Stephen Hicks: Nietzsche Perfectly Forecasts the Postmodernist Left
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ก.ย. 2024
- Stephen Hicks is a Canadian-American philosopher who teaches at Rockford University, where he also directs the Center for Ethics and Entrepreneurship. It takes a lot of effort to provide added educational value by selecting the videos for this channel, philosophyinsights. Usually, there are hours of work involved to skim through videos and edit it and selecting fitting pictures, in order to make a fit to the channel. If you enjoy the selection, consider subscribing! Also check out the facebook page of philosophyinsights, where we discuss the videos: / philosophyinsights-139...
In 2004 he wrote a book named "Explaining Postmodernism: Skepticism and Socialism from Rousseau to Foucault" which was e.g. recommended by Jordan Peterson for understanding postmodernism (cf. • Jordan Peterson: Why Y... )
Full clip, quoted under fair use: • Stephen Hicks on Postm...
--------------------
This channel aims at extracting central points of presentations into short clips. The topics cover the problems of leftist ideology and the consequences for society. The aim is to move free speech advocates forward and fight against the culture of SJWs.
If you like the content, subscribe to the channel!
"But thus I counsel you, my friends:
Mistrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful. They are people
of a low sort and stock; the hangman and the bloodhound look out of
their faces. Mistrust all who talk much of their justice! Verily, their
souls lack more than honey. And when they call themselves the good and
the just, do not forget that they would be pharisees, if only they had -
power." - Part II, Chapter 29, Thus Spoke Zarathustra.
post modernists
First comparison between SJW's and pharisees I've ever seen. Always keen to cast the first stone.
I think this goes both ways. Just supplant the powerful for the powerless
This passage, read by Jordan B. Peterson, is sampled in the Akira The Don - Tarantulas. I like the "mashup" of a classic philosophical work with the modern culture and culture war we're currently experiencing.
“What I relate is the history of the next two centuries. I describe what is coming, what can no longer come differently: the advent of nihilism!
Nihilism stands at the door: whence comes this uncanniest of all guests?
1. Point of departure: it is an error to consider 'social distress' or 'physiological degeneration' or, worse, corruption, as the cause of nihilism. Ours is the most decent and compassionate age. Distress, whether of the soul, body, or intellect, cannot of itself give birth to nihilism (i.e., the radical repudiation of value, meaning, and desirability). Such distress always permits a variety of interpretations. Rather: it is in one particular interpretation, the Christian-moral one, that nihilism is rooted.
2. The end of Christianity-at the hands of its own morality (which cannot be replaced), which turns against the Christian God (the sense of truthfulness, developed highly by Christianity, is nauseated by the falseness and mendaciousness of all Christian interpretations of the world and of history; rebound from 'God is truth' to the fanatical faith 'All is false'; a Buddhism of inaction).
3. Skepticism regarding morality is what is decisive. The end of the moral interpretation of the world, which no longer has any sanction after it has tried to escape into some beyond, leads to nihilism. 'Everything lacks meaning' (the untenability of one interpretation of the world, upon which a tremendous amount of energy has been lavished, awakens the suspicion that all interpretations of the world are false). Buddhistic tendency, a kind of yearning for Nothing. (Indian Buddhism is not the culmination of a thoroughly moralistic development; its nihilism is therefore full of morality that is not overcome: existence as punishment, existence construed as error, error thus as a punishment- is a moral valuation.)
4. Philosophical attempts to overcome the 'moral God' (Hegel, pantheism).
Overcoming popular ideals: the sage; the saint; the poet.
The antagonism of 'true' and 'beautiful' and 'good'."
~ Friedrich Nietzsche (1888)
I intuitively felt this as a teenager and could never put words to it. I've been around many people who talk down to others who are making genuine attempts to improve their position in life. They have this weird smugness even though they are basically losers themselves. They are purely skeptical, which gives a false sense of intelligence, but skepticism doesn't put food on the table and it doesn't hold up where the rubber meets the road. It doesn't create anything, other than doubt. Doubt is not a winner's mentality.
