gone |
||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
the flame passed from one candle to another |
||
|
jbouder Member Elite
since 1999-09-18
Posts 2534Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash |
I think that is the effect, but I also think Nietzsche took it farther than that. Jim |
||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
yes |
||
|
littlewing Member Rara Avis
since 2003-03-02
Posts 9655New York |
Hey Angel - yes I know - appalled me too before I opened my mind and really read into what he was saying Brian - ahahaha NO he wouldnt like that whatsoever - I must watch my choice of words - thank you Brad and J - eternal recurrance - that sounds like Karma to me? Nicely said Rebel indeed Here I think he gives us a self portrait of sorts and something we can all surely relate: "One does not only wish to be understood when one writes; one wishes just as surely not to be understood. It is not by any means necessarily an objection to a book when anybody finds it impossible to understand: perhaps that was part of the author's intention - he did not want to be understood by just "anybody." Brilliant . . . xxoo [This message has been edited by littlewing (07-14-2003 03:53 PM).] |
||
Midnitesun
since 2001-05-18
Posts 28647Gaia |
OK, so when nobody understands me, that means I am brilliant? ROTFL! ...have fun with that thought |
||
|
littlewing Member Rara Avis
since 2003-03-02
Posts 9655New York |
Kacy I always understand you so that makes me brillaint too . . . I need to go to sleep I meant that the quote was brilliant in the fact that sometimes what we write we may not intend for everyone to understand . . . we hope that they do but some people may not have had that experience etc etc why oh why must you make me think all the time - it hurts my head lol [This message has been edited by littlewing (07-15-2003 02:11 AM).] |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
From "The Gay Science": quote: I emphasize the moral point it makes, but he also seems to have seen it as a physical description of the universe. [This message has been edited by Brad (07-15-2003 03:10 AM).] |
||
|
littlewing Member Rara Avis
since 2003-03-02
Posts 9655New York |
Excellent Brad and umm . . . I would toss myself to the ground and curse and moan . . . |
||
|
jbouder Member Elite
since 1999-09-18
Posts 2534Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash |
Littlewing, Brad and others: I suppose my main criticism of Nietzsche on this point is his apparent, narrow self-centeredness. I think I agree with him that going with the flow of the sand in the hourglass can be detrimental to the individual. I also think, however, that our going against the flow in our lifetime can have a catalystic effect on others who, without our efforts, would not be able on their own to break from the flow. Nietzsche's thoughts are certainly profound, but unnecessarily restrictive ... at least insomuch as I understand Nietszche's philosophy. I don't think his thoughts are profound because few people understand them. Rather, I think they are profound because they underscore the ability of the individual to effect changes that persist long after that individual is dead and gone. History certainly bears that out to be true. Jim |
||
|
icebox Member Elite
since 2003-05-03
Posts 4383in the shadows |
This from the man who had his Witch say to Zarathustra: "When you go to Woman, bring thy whip!" *smile* |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
Littlewing: "Brad and J - eternal recurrance - that sounds like Karma to me?" Not exactly, though there are some similarities. The concept of Karma at least has a supposed direction ... enlightenment. The more bad karma is worked off, the closer one gets to Nirvana and release from Samsara (the condition of being born and reborn, and having differentiated existence as an individual). However when you learn what Buddhism really teaches about Nirvana, it turns out to be dissolution and nonentity. I personally have a hard time reconciling the idea of "good" and "bad" Karma with a destiny that denies the very concept, and does not provide any standard of judgement. So it seems "direction" is only apparant, not actual, in the doctrine of Karma. In that sense, it is very similar to Nietzsche's idea of eternal recurrence. Where is his idea different than Karma? I think his thoughts were based upon a strict naturalism where it is reasoned that since time is infinite, and matter and space are finite, the exact same configurations are bound to reoccur. He took this abstract thought to say that History would inevitably repeat itself ... and it seems from the quote of his provided by Brad that he really believed that it would replay itself to the "T". But wouldn't all the slightly different and vastly different histories have to play out as well? Jim said of Nietzsche's view that, "We are personally responsible for our actions and therefore, should strive to better ourselves, to rise above our circumstances, and to recognize that our present actions are of consequence. Otherwise, we will be doomed to repeat our mediocrity and, worse, failures of previous lives without end" But if his recurrence is based upon a fatalistic naturalism, how can "betterment" be achieved? He seems to suggest that we are doomed to repeat our lives, whether mediocre or exceptional. If one's mode of life is caused only by unavoidable configurations of matter bound to appear along the infinite stretch of time, then how is "will" or "choice" explained? This seems to me to be no small dilemma for Nietzsche's thought, since his "Will to Power" and "New Morality" ideas are both based upon choice and autonomy. Quite a dialectical tension to overcome. Another difficulty here is one of meaning. How can Nietzsche speak of two opposite emotional reactions to discovering that the universe is after the nature of eternal recurrence (closed and cyclical)? And upon what basis should one despair, or rejoice? It seems to me that the only solution for Nietzsche was a complete arbitrariness. "There are no universal values, therefore I will invent my own", is what he ended up saying. The hourglass turning over and over was fine for Nietzsche as long as he could think of himself as one of the grains that always ends up on the top of the mass of sand. I think this must be why he saw the "Old morality" as a weak and pitiful slave mentality. Unfortunately this "Old" moral code is what most still generally hold as admirable and good ... things like self-sacrifice, kindess, love, generosity, and benevolence. Consider what he wrote in "The Gay Science, section 325": "Who can attain to anything great if he does not feel in himself the force and will to inflict great pain? The ability to suffer is a small matter: in that line, weak women and even slaves often attain masterliness. But not to perish from internal distress and doubt when one inflicts