Rest in Peace Dr! I just encountered you in my life and now I can't believe your gone. Eternally grateful for your lectures and knowledge, it has transformed my understanding of everything for the better
When I listen to Dr Sugrue I feel as if I'm being given a gift. During the entirety of my education I have never heard anything so eloquently explained by anyone. Everything he speaks about he understands at a fundamental level, it's such a rarity to see such a deep level of comprehension in any subject. I truly feel as if these lectures will be cherished for future generations for years to come.
Except Nietzche was wrong. We, the People are not bound by a slave ideology. We have Agency and are Free thinkers, Not subscribed to our Father's ideology.
He summarized the ideas well but his correlation with "Mustache man" and judgements concerning that showed his "priestly" bias. Nietzsche was a Materialist and his influence was on both the left and the right. He is cast out of favor because he wasn't a Liberalist. He looked down on those attempting to destroy what it is to be a "human being".
So glad I read some of the comments before I watched. Your comment had me intrigued and, for what I got out of the lecture, I appreciate your part of the nudge I felt to commit to watching it. His shit is the shit and I’ll be watching it again. 😁
@@larsdols3157 I guess you can see it that way. But different people have different styles of communication. Some people look up when they’re talking, some people use a lot of hand gestures. I think the content is more important than the mode of communication.
Yes, familiarity and ever renewed speculation about one's own shit leads one to pace back and forth. Infallible index of shit knowledge. Though this mode of communication is not as important as the shit qua shit.
I don't care, the way he walks back and forth, comfortably has his arms behind his back, hands at rest, and does look up at times engaging his audience bringing them along in his pleasant conversation. He's captivating and holding his audience just by what he's doing! No lectern, no notes, no teleprompter, Mr. Joe Friday himself stating the fact ma'am, just the facts! Never breaks a sweat and gets in a good workout too! I'm jealous! Lol!
Nietzsche contradicts himself a lot... Particularly with individualism vs collectives, animal strategies vs civilizational strategies, magnitude of yield as it pertains to varying strategies, change vs stagnation, Humans as agents of change can also be warriors as well as opposition to them as self perceived superiors... eg: If you are a Roman who keeps making the same mistake time and time again, making blunder after Blunder.... then someone like a white Caucasian (non Jew) like Jesus comes along and advocates for a solution different from the Scrawny dark haired mix race Judeans of his day.... then Why would Jesus' strategy work?.... because yield, increased prosperity... ie: things are not being destroyed and looted all the time.... people begin to focus their energy on producing things rather than short term strategies of fending off threats....
These lectures are fantastic, you provide a good amount of subject matter for those of us "non collegiate philosophy enjoyers" to digest or argue with as we please.
Mr. Sugrue . I wish I had a philosophy professor like you in my youth . You are amazing . I am new to your channel and your lectures are stunning . I will purchase your books .
And I wish you -- and most living Americans -- HAD had English instructors who were as good at teaching grammar as Professor Sugrue is at lecturing on philosophy. In fact, I wish the schools bureaucracy in America had never given up English grammar as a focal point of every person's primary education. Most Americans can no longer express themselves in a clear, structured way, which means they no longer think or act in clear, structured ways either. The ramifications of that are all around us.
Learning about the philosophical writings of the likes of Nietzsche really helped me in writing colorful characters in my screenplay. I like seeing characters that embody philosophical ideologies that can drive them to either ascension or self destruction. Thank you for sharing this lecture.
I've listened to this lecture like 15 times, while reading the book, and each time I lean something new! And it's pretty much the same thing on each and every video in your channel, it's an impressive lecture, and it's impressive to see so many subscribes and views. You are making a difference.
I wonder what this difference is this he is making. Friedrich Nietzsche is saying that morals are a fallacy and we humans are no better than dogs. Apart hearing this position as it being recited without notes - what is the difference that is being made here. I’m interested in your view.
@@kushsakhu Sometimes while re-listening we capture a fragment of the lecture which sticks to our psyche a bit more - it "opens" up the pathways to think on the topic more since it had not been considered in that way previously.
I am most pleased to have stumbled upon this video. I was mezmerized by the audio book "Thus spoke Zaratustra" so I love having this kind of content available on youtube.
Absolutely amazing. Utmost respect in the thinker balanced with cutting criticism in the consequences of the thoughts is the basis of perfect philosophy. Separating the idea from the person is something social media platforms are incapable of. Thanks.
A damn good lecture although I'm already familiar with Nietzsche's work and have read most of it and also some biography and criticism of it I nonetheless found his critique of Nietzsche original, informed, refreshing and, thought provoking.
This is one of the greatest lectures a philosophy student could ever experience. Smooth, concise, very well organized and an overall joy to listen to. Thank you for existing.
@@larkohiya Or you're just a morally posturing weakling frightened by the slightest signs of confidence in someone. His ego is hardly visible, if at all; get lost lol
Wow. Brilliant, beautiful explanations from an incredible mind and thinker. My understanding of Nietzsche and Christianity and the world in general is much enhanced by your fantastic teaching. Thank you.
Aaaaaaand the first slide is Modernism. Wow what a surprise. This is a really good way of listening to Michael Sugrue give his opinions on Nietzsche. It has nothing to do with Nietzsche - Nietzsche warned about these people.
I've struggled to understand Nietzche but this lecture was great. Very interesting ideas. Maybe eventually I will read Nietzche and get it, one step closer
Undoubtedly one of the finest teachers I have ever seen! Rest in peace, Sir! We thank you for giving us the opportunity to listen to your lectures, even though you are no longer with us!
Excellent lecture and thorough explanation ; the more I hear of the German philosophers such as Nietzche, Kant, Hegel, Marx, etc and the specific German term they used, the more it gives me enthusiasm to learn the German language just so that I can read in the original language.
@RKO1988 well, to be fair, Hitler was a pretty big deal for the entirety of Europe and the world to be frank, he basically threatened everyone and everything, not just with ideas, but literal action. The fact aswell that his existence and influence was much closer to the 21st century than any of those other names might also contribute to that fact.
@@RKO1988 All these philosophers are fearless than freak and are in fact a detriment to society and proponents of evil 🤦🏾♂️. Just like Nazis who they inspired. 🤡
@@RKO1988 Imagine that causing the largest war in human history and torturing to death over 6 million people in an attempted genocide would overshadow a handful of books 🤦🏾♂️.
I liked the walking back and forth. He can discuss this stuff as casually as any topic. Very informative and makes anyone think. I appreciate sharing this with others. I like to learn.
Great video. Reading Nietzsche sometimes gives me a head ache. Dr. Sugrue makes Nietzsche easily understandable. I've read dozens of books on the subject, yet this breakdown on Christianity just blows open a new understanding of the subject. Outstanding.
Sadly, Nietzsche's worldview is extremely difficult to apply today. The "superman" was defeated in 1945 and I mean all supermen, not just the guy with the little moustache. Today we are ruled by a priesthood of "experts", CEOs, and bureaucrats. The merchant class and grievance class being one rung below. I belong to the working-class and I'm well read. It would be nice to have a monarchy that takes care of the big stuff like highways, bridges and wars and protects us from over-enthusiastic bureaucrats and lawyers.
@@ronniewaters9782 don't you think that you got it the other way around these CEOs and techno's are the uberman not the priests. They promote dog eat dog culture that pretty sums up the idea of a superman, the uberman.
Why can’t we have philosophy courses on Sunday’s that function like church but for people that want to hear different theories? Lol imagine the sense of liberation, community and momentum it could generate in the search for truth? This is great. Thanks uploader.
Athiesm leads to mass child sacrifice, via abortion, and contraceptives. Secular societes have murdered millions more than Christian ones Secularism is THE DEATH of a civilization.
Nietzsche has been my favorite read so far in my journey into western philosophy. Not only is his poetic prose a delight to read but also the clear and straight to the point way he poses his assertions makes it really easy for the reader to create an internal debate and discussion around them instead of simply taking the assertions in. Also in his genealogy of morals he makes some comments about the true effect of punishment in the individual that were way ahead of his time
How I wish this man was alive today I would have loved to see a panel discussion with Jordan peterson. He knew his material and so articulate...I just stumbled upon his lectures about 2months ago. Much love ❤️
One of the key points of this presentation that struck me hard is "those who can not hurt others will eventually hurt themselves". Thanks for the lecture professor this is enlightening!
A fascinating analysis of Nietzsche's devastating critique on traditional "values." With his full sight focus on the Machiavellian distortion of values by religious institutions to service tyrants, Nietzsche's philosophical attack came with mountain lightning speed and the precision of Navy Seal alpine warfare from his Olympian Swiss Alps perch. The rarefied air and vantage point of the Swiss Alps along with Nietzsche's expertise in Greek and Latin philology gave Nietzsche the edge. The mercenary soldiers, representing the T.S. Eliot "hollow men" of the traditional state, university values and the lieutenants of the decayed, ossified Roman legion Church aka "origin of the term religion R..e legion", stood no chance against Nietzsche's intellectual firepower. With his courageous, ferocious mountain attack, Nietzsche fought to liberate "modern man" from the shackles of the Roman Empire tradition, and the Machiavellian "storylines" used throughout history to service the state, where souls went to die, "soul diers" all to promote the most sinister of agendas and the most depraved tyrants in history even if draped in silk robes and bespoke Savile Row suits. He fought to reveal again out of a keen instinct to release man to his no limit capacity, to open the "dog gate" so man was left free to explore the vast Western horizons of thought and creativity, to go out on the leading edge of potentiality all while infused with the immensity and grandeur of the Ralph Waldo Emersonian described "immense intelligence" that pervades all, the real God Nietzsche fought to reveal for the luminosity of man. Thank you for sharing your video and philosophy expertise with Nietzsche aficionados across the world.
I've been having a little bit of trouble with some of Nietzsches works as I go through them, and this lecture helped me grasp him a bit better, thank you!
This is an excellent and very well informed and supported critique of Nietzsche. While I don't share the conclusions, such as Nietzsche bearing responsibility for for the Nazis and such; I very much appreciate the taking of a hammer to my intellectual idol and forcing me to reexamine again if he rings hollow or not.
these great lectures (which are) and all good lectures should be available free to everyone, and would produce an enlightened society without the elitist obstacles of money and privilege in attending universities that students can no longer afford. michael, these are wonderful, thanks!
