Curious if you can hazard a guess as to the bereaved father I'm alluding to from about 42:14-43:20... Hint: It's a member of _intelligentsia_ I've referred to in vids on occasion, and it's oftener to give him cred. But he's a mixed bag, especially after condoning/praising something yesterday (a special operation, as it were) that plenty of people are losing their minds over. He's been in the limelight for decades. If you guess correctly, in a future video I'll have to discuss any topic you feel I've failed to cover satisfactorily or have altogether neglected in the past.
Zarathustra - The Spirit of Gravity: _I question and test the ways themselves. All my travelling has been testing and questioning. True, one must learn to answer such questions! That, however, is my taste. Neither a good nor a bad taste, but my taste, of which I no longer have either shame or secrecy._ _“This is my way. What is yours?” So I answer those who ask me ‘the way’. For ‘the’ way does not exist!_ Why not read and understand his work first? Of course he has a preference for one manner of living or another. _It is only your assumption that his statement is normative._
BGE - Ch. 3 aphorism 51: _The mightiest men have hitherto always bowed reverently before the saint, as the enigma of self-subjugation and utter voluntary privation-why did they thus bow? They divined in him-and as it were behind the questionableness of his frail and wretched appearance-the superior force which wished to test itself by such a subjugation; the strength of will, in which they recognized their own strength and love of power, and knew how to honour it: they honoured something in themselves when they honoured the saint._ BGE - Ch. 3 aphorism 61: _To them religion offers sufficient incentives and temptations to aspire to higher intellectuality, and to experience the sentiments of authoritative self-control, of silence, and of solitude. Asceticism and Puritanism are almost indispensable means of educating and ennobling a race which seeks to rise above its hereditary baseness and work itself upwards to future supremacy._ No Avail: _Nietzsche believed renunciation is borne of weakness! That’s dumb! Renunciation takes balls!_ It's hilarious that you're trying to 'rebut' his work by agreeing with him.
YT apparently won't let my last reply to you show as posted on the other thread, so I'll repost it just in case it didn't alert you: _"How is life itself an apotheosis when it contains both degeneracy and strength?"_ It is absolutely an apotheosis axiologically for Nietzsche in Twilight Of The Idols. Degeneracy and the like count as intrinsic negatives only once the door to absolute affirmation is closed. With him it is left propped. Consider the reactive attitudes he champions at learning of one's eternal recurrence; even the worst of one's life is infinitely superior to its evaporation, making it an object of gratitude. There's no lofty subtlety to amor fati, and even degeneracy must always have comparatively more value to _no things happening_ anywhere in the world. The whole point is to affirm even the most degenerate and ignoble in life over its total absence, or stated psychologically, to strike the "sickly" note; the turning away from it; the denial of the will, which he so disparages. Not everywhere, not in everything he said, on and off record, but certainly in the work I draw from here. I expand on it in other videos and cast it as a deeply rooted sense of FOMO dressed in existential garb. At some point along the way, he cannot have it both ways. One can agree or disagree with this unconditional affirmation; just please don't try obscuring its clear as day binary nature with quotes from before, or even later in the same work, for anyone acquainted will note his contradictory aspects upfront. Obviously the video's aim was not to present a systematic case against this unconditional life affirmation (in fact I think Schop's many chapters accomplish that best, if anticipatorily), but to do what I've been doing as of late, which assumes a mostly partial audience. But if you're interested in my technical-analytic justifications (i.e. why negate the will, why anti-natalism, etc) see the video Existential jaws And Procreative Asymmetries. I fear that so much of what I say about my own views, taken independently of Nietzsche and my particular attacks or riffs on him in this video, will not register until you've seen at least a handful of my other videos, starting ideally with that one. Finally, as with any philosopher, I am happy to learn new things about Nietzsche, but I don't believe anything I've omitted to learn about his work and life is at all pertinent to a true understanding of his core values, at that stage (i.e. victorious life at the cost of peace and tranquillity) and all my reasons for rejecting that. But if you reply, just include your answer: True Or False: Nietzsche preached "victorious life > peace and tranquillity"
@@nix7504 This is a complete falsehood. Nietzsche completely accepted evolution, including the idea that man evolved from apelike ancestors. However, he was critical of certain aspects of Darwin's ideas, and not without reason. Darwin's interpretation of evolution is narrowed down to the struggle for survival and existence, whereas Nietzsche emphasized nature's demand for growth, change, reaching ever new pinnacles. For Nietzsche, evolution is not only about survival, it is also an expression of the will to power.