If you look into the behaviour of clinical Narcissists/Cluster B Personality Disorders and compare it to the modern left and globalist liberals it's almost exactly the same. I'm not claiming all of them are Cluster B but their strategies of manipulation are tried and tested over millennia and work on most people much of the time. You don't need to be a genius to use them, in fact you can be fairly unintelligent. It hacks into a persons dopamine supply and can make you reliant on the abuser. Cults love all this stuff, it's absolutely repugnant.
Well put. Jordan Peterson explains it as nilhilism in his 12 rules book- surround yourself with people who want the best for you
" this weird smugness " I can see their punchable b1itches resting face , you know what those people are
Absolutely......
Is disgusting
I walked past Andrea Dworkin on 7th Avenue in Park Slope many years ago. Before I realized who she was, my thought was, "That is the angriest, depressed person I've ever seen."
There is nothing Nietzsche would hate more than the modern day left.
No question.
N A Mostly because he was very critical of slave morality. However, he might actually appreciate the fact the modern left has weaponized it, so I'm not as sure he would hate it. I think he would however be very disappointed at what has happened to Germany.
Except the right
When you say right, and conjure an image of cucked judeo-christian neocons and bureaucrats, you are making a mistake. Nietzsche praised both strength and creativity, in doing so he epitomized everything admirable about the modern day "true" right wing thinker. Another name along these lines, is Julius Evola. I can think of few more interesting public figures of recent history.
nietzsche would be very much against american racism
Thankyou . I realized the postmodern world was a big lie when a group of lesbians threatened "to kick my teeth" in over a sketch of a female nude i had done for an art show at Toronto's Gay Pride, 1983. They were offended that a man had created an image of a female. They didn't care that they were threatening violence and censorship not unlike German Nazis. Then they went and marched in the parade to show how proud they are of being part of the open, tolerant and morally superior LGBT community.
Fascism is way more than censorship. Stop comparing it.
would love to see the art work and hear the lesbians?
This was way more than censorship - this was the credible threat of violence.
If Dr. Seuss is anything to go by, they will go On Beyond Zebra...
they can't see their hypocrisy--Why? because of their deluded belief that they are Good and Right
This is now more relevant than ever.
Then go do something to improve the world.
If you are arguing against doing that then your opinion doesn’t matter.
@Colin Phibes Lol okay
@Colin Phibes What evidence or insight would clarify your statement? This is for better understanding of what you derived from this video in support of your statement.
@@Darren_S What evidence or insight would clarify your statement? This is for better understanding of what you derived from this video in support of your statement.
@@nicklarsen3113 "Improving the world."... That will never happen.
"How is there laughter, how is there joy, as this world is always burning? Why do you not seek a light, ye who are surrounded by darkness? I see for myself no decline in the world." - Gautama Buddha
"Do you think you can take over the universe and improve it? I do not believe it can be done. The universe is sacred. You cannot improve it. If you try to change it, you will ruin it. For every force there is a counter force. Force, even well-intentioned, always rebounds upon oneself." - Tao Te Ching
"Politics, as a practice, whatever its professions, has always been the systematic organization of hatreds. The press is the hired agent of a monied system, and set up for no other purpose than to tell lies where their interests are involved. One can trust nobody and nothing." - Henry Adams, 'The Letters of Henry Adams'
"What is new in the world? Nothing. What is old in the world? Nothing. Everything has always been and will always be." - Sai Baba, Indian philosopher
"At all times it has not been the age, but individuals alone, who have worked for knowledge. It was the age which put Socrates to death by poison. The ages have always remained alike. Who is the wisest man? He who neither knows or wishes for anything else than what happens." - Goethe
"True wisdom comes to each of us when we realize how little we understand about life, ourselves, and the world around us. There is no solution; seek it lovingly." - Socrates
As soon as anyone seeks to divide people into groups, then make all those groups 'equal'... be wary and distrustful of such people. As soon as you seek to divide people into groups, you are everything you profess to stand against.
OldSamVimes Shorter arrows are coming into fashion.
It is not a product of necessity that some are payed more than others. We value all the spectrum one way or another. We simply do not reward all of the spectrum. The gifts of many are wanted while they are not financially compensated. If money is king and at present it is, it must go to everything we wish to keep as much as we wish to keep it...Seems to me that might actually invert the pay scale for some time...So maybe we compromise, stop smacking the pendulum and just acknowledge all things have value used correctly and level the resources game.
