>>23323091He probably means there is some sort of beauty in suffering. Is that the meaning of passion of Christ? When you save the world you are quite literally living for it. Jesus is a God. But also he is the Son. He was here before all time. I am the antichrist. I am an angel of light masquerading as a new world order. Was such a fate opposable? I wonder.
>>23323106i like posts like thisit just goes to show how deeply somebody can genuinely misappropriate something that is not what he means althougever
>>23323091Refuted by Mao Zedong.
dignity is a social construct
>>23323318What a tremendously idiotic and absolutely retarded quote>there was no history before people>there will be no history after peopleAlso it implies that "people" must be the poor and oppressedMost achievements and important events in world history are and have made by a select few individuals, disproportionately well endowed regarding wealth, social circumstances, physical or mental abilities. The absurdly large majority of people are and have been irrelevant to world history.So no, refuted by Nietzsche
>>23323554>have been* made
>>23323554>>23323318“Once upon a time, in some out of the way corner of that universe which is dispersed into numberless twinkling solar systems, there was a star upon which clever beasts invented knowing. That was the most arrogant and mendacious minute of "world history," but nevertheless, it was only a minute. After nature had drawn a few breaths, the star cooled and congealed, and the clever beasts had to die. One might invent such a fable, and yet he still would not have adequately illustrated how miserable, how shadowy and transient, how aimless and arbitrary the human intellect looks within nature. There were eternities during which it did not exist. And when it is all over with the human intellect, nothing will have happened.” ― Friedrich Nietzsche, On Truth and Lies in a Nonmoral SenseNietzsche is the father of postmodernism.
>>23323554Wordcel. You'd get mad at someone for saying water is wet.
>>23323091Do any of you on this fucking board ever read critically or are you just reading philosophy to see some 'aggrandising thoughts' about the world that you can slap into an image you post around like you're spreading a vd?But to add my own thoughts on the matter, this line in-of-itself is not as interesting to me (nor do I think it true) as what Nietzsche thinks is entailed by it...I mean, early Nietzsche here can't be treated as the sort of aphorist he developed into, in BoT his project is at least mostly coherent (though obviously contradictory...) so this line needs to be interpreted within the frame of his aesthetics, not yours.
>>23323603great argumenthow will I ever recover
>>23323106No, Nietzsche rejected dogmas about all the other branches of classical philosophy, including logic (which is funny and ironic). Logical, ethical, etc. justifications weren’t valid and shouldn’t be valid in his mind (also a funny contradiction). He thought that the only justification from a philosophical perspective then was aesthetic justification free of ethical and logical judgements. This is basically the mode of life he projected onto the Greeks and spent the rest of his life pushing.