@@nix7504 I don't believe that's my quote. And YT will send you straight to the second-tier filter with repeated mentions of my past username. It has a naughty word, don't play with fire. I did, worst decision I ever made; pre-emptive self-own.
only because we aren't born immortal here. there are organisms who are theoretically immortal, none have any higher function to a human that would be hell. but these creatures chill out just fine
Wow I replied to this and my reply got poofed, on my own damn video. That's a first. Anyway, to redo the reply but quickly: If he could the individual would often prolong their life beyond nature's cull. As long as the option of dying is within reach, I don't see why every person would necessarily experience hell before exercising that option. And surely some would live for thousands of years, and even then wouldn't make use of it. But advances in age/decrepitude-reversals would be required. Extropeanism.
I'm curious about your thoughts on Jung's psychoanalys of Nietzsche - claiming the Archetype of "Odin" was in possesion of his mind. Do you think there's any merit to the idea of genetically engrained mental predispositions belonging to separate races and/or societies?
I don't believe there's anything to that, although I'm no scientist. I formed the baseline view I have as a result of (1) having lived in a multi-culti part of the world for nearly three decades, (2) direct first-person observation of peoples; too many deviations from the behavioural norm and all that (is there even a intra-societal, intra-racial _behavioural_ norm anywhere nowadays? Doesn't seem like it) for the genetic story to pan out. The given actions and motives would have to be binding on just about everyone considered to be a member of the racial group, no? Accepting the racial essentialist story, unscientifically, based merely on what can be observed, was easier in the distant past; a past that saw little to no procreative race mixing. Now mixing has been practiced widely for enough generations that the original pure categories do not apply to most of the living. Not that I know the figures offhand. What % of the world's population today qualifies as _pure_ after being vetted by the original race categories? There's gotta be an exact number there, right? If not, it just shows that the categories are all the more subject to fluidity, hence impreciseness. I must fess to not having read Jung's psychoanalysis of _Niches._ Need to jog soon, so if there's an audio version of this work of Jung, let me know where and I'll download it for my jog. So I should muster some feedback by evening time.
Yeah someone may've been irked enough by my mostly light-hearted mockery of their idol that they shared it in a pro-N space. Fine by me. I do no self-promotional work, evidently.
What do you dispute, exactly? How is it anything other than grovelling @ life? Forget me; what do you dispute from the 17:41-23:15 segment sampling the views of others?
@@No_Availso honestly is really hard to watch your video no offense …. The idea that Nietzsche is ‘groveling at life’ is totally backwards and absurdly inaccurate , makes me think you haven’t done any more research with any more discipline than you presented in your video : pausing an audiobook every thirty seconds to make middle school esc arguments and mock him for having syphilis even tho he inherited his disease from his father . You suck at philosophy
@@ZagreusoftheDesert This is all you Niches-dickriders do; dodge detail and fling "you just can't get it" on loop like feces. _"totally backwards and absurdly inaccurate"_ It's like you need to re-enact his own huffing/puffing without blowing down the house. As I said, forget me; how was Russel, quoted here, wrong on precious Niches?
Yea that freestyler is awesome. They end up having super quick access to a massive number of words and phrases they can then rhyme. Been watching battle rap for years. So good. Uk is better, funnier, us battle rap can be quite over reliant on gun metaphors. But some of them are insane. Yo..i did not have antibullshitman doin a kick ass rock vocal on my bingo card today. Killed it.
Whoa you blasted through this one fast! Don't forget to check out at least a few parts of _Better Limp Than Simp_ over on Rumble... it concerns you :D I time-stamped the segments that cover your reply to me. (Another 2+ hour beast of a video, and you're partly to blame!). Bastards blocked it for you on YT within the UK, so it's on Rumble. I think you'll enjoy my positive feedback, and even my pushback maybe.
@@No_Avail aah sweet OK yea ill check that out. Yea I listened to this while playing VR. Good combo. Oh forgot to say.. this was a brilliant take down of late stage Neitzche ... or however you spell that. ;)
No I'm musically talentless and incapable of maintaining any kind of social scene. As the channel proves. But your assumption flatters. Even if you're trolling.
@@No_Avail I think much of his work (10 books, interview on Danny Jones, etc) is highly influenced by Nietzsche (and Plato). In fact, he wrote a book (Uber Man) based partly on the idea of the ubermensch. I can't remember what parts he disagrees with Nietzsche on, but agrees with him a lot, and has the vocabulary and wordsmithery unlike any of his contemporaries to make his points.
@@sacredhogwash9435 Does it suggest an unconditional commitment to: Worst Things Happening > No Things Happening Worse an in, whatever types of worseness one wishes to blotch in. That, cyclically > No Things Happening. If it's that, I'll take a pass.
