3 ms·

Who, then, understands his philosophy of life? I've tried looking up various interpretations and they all seem to range from "gross" to "really gross", and are

Who, then, understands his philosophy of life? I've tried looking up various interpretations and they all seem to range from "gross" to "really gross", and are just rehashings of might makes right, which is the least imaginative and most ancient philosophy in existence. Example: https://rafal.io/posts/nietzsche-slave-morality.html https://rafal.io/posts/nietzsche-slave-morality.html Please point me to the correct interpretation of Nietzsche, because I'm apparently failing to find it. Or maybe we all who are not fans of him understand what it seemed Nietzsche wanted to get at just fine and are not interested in sugar coating the consequences of such belief sets. > I think you'll witness first hand what happens when weak people rule and excellence is abandoned for equality. Question: do you consider Stalin a weak or a strong person in this context?

BucketSort 8y ago
I honestly don't agree with the premise that you can just read someone's recap to understand him. He wasn't that type of philosopher. It's just like reading someone's interpretation of a poem -- you will get that person's perspective, not necessarily that of the author. I know this makes western minds ill, in the west we believe truth can be separated from the mind and put on a page, available for everyone to understand by merely downloading it. Some things you can only understand by experience -- something eastern philosophers are more open to. So Nietzsche is the correct interpretation of Nietzsche. Why would we ever believe a philosophy of life would be a logical argument anyway? Isn't purpose and perspective more in the realm of the arts? Again, I know this is highly unsatisfactory to sons of the west and moderns completely submerged in political correctness. I don't consider people that terrorize others to be strong, that's what weak people do.
misterdoubt 8y ago
A serious reader of Nietzsche should, at a minimum, read Kaufmann's foundational book. https://press.princeton.edu/titles/10109.html https://press.princeton.edu/titles/10109.html If you want a single source for a "correct interpretation" (a term that's hard to take seriously), read that book.

BucketSort 8y ago

I honestly don't agree with the premise that you can just read someone's recap to understand him. He wasn't that type of philosopher. It's just like reading someone's interpretation of a poem -- you will get that person's perspective, not necessarily that of the author. I know this makes western minds ill, in the west we believe truth can be separated from the mind and put on a page, available for everyone to understand by merely downloading it. Some things you can only understand by experience -- something eastern philosophers are more open to. So Nietzsche is the correct interpretation of Nietzsche. Why would we ever believe a philosophy of life would be a logical argument anyway? Isn't purpose and perspective more in the realm of the arts? Again, I know this is highly unsatisfactory to sons of the west and moderns completely submerged in political correctness. I don't consider people that terrorize others to be strong, that's what weak people do.

misterdoubt 8y ago

A serious reader of Nietzsche should, at a minimum, read Kaufmann's foundational book. https://press.princeton.edu/titles/10109.html https://press.princeton.edu/titles/10109.html If you want a single source for a "correct interpretation" (a term that's hard to take seriously), read that book.