Why assume social dichotomies are bad? Why assume goods and services should be shared amongst the many? Are they so weak they canno't know what and how to fend for themselves? Maybe re-watch the lecture 😉
@@TomBombadil676 an enlightened society is egalitarian by nature. to live in the world first, second, and third, and see the beauty of humanity despite its tragic afflictions, most beyond their control, is heart rending. every human being by the fact that they exist is sacred and deserving of every possible good thing to help them survive and thrive and become fully human. this is what every great spiritual system says. to speak of 'dichotomies' about human beings from a supremacist perspective is ignorant and fascist, and defines the very poison that afflict the earth, the greed of ego and profit, encapsulated in a self righteous narcissism. and to equate their suffering and lack of necessary means for life with some kind of inferiority, is absurd. maybe you should learn what it means to be human by living with the people in villages in asia, africa, the middle east, the caribbean, south america. pethaps you'll find the humanity to make your comments impossible.
@@royalhartigan you start off with an assumption but anyway the way I see it : I we invoked polar opposites and réality stands somewhere between. Telling me i'm not serious just to classify me as irrelevant is quite rigid imo. Sometimes useful i guess
@@TomBombadil676 fact are facts and reality is reality. anyone who doesn't appreciate the equal value of every human being on this planet and pimping right wing lies about class and entitlement is pathetic and inhumane. as i said, educate yourself by living across the world in villages where people are trying to overcome the nightmare of profit, greed, and the global 1%. live with them and understand the reality o this world and its sordid history due to the mentality of those who spout your rhetoric. after all that then you can come back and discuss intelligently about what is the reality and moral vision needed. prof. sugrue would also tell you the same. this conversation is over, and mark twain was right.
Uploading these lectures of Sugrue and Staloff has done the world a lot of good, given that so many young people grow up using youtube as guides for intellectual development. I have been critical of Michael, but let me be honest: it is out of love and appreciation that I VERY rarely feel while looking at my smartphone these days. Elevating discourse is one of the MOST important things we can do for the social media generation.
An illuminating lecture. One thing I think about when I learn more about Nietzche, is that he is uniquely modern and of all the philosophers, the most active in trying to create a new world, or maybe trying to bring back a more authentic and natural world. One of the things that bothers me about Nietzsche is his focus on our differences as strong or weak rather than our similarities in humanity…and what is missing I think from his excavation of our human nature is the concept of empathy, something possibly as ancient in our psyche as any conception of pleasure or pain…
Wow you’re an incredible lecturer. Really appreciate these videos. As an admirer of Nietzsche I found you’re critiques of him very grounding. That final line was very satisfying. Thank you!
@@eastlands5756 😂 I'm not admiring this man. Why should I? If you want to support the self proclaimed anti Christ go ahead but don't drag others with you.
I really enjoy the lecture series. How the heck do you remember all this and walk back and forth reciting it all? I admire a man that 'know his stuff' to be blunt but truthful. You obviously do regarding each topic. An idea never hurt anyone or did it? Everyone has to make up their own minds about knowledge content. It is useful to know the background events of each theorist and the problems they faced during their times. Their own experiences also seem to affect their orientations for better or worse.
Read 'Thus spake Zarathustra' and find out for yourself. Good lecturers add their own interpretations of their subjects into the mix. Think of Jordan Peterson, or maybe you have no use for him either. You're basically saying you want a philosophical newscast, in the old dry style. Just the facts and no opinions. Or only slyly added opinions. Camouflaged programming. The emotionally charged propaganda puppet shows of todays MSM are a different issue and a bigger problem. You could of course just read the Nietzsche wiki page. Definitely won't be any bias there.
Just love the vapid generalized critical commentary from some random anonymous internet dude who offers no detailed support or argument for their opinions. "What Nietzsche thought"? As if you know and have some authority on the matter.
Born and raised in the Vedic culture, I grew up practicing Buddhism and Hinduism in parallel which is pretty common in Nepal. When I came to America and started studying philosophy, the first thought that came to my mind upon reading Fedrick Nietzsche is that he is the Buddha of the west. Friedrich Nietzsche was as enlightened as Buddha if not more.
Dad disagrees, saying Buddha extinguishes desire, Nietzsche intensifies it.Even though he was an invalid, Nietzsche chose the active life over the contemplative life in his philosophy and he rejected Buddha for many of the same reason he rejected Jesus. My father said he is very impressed with the Diamond Sutra and the Ramayana. He said you might profit from Meister Eckhart, the great Christian mystic. Dad has a lecture on Meister Eckhardt posted. God bless.
If Buddha and Nietzsche were confronted, could either produce any argument that ought to appeal to the impartial listener? I am not thinking of political arguments. We can imagine them appearing before the Almighty, as in the first chapter of the Book of Job, and offering advice as to the sort of world He would create. What could either say? Buddha would open the argument by speaking of lepers, outcast and miserable; the poor, toiling with aching limbs and barely kept alive by scanty nourishment; the wounded in battle, dying in slow agony; the orphans, ill-treated by cruel guardians; and even the most successful haunted by the thought of failure and death. From all this load of sorrow, he would say, a way of salvation must be found, and salvation can only come through love. Nietzsche, whom only Omnipotence could restrain from interrupting, would burst out when his turn came. "Good heavens, man, you must learn to be of tougher fibre. Why go about sniveling because trivial people suffer? Or, for that matter, because great men suffer? Trivial people suffer trivially, great men suffer greatly, and great sufferings are not to be regretted, because they are noble. Your ideal is a purely negative one, absence of suffering, which can be completely secured by non-existence. I, on the other hand, have positive ideals: I admire Alcibiades, and the Emperor Frederick II, and Napoleon. For the sake of such men, any misery is worth while. I appeal to You, Lord, as the greatest of creative artists, do not let Your artistic impulses be curbed by the degenerate fear-ridden maundering of this wretched psychopath." Buddha, who in the courts of Heaven has learnt all history since his death, and has mastered science with delight in the knowledge and sorrow at the use to which men have put it, replies with calm urbanity: "You are mistaken, Professor Nietzsche, in thinking my ideal a purely negative one. True, it includes a negative element, the absence of suffering; but it has in addition quite as much that is positive as it to be found in your doctrine. Though I have no special admiration for Alcibiades and Napoleon, I, too, have my heroes: my successor Jesus, because he told men to love their enemies; the men who discovered how to master the forces of nature and secure food with less labour; the medical men who have shown how to diminish disease; the poets and artists and musicians who have caught glimpses of the Divine beatitude. Love and knowledge and delight in beauty are not negations; they are enough to fill the lives of the greatest men that have ever lived." "All the same," Nietzsche replies, "your world would be insipid. You should study Heraclitus, whose works survive complete in the celestial library. Your love is compassion, which is elicited by pain; your truth, if you are honest, is unpleasant, and only to be known through suffering; and as to beauty, what is more beautiful than the tiger, who owes his splendour to his fierceness? No, if the Lord should decide for your world, I fear we would all die of boredom." "You might," Buddha replies, "because you love pain, and your love of life is a sham. But those who really love life would be happy as no one can be happy in the world as it is." - Bertrand Russell
@@russv.winkle8764 Buddhism is not really about "changing the world" or "loving the world" but more on the personal level with the emphasis on self-discipline (extinguish desires ), self development, and self salvation from within.
@@shiangjeoushyu8586 Mahayana explicitly teaches to forestall personal enlightenment to benefit others according to the stages of the Path (Lam Rim). So yeah, Buddhism is definitely about loving the world. Avalokiteshvara Buddha is literally the personification of infinite compassion and mercy; Chan Buddhism has Kuan Yin nourishing seekers with water, Pure Land Buddhists have Amitabha Buddha saving seekers. Theravada Buddhism differs slightly but still acknowledge the Bodhisattva. Even a Naturalistic Buddhist would recognize that utilitarianism is baked into 'personal liberation'. I just don't see a desecaant version of Buddhism devoid of compassion.
This a truly eye opening exploration of the least palatable elements of a Nietschean world. Nietsche's analysis of the origin of Christian ethics is very compelling, but his alternative seems dystopian. To stop protecting the meek in order to untether the dominant and strong is bound to produce endless seasons of backlash and revolution. Correct me if I am wrong, but Nietsche would oppose a peaceful civil rights movement or any other humanitarian reform. Nietsche would say, if you want more power, take it by force, that is, become a hawk rather than a rabbit that plies its pitiable nature. To my mind, merciful rulers make more stable societies, and brutal regimes sow the seeds of their own destruction
If you're free to pursue your self-interest and what you're describing is not in anyone's self-interest then obviously adopting Nietzsches view would not lead to your situation.
