Head to https://squarespace.com/weltgeist to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain using code WELTGEIST
Support us on Patreon, get access to exclusive videos:
▶ https://www.patreon.com/WeltgeistYT
OUR ANALYSES:
▶ Beyond Good and Evil: https://youtu.be/WIHXZUltfqk
▶ The Antichrist: https://youtu.be/qej1Z8Qzq_c
▶ Genealogy of Morals: https://youtu.be/6PUx4cOfFcI
▶ Twilight of the Idols: https://youtu.be/YpVr_NEvWYA
▶ The Will to Power: https://youtu.be/He6ZC7ZFBt8
▶ Daybreak: https://youtu.be/cOL2z7nuXdA
▶ The Joyful Science: https://youtu.be/U0fTBOJ-C_I
source
Head to https://squarespace.com/weltgeist to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain using code WELTGEIST
A weak mind follows the pack, and right now the pack is chanting, "Nietzsche. Nietzsche. Nietzsche." Arguments, Debate, Compromise is the stuff of strong minds willing to listen without fear of being called weak. That is what defines and strengthens democracies.
when you say at 24:35 "we root for the medians, we feel like they deserve to win because the athenians are power angry" that's not true, i root for the medians but i don't feel like they deserved to win, they knew they wouldn't win and still decided to fight, i admire the medeans sacrifice because they couldn't win, that's what make it beautiful, you call this a "slave" mentality but they had the choice of becoming slaves or dead and they chose death where someone with the "strenght" mentality would have seen their inferiority and would have chose to live a servile life as the athenians expected from the medeans to do, there is no strenght to do what you can against weaker than you but there is to do what you can't against stronger, the "weak" mentality is not born from weakness but from fear and the strongs fear those who are stronger when the weak knows fear is not a good thing to listen, if you have friends you can help eachother, if you have foes you can't sleep well while waiting someone stabs you
Despite all his references to antiquity, Nietzsche was very grounded in his own time. Rationalism, irrationalism, racism, imperialism, socialism, etc. It's more about XIX century Europe than anything else.
"A lion does not concern himself with the opinions of sheep"
Tywin Lannister, Nietzsche and Machiavelli of Westeros
I see so many people mocking nietzsche for not following his own words. But he himself has said that he is not making a philosophy which is optimal, but making way for future philosophers to do that job. And, isnt that what all the elders around us do? tell us not to be as flawed as they are? this is how we grow as a community….smh…
Anyone who cannot explain why something is, has not understood it himself, and is therefore weak and blind. If you disagree with me, I will get your YouTube channel banned, “just because I can” 💪
A 31:03 minute long argumentation and exposition on why arguing is for the weak
As always a balanced approach between the two philosophies is best. No extreme is good as one cannot function without the other.
TLDR; Idiocracy
No thanks. We've already tried Nietzsche maxxing and look what it has wrought. It is all fun and games until the commander becomes the commanded. Defiance from the angry mob's orders is met with rolling heads. Might is right until it is your turn to get some. 😅 I think I am sticking with Sophia for now. She is the true life affirming principle. In this way power maxxing is ressentiment because it is willing to rule a world with no one left to rule in the wake of its destruction and unchecked narcissism. Do what thou wilt, but for higher men such as myself, there is only one for me, Sophia.
The art of telling people to shut up.
Keep in mind the masses can also "do what thou wilt" If arguments are meaningless then so is your life. Bigger Grug had a bigger rock. Suit yourself, but that doesn't sound like a game I'd like to play with my life
Was Socrates, ever happy?
This guy would love Senator Armstrong
So basically everyone in the Supreme Court
Arguing is just a waste of time, period. That's a nonstarter. All you can really do is put in the work in pursuit of the truth and maybe gain results if you're dedicated and lucky. You can have a conversation that has points of contrast that can be useful in order to broaden ones understanding. But if you find yourself arguing, then one or both parties have failed catastrophically in the pursuit of understanding the subject at hand.
I’ve always tried to find a balance, an imbalance really, but a working system that allows me to do both. Through journaling I reflect and develop aims and goals, and then I just try to execute on those goals without thinking. I course correct with evening journaling sessions.
Nietzsche is always interesting for a teenage mind.
The video itself is really well explained, but I think the title is very misleading. The point isn't that "arguments are bad" but that one should have a philosophy based on action and not reason
😊😊😊😊🎉
The ego required to believe one can "correct existence."
You'll never lose money betting on the arrogance of mankind.
You can't argue with a bullet, and no one can debate while a fist is in their face.
the dimb guy's philosophy
Like many things, reason is a good servant and a terrible master.
Wouldn't a statement along the lines of "arguments are bad" be a self-defeating statement, as it is itself an argument? I mean, what Nietzsche is doing here is making arguments for why arguments are bad.
In my humble opinion, Nietzsche is a broken idealist. He discovered that the world is cruel and governed primarily by power, and that thought, rationalisation and reasoning are weak in comparison. But the truth is that we humans are different from other animals and that we have many complex systems of symbolization and morality that are transmitted to the next generations. Every human being initially adapts morally. The only difference is that someone goes deep into it and someone is too lazy or too busy to question it. There are no people who rationalise and people who do not. We all do. The confident and those who do not question are simply the product of an old and very established era of a process and morality already thought of by someone who was the thinker and was considered weak and wrong in his day. Just think of any ideology that began by being ridiculed, sidelined and disregarded by a confident men who felt strong and determined on the shoulders of the past. When i see a man who is too confident i see weakness, he is more like an animal then human, therefore easy to manipulate as his confidence is based on simple priorities. These men only appear strong, to hide and protect themselves from the unknown world they actually are afraid of. Or these man are not capable of changing as their coping mechanism. That is also sign of being weak even if it that gives them advantage in the physical world. Its like being asked do you want to solve hard question or the easy ones. The weak person will choose the easy ones and therefore get the highest grade, while the trully strong mind will choose the hardest question. Yes he is more likely to fail, but if he solves it he alone becomes the new standard among the bigger and stronger majority that can still chose to ignore his success or even put him down, but soon or later his genius overcomes them all. Its how legends are born. Its how world is changed. Not by confident majority, but by fearless disagreeable weak minority. Being weak and exceptional among the averige strong now, but becoming the new strong average in the future.
Neitzsche’s idea that we actually have no justifications for anything we do reminds me of Robert Sapolsky’s belief that humans have no free will and that every decision we make is made subconsciously, after which we consciously think of justifications or reasons for making that decision. Like a post-hoc rationalization I guess.
According to Sapolsky, this is true for every decision we ever make, from something as major as who to marry to something as trivial as which shoe we put on first.
Nietsche’s morality is synonymous to the satanist slogan “do as thy wilst”. I think he would have a different opinion of this kind of “morality” if the elite, the powerful, and the noble raided and pillaged his town and raped his mother and put to the sword everyone he loved.
It’s safe to muse in the philosophy of “morality” from the comfort of your armchair.
Plus, when he philosophizes about “morality”, doesn’t he present arguments? So, he contradicts himself. Why would I even listen to this charlatan of a “philosopher”?!
Let’s not forget that Nietsche’s philosophy and morality is what gave rise to naziism and we all know where that led to.
YESSS! VIDEO ON ALCIBIADES
Actually arguments, and reason in general, carry no real weight in human affairs. What is actually called 'arguing' in real human affairs is a contest of wills and words used as weapons — NOT instruments of reason. Rhetoric, not reason, is the human way in everyday discourse and conversation. So, actually, like he mostly does, Nietzsche is just beating a dead horse — in fact, he is beating a horse that never even lived to see the light of day.
When exactly did reason ever dominate the thinking of a society?
ANSWER: NEVER !
Power is simply the ability to make change (as far as I'm concerned, anyway). Martial power is one way, good arguments are another.
Yeah, idk about that.
Honestly, at this point in my life, the best dang philosophy is The Triforce of Zelda lol.
Power. Wisdom. Courage. I can think of nothing more explanatory for how we exist.
Interesting argument
Its crazy how many big ideas are in the first half of this video. The problem with the animal analogy is the FACT humans are not animals. We are elevated above them by a degree unfathomable to the animal. Its interesting that the argument that might makes right seems plausible after this discussion. I personally reject it but there is a certain validity of it vis a vis conservatism. I found the definition of philosophy to be lacking. My understanding was that philosophy’s sole purpose was to root out the truth. This is where the humanistic value setting argument breaks down too. Humans did not create their souls…therefore they cannot create the rules of morality…instead they must seek out the truth of what is/is not moral bc the rules created/set in place set when the soul was created….
You misinterpret him. He is not arguing what to do, he is arguing what is
Putin :
1: You are racist – where you are displaying socrates being ugly and not greek coz painting show he's tan and the general is good looking coz he's fairer.
2: You didn't understand Neitche
3: Your agenda is to bring back the barbarism
4: Neitche spent his entire life arguing
"Why Are We Here?
Why Do We Exist?"
It's funny how many philosophers have tormented themselves with this question.
Only a being struggling to find its place in the cosmos would find such a riddle puzzling.
Spiritual Answer: Inner maturity
Biological Answer: Evolution itself
Neither answer is
separate from the
other.
And just like that…I've solved
one of the most timeless riddles.
No more wild-goose chasing.
Trust in the will of the
universe and enjoy the
Festival of Life. You'll be
better off for it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrBvf3XMEKE