Nietzsche - the most important philosopher - discuss

[LaMont Cranston]

Xamonas, I am not saying that you won't find value in going back and taking another look at what FN had to say. He was a brilliant thinker, but the idea that Nietzsche thoughts are "clearly unmatched" when compared to many others of the last 3000 years is laughable. (Or is it "Nietzsche is one of the most - it not the most - important philosopher of the past 2000 years") What would we expect from a guy who compares himself to Mozart, Alexander and Newton?

I took another good, long look at Nietzsche about a year ago, and it all came back to me why I rejected him in the first place. Even our friend Comte says that it may require years of study to have a proper understanding of him. For a moment, let's forget about the brilliance of FN and consider your priorities. I know very little about your life, but at this time and place, do you want to dedicate years of study so you can carry on at cocktail parties or other gatherings? Purely from a practical point of view, does it appear that what you might get out of those years of study will be worth the time spent...especially when you undoubtedly have many other possibilities available to you?

What Comte has reminded us of is that such things as musical tastes and appreciation of ideas is a personal thing. I love Mozart and think he was the greatest musical genius of all time. That doesn't mean that I don't love the music of many others.

To be quite honest, I don't care enough about Comte to find out his reasons for being so infatuated with Nietzsche. What does appear to be true is that he is infatuated, but it must be others who are the ones who are passive-aggressive.

[LaMont Cranston]

piscator, Excuse me, but did you say something? I was busy admiring that girl who's butt crack is partially covered by a salmon.

Just as a point of information, is that a king salmon, a silver, a coho or what?

"Many fish bite if you have good bait..." Taj Mahal

[Comte de Saint-Germain]

What you don't seem to get is that many of us who are seriously interested in the history of philosophical thought

I know very little about your life, but at this time and place, do you want to dedicate years of study so you can carry on at cocktail parties or other gatherings?

Apparently, those of 'us' that are seriously interested in the history of philosophical thought are interested so they can carry on at cocktail parties or other gatherings. How much further do you intend to disqualify yourself?

What Comte has reminded us of is that such things as musical tastes and appreciation of ideas is a personal thing. I love Mozart and think he was the greatest musical genius of all time. That doesn't mean that I don't love the music of many others.

Indeed. Musical preference is personal. Musical quality is not. I like Nietzsche and I like his style, like I dislike Mozart and Mozart's style (mainly his early, actually.. I find his later Romanticism as he approaches Beethoven - or rather the reverse - better) . This is separate to his genius and his importance, which are great - like Mozart's talent.

[LaMont Cranston]

piscator, I was thinking a bit about one of our conversations from the other day regarding being a "fisher of fish" or a "fisher of men." I'd rather be a "fisher of women." (In the case of The Shadow, her name is Margo Lane.)

[piscator]

piscator, Excuse me, but did you say something? I was busy admiring that girl who's butt crack is partially covered by a salmon.

Just as a point of information, is that a king salmon, a silver, a coho or what?

that's a pollock

[LaMont Cranston]

piscator, Well, whether it's a salmon or a pollock, please tell the young lady, if you happen to know her, that she has a great ass. I'm sure even Nietzsche would agree that her ass was fine, regardless of what kind of fish she was holding.

By the way, is that the kind of pollock (sometimes spelled pollack) that's known as a walleye pollock?

[LaMont Cranston]

Xamonas, I remember now why I lost interest in Nietzsche. If memory serves, I met a girl aith an ass that looked something like that, and I also discovered wine, marijuana, LSD, poker and a number of other things that were a lot more fun. The years have passed, and I somehow never got back to seriously being interested in FN. Where does the time go?

[Comte de Saint-Germain]

The only way this could have been more obvious is if the fish had been red and a herring.

[colubridae]

piscator, Excuse me, but did you say something? I was busy admiring that girl who's butt crack is partially covered by a salmon.

Just as a point of information, is that a king salmon, a silver, a coho or what?

that's a pollock

[Matthew Shute]

I know very little about your life, but at this time and place, do you want to dedicate years of study so you can carry on at cocktail parties or other gatherings?

...and I suppose you spent years building up your appreciation of Mozart so that you could rivet everyone on the bus by loudly humming his tunes.

Knowledge can indeed be a means to a shallow end; but perhaps the love of knowledge, while probably useless, is far more interesting and noble.

[leo-rcc]

Who?

[Surendra Darathy]

I also discovered wine, marijuana, LSD, poker and a number of other things that were a lot more fun.

Eventually even the hedonist is sated, and turns to eternity for the high that develops no tolerance. It's eternal.

As for tolerance, pun intended.

De rigeur, at the very least, is joining a cult of personality, such as following Jeebus, Jim Jones, or L. Ron Hubbard. At least Nietzsche discourages people from making of his work a cult of personality. Only those with other cults of personality to which to adhere bend FN into that sort of shape. For example, Nietzsche is not likely to sit well with those who a priori hold a low opinion of human beings.

[LaMont Cranston]

Matthew, Actually, I haven't been on a bus in many years. For limited thinkers, knowledge can be the means to a shallow end; it can also be so much more than that. The love of knowledge and attaining knowledge are, for many of us, far from useless. In fact, the love of knowledge and the attainment of same can be interesting, noble, life-enhancing, pleasurable, wonderful, useful and a lot of other things...

[LaMont Cranston]

colubridae, I thought the same thing when he said it was a pollock...

[LaMont Cranston]

Surendra, Gee, thanks for telling us that pun was intended. We needed that!

Back on that other forum where we first met, there was a thread called "What is hedonism about?" that went for something like 1400 posts. In one sentence, you have demonstrated that, despite your self-proclaimed brilliance, you know nothing about hedonism. One of the many things you fail to understand is that it's possible to appreciate Nietzsche for who he was and what he had to say and to have an extremely high opinion of human beings. Of course, rigid thinkers will, most likely, have a tough time getting next to an idea such as that.

To the best of my knowledge, nobody has said that Nietzsche wasn't a brilliant thinker; he was. Does it come as all that much of a suprise that despite his brilliance, some of us do not fall all over ourselves and tout him as the greatest mind of the last 3000 years?