@@No_Avail No, definitely not. I don't hear any of that from Jason Jorjani. Actually, his whole worldview is quite different than anything else I've ever heard. The Danny Jones interview really captures that. The guy can speak at a level beyond anyone I've heard, and I've heard a lot. He definitely doesn't want worse things happening. He is concerned about the future, and he uses philosophy to try to show what me must do and not do.
@@sacredhogwash9435 I'll check out the Danny Jones interview (I'm assuming it's on YT). If you think one of his 10 books stands out in particular, I'll add it to the reading list.
@@adcaptandumvulgus4252 We can have great confidence in certain theories and less (much less) in others. Keeping in mind that the really big questions lend themselves to provisional answers only. At least for now.
But also there's no way of knowing how courageous/cowardly were the scientists, authors, poets, actors, etc who are deceased but remembered. Inevitably, at least some were far from courageous. None of it makes their historical impact any less noteworthy.
Curious if you can hazard a guess as to the bereaved father I'm alluding to from about 42:14-43:20...
Hint: It's a member of _intelligentsia_ I've referred to in vids on occasion, and it's oftener to give him cred. But he's a mixed bag, especially after condoning/praising something yesterday (a special operation, as it were) that plenty of people are losing their minds over. He's been in the limelight for decades. If you guess correctly, in a future video I'll have to discuss any topic you feel I've failed to cover satisfactorily or have altogether neglected in the past.
My first thought is Aleksandr Dugin, I don't know if that makes sense, probably not
@@rzyganiedomordy4633 Dugin barely has name recognition with me...
Initials are: DF
@@No_Avail David French? David Frum?
@@Svankmajer Bingo @ Frum.
Zarathustra - The Spirit of Gravity:
_I question and test the ways themselves. All my travelling has been testing and questioning. True, one must learn to answer such questions! That, however, is my taste. Neither a good nor a bad taste, but my taste, of which I no longer have either shame or secrecy._
_“This is my way. What is yours?” So I answer those who ask me ‘the way’. For ‘the’ way does not exist!_
Why not read and understand his work first? Of course he has a preference for one manner of living or another. _It is only your assumption that his statement is normative._
BGE - Ch. 3 aphorism 51:
_The mightiest men have hitherto always bowed reverently before the saint, as the enigma of self-subjugation and utter voluntary privation-why did they thus bow? They divined in him-and as it were behind the questionableness of his frail and wretched appearance-the superior force which wished to test itself by such a subjugation; the strength of will, in which they recognized their own strength and love of power, and knew how to honour it: they honoured something in themselves when they honoured the saint._
BGE - Ch. 3 aphorism 61:
_To them religion offers sufficient incentives and temptations to aspire to higher intellectuality, and to experience the sentiments of authoritative self-control, of silence, and of solitude. Asceticism and Puritanism are almost indispensable means of educating and ennobling a race which seeks to rise above its hereditary baseness and work itself upwards to future supremacy._
No Avail:
_Nietzsche believed renunciation is borne of weakness! That’s dumb! Renunciation takes balls!_
It's hilarious that you're trying to 'rebut' his work by agreeing with him.
YT apparently won't let my last reply to you show as posted on the other thread, so I'll repost it just in case it didn't alert you:
_"How is life itself an apotheosis when it contains both degeneracy and strength?"_
It is absolutely an apotheosis axiologically for Nietzsche in Twilight Of The Idols. Degeneracy and the like count as intrinsic negatives only once the door to absolute affirmation is closed. With him it is left propped. Consider the reactive attitudes he champions at learning of one's eternal recurrence; even the worst of one's life is infinitely superior to its evaporation, making it an object of gratitude. There's no lofty subtlety to amor fati, and even degeneracy must always have comparatively more value to _no things happening_ anywhere in the world. The whole point is to affirm even the most degenerate and ignoble in life over its total absence, or stated psychologically, to strike the "sickly" note; the turning away from it; the denial of the will, which he so disparages. Not everywhere, not in everything he said, on and off record, but certainly in the work I draw from here. I expand on it in other videos and cast it as a deeply rooted sense of FOMO dressed in existential garb. At some point along the way, he cannot have it both ways. One can agree or disagree with this unconditional affirmation; just please don't try obscuring its clear as day binary nature with quotes from before, or even later in the same work, for anyone acquainted will note his contradictory aspects upfront. Obviously the video's aim was not to present a systematic case against this unconditional life affirmation (in fact I think Schop's many chapters accomplish that best, if anticipatorily), but to do what I've been doing as of late, which assumes a mostly partial audience. But if you're interested in my technical-analytic justifications (i.e. why negate the will, why anti-natalism, etc) see the video Existential jaws And Procreative Asymmetries.