The gifted are not deserving of more rights or privileges than their birth already gave them.
May as well be proud to the point of being willing to kill over eye color. It is comically short sided...but for the consequences.
equity is a Dollar Amount that is invested in a home or business. "Home Equity"
Your thinking shows lack of education...do you know what a "DICTIONARY" is?
Think Critically is ironically named. No thought at all in your post, only Marxist rhetoric.
Typical labor theory of value propaganda, still claiming the world is flat.
Labor has no inherent value, dig some holes and fill them back in, what is it worth to anybody? Nothing.
The only true value is that which is assigned to the products of said labor by the demands of the end consumers of said products. Whether this product is a vidja game widget or a healthy environment for raising a child this will hold true.
"The worst form of tyranny the world has ever known,the tyranny of the weak over the strong, It is the only tyranny that lasts."Oscar Wilde
I use that one. that it was then and is so now is the part i emphasize.
This quote doesn’t make any sense out of context. Are you implying a tyranny of the strong over the weak is somehow better? How so?
Maybe you should take some more quotes out of context to prove your point.
But that seldom happens if ever!
Ian Farris tyranny by the strong is tyranny by the few. The quote shouldn’t have to establish that idea or the following idea that the few can be overthrown quickly, which the OP’s quote established.
CarrotFlowers what? This says tyranny of the weak over the strong. What does that mean???
Dude's been dead 120 years and he saw these troublemakers coming that long ago.
Because all of this has happened before and it’s all happening again.
It wasn't just prediction, it stems from his recognition of the behavior in his time.
Read Plato or go back to the laws of Hammurabi 5-6 thousand years ago. Nothing has changed. Slave mentality is not unique to one side of the political spectrum and neither is violence and tyranny.
Indeed and it’s not the only thing he foresaw. He predicted the world wars, the high risk of a holocaust and Nazism (he could see it very clearly because his sister married an early Nazi, much to his chagrin) and predicted the eventual creation of the European Union, noting; “Europe wants to become one”. And all this during his sane life before succumbing to possible/probable syphilis.
He also said he was writing for further generations because his ideas would not be understood during his lifetime.
This is enlightening...Nietzsche was truly a genius.
So here we've come to praise Nietzsche, not to bury him.
“What I relate is the history of the next two centuries. I describe what is coming, what can no longer come differently: the advent of nihilism!
Nihilism stands at the door: whence comes this uncanniest of all guests?
1. Point of departure: it is an error to consider 'social distress' or 'physiological degeneration' or, worse, corruption, as the cause of nihilism. Ours is the most decent and compassionate age. Distress, whether of the soul, body, or intellect, cannot of itself give birth to nihilism (i.e., the radical repudiation of value, meaning, and desirability). Such distress always permits a variety of interpretations. Rather: it is in one particular interpretation, the Christian-moral one, that nihilism is rooted.
2. The end of Christianity-at the hands of its own morality (which cannot be replaced), which turns against the Christian God (the sense of truthfulness, developed highly by Christianity, is nauseated by the falseness and mendaciousness of all Christian interpretations of the world and of history; rebound from 'God is truth' to the fanatical faith 'All is false'; a Buddhism of inaction).
3. Skepticism regarding morality is what is decisive. The end of the moral interpretation of the world, which no longer has any sanction after it has tried to escape into some beyond, leads to nihilism. 'Everything lacks meaning' (the untenability of one interpretation of the world, upon which a tremendous amount of energy has been lavished, awakens the suspicion that all interpretations of the world are false). Buddhistic tendency, a kind of yearning for Nothing. (Indian Buddhism is not the culmination of a thoroughly moralistic development; its nihilism is therefore full of morality that is not overcome: existence as punishment, existence construed as error, error thus as a punishment- is a moral valuation.)
4. Philosophical attempts to overcome the 'moral God' (Hegel, pantheism).
Overcoming popular ideals: the sage; the saint; the poet.
The antagonism of 'true' and 'beautiful' and 'good'."
~ Friedrich Nietzsche (1888)
Yes, he was, but this guy distorts his teachings.
@@larryburgess4816 He sure does. Hicks is a follower of Ayn Rand.
Case closed.
He went crazy too.