Agree with you. Am against any kind of domination of a human being by another. This usually means the use of violence through strength to succeed on dominating a whole society. And this is intrinsically perverse. It always leads to sorts of fascism. Which means a failure and implies necessarily crime. So, also, sooner than later, not does it only it fails, but brings revolt. Because you cannot try to make everybody think like you. Obviously we aren't photocopies and there will always be people thinking differently. If you then force them to submit and comply with what you think has to be, you'll have to apply violence on them. To first silence them and soon to kill them, so they never opposing to you. This is fascism and this is why it forcely implies crime. So it has to be ethically condemned and we must fight against it. We have to understand others and accept the different, for we are all different. Any other way of thinking is wrong. We don't have to impose or try to impose ourselves on others. All of us can be "strong warriors" during some time and become weak under other circumstances. I wouldn't divide the world into the strong and the weak ones because this isn't real. But of course we belong to chaos, and so we have to accept this too. And this means that we live under uncertainty and constant change. Having to adapt ourselves almost constantly, to the rules of uncertainty and change. And the better we get adapted to this, the smarter we will be, as known. Ain't this so? - it in't surprising that Nietzsche was used by the Nazis, those criminals thought about themselves they were superheroes kind of. That's the fascist leadership principle trend, it's what it tends to, unavoidingly. That's how they think in terms of the superior and the inferior ones, the weak and the strong ones. Who could agree with that⁉️ - They did and others may again, but one has to keep clear fascism is just a big mistake implying sooner than later crime. When they come into power, if it happens, they may have succeed, overpowering its society, but they'll never convince. As was stated. Fascism is an involution and a quick way into crime. Don't get cheated. 🤔🙄🧐😔🙏
@Nebby Scumbold Problem lies in people needing delusions of divine authority and promises of ultimate supernatural justice in their lives (or should I say afterlives?) just so they can be "morally accountable", which often devolves into a refusal to accept the world as it is. Master morality, or "nietzschean" pride as you seem to label it, comes from the acceptance that the heavenly father will not/can not save us from ourselves, we are all we got and finding purpose and beauty in that is the only sane remedy against nihilism.
solid introduction to Nietzsches thinking I guess, eventhough I feel that it could've been a little bit more nuanced in regards to Nietzsches actual personality (or at least the impression one can extract from his private letters, diaries and tales from people who knew him) and the fact that he loved to examine things from different perspectives, with a variety of "masks" as he liked to call it. For he especially implemented this technique in BGE, which might have been partially inspired by for example Sokrates' irony and Kierkegaards usage of pseudonyms, as some scholars pointed out. It would've been interesting to hear some more answers to Nietzsches historical- philosophy ideas from an actual historian, too. But to keep it short, great work in terms of lecturing anyway, even if I hope that the audience has digged deeper into Nietzsches work after shaking off this overtly dark and misanthropic perception (he neither was an antisemite, in fact he was one of THE intellectual anti-antisemites of his days, nor was he an actual misogynist (women-hater), just because he liked to selfconsciously poke at "Weiber" from time to time)
I think this lecture is shallow in its uncritical promotion of Nietzsche's most problematic text, The Genealogy of Morals. The PC allegations that are supposed to establish critical distance are shallow too.
@@MacSmithVideo on the contrary, I think his interjecting thoughts are evidence of his understanding, and not the other way around as you seem to think.
Pleasure to listen to! Awesome when people with different convictions and view points recognize and give credit to true talent. Real sign of intelligence and seriousness in my opinion. Wish he talked more on how Nietzsche sees modern science, atheism and essentially our metaphysical belief in the truth as a product of slave morality and christianity.
There is one big issue I find with the concept of master morality, that is that the masters themselves rarely lived up to this ideal of potence, superiority or excellence that Nietzsche deems "good" and that he hopes will unleash the highest human potential. Especially if we are talking about the masters in the context of an aristocratic society like ancient Rome or feudal Europe. Most of these aristocrats and noblemen simply inherited their position of power, wealth and potence and didn't earn it through their own merits or achievements, just like the weak and poor didn't either, these societies allowed almost no social mobility and set up rigid laws wich determined wich people belonged to the nobility by birth and bloodline, wich belonged to the middle classes and wich belonged to the rabble, to the slaves, to the dispossessed. A nobleman could be the most depraved, good for nothing and he would still be guaranteed a life of wealth, status and power (and indeed you can find many such individuals in history books) , while the most brilliant potential artist, thinker or scientist could be born among the slaves or poor and never amount to anything because they are confined by the social structures around them, wich prevents one from falling and the other from rising. There is nothing admirable about the ability of the aristocrat to enslave, torture or kill the peasant, when the entire world is set up in his favour and has been for many generations without any effort or contribution of his own. You will never produce a superior breed of people by essentially allowing a small group of people to secure all ressources of power and wealth and pass them on among their own through inheritance, wich means they can just rest on the laurels of their ancestors. The only society in wich the concept of master morality with this intention behind it would be logically sound would be one wich guarantees equality of opportunity within every new generation, in other words a true meritocracy. And isn't this what the proponents of "slave morality" that Nietzsche condemned so harshly, the christians, the liberals, the socialists, were essentially asking for? To be liberated from the shackles of oppression in order to have the same freedoms and means to reach their full potential as their oppressors? I find it ironic that one of the finest examples of an Übermensch, a man who was not held back by slave morality, the living ideal of the warrior aristocrat, in Nietzsches mind was Napoleon Bonaparte. But simultaneously he regretted the demise of the old french aristocracy, in wich allegedly a distant echo of the values of master morality lived on in christian europe, and it's destruction in the french revolution (wich was of course another evil spawn of slave morality). But the rise of someone like Napoleon from an insignificant background to a great conqueror and the most powerful man in europe solely through political and military genius was only even possible thanks to the french revolution that destroyed old class barriers and levelled the playing field.
This entire fallacy is kind of nullified by the fact that simply usurping power (taking it illegitimately) was just as common as inheritance, particularly in the societies you mention. Sure some inept dweeb could inherit power, but he'd also be very vulnerable to that general Maximus Alphacus taking it from him through his own force & ability. And why would he not? The rest of the nation sees how unfit the ruler is, and the army is loyal to Alphacus so.. oh look, another dethroned weakling. I do agree though, Master Morality would be "purest" in a society which necessitated the Masters to exert & verify their strength instead of simply inheriting power. The thing is, inheritance usually leads to weakness over time, which usually leads to a usurped or overthrown aristocracy; so the problem mostly solved itself throughout history. Also, Napoleon was going to rise regardless; he already had gained a sizable reputation for his generalship by the onset of the 1800's thanks to Toulon & Piedmont, he was a rising star already. The revolution skyrocketed his progress, sure; but in all likelihood he would have staged a coup himself had the revolution not kicked off.
I came away from the Genealogy of Morals with a very different perspective. Nietzsche attacked Christianity, and religion in particular because it was an 'Anesthesia' for the people's anger created through the domestication process of society. Nietzsche was not praising the masters, he was seeking to free people. My main take away was that he observed that people walked through life focused on an afterlife, and not the world around them. Many tyrants enjoyed their power thanks to this anesthesia of the social conscious.
A good and wise parent knows that disciplining their child properly will not destroy their creativity. In the same way, any society must devise a good and wise plan for disciplining their creative people so that the "damage" they do to the rest of society can be reduced. There needs to be mechanisms that allow the mass of society to defend themselves. We have the right to protect ourselves, even from unintentional consequences of the "run fast and break things" class.
One thing Nietzsche misses in his disdain for the "mediocre" is that the mediocre masses are what the genius and the strong emerge out of. Without the mediocre to compare itself too, the exceptional is the new mediocre. Fail to respect the mediocre, and they will overwhelm you with sheer numbers, as they rightly should. You are not a giant because you stand on the shoulders of others.
Most exceptional artists and thinkers are rarely praised for their works, particularly in the period of process, but they still do it because it's what is real to them. Mediocrity is the opposite, never growing to potential constantly assessing trivial matters. Nietzsche wasn't bashing the common man, he was trying to help him, but to reduce it to the most common man would have diluted the content and the growth gap is already to great. Nietzsche is for the already freed spirit, which is not contended to simple comparisons like you are trying to make born out of ego. Your theory is also invalid in the sense that if the masses could ascertain the thought level of great thinkers, good, geniuses would still be born, but the new base level would propel them to constructs that our limited minds could not fathom. It's evolution of the intellect, to try to disrespect someone as intelligent as Nietzsche is self defeating more than any illumination of self actualization that may have brightened in the nine people that liked your comment.
Great presentation and one I related to in its entirety. Great insight into the significance of Nietzsche for philosophy and culture. I met Nietzsche many years ago getting a BA in philosophy at a Jesuit University and have never grown tired of hm. In fact I discover more of him every year. I found fascinating the investigation into the contradictory aspects of his history and personality. The seemingly timid and oversensitive son of a Protestant minister ( I believe Lutheran) that even in his last sickly years still wore a Christian necklaces - and opposite to it the image of the over-man that he brings into life by his writings.I heard it said by Italian philosophers that before and after Nietzsce for a span of over 100 years most German philosophers were anti-semitic. Which may explain why an entire highly cultured people bought so esaily ithe dream of "Deutchland uber alles" and its ultimate catastrophe.
I've watched lots of Sugrue, and just now noticed the mic cable extending from his pant leg. It makes his ponderous pacing all the more impressive considering he never becomes entangled in it!
Great explanation of Nietzsche’s opinion. My question is, by forcing us back to a more natural approach, doesn’t Nietzsche’s promotion of a strength based hierarchy, potentially lead to a slave class dominated by those “warriors” (which are rare) highest in the hierarchy? To put it into practice, In 2022, assuming we’re self sovereign in the west today, money is the tool used to gauge superiority in the “warrior” hierarchy and with comes the power, control, and spoils. With the disproportionate allocation of money, classism today, would Nietzsche be ok with things? Simply because this is natural? Christianity on the other hand would help flatten the curve. Not necessarily discouraging having money, but promoting it as a means to the goal, not the goal itself. And by doing so, relinquishes the yearning for the power, control, spoils that come with it. Is this not a more enticing view in general? Not only for the Christian but for the individual who comes out of the depths by the virtuous actions of Christianity. “The rose that grew from concrete.” Doesn’t a christian world bring consistent virtues whereas Nietzsche’s approach leads to subjectivity that may include virtue or result in self serving principles, all at the discretion of “the warrior” where self sovereignty of the masses may not exist? Also, Nietzsche’s understanding of christianity seems solely based from Christianity under the roman west. This completely isolates christianity and elevates the roman catholic church as the one true Church. But within the apostolic faiths, sister church’s to Rome, Church of the East for example, expressed their faith in understanding and love and evangelized from Mesopotamia all the way to China, which was a death wish at the time. So my question is whether his critique of Christianity is one only viewed through his lens living in the roman west or in general? Please excuse my ignorance. While i know of Nietzsche i don’t really know his work and opinions in depth. Interesting to think about nonetheless
If you're asking whether or not master morality can be used as a justification for class inequality, then the answer can go two ways. Yes, for the reasons you talked about with power, control, and spoils going to those who consciously and competitively pursued them. No, in the sense that a capitalist hierarchy justified itself as a utilitarian hierarchy, and Nietzsche wrote against utilitarian men with some passion. Nietzsche thought of people seeking comfort and ease as safe, stupid, and artistically irrelevant. Christianity has been a curve-flattening religion since its inception, and the last seventeen hundred years of Western history can easily be seen as the aristocratic and royal hierarchies versus everyone else, coming to compromises and then, particularly after the Protestant Reformation, with the aristocracies gradually being supplanted by the bourgeoisie. Today, the term "bourgeois" gets attached to serious wealth instinctively, but it wasn't always that way: the bourgeoisie were actually the prosperous middle classes a couple hundred years ago, and they became the power after religious and aristocratic leaders found themselves without legitimacy, which led to Marx proclaiming them the new enemy - same as the old enemy - in his struggles of dialectical materialism. I think the real question is whether or not hierarchy is inevitable. If you were to use a moral hierarchy to redistribute money, they would be the next empowered hierarchy, able to reallocate as they saw fit; you wouldn't be able to manage such a system without someone having impunity to take and give as they saw fit. Remember that Nietzsche is critiquing the reaction to power by the powerless, along with the powerful, and it's pretty easy to conclude, as he does, that everyone who plays these games is in it for power. He's about the worst thinker to use if you want to justify redistribution.