great suffering and hears the cry of it-that is great, that belongs to greatness." Didn't someone say above that when they first read Nietzsche that they were appalled? I think this reaction is a good indication that you have retained what it means to be human. How frightening it would be for the strong and powerful to take this seriously (actually it would be also a frightening scenario for "plain" people to take this seriously)... and from history, regrettably, it is evident that many have. Local Parasite: "I like the irony of reading Nietzsche "religiously." Think he'd go for that?" True. He bashed religious ideas without mercy. And yet, don't his own solutions for the dilemmas of life have religious overtones? He ditches the idea of Eternal life, but embraces "Eternal recurrence" in an attempt to fill the void. He rejects the worship of a God who imposes and defines moral absolutes and values, but ends up urging the Superman morality. He even wrote when God "dies", we end up having to be gods ourselves. To summarize the main thrust of Nietzschian philosophy ... Worship oneself, and do it lustfully and vigorously. Littlewing: "umm . . . I would toss myself to the ground and curse and moan" umm . . . Me too. I hope I've explained why. To end, giving credit where credit is due, I'll say that Nietzsche was indeed brilliant. He was a brilliant writer and thinker. He was richly gifted by the God he pronounced dead under his own pen. But overall, his philosophy is wanting, and his morality is reprehensible. Most people, I feel, are attracted to his great charisma. And sometimes the art of delivery can make us indiscriminate of what was delivered. Stephen. [This message has been edited by Stephanos (07-16-2003 03:54 AM).] |
||
|
jbouder Member Elite
since 1999-09-18
Posts 2534Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash |
Stephen: I think what he meant was that if we should strive for a level of achievement in our lifetime that we could bear repeating over and over again. Granted, some people seem content with mediocrity, but few people find contentment in failure. I think the basis would be, in Nietzsche's mind anyway, somewhat subjective. I don't see how his idea of eternal recurrence can ever be more than hypothetical. How I would apply his idea is by putting a different spin on the question of whether a person is content wasting his or her life. The spin would be, if you had to repeat your wasted life over and over again, would it cause you despair. I agree with you that there is some danger in getting caught up in Nietzsche's personality, rather than looking for value in some of his ideas. I'm personally confused by his view that Christians spend an inordinate amount of wasted time trying to "save their souls" when I thought Luther pretty much laid to rest in the German church the scholastic confusion of how our souls are saved. That said, I really don't know much about the state of the Lutheran church in Germany during Nietzsche's day. Jim |
||
|
littlewing Member Rara Avis
since 2003-03-02
Posts 9655New York |
Stephen and J: you guys made amazing points indeed and no, I do not think it is healthy to get caught up in his writings, I think you first need a healthy mind to read him and an open one at that. His aphorisms make the most sense to me - read Death of Tragedy and was blown away completely. I do agree on the point that if we had to live our "miserable lives over" is accurate regarding his philosophy. What freaked me out when I first read him was exactly his Nazish non - Christian views. But I read him because he goes from one point that makes no absolute sense to another that seems as if it were written specifically for me. I see him as really the only philospher that everyone can get something out of, contrary to Kant or Jung (whom I also adore) but meaning that Nietzsche is all over the place in so many subject areas that he really makes you think about your life instead of imposing a doctrine on you. By my earlier comments, I meant that I think he wrote with the idea in mind that he really didnt care if anyone "got" him or not and that is what keeps me in awe. I dont see him as narrow and restrictive as all. Then again, I was raised Roman Catholic so there ya go [This message has been edited by littlewing (07-16-2003 11:43 PM).] |
||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
quote: great song -- hell of a philosophy [This message has been edited by Local Rebel (07-17-2003 04:03 PM).] |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
Hell is not so much a philosophy as it is the end result of a chosen path. My opinion is that there are many great thinkers and writers who, having rejected faith in God, got a pretty rich view of it's advent in their own souls. Of course, being philosophizers, their description of Hell translated into Philosophy. Stephen |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
"I'm personally confused by his view that Christians spend an inordinate amount of wasted time trying to "save their souls" when I thought Luther pretty much laid to rest in the German church the scholastic confusion of how our souls are saved." Well Jim, no matter what epiphany Luther had about the nature of Salvation, I don't think he intended to make it a careless enterprise. Mere works is no way to be righteous in God's sight, but faith remains a matter of "fear and trembling" according to scripture, and salvation is spoken of as something to be "worked out". As to Nietzsche and the German Church, it is clear from his writings that he deemed the teachings of the Church as Mythology ... and a political attempt to control people through making them into a slave race. All of the Biblical teachings about love, kindness, meekness, humility, self-sacrifice etc... he disdained as signs of weakness. He then promoted their opposite vices as "life affirming". He was overly ambitious in his attempt to establish a whole new paradigm for morality, by overthrowing the moral code he claimed was imposed by religious leaders. However the teaching of the Church always was that these principles (more or less) are indelibly written on the hearts of men by God himself, through the conscience. How hard it is to eliminate what God has published so emphatically and broadly! Since Nietzsche was a rebel against the established religion of his day, it is not hard to see why any Church doctrine was rejected by him. Isn't it true that his Father was a Lutheran minister? Stephen. [This message has been edited by Stephanos (08-01-2003 01:16 AM).] |
||
|
mrmojorisin5908 Member
since 2004-05-03
Posts 103Colorado |
the only way to know that we are truly alive is to confront what we fear most: death! |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
No, that's an endorphin rush. The only way to know you're truly alive (whatever that means) is to live. |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
