Proving Godwins law in one post?

[Cain]

Well, Nietzsche came from a long line of Lutheran pastors, and it was initially expected of him that he would enter the same profession.  There were also some interesting parallels drawn between amor fati, the will to power, eternal recurrence and aspects of Lutheran thinking by Kaufmann. 

Edit: I've also seen it suggested, though I cannot remember by who, that it was Max Stirner, not Schopenhauer, who caused Nietzche to critically examine Christianity.

[The Johnny]

I meant odd in how those ideas are present in Lutheran philosophy in one way or another... although i basicly only know about the idea of "personal relationship with God with no intermediaries" sort of thing in Lutheranism... funny, 'cause i went to a Lutheran school at some point, but nothing seems to have stuck.

From what i found by reading "The Ego and its Own", Nietzsche was deeply influenced by Stirner's egoism... which in turn, i guess lead N. into the sense of how we should worry about ourselves and not the imaginary pie in the sky.

Anyhow, after years and years of reading and rereading him, the only thing that i deem worthy of N. is his idea of "perspectivism" (believe me, its there, just nobody has taken the time to examine it like the oh so over-analyzed "eternal recurrence" and "nihilism") and the transmutation of values, which are primarly presented explicitly in "Der Wille Zur Macht", his last book that has a lot of controversy to what was modified by his sister...

I need to find myself a revised version of that, my copy is from early 2000's, and i read/heard somebody was coming up with a critically revised version like 4 years ago, they should have finished it by now...

[Cain]

His metaphysical speculations are sadly overlooked in favour of his more provocative ethical and political statements, it is true.

I have the 2000 Kaufmann/Hollingdale translation of The Will to Power, I thought it was pretty decent.  Especially since, by far, the largest section of the book deals exactly with perspectivism, epistemology etc, while correcting the malicious editing that Frau Förster-Nietzsche undertook.

I'm not sure there would need to be a more critical version than that, unless you are speaking specifically of a Spanish-language translation, perhaps?  Also I believe Derrida, Foucault and Deleuze all took a fair bit from perspectivism, so you may want to read them at some time.

[The Johnny]

It is a metaphysical speculation, but it has a huge importance regarding ethics and even methodology, thats why i am estranged to why its ignored. In my school we see a lot of subjectivity, barely anything regarding representations, and i think perspectivism would give it an innovative support.

I have the... -looking in RL-... 2000 EDAF version (spanish), but these assholes dont mention on which revision the translation is based on. I was expecting a Collin/Montinari version, thats the one thats supposedly in the works (they should be done by now?)... Ill probably need to import the Kaufmann version in english, bilingual or english bookstores are lacking here.

I read those authors, but theres this one guy i havent: Jose Ortega de Gasset, which also deals with the subject.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

So here's the deal. Fuck the weak.

The Machine^TM already does that.  It doesn't need my help.

And also, this. 

[Doktor Howl]

I agree with that statement im interpreting you are making, just id choose "power" instead of "strenght" because "strenght" connotes physical strenght, and thats not what it comes down to always.

And by power i mean the capability to influence a circumstance.

For example, if representations guide practices and actions, undermining/critiquing/deconstructing those representations will have an effect in deligitimizing the practices/actions to a sector of the population. And thats pure words, thinking and communicating.

Power manifests itself in very different ways.

Heh,  I chose "strength" as opposed to "power" solely because I carry many more negative connotations of power but, yeah, terminology aside I think we're talking about the same thing.

What I criticise as weakness or lack of power isn't necessarily the weakness or lack of power in and of itself (everybody has to start somewhere) it's wilfully hanging onto that state and insisting that you shouldn't have to change, the world should be a different way, that  pisses me off. That's where you cross the line into "deserves it" as far as my sympathy for you is concerned.

The whole point of society is to make sure that everyone has the best day possible, whether or not they are strong or weak on that day, or in general.

[hooplala]

I agree with that statement im interpreting you are making, just id choose "power" instead of "strenght" because "strenght" connotes physical strenght, and thats not what it comes down to always.

And by power i mean the capability to influence a circumstance.

For example, if representations guide practices and actions, undermining/critiquing/deconstructing those representations will have an effect in deligitimizing the practices/actions to a sector of the population. And thats pure words, thinking and communicating.

Power manifests itself in very different ways.

Heh,  I chose "strength" as opposed to "power" solely because I carry many more negative connotations of power but, yeah, terminology aside I think we're talking about the same thing.

What I criticise as weakness or lack of power isn't necessarily the weakness or lack of power in and of itself (everybody has to start somewhere) it's wilfully hanging onto that state and insisting that you shouldn't have to change, the world should be a different way, that  pisses me off. That's where you cross the line into "deserves it" as far as my sympathy for you is concerned.

The whole point of society is to make sure that everyone has the best day possible, whether or not they are strong or weak on that day, or in general.

Which was the main point Ayn Rand fundamentally didn't understand. 

[Doktor Howl]

Which was the main point Ayn Rand fundamentally didn't understand.

Ayn Rand and her followers view life as a race.

Which I guess it is.  But the finish line is a coffin, so the amount of shit you accrue at the expense of others is meaningless.

[Dildo Argentino]

I read some Hungarian professor of theory of justice who claimed that empirical study indicates that freedom is on the way out as the core value of our civilization and human dignity is on the way in. And that one of the main problems with putting human dignity there is that it encourages use of the victim card. Because if you can prove that your human dignity is being infringed, you can get your way.

I think equity is actually one of the first social technologies (along with ritual and meditation). Recent research suggests dogs are in on it, it may even be a joint invention between two pack animals (dogs and humans). I don't think we need to talk about right and wrong (in the strong, metaphysical sense), or the convenient fictions we call rights, to see that the invention and widespread application of the notion fairness threw the entire older system of strong versus weak, survival of the fittest (fittest blood-line, that is)  into a massive wobbly.

In an individualistic, brutally hyerarchic culture, the weak get weaker and the strong get stronger. But in a culture that has conceived of communal action in the interest of communal fairness, the sufficiently organised weak can keep the strong in check. Bonobos clearly lean towards that style of organisation. Chimps don't. We are a bit of a mix. I hope the bonobo side wins out.

As for the present situation, the weakness you despise in others, Pent, is in most cases learned helplessness. Those people were not born whining losers, they were made so, in most cases unconsciously and, tragically, with the best intentions, but all the more deliberately and systematically. This (that a large part of every generation is systematically turned into culture-dependent whining weaklings who give up their personal efficacy for the safety in conforming), is a great ill of our civilization. And unlearning learned helplessness is no trivial task. Being kind tends to work better than being a cocky bastard.

(amazing thread, by the way)

[Doktor Howl]

I read some Hungarian professor of theory of justice who claimed that empirical study indicates that freedom is on the way out as the core value of our civilization and human dignity is on the way in.

Yes, no, in that order.

[Reginald Ret]

I have no idea how I'm going to say this without coming off as more right than hitler. This post is probably a very bad idea but, fuck it, I'ma stick my cock in the grinder and see what happens

So what I want to talk about is weak v's strong. Why do the strong survive? Why do the weak get shit on? The answer to this is simple. Firstly the strong survive because no one can fucking stop them. That's pretty much it. There's no mysterious force at play here, no divine fuckery stacking the deck. If you're strong enough to deal you deal. Conversely, the weak get shit on because they can't do anything to stop it and there isn't always a benevolent strong person nearby to hold their little handie. Sucks to be weak, I guess.

There's always someone bigger than you. You can't be the strongest but there's always someone weaker than you too. You don't have to be able to outrun the lion, just the fat guy next you. Truth be told you don't even have to run, the lion will go around you to get to fatty, just so long as you look like you'll make his lunch a bit harder to come by. Strength can be a deterrent, just as weakness can be an invitation.

Strength comes in many forms. There's physical strength, mental strength, emotional strength. There's probably another couple of basic types of strength that I haven't noticed or thought about and then there's subsets and amalgamations of these. Strength is a complicated business. Weakness is equally complex. Someone physically strong may be an emotional and intellectual cabbage. Stephen Hawking may be physically useless with a mind and a strength of character that could cut diamond.

As a race we tend to admire strength, albeit begrudgingly, with a dash of jealous in a lot of cases. No one, tho, to the best of my knowledge, admires weakness. Collectively however, we seem to do a fuckload to encourage it. Why is this? Why aren't the strong yelling at the weak - "stop being a fucking maggot and sort yourself out"?

You see strong aint necessarily something that you just get handed at birth. I've heard a lot about "privilege" on this board lately. Well let me tell you about privilege. Sure you might be born lucky, rich family, silver spoon and all the trimmings but that isn't the only way to gain privilege. Not by a long shot. Privilege can be earned. Privilege can be fought for. Privilege can be fucking taken.

Speaking as someone who used to be weak, I can attest to the fact that strength and privilege are things you can gain. Things you can change in yourself.

