Where Nietzsche Went Wrong.

[Dark Light]

I am a fan of most of Nietzsche's work, but, in my opinion he screwed up in a few places. For one, he advocated that humans were special among animals, but only in their ability to change. He believed we could become whatever we wanted to be if we just gave it the ole' college try. Now this is not without some merit. We can certainly change more than other animals, but we can't just quit being ourselves no matter how hard we try. We do have physical, chemical make-up that prevents us from changing completely. For example, some folks will usually fight in a 'fight or flight' situation, even when it is advantageous to fly. You cannot simply will yourself to respond differently. Another mistake is his 'God is dead' hypothesis. He believed (not unlike ideal future of Gene Roddenberry) that religion, and God had served it's purpose and humanity was ready to just move on. Well over a hundred years after Nietzche's death religion is still a pretty powerful force, and that is unlikely to change in the next hundred years either (in my opinion). I have doubts that humanity will ever cast off its religious shackles without evolutionary change over the course of many millennia. Hmm..I was going to make another refutation but I forgot what it was...

Do you agree? Disagree? Where else did Nietzsche go wrong?

[Buddy Christ]

I love Nietzsche. He was one of those blunt, unforgiving, in-your-face atheists in a time when it was cultural suicide to be an atheist. If I believed in reincarnation, I would guess that Christopher Hitchens was Nietzsche in a former life.

As far as where he went wrong? It's been way too long for me get into that conversation. I haven't read Nietzsche (The Will to Power was my last one) since college. The best I can do is answer in the abstract. I would say that however wrong Nietzsche was on specific points, his intent and message were delivered powerfully enough to serve their purpose. For instance, claiming that God was dead and that he was the anti-Christ worked more as a sledgehammer to jar stubborn mindsets of the time period than for any specific reason.

[Mr Woof]

(13-11-2012 10:46 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  I am a fan of most of Nietzsche's work, but, in my opinion he screwed up in a few places. For one, he advocated that humans were special among animals, but only in their ability to change. He believed we could become whatever we wanted to be if we just gave it the ole' college try. Now this is not without some merit. We can certainly change more than other animals, but we can't just quit being ourselves no matter how hard we try. We do have physical, chemical make-up that prevents us from changing completely. For example, some folks will usually fight in a 'fight or flight' situation, even when it is advantageous to fly. You cannot simply will yourself to respond differently. Another mistake is his 'God is dead' hypothesis. He believed (not unlike ideal future of Gene Roddenberry) that religion, and God had served it's purpose and humanity was ready to just move on. Well over a hundred years after Nietzche's death religion is still a pretty powerful force, and that is unlikely to change in the next hundred years either (in my opinion). I have doubts that humanity will ever cast off its religious shackles without evolutionary change over the course of many millennia. Hmm..I was going to make another refutation but I forgot what it was...

Do you agree? Disagree? Where else did Nietzsche go wrong?

Nietzsche was very much for the 'overman' ,as distinct from the strong group directive, and it was his sister that created the link to fascism for her own self aggrandizement.
As for what went wrong? In what was to some degree radicalism at the time I don't think a great deal did actually.
He saw that a weak fawning attitude towards religion (Christianity)served vested interests and did his best, despite ill health, to be as adventuresome as possible. As you indicate human nature varies; he may have been overly demanding, and his style of argument was quite boisterous. Unlike Schopenhaeur he was very positive before succumbing to insanity.

I have never really understood his Eternal Re-occurence, which was very metaphysical for him, and has always reminded me of Ground hog Day.

[Dark Light]

Mr. Woof, as I re-call it Nietzshe pretty much said the meta-physical is bullshit, but even if it isn't we can't understand it so it's not worth wasting time on. This eternal re-occurrence is something alien to me. Was this something from his unfinished manuscript or something? Or maybe something from his years in academia?

[Mr Woof]

(14-11-2012 01:36 AM)Dark Light Wrote:  Mr. Woof, as I re-call it Nietzshe pretty much said the meta-physical is bullshit, but even if it isn't we can't understand it so it's not worth wasting time on. This eternal re-occurrence is something alien to me. Was this something from his unfinished manuscript or something? Or maybe something from his years in academia?

Possibly; I forget the source myself. I think he based the notion on astronomy.
Maybe some people raise the issue in an endeavour to put him down.......