Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: an0n on May 20, 2003, 06:26:14 pm
-
I just got Thus Spoke Zarathustra and Beyond Good And Evil delivered (Bought 'em offa Amazon). Both by Nietzsche.
Awesome books.
Nietzsche kicks ass.
And as an unrelated side-note: Socrates kicks ass.
Discuss.
-
*hasn't had the pleasure of Nietzsche yet*
good news is, Summer Break is in ... *counts on fingers*... 3 weeks.. I think. w00t.
-
Buy Nietzsche. Preferably one of Kaufmans translations (they wipe the floor with all the other garbage versions).
They ain't that expensive and will improve your mind simply through the process of reading, even if you don't understand them or agree with the ideas discussed/implied/hinted-at/put-forward.
I'd recommend starting with Zarathustra. It's a story one so should entertain the more.....mentally-handicapped among you.
-
Me = Philosophy student.
Me = Have exams.
Me = Have exams on Nietzsche.
Me = brain dribbling out of ears.
-
favourite quotes in siggy...;)
-
I have a particular 'robot chubby' for the whole norm-then-elevate-then-create ideas.
-
what?:wtf:
-
The first doo-hickey of Zarathustra.
To quote the preface in my copy:
To become more than an all-too-human animal man must become a creator. But this involves a break with previous norms. Beethoven, for example, creates new norms with his works. Yet this break is only constructive when accomplished not only by one who wants to make things easy for himself, but by one who has previously subjected himself to the discipline of tradition. First comes the beast of burden, then the defiant lion, then creation.[/size]
-
[color=66ff00]'Nietzsche is dead' - God.
:D
[/color]
-
He was insane for 11 years before dying (probably of syphillis).
And I find your remark wholey inappropriate and disrespectful. He worked tirelessly for 10 hours at a time with tears streaming from his ****ed-up eyes, migraines piercing his brain and the powerful drugs he used to get to sleep slowly rotting his stomach and causing him to vomit blood, all so he could enlighten us with his views on all aspects of life and thought.
He was a great man.
-
This is coming from...you?
*stiffles laugh*
*Gets ready for flaming*
-
Nietzsche was a brilliant writer indeed. Unfortunately, he was not nearly so brilliant a philosopher. His ideas are mostly inconsistent with one another once you get past the masterful command of the word. When it comes to expressing his insights, he can do so powerfully. When it comes to describing what should be done, however, one will often find that the idea underlying the eloquent words of chapter 1 is completely incompatible with the idea under the the words of chapter 2. As a general rule about most things, he wants black to be white and yet still have it be black.
As for his insanity towards the end of his life, it might also be that he actually tried to live and believe everything in his philosophy rather than any medical problem. No, seriously. To fully live and believe according to what Nietzsche taught would leave one virtually indistinguishable from a madman in the eyes of the rest of the world, since one would no longer be able to relate to the world as it now is.
-
Ok, coming from someone who's tag isn't "Insidious little *****", I believe you guys :D ;)
-
Originally posted by Sesquipedalian
Nietzsche was a brilliant writer..............................as it now is.
I must be stoned, because all I see is a huge bulls-eye.
And he was mad. There's no ifs or buts about it. He had crippling migraines for years and was vomitting blood. Methinks that's quite a big clue that something wasn't right.
-
Originally posted by an0n
I must be stoned, because all I see is a huge bulls-eye.
I have four years of philosophy under my belt, including a thesis which dealt in part with Nietzsche, but the analysis expressed above I cannot claim as originating with me. This is the opinion of many philosophers and philosophy professors who know a lot more than I do. Looking at his writings myself, I have to agree with them, that's all.
-
Fair enough.
I have a point to respond with but I wanna re-read Zarathustra to make sure.
-
never really read those two; I am more into stuff from Popper, Wittgenstein and the like. So are those any good? (the ideas that is; I don't care much for flowery language :D)
of course, the best philosophy books are math books. :D
-
yeah, I love Godel, Escher, Bach. That's a fun math book ;7 :D
-
True, I talk of dreams;
Which are the children of an idle brain,
Begot of nothing but vain fantasy,
Which is as thin of substance as the air,
and more inconstant than the wind...
-
Originally posted by Maeglamor
[color=66ff00]'Nietzsche is dead' - God.
:D
[/color]
:nod: :yes:
-
I am getting the urge to sing the Bruces' Philosophy song.
-
since I just recently noticed that I don't have anything particular to read this summer, I guess I could get those two books and read.
might as well get Dante Alighieris divine comedy, and goethe's faust. I think I'll rank them higher on the priority list than Friedrich, tho.
-
Originally posted by Knight Templar
*hasn't had the pleasure of Nietzsche yet*
good news is, Summer Break is in ... *counts on fingers*... 3 weeks.. I think. w00t.
Goody. :doubt: Mine's in 4 or 5 weeks.
December 31, 1969
What? You are still attending school?
-
From what I know, I cant stand him. He's all "death, crappy humans bla bla" but I guess thats exactly why you like him anon.
Philosophy isnt hard to invent.Plop down a few "profound" passages and a memorable phrase, and you're a philosopher. Its like those people who throw paint on a canvas and call it art, or those people who paint something simple and stupid, but say its really very deep. If you are not required to actually examine and ideas, but just say something far out and controversial, than anyone can be a philosopher.
These people are the so called fakes, and in my opinion include:
-All the crappy, no talented "modern" artists
-David Lynch
-Niet...whatever
-Picasso
edit: and also that Cristo guy who just makes huge plastic coverings for things, like the Reichstag and a very long "wall" made of plastic...that money could have been better spent feeding hungry children. And yet people consider him an artist.
-
Originally posted by Maeglamor
[color=66ff00]'Nietzsche is dead' - God.
:D
[/color]
Heh, never heard that one before - nice. :D
-
If you want some good reading try Kafka's Metamorphosis. Really cool, really wierd stuff in that book.
-
Originally posted by tEAbAG
If you want some good reading try Kafka's Metamorphosis. Really cool, really wierd stuff in that book.
Albert Camus is even better, I think. You should read some of that, teabag. :)
Kafka is amazing, of course: one of the best nihilist artists there were. (That, of course is actually a huge paradox, since art can never be nihilistic, because art always means something.) Like the book of Eccelesiasties, Kafka cries "Meaningless, meaningless, everything is meaningless," but having no God, he finds no answer, and can only despair.
I like Camus better because Kafka wallows in his despair over his nihilism, whereas Camus said "A literature of despair is a contraction in terms... In the darkest depths of our nihilism, I have sought only for the means to transcend our nihilism." It remains true that in none of his writings does he succeed, but he tries. As one who does believe in God, and therefore does have a legitimate basis for meaning in life, for me this brave struggle is inspiring, as any tale of courage is. Camus, whether in this life or the next, will find his answers.
-
Philiosphy is easy:
To quote an old sig of mine:
"I used to think I was someone else, now I know that I am."
:p
-
I think my personal favorite of all, though, is Dostoevsky. He predates the nihilists and existentialists, but quite franky is better than them all. Notes from the Underground is a book I've come back to many times.
-
"I am, therefore He Is." - Sandwich. :D
-
Originally posted by Rictor
From what I know, I cant stand him. He's all "death, crappy humans bla bla" but I guess thats exactly why you like him anon.
Philosophy isnt hard to invent.Plop down a few "profound" passages and a memorable phrase, and you're a philosopher. Its like those people who throw paint on a canvas and call it art, or those people who paint something simple and stupid, but say its really very deep. If you are not required to actually examine and ideas, but just say something far out and controversial, than anyone can be a philosopher.
These people are the so called fakes, and in my opinion include:
-All the crappy, no talented "modern" artists
-David Lynch
-Niet...whatever
-Picasso
edit: and also that Cristo guy who just makes huge plastic coverings for things, like the Reichstag and a very long "wall" made of plastic...that money could have been better spent feeding hungry children. And yet people consider him an artist.
....or the money you spend wasting the resources of cyberspace!!!
Art is not something that can be summed up in dollars and euros!
Philosophy is easy...yeah IGNORANCE is easy!!
Not having to think about something, no don't take me wrong I don't mean ponder, wonder, I mean think .
Have you ever thought of something and simply....there was no answer? No one truly knew anything, nonem, not even you....
Nothing , yes that's the scarry thing.
That's why most people never think.
They rather say it's stupid, or they violate the question by being bigott and not think of it at all.
As for your remark on "modern art" - Have you ever seen Gernica?
If you still believe you're right let's give your "real art" a new aspect: The realism that some people love - in service of Adolf Hitler. Later also in service of the so called socreal in the kommunists' hand. Jüd Suss was a part of the nazi propagnada - although Faugthfangler had little to do with them.
Approved art as you may call never existed - there simply was art.
Art that people found good, art that gave them hope.
...and there were people who wanted to get a hold of that art.
--------
Summaisen Sandwich sama and everybody else. Sorry, I myself hate flame and all forms of lashing out, but some things just can't be left unattained.
This was one such event, and I would refrain from doing it now or later, but in this case Rictor has "written off" too much.