@@ideologybot4592 Nietzsche's philsoophy is ridiculous. Marx made correct predictions of how class dynamics lead to depressionary economics, and these predictions were borne out during the great depression and again during the great recession. Marx correctly analyzed the dynamics of worker and owner, realizing that workers have too little power to acquire wages which allow them to clear the market. This is an incredible insight. By contrast, Nietzsche made pronouncements about historical migrations and etymology which are ridiculous, his analysis of the origins of morality is both anti-theological and completely false, and he had the habit of blaming Jewish people for Christianity, which is extremely stupid, considering that the Christians separated from the Jews as modern Christianity was created. The point of Christianity is to abolish slavery. Your speculation about 'heirarchy being inevitable' is as ridiculous as the claim in Roman times that slavery is inevitable.
@@annaclarafenyo8185 Wow... you seriously do not understand shit about Nietzsche... get back tot class please before writing such horable incorrect comments
Nietzsche despised what he called "merchants". He, like Aristotle, saw them as base, and what he really valued was a kind of spiritual-artistic nobility.
A fascinating analysis of Nietzsche's devastating critique on traditional "values." With his full sight focus on the Machiavellian distortion of values by religious institutions to service tyrants, Nietzsche's philosophical attack came with mountain lightning speed and the precision of Navy Seal alpine warfare from his Olympian Swiss Alps perch. The rarefied air and vantage point of the Swiss Alps along with Nietzsche's expertise in Greek and Latin philology gave Nietzsche the edge. The mercenary soldiers, representing the T.S. Eliot "hollow men" of the traditional state, university values and the lieutenants of the decayed, ossified Roman legion Church aka "origin of the term religion R..e legion", stood no chance against Nietzsche's intellectual firepower. With his courageous, ferocious mountain attack, Nietzsche fought to liberate "modern man" from the shackles of the Roman Empire tradition, and the Machiavellian "storylines" used throughout history to service the state, where souls went to die, "soul diers" all to promote the most sinister of agendas and the most depraved tyrants in history even if draped in silk robes and bespoke Savile Row suits. He fought to reveal again out of a keen instinct to release man to his no limit capacity, to open the "dog gate" so man was left free to explore the vast Western horizons of thought and creativity, to go out on the leading edge of potentiality all while infused with the immensity and grandeur of the Ralph Waldo Emersonian described "immense intelligence" that pervades all, the real God Nietzsche fought to reveal for the luminosity of man. Thank you for sharing your video and philosophy expertise with Nietzsche aficionados across the world.
@@shaunkerr8721not the original poster but I am also christian and I find nietzche to be unbelievably smug, self important, and wicked. I am diametrically opposed to him on nearly every point he makes
@@vsaucemichaelhere3409 That's fine as none of that makes him wrong. "There are no moral phenomena, only moral interpretations of phenomena." Furthermore, look around you; how much of society lives its life for God? We have workdays Mon-Fri, festival day on Sat and God's day is Sun (for some Christians, most churches are half empty these days) Even the Christians do not center their life around God. Who gets up in the morning and worships Jesus? Takes their lunch break and dedicates it, every day to Jesus? Spends their free time in the service and worship of Jesus (primarily, not totally, but, mostly)? Next to no one does this. 200 years ago it was the norm. He was correct; God is dead and we are simply living in the shadow of a former way we found meaning in life.
Came back to pay gratitude to one of the finest teachers mankind can ever have. Rest in love professor ❤
Rest in Peace Dr! I just encountered you in my life and now I can't believe your gone. Eternally grateful for your lectures and knowledge, it has transformed my understanding of everything for the better
he passed? when and how ? do you know ?
@@antonioleyva-rv6buCheck his channel.
Best lecture on N? Perhaps ❤
Literally, same.
The NYT *finally* published an obit on him just today.
When I listen to Dr Sugrue I feel as if I'm being given a gift. During the entirety of my education I have never heard anything so eloquently explained by anyone. Everything he speaks about he understands at a fundamental level, it's such a rarity to see such a deep level of comprehension in any subject. I truly feel as if these lectures will be cherished for future generations for years to come.
I agree, he is very good at explaining very complicated philosophical concepts.
Agreed Specially the political stuff that is political Fossati that he’s been talking about you
@@RayForrester agreed
Is he still alive if so could he would he ever if I ever do Fawcett would he teach my philosophy maybe
for sure! This man is the ultimate lecturer! Wow!
Finally someone who can speak about Nietzsche without constantly critiquing and/or praising the ideas.
You know he’s Catholic right? 🤦
Good point. It's not easy.
@@Medina-bk2fowhew!
Except Nietzche was wrong. We, the People are not bound by a slave ideology. We have Agency and are Free thinkers, Not subscribed to our Father's ideology.
He summarized the ideas well but his correlation with "Mustache man" and judgements concerning that showed his "priestly" bias.
Nietzsche was a Materialist and his influence was on both the left and the right. He is cast out of favor because he wasn't a Liberalist.
He looked down on those attempting to destroy what it is to be a "human being".
Excellent lecture. You know a man knows his shit when he can just walk back-and-forth and talk off the top of his head.
So glad I read some of the comments before I watched. Your comment had me intrigued and, for what I got out of the lecture, I appreciate your part of the nudge I felt to commit to watching it. His shit is the shit and I’ll be watching it again. 😁
@@mikerobak790 If he has done a shit, as he keeps his arms crossed behind his back most of the time I, for one, didn't notice.
The walking actually makes him look nervous and insecure.
@@larsdols3157 I guess you can see it that way. But different people have different styles of communication. Some people look up when they’re talking, some people use a lot of hand gestures. I think the content is more important than the mode of communication.
Yes, familiarity and ever renewed speculation about one's own shit leads one to pace back and forth. Infallible index of shit knowledge. Though this mode of communication is not as important as the shit qua shit.
This is a man who makes sure he covers his 10,000 steps.
It's tough to stand still for an hour. He has a brilliant mind.
Brutal, yet deep inside... so true.
Now, in the current times, you would call it a: "TED talk"...
Dude is driving me nuts. Sit still dude
i think it's a tradition for many philosophers to think while walking. Starting from Aristotle. Maybe even before him.
@@tvviewer4500 If that's all you can take away from this, then don't watch. Listen.
For content like this internet was created. Thank you for your work, Dr. Sugrue
I can not thank you enough Dr. Sugrue for making these lectures free to the public. You breath life and fire into philosophy.
Into political activism by spreading revisionism and erasing the actual content they discuss.
@@-John-Doe- these are bots to boost the channel interaction. Don't sweat about what they believe. It's useless.
The Christian can’t do anything but cope. Lollll
How great he was😮💨
I don't care, the way he walks back and forth, comfortably has his arms behind his back, hands at rest, and does look up at times engaging his audience bringing them along in his pleasant conversation. He's captivating and holding his audience just by what he's doing! No lectern, no notes, no teleprompter, Mr. Joe Friday himself stating the fact ma'am, just the facts! Never breaks a sweat and gets in a good workout too! I'm jealous! Lol!
I was so uneducated I didn’t even know of philosiphy and now it’s all I can see around me.
Tell me about😂
I spent my life trying to convince fish that they are wet.
there's still time to read Marx!
@@DGE123hell yeah, seconded comrade
Nietzsche contradicts himself a lot... Particularly with individualism vs collectives, animal strategies vs civilizational strategies, magnitude of yield as it pertains to varying strategies, change vs stagnation, Humans as agents of change can also be warriors as well as opposition to them as self perceived superiors... eg: If you are a Roman who keeps making the same mistake time and time again, making blunder after Blunder.... then someone like a white Caucasian (non Jew) like Jesus comes along and advocates for a solution different from the Scrawny dark haired mix race Judeans of his day.... then Why would Jesus' strategy work?.... because yield, increased prosperity... ie: things are not being destroyed and looted all the time.... people begin to focus their energy on producing things rather than short term strategies of fending off threats....
These lectures are fantastic, you provide a good amount of subject matter for those of us "non collegiate philosophy enjoyers" to digest or argue with as we please.
The fact that he can lecture all of this with no notes is pretty amazing.
Listen to manly p hall, even more impressive
If you want modern history, check out Roy Cassagandra 💪💪
Ehhh kind of. It is a presentation
His job but agreed
@@HOurWrld999Alex Jones also has some good stuff!!
Mr. Sugrue . I wish I had a philosophy professor like you in my youth . You are amazing . I am new to your channel and your lectures are stunning . I will purchase your books .
And I wish you -- and most living Americans -- HAD had English instructors who were as good at teaching grammar as Professor Sugrue is at lecturing on philosophy. In fact, I wish the schools bureaucracy in America had never given up English grammar as a focal point of every person's primary education. Most Americans can no longer express themselves in a clear, structured way, which means they no longer think or act in clear, structured ways either. The ramifications of that are all around us.
@@celtaclassroom7082 Are you going to be okay?
Shu e F G H na na
Learning about the philosophical writings of the likes of Nietzsche really helped me in writing colorful characters in my screenplay. I like seeing characters that embody philosophical ideologies that can drive them to either ascension or self destruction. Thank you for sharing this lecture.
