Why do so many leftist atheists endorse Nietzsche?
Post Reply
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-08-2013, 01:38 PM (This post was last modified: 03-08-2013 01:41 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Why do so many leftist atheists endorse Nietzsche?
(03-08-2013 01:36 PM)JAH Wrote:  OK GirlyMan I will bite and I have in fact reduced it to 5 sentences.

As above, we are animals and should view ourselves as such.

We are social animals and should organize ourselves such that all are benefited.

That organization should respect the other.

That organization should not include domination.

We are dependent on the earth, our home, we should protect it.

Complex in detail but simple in stating. What philosopher ever admitted to that. They mostly get lost in the details. Which I readily admit are immense.

You should start a new thread in the Philosophy section where it won't get lost in this trollshit.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-09-2013, 08:11 AM (This post was last modified: 16-09-2013 08:25 AM by Luminon.)
RE: Why do so many leftist atheists endorse Nietzsche?
(02-08-2013 11:17 AM)janthuffy Wrote:  "God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. Yet his shadow still looms. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?" (Nietzsche, The Gay Science, Section 125)

Nietzsche's point was that while we may have gotten over the concept of "God" in itself by killing him, its remnants still remain in our culture, morally and ethically, in what is the secular humanist movement and other such invented "sacred games". In other words, if Nietzsche was around today to witness this humanist movement, his response would simply be this "In your motto "Good without a God", you have one too many o's in the first word."
My impression is, that Nietzsche died from overdose of sanity. Sanity in an insane society acts as a strong poison. In great doses it kills, in small doses it causes depression, mental breakdown and suicide. The only way is to take it at regular doses under safety precautions - the greatest doses one can handle. Once one is poisoned with sanity, there is no hope but to get poisoned even more, because there comes a time when both, worldly and philosophic things are a poison. The only question is, what dies first, the body or the pride. If the pride, then there is the hope of something else taking over and saving us, rendering us pure inside and impervious outside to all the toxicity that was there all along, only without our recognition. Poison of sanity speeded up our metabolism, eating us away, while the poison of cultural insanity would render us senile wrecks in front of a TV.

Francis Bacon said, knowing a little science may lead one to atheism, but knowing more science will lead one to religion. Of course he did not mean the tribalistic organized religion as we all know it and hate it. He rather meant the religion of Thomas Paine, when one's mind is one's church, or the religion of Abraham Lincoln. When I do good, I feel good; when I do bad, I feel bad, and that is my religion.
I say, there is a reassuring presence of "god" in such a church, there is a certainty of revelation, of the power to know, that gives us confidence to know the right and wrong.
Nietzsche did not withdraw when the metabolism of his sanity speeded up, he did not stabilize himself in seclusion of his own mind-church, and he wore himself out on the world outside. He said A, he knew there must be C, but he did not get to saying B. He was a victim of this phenomenon called dark night of the soul, that is killing off philosophers and artists since the beginnings of culture.

If losing faith in Christianity is difficult, try losing faith in the culture. That's like when humanity is walking completely in the dark, but you're the only one who realized it's dark. They all say stumbling and falling down is normal. And you don't have the light, you even doubt if such a thing as light is real. There always are people claiming they have the light and will light your way, if you give them your money. But somehow you feel that if they really had light, it would shine at everyone, and not just those who pay. And one day when you finally see the light, it will hurt as hell, it will burn your eyes, it will reveal the worst what you thought was the best. And it will all burn like insanity in the light of sanity. That's what the light is. All the emo mystics of history saying humans are not good enough compared to god, that's not just Church propaganda, that's their experience of that stage. There are further stages, of course. You can not understand such people unless you go through the experiences.

For now you guys are still wondering if we can really know anything. You have limited knowledge (such as that human is an animal) and you try to make a coherent sense of it. You only lie to yourself, if humans were like animals, we would not need to affirm it, it would be self-evident. But trust me, that won't last. The more you cling to it, the worse will be the next expansion of awareness. If Dante wrote, "Abandon all hope, ye who enter here," philosophers enter into a hell all of their own, in which they must, absolutely must, abandon all certainty. All of it. They must lose all but their bones, become philosophically destitute and neck-deep in philosophic debt. The hell will torture you, as long as you are not empty-handed.

You must be like little children, if you want to enter the kingdom of God. Sooner a camel goes through an eye of the needle, than a rich person enters the Heaven. Yeah, I recognize the handwriting. This is the process of de-culturizing, de-conditioning, de-attaching, philosophical destitution, the agnostic jackpot of jack-shit. See you on the other side.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Luminon's post
16-09-2013, 04:04 PM
Re: Why do so many leftist atheists endorse Nietzsche?
Why do the politics if a 19th century philosopher negate any relevance of admiring his philosophical work.

Do you dislike Heidegger because he was a Nazi party supporter? Or dislike the music of Wagner because he was anti-Semitic?

I enjoy Nietzsche... But I don't know what "endorsing" means in this context. I don't need to agree with, even a majority of a persons ideas to acknowledge some that may have been crucial ideas at the time that aided philosophical thoughts.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like ClydeLee's post
16-09-2013, 10:55 PM
Why do so many leftist atheists endorse Nietzsche?
I am an atheist, lean to the left, and I like Nietzsche.

I don't want to over-analyse his works. His work has nothing to do with Nazi ideology, objectivism or libertarianism.
I appreciate his work as literature and poetry. With biting sarcasm and playful wit he Sharply observed the culture
he lived in. What he saw was a lot of hypocracy, and a religion that forces its morality upon others.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: