What exactly is dangerous about Nietzsche?

Mouthwash

Escaped Lunatic
Joined
Sep 26, 2011
Messages
9,370
Location
Hiding
I've heard a lot about people reading things into Nietzsche that aren't there, and I'm wondering where exactly people tend to go wrong when reading him.

Also, is he better to read in German or English? I'm thinking about learning German one of these days.
 
His views of morality as subjective and under decline due to the scientific revolution can easily be interpreted as that he is opposed to morality or supportive of social darwinism. I rather think that he believes morality can never be objectively interpreted, and is more or less my outlook as well. I think he strongly argues against petty vengeance and the concept of 'compassion' (as in not thinking it exists, rather than being opposed to it).

Another major misinterpretation is that he believes in truth as something that does not exist, even though he is more likely stating that the truth is incomprehensible. This misinterpretation spawned a whole a group of "philosophers" called Postmodernists, which includes such airheads as Derrida and the like. Of course, Nietzsche also inspired Fascists and Critical theorists by systematically overblowing certain issues raised by Nietzsche while downplaying rather critical issues of Nietzsche's. So all in all, the main danger of Nietzsche is the susceptibility to misinterpret him. Reading Nietzsche requires a certain logical faculty and knowledge of life that very few people have and lead them (usually socially challenged people) to spawn entire philosophical systems that are total abominations.
 
There's nothing dangerous about Nietzsche. He's been dead a long time now.

As far as I know he was never armed, even when living.
 
There's nothing dangerous about Nietzsche. He's been dead a long time now.

As far as I know he was never armed, even when living.

Well, this is actually the right answer.
 
People seem to think he was a nihilist for some reason.
 
True.

Nihilism is often associated with the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, who provided a detailed diagnosis of nihilism as a widespread phenomenon of Western culture. Though the notion appears frequently throughout Nietzsche's work, he uses the term in a variety of ways, with different meanings and connotations, all negative. Karen Carr describes Nietzsche's characterization of nihilism "as a condition of tension, as a disproportion between what we want to value (or need) and how the world appears to operate."[20] When we find out that the world does not possess the objective value or meaning that we want it to have or have long since believed it to have, we find ourselves in a crisis.[21] Nietzsche asserts that with the decline of Christianity and the rise of physiological decadence, nihilism is in fact characteristic of the modern age,[22] though he implies that the rise of nihilism is still incomplete and that it has yet to be overcome.[23] Though the problem of nihilism becomes especially explicit in Nietzsche's notebooks (published posthumously), it is mentioned repeatedly in his published works and is closely connected to many of the problems mentioned there.

Nietzsche characterized nihilism as emptying the world and especially human existence of meaning, purpose, comprehensible truth, or essential value. This observation stems in part from Nietzsche's perspectivism, or his notion that "knowledge" is always by someone of some thing: it is always bound by perspective, and it is never mere fact.[24] Rather, there are interpretations through which we understand the world and give it meaning. Interpreting is something we can not go without; in fact, it is something we need. One way of interpreting the world is through morality, as one of the fundamental ways in which people make sense of the world, especially in regard to their own thoughts and actions. Nietzsche distinguishes a morality that is strong or healthy, meaning that the person in question is aware that he constructs it himself, from weak morality, where the interpretation is projected on to something external. Regardless of its strength, morality presents us with meaning, whether this is created or 'implanted,' which helps us get through life.[25]

Nietzsche discusses Christianity, one of the major topics in his work, at length in the context of the problem of nihilism in his notebooks, in a chapter entitled "European Nihilism".[26] Here he states that the Christian moral doctrine provides people with intrinsic value, belief in God (which justifies the evil in the world) and a basis for objective knowledge. In this sense, in constructing a world where objective knowledge is possible, Christianity is an antidote against a primal form of nihilism, against the despair of meaninglessness. However, it is exactly the element of truthfulness in Christian doctrine that is its undoing: in its drive towards truth, Christianity eventually finds itself to be a construct, which leads to its own dissolution. It is therefore that Nietzsche states that we have outgrown Christianity "not because we lived too far from it, rather because we lived too close".[27] As such, the self-dissolution of Christianity constitutes yet another form of nihilism. Because Christianity was an interpretation that posited itself as the interpretation, Nietzsche states that this dissolution leads beyond skepticism to a distrust of all meaning.[28][29]

"I praise, I do not reproach, [nihilism's] arrival. I believe it is one of the greatest crises, a moment of the deepest self-reflection of humanity. Whether man recovers from it, whether he becomes master of this crisis, is a question of his strength!"
 
Also, is he better to read in German or English? I'm thinking about learning German one of these days.
I'd advise English for the sole reason that your German would probably have to be really good to not get constant headaches. Let others have them and enjoy the fruit of their labor.
 
Can you deem someone as dangerous when Wagner can make him cry? :shake:
As more of a Debussy kind of guy, that's not necessarily something in his favor.

Kind of relatedly, I've always thought about reading some Nietzsche (recently motivated by playing some SMAC again), and apparently I'm linguistically favorably equipped in this case. What's the best way to start?
 
A problem with Nietzsche is that his name is unpronounceable.
 
I don't believe he, nor the rest of his family, thought so.

[Imagine having a name you couldn't pronounce!]
Spoiler :


By the way, I think I'm going to be moving onto square brackets for a while. Just for your information. Nonono. Don't thank me. There's no need.
 
Neat Chuh!

[I bet that's not even close. But I'm sticking to it.]
 
Neat Chuh!

[I bet that's not even close. But I'm sticking to it.]
That's how I would've approximated it. The z is completely unnecessary even in German spelling.
 
That's how I would've approximated it. The z is completely unnecessary even in German spelling.

Actually, I put a strong emphasis on the 'z', pronouncing it in the English way (as opposed to the German way which essentially is the same as pronouncing the 't' and 's' in immediate succesion, am I correct?). I would have approximated it as Neatz yuh.
 
Nee-chee for me.
 
Back
Top Bottom