I've listened to this lecture like 15 times, while reading the book, and each time I lean something new! And it's pretty much the same thing on each and every video in your channel, it's an impressive lecture, and it's impressive to see so many subscribes and views. You are making a difference.
I wonder what this difference is this he is making. Friedrich Nietzsche is saying that morals are a fallacy and we humans are no better than dogs. Apart hearing this position as it being recited without notes - what is the difference that is being made here. I’m interested in your view.
@@kushsakhu Sometimes while re-listening we capture a fragment of the lecture which sticks to our psyche a bit more - it "opens" up the pathways to think on the topic more since it had not been considered in that way previously.
@@mingus445_gaming okay. Thank you for your good point.
this channel is an absolute goldmine, i can't believe it, THANK YOU for uploading these!
I am most pleased to have stumbled upon this video. I was mezmerized by the audio book "Thus spoke Zaratustra" so I love having this kind of content available on youtube.
Absolutely amazing. Utmost respect in the thinker balanced with cutting criticism in the consequences of the thoughts is the basis of perfect philosophy. Separating the idea from the person is something social media platforms are incapable of. Thanks.
A damn good lecture although I'm already familiar with Nietzsche's work and have read most of it and also some biography and criticism of it I nonetheless found his critique of Nietzsche original, informed, refreshing and, thought provoking.
Seldom have I been so impressed with a speaker. He makes,his,points very clearly and in a logical progression.
Bravo!
He also makes pretty basic errors that should be easy to spot if one has actually read Nietzsche. He really has no idea what he's talking about.
@@MacSmithVideo Care to explain, I have no idea who nietzche is so I'd like to hear your thoughts.
This is one of the greatest lectures a philosophy student could ever experience. Smooth, concise, very well organized and an overall joy to listen to. Thank you for existing.
An articulate, non-egotistical lesson. Thank you!
@@scottystcloud7086 lame
If you think the ego is not present in this speaker to the point it gets in its own way then you need more study. :3
@@larkohiya not extinct of course (but what is?) but not so arrogant and self-congratulating like many of these style talks are.
@@flm8580 Lois Lame?
@@larkohiya Or you're just a morally posturing weakling frightened by the slightest signs of confidence in someone. His ego is hardly visible, if at all; get lost lol
This was in-fact, a banger.
Mans spitting mad fire.
Facts
i’m not a rapper
a banger, indeed.
Wow. Brilliant, beautiful explanations from an incredible mind and thinker. My understanding of Nietzsche and Christianity and the world in general is much enhanced by your fantastic teaching. Thank you.
Can’t get enough of Nietzsche. Love hearing the (sometimes vastly)different interpretations that professors have of him.
You mean predictable radicals vs anyone who intuitively understands the content and doesn’t need it explained?
Aaaaaaand the first slide is Modernism. Wow what a surprise.
This is a really good way of listening to Michael Sugrue give his opinions on Nietzsche.
It has nothing to do with Nietzsche - Nietzsche warned about these people.
@@-John-Doe- maybe Michael should do movie reviews ?
Thus, there is no one correct interpretation. Some though are more astute than others..
@@thatcherwasson2093 he be dead though..
Your lectures are truly a work of art. Thank you so much for recording them all those years ago and for sharing them now.
This dude is like my Alan Watts of psychology. He explains things so understandably.
Big Alan Watts fan here. Only Watts is better. This man's incessant pacing is too much like a Pentecostal Preacher for me.
@@dashlamb9318odd because this is philosophy and Alan watts was actually trained as an episcopal minister 😂.
Prof Sugrue brings back Nietzsche alive with his stimulating and profound interpretation in his inimitable style. Thanks to such unique professor.
His interpretation is pretty generic imo
@@charlesdesobry9446 there’s not exactly a plethora of ways to “interpret” him. Nietzsche said what he said and meant what he meant.
I've struggled to understand Nietzche but this lecture was great. Very interesting ideas. Maybe eventually I will read Nietzche and get it, one step closer
Yeah that might help.
But dont start with Zarathustra 😉
@@katarinaj.6830 May i ask why not?
@@koig8393 all I say is..I have to agree with the original comment, I also struggle to understand him, Zarathustra may seem a bit much for a beginner
It seems simple...just be an evil selfish human without pity and place your personal ambition above all things. This is a philosophy of evil.
Undoubtedly one of the finest teachers I have ever seen! Rest in peace, Sir! We thank you for giving us the opportunity to listen to your lectures, even though you are no longer with us!
All the lectures are *expletive* good. You, Darren Staloff, and Rick Rodrick have made some great contributions. Thank you.
Man really just strolls around the stage and *chats* about this stuff. I love it
Excellent lecture and thorough explanation ; the more I hear of the German philosophers such as Nietzche, Kant, Hegel, Marx, etc and the specific German term they used, the more it gives me enthusiasm to learn the German language just so that I can read in the original language.
@RKO1988 well, to be fair, Hitler was a pretty big deal for the entirety of Europe and the world to be frank, he basically threatened everyone and everything, not just with ideas, but literal action. The fact aswell that his existence and influence was much closer to the 21st century than any of those other names might also contribute to that fact.
@@RKO1988 Nothing about Marx is great.
As a German I who enjoys reading English authors in their original language, I wish you success in your endeavor!
@@RKO1988 All these philosophers are fearless than freak and are in fact a detriment to society and proponents of evil 🤦🏾♂️. Just like Nazis who they inspired. 🤡
@@RKO1988 Imagine that causing the largest war in human history and torturing to death over 6 million people in an attempted genocide would overshadow a handful of books 🤦🏾♂️.
I liked the walking back and forth. He can discuss this stuff as casually as any topic. Very informative and makes anyone think. I appreciate sharing this with others. I like to learn.
Great video. Reading Nietzsche sometimes gives me a head ache. Dr. Sugrue makes Nietzsche easily understandable. I've read dozens of books on the subject, yet this breakdown on Christianity just blows open a new understanding of the subject. Outstanding.
weird. I've never found Nietzsche to be hard to understand
Hey, actually I'm pretty new to philosophy, can u tell me from did you start?
Sadly, Nietzsche's worldview is extremely difficult to apply today. The "superman" was defeated in 1945 and I mean all supermen, not just the guy with the little moustache. Today we are ruled by a priesthood of "experts", CEOs, and bureaucrats. The merchant class and grievance class being one rung below. I belong to the working-class and I'm well read. It would be nice to have a monarchy that takes care of the big stuff like highways, bridges and wars and protects us from over-enthusiastic bureaucrats and lawyers.
@@ronniewaters9782 don't you think that you got it the other way around these CEOs and techno's are the uberman not the priests. They promote dog eat dog culture that pretty sums up the idea of a superman, the uberman.
Well articulated
Why can’t we have philosophy courses on Sunday’s that function like church but for people that want to hear different theories? Lol imagine the sense of liberation, community and momentum it could generate in the search for truth?
This is great. Thanks uploader.
Athiesm leads to mass child sacrifice, via abortion, and contraceptives. Secular societes have murdered millions more than Christian ones Secularism is THE DEATH of a civilization.
😂😂😂 that is assuming most people are smart which they are not and will never be
That's why you have univiersities 😊 Sunday is the Lord's Day 🙏
Nietzsche has been my favorite read so far in my journey into western philosophy. Not only is his poetic prose a delight to read but also the clear and straight to the point way he poses his assertions makes it really easy for the reader to create an internal debate and discussion around them instead of simply taking the assertions in. Also in his genealogy of morals he makes some comments about the true effect of punishment in the individual that were way ahead of his time
Thank you so much Dr. Sugrue. These videos are fascinating to a casual philosophy reader like myself
Since I found this channel my appetite for philosophy has been re ignited! Amazing speaker!
Oh this one’s gotta be totally kickass!!! gonna brew us some tea, sit back relax and learn with the professor 👍🏻✌🏼
I usually light one up for the lectures with Prof. Finch😂
You read my mind!
The Original Naked Blonde Writer right on Ms. Plath👍👍
What kind of tea goes best with these lectures?
@@Rawdiswar oolong
Great, educational lectures free on your phone. What a wonderful world!
How I wish this man was alive today I would have loved to see a panel discussion with Jordan peterson.
He knew his material and so articulate...I just stumbled upon his lectures about 2months ago. Much love ❤️
I suggest you go after some real philosophers instead. Peterson has no place in a conversation about Nietzsche.
Peterson is a philosopher like Tom Cruise is an air force hero.
One of the key points of this presentation that struck me hard is "those who can not hurt others will eventually hurt themselves". Thanks for the lecture professor this is enlightening!
If you had come up with a similar bromide, would you have thanked yourself?
If you want more enlightenment, consult Jesus, the Light of the world.
I don't believe that, just does not make any sense.
@@yveelizaif you don’t have the capability to hurt others then it’s only a matter of time until you yourself are exploited or harmed
It’s very trite, but it doesn’t make it true.
As a German & European History double major, thank you for such a wonderful lecture.
A fascinating analysis of Nietzsche's devastating critique on traditional "values." With his full sight focus on the Machiavellian distortion of values by religious institutions to service tyrants, Nietzsche's philosophical attack came with mountain lightning speed and the precision of Navy Seal alpine warfare from his Olympian Swiss Alps perch. The rarefied air and vantage point of the Swiss Alps along with Nietzsche's expertise in Greek and Latin philology gave Nietzsche the edge. The mercenary soldiers, representing the T.S. Eliot "hollow men" of the traditional state, university values and the lieutenants of the decayed, ossified Roman legion Church aka "origin of the term religion R..e legion", stood no chance against Nietzsche's intellectual firepower. With his courageous, ferocious mountain attack, Nietzsche fought to liberate "modern man" from the shackles of the Roman Empire tradition, and the Machiavellian "storylines" used throughout history to service the state, where souls went to die, "soul diers" all to promote the most sinister of agendas and the most depraved tyrants in history even if draped in silk robes and bespoke Savile Row suits. He fought to reveal again out of a keen instinct to release man to his no limit capacity, to open the "dog gate" so man was left free to explore the vast Western horizons of thought and creativity, to go out on the leading edge of potentiality all while infused with the immensity and grandeur of the Ralph Waldo Emersonian described "immense intelligence" that pervades all, the real God Nietzsche fought to reveal for the luminosity of man. Thank you for sharing your video and philosophy expertise with Nietzsche aficionados across the world.
