@amist,
I posted this before and am not sure it was put in the right place so forgive the duplicate, please:
So many people do not understand Nietzsche or his Thus Spoke Zarathustra that it is an incredible phenomenon to behold the writing and the world's response to it. Nietzshce was NOT a godless man. On the contrary this work is that of an incredibly intelligent, witty, and god loving man who is indicting the world he lives in for their faithlessness and unfaithfulness to God. This is very well illustrated in the opening chapter of the first volume in which Zarathustra (who is the personification of Nietzsche) attempts to speak to the people of the world (to man) and finds that 'There they stand... there they laugh: they do not understand me; I am not the mouth for these ears.' The message proclaimed in the book that God is dead - is not understood correctly. In fact it is the people that interpret Nietzsche as a herald of godlessness that he incriminates for the wit of his writings illustrates the unspoken second clause of the proclamation: God is dead... and it is you fools who are killing him.
@GoshisDead,
Quote:I really don't think reading N can affect a person's faith any more than it was already affected before reading N.
Fred wasn't much of one for "faith." One of many of his comments on faith went something like this (paraphrasing): "Faith does not move mountains. On the contrary, it erects mountains where there were none."
Another: "Convictions are greater enemies of truth than lies."
Hi,
The question posed originally is a good one.
I've struggled with reconciling my fondness for Freddy with my faith - which approximates Judaism more closely than any one else, though I don't consider myself Jewish.
In the end, my conclusion for myself is that the Nietzcehan thing to do with any belief system is to question it, doubt it, wring it, devour it and spit it out. If, after all that, one finds it worthy of one's commitment, then one has reason with which to embrace it.
To quote from, "The Gay Science": I favor any skepsis to which I may reply, let us try it! But I no longer wish to hear anything of all those things and questions that do not permit any experiment.
I would encourage anyone who wants to discuss Nietzsche to doubt everyone's opinion, and especially those whose opinions are based on the opinions of others.
@Felim1,
Nietzsche was a negative nihilist.He just didn’t realise that he was.
@tsarstepan,
The problem with this is it cant be proved one way or the other whether God exists or not. This is truth and man knows it. One can't reach nihilism and then draw a conclusion one way or the other. If one does then one goes right or left into positive or negative nihilism....in HOPE....nothing more ...nothing less.
@Jasper10,
Do you genuinely think I care about this or any other philosophy thread? That's both sad and funny at the same time.
@tsarstepan,
I don’t know if you care or not ...I just thought you might want to hear why Nietzsche got it wrong.
@Jasper10,
I would suggest that the only possible way Atheists can prove their philosophy is DEFINITIVELY TRUE is by saying absolutely nothing at all.
It is only by remaining SILENT that they can prove that they don’t exist.
@Jasper10,
Surely, there is no opinion after the big atheistic cancelling out.How come there isn’t silence from atheists? I thought they didn’t exist?
You need to exist to have an opinion.
@Jasper10,
Unless you are a computer that is or engaging with one.We really need to learn to think for ourselves “in the moment” rather than engaging with “out of the moment” automated thoughts only.
@Jasper10,
I would suggest that the biological computer brain ORGAN can only balance out thought statements for and against.It can therefore only be honest when it computes that it doesn’t know whether it exists or not.
I would suggest that if we were to never think again….. ever,Thoughts for and against having been silenced.
We are.
@Jasper10,
I would suggest that the alternative suggestion would be that if all thoughts for and against were silenced then we would cease to exist.
Hence the two statements,
“I think therefore I am”
“I am therefore I think”
Take your pick.
@amist,
Nietzsche, for better or worse, wasn't guilty of anything at all although he was rather indiscreet about the whole affair.
How would I respond to Nietzsche?
@Jasper10,
It is possible to make an assertion one way or the other but the something making that assertion needs to EXIST first in one form or another .i.e. EXIST and either have life or not have life.
@Jasper10,
Jasper10 wrote:
It is possible to make an assertion one way or the other but the something making that assertion needs to EXIST first in one form or another .i.e. EXIST and either have life or not have life.
YOU may assert that you exist...but that does not mean you exist. And YOU MAY assert that you do not exist...but that also does not mean you exist.
@Frank Apisa,
I dunno Frank, one manifestation, one vote?
@Agent Smith,
Nietzsche is Pietzsche, but Camus is Bleu.
@bobsal u1553115,
bobsal u1553115 wrote:
I dunno Frank, one manifestation, one vote?
I'm just attacking his attempt at logic.
We'll see how that goes.