"But it's not as simple as that. It's really hard. I'm not the kind of person who can do that"

If I've heard this shit once, I've heard it a million times. It's something that is said exclusively by weak people and, every time I hear it, I just want to punch them in the face. Be careful with that shit, cos I've got the muscle to follow through on that.

1) It is as simple as that

2) It's probably even harder than you think it is - when did I say it was easy?

3) You become the kind of person who can do it only after you get off your lazy weak ass and get the fucking thing done

Strong people complain in a slightly different manner - "This is doing my fucking head in. I will not be beaten. I don't give a fuck how long it takes, I'm not leaving here until I've kicked it's ass"

So here's the deal. Fuck the weak. I can't help feeling sorry for them but, at the end of the day, the only one that can do anything about their situation is themselves. That might not be strictly true, strong people can help but why should they bother if the weak aint going to? Weak is lazy that way. Weak is self defeating. Weak is whining about it "not being fair" and insisting that the solution is the whole world changes.

I used to be that person. Somewhere along the line I figured out that, regardless about how loudly I whined like a bitch, I couldn't change the world. I did manage to change myself, tho and you know what? From a position of privilege, the world aint all that bad the way it is. It's the weak who are having a tough time of it.

Fuck 'em!

Having only read the OP I will state that I have no faith in the strength of one who spells though without the second half of that word.
Other than that, I don't care about this subject. Be nice to those weaker than you or I will be not nice.

[P3nT4gR4m]

Kinda interesting to revisit this trainwreck of thought. Thanks for the bump. I still hold the conviction of the OP but I feel it's badly worded. Badly framed in terms of weak and strong. Too many connotations of physical strength, that's not what I'm about. Whiners and fighters maybe? People who accept their lot in life v's people who yell "Fuck this!" and kick the doors out?

I can't really blame the whiners for their whining, either. Any more than I can blame a paraplegic for being hit by a bus. Conditioning is something that happens to you. Some work out you can slip the trap but it's a trick, if they don't notice, it affects them. Not their fault they didn't notice, any more than it's blind luck if they saw through it but it pisses me off nonetheless.

This conviction I have that if there were less whiners and more fighters, it'd be cooler. Maybe not. Maybe world war three. Maybe whiners are necessary to balance the "Fuck this - kick the doors out mentality" Or else there'd be no doors left on their hinges?

[Doktor Howl]

Kinda interesting to revisit this trainwreck of thought. Thanks for the bump. I still hold the conviction of the OP but I feel it's badly worded. Badly framed in terms of weak and strong. Too many connotations of physical strength, that's not what I'm about. Whiners and fighters maybe? People who accept their lot in life v's people who yell "Fuck this!" and kick the doors out?

I can't really blame the whiners for their whining, either. Any more than I can blame a paraplegic for being hit by a bus. Conditioning is something that happens to you. Some work out you can slip the trap but it's a trick, if they don't notice, it affects them. Not their fault they didn't notice, any more than it's blind luck if they saw through it but it pisses me off nonetheless.

This conviction I have that if there were less whiners and more fighters, it'd be cooler. Maybe not. Maybe world war three. Maybe whiners are necessary to balance the "Fuck this - kick the doors out mentality" Or else there'd be no doors left on their hinges?

It's not the whiners that are the problem, though.  They're just annoying.

The problem is with the complacent.

[Dildo Argentino]

Kinda interesting to revisit this trainwreck of thought. Thanks for the bump. I still hold the conviction of the OP but I feel it's badly worded. Badly framed in terms of weak and strong. Too many connotations of physical strength, that's not what I'm about. Whiners and fighters maybe? People who accept their lot in life v's people who yell "Fuck this!" and kick the doors out?

I can't really blame the whiners for their whining, either. Any more than I can blame a paraplegic for being hit by a bus. Conditioning is something that happens to you. Some work out you can slip the trap but it's a trick, if they don't notice, it affects them. Not their fault they didn't notice, any more than it's blind luck if they saw through it but it pisses me off nonetheless.

This conviction I have that if there were less whiners and more fighters, it'd be cooler. Maybe not. Maybe world war three. Maybe whiners are necessary to balance the "Fuck this - kick the doors out mentality" Or else there'd be no doors left on their hinges?

It's not the whiners that are the problem, though.  They're just annoying.

The problem is with the complacent.

That is so right.

[P3nT4gR4m]

Hmmm, yeah, you could be on to something. Is this a spectrum, maybe? Do the complacent fall in the middle? Strong enough to bear it without whining but hardly strong enough to do anything about it?