I fear that so much of what I say about my own views, taken independently of Nietzsche and my particular attacks or riffs on him in this video, will not register until you've seen at least a handful of my other videos, starting ideally with that one.
Finally, as with any philosopher, I am happy to learn new things about Nietzsche, but I don't believe anything I've omitted to learn about his work and life is at all pertinent to a true understanding of his core values, at that stage (i.e. victorious life at the cost of peace and tranquillity) and all my reasons for rejecting that.
But if you reply, just include your answer: True Or False: Nietzsche preached "victorious life > peace and tranquillity"
"Like most 19th century philosophers he was *about* to study biology, he was *about* to study science."
-JP Stern on Nietzche.
I have the same problem..
@@No_Avail He was fervently anti-evolution apparently, which is pretty lame, uncool, not very swag and does NOT pass the vibe check.
@@nix7504 I might've been too. Who wants to resemble a monkey anyway. Better to descend from the fearless overmanz.
@@No_Avail what about monkey overmen
@@nix7504 This is a complete falsehood. Nietzsche completely accepted evolution, including the idea that man evolved from apelike ancestors. However, he was critical of certain aspects of Darwin's ideas, and not without reason. Darwin's interpretation of evolution is narrowed down to the struggle for survival and existence, whereas Nietzsche emphasized nature's demand for growth, change, reaching ever new pinnacles. For Nietzsche, evolution is not only about survival, it is also an expression of the will to power.
Virgin Inmendham vs Chad No Avail.
Gary has tiger blood tho. Old, slightly-altered photos of him prove he's a human-tiger hybrid.
@@No_Avail "This is just so nipticky... and bullshity from antibullshitman. This is just bullshit from antibullshitman" - Gary
@@nix7504 He has his mantras no doubt.
@@No_Avail "I mean you said nitpicky like 10 fucking times in your video. That to me is kind of bullshit." - Antibullshitman
@@nix7504 I don't believe that's my quote. And YT will send you straight to the second-tier filter with repeated mentions of my past username. It has a naughty word, don't play with fire. I did, worst decision I ever made; pre-emptive self-own.
No life without death. A deathless life would be hell.
only because we aren't born immortal here. there are organisms who are theoretically immortal, none have any higher function to a human that would be hell. but these creatures chill out just fine
Wow I replied to this and my reply got poofed, on my own damn video. That's a first. Anyway, to redo the reply but quickly: If he could the individual would often prolong their life beyond nature's cull. As long as the option of dying is within reach, I don't see why every person would necessarily experience hell before exercising that option. And surely some would live for thousands of years, and even then wouldn't make use of it. But advances in age/decrepitude-reversals would be required. Extropeanism.
I'm curious about your thoughts on Jung's psychoanalys of Nietzsche - claiming the Archetype of "Odin" was in possesion of his mind.
Do you think there's any merit to the idea of genetically engrained mental predispositions belonging to separate races and/or societies?
I don't believe there's anything to that, although I'm no scientist. I formed the baseline view I have as a result of (1) having lived in a multi-culti part of the world for nearly three decades, (2) direct first-person observation of peoples; too many deviations from the behavioural norm and all that (is there even a intra-societal, intra-racial _behavioural_ norm anywhere nowadays? Doesn't seem like it) for the genetic story to pan out. The given actions and motives would have to be binding on just about everyone considered to be a member of the racial group, no?
Accepting the racial essentialist story, unscientifically, based merely on what can be observed, was easier in the distant past; a past that saw little to no procreative race mixing. Now mixing has been practiced widely for enough generations that the original pure categories do not apply to most of the living. Not that I know the figures offhand. What % of the world's population today qualifies as _pure_ after being vetted by the original race categories? There's gotta be an exact number there, right? If not, it just shows that the categories are all the more subject to fluidity, hence impreciseness.
I must fess to not having read Jung's psychoanalysis of _Niches._ Need to jog soon, so if there's an audio version of this work of Jung, let me know where and I'll download it for my jog. So I should muster some feedback by evening time.
Wow, this video seems to have had a large (by this channel's standards) increase in views in a short period of time
Yeah someone may've been irked enough by my mostly light-hearted mockery of their idol that they shared it in a pro-N space. Fine by me.
I do no self-promotional work, evidently.
This is the most dishonest and stupid critique of Nietzsche I have ever seen. I enjoyed listening to him in between your misunderstandings atleast
What do you dispute, exactly? How is it anything other than grovelling @ life? Forget me; what do you dispute from the 17:41-23:15 segment sampling the views of others?