Conscience is our plan B to bite ourselves instead of having power over others because of our weak and inferiority. Such an amazing explanation!
Amazing lecture, thank you for preserving it for all of us to enjoy and learn from!
This is the first youtube lecture which I listen with full attention from first to last😍
40:42 - A worthy observation and a question that everyone needs to answer. Amazing that this guy does this with no notes.
1. Philosophy of culture
2. Value of moral
3. Beyond good and evil
Grateful ❤
I've been having a little bit of trouble with some of Nietzsches works as I go through them, and this lecture helped me grasp him a bit better, thank you!
This is an excellent and very well informed and supported critique of Nietzsche. While I don't share the conclusions, such as Nietzsche bearing responsibility for for the Nazis and such; I very much appreciate the taking of a hammer to my intellectual idol and forcing me to reexamine again if he rings hollow or not.
The immeasurably erudite Professor Sugrue. I'm a grad student and your work has had a profound impact on my intellectual development. Thank you, sir.
these great lectures (which are) and all good lectures should be available free to everyone, and would produce an enlightened society without the elitist obstacles of money and privilege in attending universities that students can no longer afford. michael, these are wonderful, thanks!
Why assume social dichotomies are bad? Why assume goods and services should be shared amongst the many? Are they so weak they canno't know what and how to fend for themselves? Maybe re-watch the lecture 😉
@@TomBombadil676 an enlightened society is egalitarian by nature. to live in the world first, second, and third, and see the beauty of humanity despite its tragic afflictions, most beyond their control, is heart rending. every human being by the fact that they exist is sacred and deserving of every possible good thing to help them survive and thrive and become fully human. this is what every great spiritual system says. to speak of 'dichotomies' about human beings from a supremacist perspective is ignorant and fascist, and defines the very poison that afflict the earth, the greed of ego and profit, encapsulated in a self righteous narcissism. and to equate their suffering and lack of necessary means for life with some kind of inferiority, is absurd. maybe you should learn what it means to be human by living with the people in villages in asia, africa, the middle east, the caribbean, south america. pethaps you'll find the humanity to make your comments impossible.
@@royalhartigan you start off with an assumption but anyway the way I see it : I we invoked polar opposites and réality stands somewhere between. Telling me i'm not serious just to classify me as irrelevant is quite rigid imo. Sometimes useful i guess
@@TomBombadil676 fact are facts and reality is reality. anyone who doesn't appreciate the equal value of every human being on this planet and pimping right wing lies about class and entitlement is pathetic and inhumane. as i said, educate yourself by living across the world in villages where people are trying to overcome the nightmare of profit, greed, and the global 1%. live with them and understand the reality o this world and its sordid history due to the mentality of those who spout your rhetoric. after all that then you can come back and discuss intelligently about what is the reality and moral vision needed. prof. sugrue would also tell you the same. this conversation is over, and mark twain was right.
Ironically anti Nietzschean.
Uploading these lectures of Sugrue and Staloff has done the world a lot of good, given that so many young people grow up using youtube as guides for intellectual development. I have been critical of Michael, but let me be honest: it is out of love and appreciation that I VERY rarely feel while looking at my smartphone these days. Elevating discourse is one of the MOST important things we can do for the social media generation.
Yes, the “beyond good and evil” is my favourite! Thanks so much for this lecture 🙏💖
women
An illuminating lecture. One thing I think about when I learn more about Nietzche, is that he is uniquely modern and of all the philosophers, the most active in trying to create a new world, or maybe trying to bring back a more authentic and natural world. One of the things that bothers me about Nietzsche is his focus on our differences as strong or weak rather than our similarities in humanity…and what is missing I think from his excavation of our human nature is the concept of empathy, something possibly as ancient in our psyche as any conception of pleasure or pain…
My Most Favourite Professor!
One question what is your thoughts on Christianity
Unquestionably one of the best lectures on Nietzsche
What a great body of work. Thank you for your contribution to humanity Dr. Sugrue you will surely be missed
Wow you’re an incredible lecturer. Really appreciate these videos. As an admirer of Nietzsche I found you’re critiques of him very grounding. That final line was very satisfying. Thank you!
* as an admirer of evil
😂😂😂"as an admirer of evil" that got me
@@craxyman9025 That's why we should move past good and evil. And just be an admirer!
@@eastlands5756 😂 I'm not admiring this man. Why should I? If you want to support the self proclaimed anti Christ go ahead but don't drag others with you.
@@sincronot Silly question.
I want to go back in time and give this man a glass of water
This is a great video. One critique I have is there is a growing trend with uploaded videos in general where the date a video was made isn’t included.
Clear, concise, and logical. Thank you sir.
This lecturer is nothing short of brilliant !
You gave the best lecture on philosophy I ever had. Clear , and to the point.
A concise and clear presentation, glad I came across this.
I really enjoy the lecture series. How the heck do you remember all this and walk back and forth reciting it all? I admire a man that 'know his stuff' to be blunt but truthful. You obviously do regarding each topic. An idea never hurt anyone or did it? Everyone has to make up their own minds about knowledge content. It is useful to know the background events of each theorist and the problems they faced during their times. Their own experiences also seem to affect their orientations for better or worse.
absolutely beautiful lecture, this man's breadth of knowledge is incredible. Rest in peace Dr. Sugrue
You know this is going to be a great day if it starts with this 🦋
I love these lectures, I've just found your channel, thank you.
Thank you for posting these lectures Dr. Sugrue!
Amazing professor. He has other lectures, which are amazing
WHY THE NAZIS LOVE NIETZSCHE XXX Nietzsche and the Nazis - FREE AUDIO BOOK ua-cam.com/video/a2C90l7YlT8/v-deo.html
@@EYECRAFTVideo nazis also drive vw
Quick boycott vw
A brilliant presentation, Sir.
Thank you.
My God. What an amazing lecture. It's a gift to us. This guy was born to be a professor.
In my 20s I would binge watch epic fail videos on YT. Now in my 30s I watch philosophical lectures.
Got any favourites that you’d like to share?
I am Grateful to be obsessed with these lectures at 26. Never too late.
Here at 21
This is a great _Lecture_ on what Michael Sugrue thinks. It would be better to have someone inform people of what Nietzsche thought.
Agreed. I was thinking the same with what he did in the Marcus Aurelius lecture. Yeah, but interesting to listen to
Read 'Thus spake Zarathustra' and find out for yourself. Good lecturers add their own interpretations of their subjects into the mix. Think of Jordan Peterson, or maybe you have no use for him either.
You're basically saying you want a philosophical newscast, in the old dry style. Just the facts and no opinions. Or only slyly added opinions. Camouflaged programming.
The emotionally charged propaganda puppet shows of todays MSM are a different issue and a bigger problem.
You could of course just read the Nietzsche wiki page. Definitely won't be any bias there.
I agree. Thia was a great, thought provoking lecture, but Nietzsche himself would not see this as an accurate presentation of his ideas.
🥂yep
Just love the vapid generalized critical commentary from some random anonymous internet dude who offers no detailed support or argument for their opinions. "What Nietzsche thought"? As if you know and have some authority on the matter.
What an outstanding individual. This lecture deserves the highest praise.
Born and raised in the Vedic culture, I grew up practicing Buddhism and Hinduism in parallel which is pretty common in Nepal. When I came to America and started studying philosophy, the first thought that came to my mind upon reading Fedrick Nietzsche is that he is the Buddha of the west. Friedrich Nietzsche was as enlightened as Buddha if not more.
Dad disagrees, saying Buddha extinguishes desire, Nietzsche intensifies it.Even though he was an invalid, Nietzsche chose the active life over the contemplative life in his philosophy and he rejected Buddha for many of the same reason he rejected Jesus. My father said he is very impressed with the Diamond Sutra and the Ramayana. He said you might profit from Meister Eckhart, the great Christian mystic. Dad has a lecture on Meister Eckhardt posted. God bless.
@@dr.michaelsugrue Does Buddha's practice of "none-ness" towards all human emotional desires really extinguish desire?
If Buddha and Nietzsche were confronted, could either produce any argument that ought to appeal to the impartial listener? I am not thinking of political arguments. We can imagine them appearing before the Almighty, as in the first chapter of the Book of Job, and offering advice as to the sort of world He would create. What could either say?
Buddha would open the argument by speaking of lepers, outcast and miserable; the poor, toiling with aching limbs and barely kept alive by scanty nourishment; the wounded in battle, dying in slow agony; the orphans, ill-treated by cruel guardians; and even the most successful haunted by the thought of failure and death. From all this load of sorrow, he would say, a way of salvation must be found, and salvation can only come through love.
Nietzsche, whom only Omnipotence could restrain from interrupting, would burst out when his turn came.
"Good heavens, man, you must learn to be of tougher fibre. Why go about sniveling because trivial people suffer? Or, for that matter, because great men suffer? Trivial people suffer trivially, great men suffer greatly, and great sufferings are not to be regretted, because they are noble. Your ideal is a purely negative one, absence of suffering, which can be completely secured by non-existence. I, on the other hand, have positive ideals: I admire Alcibiades, and the Emperor Frederick II, and Napoleon. For the sake of such men, any misery is worth while. I appeal to You, Lord, as the greatest of creative artists, do not let Your artistic impulses be curbed by the degenerate fear-ridden maundering of this wretched psychopath."
Buddha, who in the courts of Heaven has learnt all history since his death, and has mastered science with delight in the knowledge and sorrow at the use to which men have put it, replies with calm urbanity:
"You are mistaken, Professor Nietzsche, in thinking my ideal a purely negative one. True, it includes a negative element, the absence of suffering; but it has in addition quite as much that is positive as it to be found in your doctrine. Though I have no special admiration for Alcibiades and Napoleon, I, too, have my heroes: my successor Jesus, because he told men to love their enemies; the men who discovered how to master the forces of nature and secure food with less labour; the medical men who have shown how to diminish disease; the poets and artists and musicians who have caught glimpses of the Divine beatitude. Love and knowledge and delight in beauty are not negations; they are enough to fill the lives of the greatest men that have ever lived."
"All the same," Nietzsche replies, "your world would be insipid. You should study Heraclitus, whose works survive complete in the celestial library. Your love is compassion, which is elicited by pain; your truth, if you are honest, is unpleasant, and only to be known through suffering; and as to beauty, what is more beautiful than the tiger, who owes his splendour to his fierceness? No, if the Lord should decide for your world, I fear we would all die of boredom." "You might," Buddha replies, "because you love pain, and your love of life is a sham. But those who really love life would be happy as no one can be happy in the world as it is."
- Bertrand Russell
@@russv.winkle8764 Buddhism is not really about "changing the world" or "loving the world" but more on the personal level with the emphasis on self-discipline (extinguish desires ), self development, and self salvation from within.
@@shiangjeoushyu8586 Mahayana explicitly teaches to forestall personal enlightenment to benefit others according to the stages of the Path (Lam Rim). So yeah, Buddhism is definitely about loving the world. Avalokiteshvara Buddha is literally the personification of infinite compassion and mercy; Chan Buddhism has Kuan Yin nourishing seekers with water, Pure Land Buddhists have Amitabha Buddha saving seekers. Theravada Buddhism differs slightly but still acknowledge the Bodhisattva. Even a Naturalistic Buddhist would recognize that utilitarianism is baked into 'personal liberation'. I just don't see a desecaant version of Buddhism devoid of compassion.
This a truly eye opening exploration of the least palatable elements of a Nietschean world. Nietsche's analysis of the origin of Christian ethics is very compelling, but his alternative seems dystopian. To stop protecting the meek in order to untether the dominant and strong is bound to produce endless seasons of backlash and revolution. Correct me if I am wrong, but Nietsche would oppose a peaceful civil rights movement or any other humanitarian reform. Nietsche would say, if you want more power, take it by force, that is, become a hawk rather than a rabbit that plies its pitiable nature. To my mind, merciful rulers make more stable societies, and brutal regimes sow the seeds of their own destruction
If you're free to pursue your self-interest and what you're describing is not in anyone's self-interest then obviously adopting Nietzsches view would not lead to your situation.
Romans with master morality is hardly thought of as failed society but one of the high points in the western history. It was a brutal regime
Agree with you. Am against any kind of domination of a human being by another. This usually means the use of violence through strength to succeed on dominating a whole society. And this is intrinsically perverse. It always leads to sorts of fascism. Which means a failure and implies necessarily crime. So, also, sooner than later, not does it only it fails, but brings revolt. Because you cannot try to make everybody think like you. Obviously we aren't photocopies and there will always be people thinking differently. If you then force them to submit and comply with what you think has to be, you'll have to apply violence on them. To first silence them and soon to kill them, so they never opposing to you. This is fascism and this is why it forcely implies crime. So it has to be ethically condemned and we must fight against it. We have to understand others and accept the different, for we are all different. Any other way of thinking is wrong. We don't have to impose or try to impose ourselves on others. All of us can be "strong warriors" during some time and become weak under other circumstances. I wouldn't divide the world into the strong and the weak ones because this isn't real. But of course we belong to chaos, and so we have to accept this too. And this means that we live under uncertainty and constant change. Having to adapt ourselves almost constantly, to the rules of uncertainty and change. And the better we get adapted to this, the smarter we will be, as known. Ain't this so? - it in't surprising that Nietzsche was used by the Nazis, those criminals thought about themselves they were superheroes kind of. That's the fascist leadership principle trend, it's what it tends to, unavoidingly. That's how they think in terms of the superior and the inferior ones, the weak and the strong ones. Who could agree with that⁉️ - They did and others may again, but one has to keep clear fascism is just a big mistake implying sooner than later crime. When they come into power, if it happens, they may have succeed, overpowering its society, but they'll never convince. As was stated. Fascism is an involution and a quick way into crime. Don't get cheated. 🤔🙄🧐😔🙏
F.N. analysis was ahistorical and uncritical !!! an a priori construction also, but irresponsable.
@Nebby Scumbold Problem lies in people needing delusions of divine authority and promises of ultimate supernatural justice in their lives (or should I say afterlives?) just so they can be "morally accountable", which often devolves into a refusal to accept the world as it is. Master morality, or "nietzschean" pride as you seem to label it, comes from the acceptance that the heavenly father will not/can not save us from ourselves, we are all we got and finding purpose and beauty in that is the only sane remedy against nihilism.
A teacher for the ages. Miss you! God bless you.
solid introduction to Nietzsches thinking I guess, eventhough I feel that it could've been a little bit more nuanced in regards to Nietzsches actual personality (or at least the impression one can extract from his private letters, diaries and tales from people who knew him) and the fact that he loved to examine things from different perspectives, with a variety of "masks" as he liked to call it. For he especially implemented this technique in BGE, which might have been partially inspired by for example Sokrates' irony and Kierkegaards usage of pseudonyms, as some scholars pointed out. It would've been interesting to hear some more answers to Nietzsches historical- philosophy ideas from an actual historian, too. But to keep it short, great work in terms of lecturing anyway, even if I hope that the audience has digged deeper into Nietzsches work after shaking off this overtly dark and misanthropic perception (he neither was an antisemite, in fact he was one of THE intellectual anti-antisemites of his days, nor was he an actual misogynist (women-hater), just because he liked to selfconsciously poke at "Weiber" from time to time)
It's not just lacking nuance. It's filled with basic errors and moralistic nonsense. He doesn't seem to know much at all about Nietzsche.
I think this lecture is shallow in its uncritical promotion of Nietzsche's most problematic text, The Genealogy of Morals. The PC allegations that are supposed to establish critical distance are shallow too.
@@MacSmithVideo on the contrary, I think his interjecting thoughts are evidence of his understanding, and not the other way around as you seem to think.
Your political correctness is embarrassing. You are obviously a victim of slave morality.
@@j.langer5949 fascinating insight! would you mind to elaborate on that, gentleman?
Pretty amazing how he makes a person understand hard knowledge easily. Great work
This man, who taught me a lot, has passed. His legacy, though, will live on for a long time, I can promise you guys that.
Probably the greatest lecture I've seen and the best on Nietzsche, or morality for that matter.
except there is no criticism of F.N. ideas themselves.
wait till u see his lecture about marcus aurelius
Sincerely appreciate your teaching ability.
Dr. Sugrue is my dad. He saved my life. I love philosophy.
Pleasure to listen to! Awesome when people with different convictions and view points recognize and give credit to true talent. Real sign of intelligence and seriousness in my opinion. Wish he talked more on how Nietzsche sees modern science, atheism and essentially our metaphysical belief in the truth as a product of slave morality and christianity.
Can you recommend me sources that discuss N.’s views on modern atheism and science?
There is one big issue I find with the concept of master morality, that is that the masters themselves rarely lived up to this ideal of potence, superiority or excellence that Nietzsche deems "good" and that he hopes will unleash the highest human potential.
Especially if we are talking about the masters in the context of an aristocratic society like ancient Rome or feudal Europe. Most of these aristocrats and noblemen simply inherited their position of power, wealth and potence and didn't earn it through their own merits or achievements, just like the weak and poor didn't either, these societies allowed almost no social mobility and set up rigid laws wich determined wich people belonged to the nobility by birth and bloodline, wich belonged to the middle classes and wich belonged to the rabble, to the slaves, to the dispossessed.
A nobleman could be the most depraved, good for nothing and he would still be guaranteed a life of wealth, status and power (and indeed you can find many such individuals in history books) , while the most brilliant potential artist, thinker or scientist could be born among the slaves or poor and never amount to anything because they are confined by the social structures around them, wich prevents one from falling and the other from rising. There is nothing admirable about the ability of the aristocrat to enslave, torture or kill the peasant, when the entire world is set up in his favour and has been for many generations without any effort or contribution of his own. You will never produce a superior breed of people by essentially allowing a small group of people to secure all ressources of power and wealth and pass them on among their own through inheritance, wich means they can just rest on the laurels of their ancestors.
The only society in wich the concept of master morality with this intention behind it would be logically sound would be one wich guarantees equality of opportunity within every new generation, in other words a true meritocracy. And isn't this what the proponents of "slave morality" that Nietzsche condemned so harshly, the christians, the liberals, the socialists, were essentially asking for? To be liberated from the shackles of oppression in order to have the same freedoms and means to reach their full potential as their oppressors? I find it ironic that one of the finest examples of an Übermensch, a man who was not held back by slave morality, the living ideal of the warrior aristocrat, in Nietzsches mind was Napoleon Bonaparte. But simultaneously he regretted the demise of the old french aristocracy, in wich allegedly a distant echo of the values of master morality lived on in christian europe, and it's destruction in the french revolution (wich was of course another evil spawn of slave morality). But the rise of someone like Napoleon from an insignificant background to a great conqueror and the most powerful man in europe solely through political and military genius was only even possible thanks to the french revolution that destroyed old class barriers and levelled the playing field.
This entire fallacy is kind of nullified by the fact that simply usurping power (taking it illegitimately) was just as common as inheritance, particularly in the societies you mention. Sure some inept dweeb could inherit power, but he'd also be very vulnerable to that general Maximus Alphacus taking it from him through his own force & ability. And why would he not? The rest of the nation sees how unfit the ruler is, and the army is loyal to Alphacus so.. oh look, another dethroned weakling.
I do agree though, Master Morality would be "purest" in a society which necessitated the Masters to exert & verify their strength instead of simply inheriting power. The thing is, inheritance usually leads to weakness over time, which usually leads to a usurped or overthrown aristocracy; so the problem mostly solved itself throughout history.
Also, Napoleon was going to rise regardless; he already had gained a sizable reputation for his generalship by the onset of the 1800's thanks to Toulon & Piedmont, he was a rising star already. The revolution skyrocketed his progress, sure; but in all likelihood he would have staged a coup himself had the revolution not kicked off.
I came away from the Genealogy of Morals with a very different perspective. Nietzsche attacked Christianity, and religion in particular because it was an 'Anesthesia' for the people's anger created through the domestication process of society. Nietzsche was not praising the masters, he was seeking to free people. My main take away was that he observed that people walked through life focused on an afterlife, and not the world around them. Many tyrants enjoyed their power thanks to this anesthesia of the social conscious.