I doubt wheter he's conscious, that his very personal view of life is possible thanks to a couple of Greek phylosophs - especially Platon.
I hope I have given him a little insight....
-
Flasher: you got me all confused. Do you agree with me or disagree? If you want me to get the point, use short simple words from on ok?:D :D
I was not trying to express it in dollards an cents. And believe me, I have spent a good while thinking, trying to define art, and arguiing with my parents who happen to like Picasso and David Lynch. I am not just a hick who has never seen art or read philosophy (I have never read much philosphy, but I have spent huge amounts of time thinking about it, and in my opinion thats just as good), and tries to speak about it.
I have come to the conclusion that to be art, something must be:
-If its a visual art, it must be beautiful to behold.
-It must require a level of talent to make that is beyond ordinary people
-It must have a message (some of it doesnt, but mostly it does)
-More (or less) to come, as I ponder some more
What I see when I look at for example Mulholland Drive, is something that almost certainly does not truly have a message, but was only driven to appeal to people who consider themselves above the intelect of normal people, and to play into their feelings of a "smart" movie. Or if it did have a message intended, it was obscured by some many strange plot details, and it was made intentionally hard to figure out. Why? Is there something less intelectual, or less artistic is displaying the message clearly?
In modern art, there are many examples of pieces thar are considered remarkable and legendary, that I could myself produce easily. Does then, the name brand matter, like for shoes? Is the painting itself not important, but rather the person? If that is the case, then my point is proven. Anyone can claim that 3 red dots a white background represents the eternal suffering of man, but c'mon...do you believe them? Please explain to me, how it making a very long wall made of pink plastic, across a barren countryside art?
____________________________________________
I'll give you two examples to examine.
1. Visual: The guy who did the red, yellow and blue boxes (I dont wanna go look at an art book right now) vs Joe Madureira. One picture, is several boxes, simple rectangles, of varying colours...thats it. The second, if you are not familiar, is a comic book artist, who's style is very cool and (until everyone started copying him) very unique. His drawings express great emotion, and are simply cool to look at. When he has had the opportunity to create characters himself, they have turned out unique, interesting and simply cool.("Low brow idiot, cool isnt important" I hear you say) Tell me then, who is the artist?
2. Movie: Mulholland Drive vs Fight Club. One, if it even exists, hides the message behind so many stange events, that it is hard to even understand the message, much less agree or disagree. However, I think that it is simply an "artsy" movie (I can just see your hick detector going of the scale for using that term), which simply tries to present that a series of starnge events are very profound and appeals to people who think of themselves as being intelectuals, and therefor they are above the normal people because they can "interpret" complex art. And the other, Fight Club, is a film who's message is both profound and easy to understand from watching the movie. it also has a different message based on the viewer, and does a very good job of presenting and satirizing modern culure. It really makes you think, and examines the human being and the cuture he creates. Which one of these is more artistic, and why?
Why then, is a comic book, however profound and well drawn, not considered art (by most people), but a few coloured boxes on a white background is? Try to exmaplin it using logic and reason, instead of just falling back on tradtition of what is art and what isnt..
edit: my bad spelling doesnt disqualify my opinion...I'm just a bad speller when writing in a hurry, and dont really see the oint in fixing it up afterwards, as long as you get my point..:nod: :nod:
-
The blind can not be told of the light, if their mind is blind as well.
-
translation: I have no arguements, so I'll resort to profound sounding phrases in hopes of making myself look so smart as to automatically qualify my opinion as the right one....
-
Originally posted by Flaser
Summaisen Sandwich sama and everybody else. Sorry, I myself hate flame and all forms of lashing out, but some things just can't be left unattained.
Is that something about me? I see the word "sandwich" in there, but I don't recognize the two words around it. :confused:
-
Originally posted by Flaser
The blind can not be told of the light, if their mind is blind as well.
You do not need eyes to see the light...
-
Originally posted by Sandwich
Is that something about me? I see the word "sandwich" in there, but I don't recognize the two words around it. :confused:
Oh, sorry Sandwich I was just taken by my other me who keeps resorting to Japanese formalities (it's nice to have over 5 ways to simply call someone), anyway it simply meant:
I'm truly apologising Sandwich (sama=master) Keeper of Shivans and eveyone else.
BTW. Rictor. Please drop the issue. I've given up on convincing you. The only truly apropiate response you've manged so far was that I wasn't either with or against you - there's no sense in either.
I believe the communication gap between us is just too much...
PS. to BTW I'm Flaser not Flasher you retarded underwear maniac, please give form to your desires elsewhere.