@@No_Availso honestly is really hard to watch your video no offense …. The idea that Nietzsche is ‘groveling at life’ is totally backwards and absurdly inaccurate , makes me think you haven’t done any more research with any more discipline than you presented in your video : pausing an audiobook every thirty seconds to make middle school esc arguments and mock him for having syphilis even tho he inherited his disease from his father . You suck at philosophy
@@ZagreusoftheDesert This is all you Niches-dickriders do; dodge detail and fling "you just can't get it" on loop like feces.
_"totally backwards and absurdly inaccurate"_ It's like you need to re-enact his own huffing/puffing without blowing down the house.
As I said, forget me; how was Russel, quoted here, wrong on precious Niches?
@ZagreusoftheDesert I totally agree! (and a good critique of any philosopher can be worthwhile, ) but this is garbage!
Yea that freestyler is awesome. They end up having super quick access to a massive number of words and phrases they can then rhyme. Been watching battle rap for years. So good. Uk is better, funnier, us battle rap can be quite over reliant on gun metaphors. But some of them are insane.
Yo..i did not have antibullshitman doin a kick ass rock vocal on my bingo card today. Killed it.
Whoa you blasted through this one fast! Don't forget to check out at least a few parts of _Better Limp Than Simp_ over on Rumble... it concerns you :D
I time-stamped the segments that cover your reply to me. (Another 2+ hour beast of a video, and you're partly to blame!). Bastards blocked it for you on YT within the UK, so it's on Rumble. I think you'll enjoy my positive feedback, and even my pushback maybe.
@@No_Avail aah sweet OK yea ill check that out.
Yea I listened to this while playing VR. Good combo.
Oh forgot to say.. this was a brilliant take down of late stage Neitzche ... or however you spell that. ;)
@@SkidRowRadio _Breakfast At Niches_
Idk why I was recommended this video. Are you one of those guys that plays video games all day and are armchair thinkers?
You get an *F* on first impressions and lazy conjecture.
neiche wasnt endorsing he was warning
He was doing lots. Certainly wrote lots.
k bro.
Something malfunctioned here, and I don't think it's the translation tool.
you look like you have a post-punk band. do you have a post-punk band? if not, why not?
No I'm musically talentless and incapable of maintaining any kind of social scene. As the channel proves. But your assumption flatters. Even if you're trolling.
What would Jason Jorjani say about this?
Another one I've not had the fortune or misfortune to acquaint myself with. So I ask; why him?
@@No_Avail I think much of his work (10 books, interview on Danny Jones, etc) is highly influenced by Nietzsche (and Plato). In fact, he wrote a book (Uber Man) based partly on the idea of the ubermensch. I can't remember what parts he disagrees with Nietzsche on, but agrees with him a lot, and has the vocabulary and wordsmithery unlike any of his contemporaries to make his points.
@@sacredhogwash9435 Does it suggest an unconditional commitment to:
Worst Things Happening > No Things Happening
Worse an in, whatever types of worseness one wishes to blotch in. That, cyclically > No Things Happening.
If it's that, I'll take a pass.
@@No_Avail No, definitely not. I don't hear any of that from Jason Jorjani. Actually, his whole worldview is quite different than anything else I've ever heard. The Danny Jones interview really captures that. The guy can speak at a level beyond anyone I've heard, and I've heard a lot. He definitely doesn't want worse things happening. He is concerned about the future, and he uses philosophy to try to show what me must do and not do.
@@sacredhogwash9435 I'll check out the Danny Jones interview (I'm assuming it's on YT). If you think one of his 10 books stands out in particular, I'll add it to the reading list.
Until we're omniscient, no one will know, is my not so humble opinion.
Know what?
@@No_Avail the truth the answer etc. I could be mistaken, it is true I'm not omniscient.
@@adcaptandumvulgus4252 We can have great confidence in certain theories and less (much less) in others. Keeping in mind that the really big questions lend themselves to provisional answers only. At least for now.
No avail, No avail. Do something else.
I often do. Variety as spice and so on.
5:27 brave fools make history, wise cowards are forgotten
I didn't realize infamy is to be prized over clarity and truth. Nvm then.
But also there's no way of knowing how courageous/cowardly were the scientists, authors, poets, actors, etc who are deceased but remembered. Inevitably, at least some were far from courageous. None of it makes their historical impact any less noteworthy.
Nah. "History" is the tip of the iceberg. Being remembered is irrelevant on that scale.
@@thejackanapes5866 Are you alluding to the possibility of being remembered by something grander than history?
"Wise men wonder while strong men die" - Breaking Benjamin