@@Huspree2011 Very true statement. I think it is interesting (and I have to agree with him) in that he believes in Christ but not Christianity.
A good and wise parent knows that disciplining their child properly will not destroy their creativity. In the same way, any society must devise a good and wise plan for disciplining their creative people so that the "damage" they do to the rest of society can be reduced. There needs to be mechanisms that allow the mass of society to defend themselves. We have the right to protect ourselves, even from unintentional consequences of the "run fast and break things" class.
We dont have any rights because we are weak and unremarkable. In fact rights do not exist
One thing Nietzsche misses in his disdain for the "mediocre" is that the mediocre masses are what the genius and the strong emerge out of. Without the mediocre to compare itself too, the exceptional is the new mediocre. Fail to respect the mediocre, and they will overwhelm you with sheer numbers, as they rightly should. You are not a giant because you stand on the shoulders of others.
Great thinkers are never shrill and obsessed with their own superiority to the herd.
In truth the mediocre masses are the ones standing on the shoulder of giants. They just can’t see it and resentment would be their undoing.
Most exceptional artists and thinkers are rarely praised for their works, particularly in the period of process, but they still do it because it's what is real to them. Mediocrity is the opposite, never growing to potential constantly assessing trivial matters. Nietzsche wasn't bashing the common man, he was trying to help him, but to reduce it to the most common man would have diluted the content and the growth gap is already to great. Nietzsche is for the already freed spirit, which is not contended to simple comparisons like you are trying to make born out of ego. Your theory is also invalid in the sense that if the masses could ascertain the thought level of great thinkers, good, geniuses would still be born, but the new base level would propel them to constructs that our limited minds could not fathom. It's evolution of the intellect, to try to disrespect someone as intelligent as Nietzsche is self defeating more than any illumination of self actualization that may have brightened in the nine people that liked your comment.
@@robotrichard Romans 1:22
Nietzsche did not understand Christianity.
@@noeeon9910 absurd reference to a verse from an irrelevant old book, written by fearful, ignorant men.
As a Christian, I am always intrigued by what non-Christians think. Great video.
Brilliant lecture. I've struggled to make sense of Neitzche so not really engaged. Looking forward to going back with this insight.
He's one of those pacers. The camera guy must already have experience filming him.
Great presentation and one I related to in its entirety. Great insight into the significance of Nietzsche for philosophy and culture. I met Nietzsche many years ago getting a BA in philosophy at a Jesuit University and have never grown tired of hm. In fact I discover more of him every year. I found fascinating the investigation into the contradictory aspects of his history and personality. The seemingly timid and oversensitive son of a Protestant minister ( I believe Lutheran) that even in his last sickly years still wore a Christian necklaces - and opposite to it the image of the over-man that he brings into life by his writings.I heard it said by Italian philosophers that before and after Nietzsce for a span of over 100 years most German philosophers were anti-semitic. Which may explain why an entire highly cultured people bought so esaily ithe dream of "Deutchland uber alles" and its ultimate catastrophe.
Well Germany then “cleansed” itself of the Jewish population so the Jewish question became less relevant.
I've watched lots of Sugrue, and just now noticed the mic cable extending from his pant leg. It makes his ponderous pacing all the more impressive considering he never becomes entangled in it!
This should have 1.2M views.
Great explanation of Nietzsche’s opinion. My question is, by forcing us back to a more natural approach, doesn’t Nietzsche’s promotion of a strength based hierarchy, potentially lead to a slave class dominated by those “warriors” (which are rare) highest in the hierarchy?
To put it into practice, In 2022, assuming we’re self sovereign in the west today, money is the tool used to gauge superiority in the “warrior” hierarchy and with comes the power, control, and spoils. With the disproportionate allocation of money, classism today, would Nietzsche be ok with things? Simply because this is natural?
Christianity on the other hand would help flatten the curve. Not necessarily discouraging having money, but promoting it as a means to the goal, not the goal itself. And by doing so, relinquishes the yearning for the power, control, spoils that come with it.
Is this not a more enticing view in general? Not only for the Christian but for the individual who comes out of the depths by the virtuous actions of Christianity. “The rose that grew from concrete.”
Doesn’t a christian world bring consistent virtues whereas Nietzsche’s approach leads to subjectivity that may include virtue or result in self serving principles, all at the discretion of “the warrior” where self sovereignty of the masses may not exist?
Also, Nietzsche’s understanding of christianity seems solely based from Christianity under the roman west. This completely isolates christianity and elevates the roman catholic church as the one true Church. But within the apostolic faiths, sister church’s to Rome, Church of the East for example, expressed their faith in understanding and love and evangelized from Mesopotamia all the way to China, which was a death wish at the time. So my question is whether his critique of Christianity is one only viewed through his lens living in the roman west or in general?
Please excuse my ignorance. While i know of Nietzsche i don’t really know his work and opinions in depth. Interesting to think about nonetheless
If you're asking whether or not master morality can be used as a justification for class inequality, then the answer can go two ways. Yes, for the reasons you talked about with power, control, and spoils going to those who consciously and competitively pursued them. No, in the sense that a capitalist hierarchy justified itself as a utilitarian hierarchy, and Nietzsche wrote against utilitarian men with some passion. Nietzsche thought of people seeking comfort and ease as safe, stupid, and artistically irrelevant.
Christianity has been a curve-flattening religion since its inception, and the last seventeen hundred years of Western history can easily be seen as the aristocratic and royal hierarchies versus everyone else, coming to compromises and then, particularly after the Protestant Reformation, with the aristocracies gradually being supplanted by the bourgeoisie. Today, the term "bourgeois" gets attached to serious wealth instinctively, but it wasn't always that way: the bourgeoisie were actually the prosperous middle classes a couple hundred years ago, and they became the power after religious and aristocratic leaders found themselves without legitimacy, which led to Marx proclaiming them the new enemy - same as the old enemy - in his struggles of dialectical materialism.
I think the real question is whether or not hierarchy is inevitable. If you were to use a moral hierarchy to redistribute money, they would be the next empowered hierarchy, able to reallocate as they saw fit; you wouldn't be able to manage such a system without someone having impunity to take and give as they saw fit. Remember that Nietzsche is critiquing the reaction to power by the powerless, along with the powerful, and it's pretty easy to conclude, as he does, that everyone who plays these games is in it for power. He's about the worst thinker to use if you want to justify redistribution.
@@ideologybot4592 Nietzsche's philsoophy is ridiculous. Marx made correct predictions of how class dynamics lead to depressionary economics, and these predictions were borne out during the great depression and again during the great recession. Marx correctly analyzed the dynamics of worker and owner, realizing that workers have too little power to acquire wages which allow them to clear the market. This is an incredible insight.
By contrast, Nietzsche made pronouncements about historical migrations and etymology which are ridiculous, his analysis of the origins of morality is both anti-theological and completely false, and he had the habit of blaming Jewish people for Christianity, which is extremely stupid, considering that the Christians separated from the Jews as modern Christianity was created.
The point of Christianity is to abolish slavery. Your speculation about 'heirarchy being inevitable' is as ridiculous as the claim in Roman times that slavery is inevitable.
@@annaclarafenyo8185 Wow... you seriously do not understand shit about Nietzsche... get back tot class please before writing such horable incorrect comments
Nietzsche despised what he called "merchants". He, like Aristotle, saw them as base, and what he really valued was a kind of spiritual-artistic nobility.
A fascinating analysis of Nietzsche's devastating critique on traditional "values." With his full sight focus on the Machiavellian distortion of values by religious institutions to service tyrants, Nietzsche's philosophical attack came with mountain lightning speed and the precision of Navy Seal alpine warfare from his Olympian Swiss Alps perch. The rarefied air and vantage point of the Swiss Alps along with Nietzsche's expertise in Greek and Latin philology gave Nietzsche the edge. The mercenary soldiers, representing the T.S. Eliot "hollow men" of the traditional state, university values and the lieutenants of the decayed, ossified Roman legion Church aka "origin of the term religion R..e legion", stood no chance against Nietzsche's intellectual firepower. With his courageous, ferocious mountain attack, Nietzsche fought to liberate "modern man" from the shackles of the Roman Empire tradition, and the Machiavellian "storylines" used throughout history to service the state, where souls went to die, "soul diers" all to promote the most sinister of agendas and the most depraved tyrants in history even if draped in silk robes and bespoke Savile Row suits. He fought to reveal again out of a keen instinct to release man to his no limit capacity, to open the "dog gate" so man was left free to explore the vast Western horizons of thought and creativity, to go out on the leading edge of potentiality all while infused with the immensity and grandeur of the Ralph Waldo Emersonian described "immense intelligence" that pervades all, the real God Nietzsche fought to reveal for the luminosity of man. Thank you for sharing your video and philosophy expertise with Nietzsche aficionados across the world.
I wish public schools had people like this,, i feel like I should be paying to listen to this guy
I am Christian and I am thankfu to have this lecture at my disposal.
I'm interested in your opinions of his opinions.
I'm also curious what your thoughts are
@@shaunkerr8721not the original poster but I am also christian and I find nietzche to be unbelievably smug, self important, and wicked. I am diametrically opposed to him on nearly every point he makes
@@vsaucemichaelhere3409 That's fine as none of that makes him wrong. "There are no moral phenomena, only moral interpretations of phenomena." Furthermore, look around you; how much of society lives its life for God? We have workdays Mon-Fri, festival day on Sat and God's day is Sun (for some Christians, most churches are half empty these days) Even the Christians do not center their life around God. Who gets up in the morning and worships Jesus? Takes their lunch break and dedicates it, every day to Jesus? Spends their free time in the service and worship of Jesus (primarily, not totally, but, mostly)? Next to no one does this. 200 years ago it was the norm. He was correct; God is dead and we are simply living in the shadow of a former way we found meaning in life.
@@vsaucemichaelhere3409Burned any good books lately?
does anyone know when these lectures took place, and is dr. sugrue still teaching? thanks. these should be on network tv for everyone!
I'd also like to know
1992 I think.
@@erickomar3152 thanks.