I have always said to my socialist friends that the only reason Marxism will never go away is because it *sounds* so good. Who can argue against something like "Everyone should be taken care of and have everything nice" without looking like an asshole?
And who doesn't want to believe that all the success they achieve is due to their awesomeness and innate superiority? On of our two statements is based within the parameters of reality. It isn't that the good and capable are rewarded and the cast out and down are objectively inferior either.
By pointing out that such a statement suggests we think we're gods. Perhaps demi god level if you consider some of the capabilities some of our technology awards us.
We can cure blindness in many people, why wouldn't we think we can cure hunger? The only catch is we never ask if we should, just because we can.
Marxism is atavism. It harks back to the collectivist attitudes of the small group of the distant past, when most people knew at most a few hundred others and had to cooperate to survive. Marxism will never go away because it resonates with these vestiges of our nature. Unfortunately it also represents an economic algorithm that doesn't scale.
Kevin w how do I like this comment more than once?
@Kevin w I never advocated communism. I did demonstrate that a meritocracy is a myth. So who is it throwing the strawman? Poor people are also objectively created by rich people. Rich people are created by taking an inordinate share of something, seizing a resource that they never had any more right to than anyone else. The scenario of a community all with private wells demonstrates the point well and validly. So everyone has a well accessing groundwater. You come along and decide"Hey I am gonna dig twice and deep as everyone else." and now do to your "industriousness" and "intellect" you have all of the communities water, having effectively lowered their wells to non-productive status. In reality the traits you have demonstrated are immaturity, selfishness, and dishonesty but since you are now the boss(assuming the people don't just remove you from the gene pool) you get to name the traits anew. All of these things you have demonstrated admirably in your response to myself but even if you hadn't these are the facts. Which of us is 2 again?
I remember when I got into this debate with a Marxist. His only response was "Nietzsche was mentally ill." I replied..."so was Karl Marx." So he wanted to change the subject.
They throw comments around like that as if it means something. "He was mentally ill", "He was racist", "He was sexist". In their mind, that discredits everything the person ever said.
But it doesn't. Hitler was a thoroughly contemptible human being and racist to the core. I would never defend his beliefs on race, or his war-mongering. However, Hitler was also the first European leader to realize the dangers of smoking and pass legislation to try and discourage smoking. I'm able to acknowledge he was an evil racist cunt, and *also* acknowledge that he was right about cigarettes.
Most leftists have the mentality of eight year olds though, and that even that low level of nuance eludes them.
Well, to be fair, he was right, and you were wrong. Marx was never mentally ill the way Nietzsche was. The ideas discussed in this video certainly weren't conceived after he went mad, though, so it's a moot point.
Any time they try to bring up mental illness, I just say, “it’s ok to not be ok, is it not? That is what you lot say, is it not?” They thrown insults around that contradict their own beliefs, and all they do is project. They are racists. They are thugs. They are dangerous. They believe they are better than everyone else at the same time as claiming everyone is the same, unless you are white, heterosexual and male, or if you are a conservative or have a different opinion, all of the above doesn’t matter. Ideology above all, even logic.
@@wildzwaan Marx was severely mentally ill with significant addiction throughout his entire adult life. Nietzsche's mental illness didn't manifest until later in his life.
@@wildzwaan get wrecked
You know what I enjoy the most? Is that while trying to deny this, the comments section is FULL of lefty post-mos that are exhibiting... RESENTMENT :D
The entire talk was designed to elicit resentment from its pomo target. The entire talk calls them shitty people in virtually every conceivable way and discredits them. The realization that this makes people angry is not evidence that you're right, imbecile.
Disentropic -- if you genuinely believe the purpose of this talk is nothing more than to piss you off, the irony is entirely lost on you.
@@BullyHunterOver
No.
Discredit:
1. to refuse to accept as true or accurate : disbelieve
2. to cause disbelief in the accuracy or authority of
3. to deprive of good repute : disgrace
@@BullyHunterOver If you look at the definition of the word discredit, I used it correctly.
@@BullyHunterOver What are you droning on about? You brought up the word discredit and you based this on an incorrect understanding of the meaning of the word. Discredit, among other definitions, means "to cause to be doubted to distrusted." That's my first hit on a search engine. Now you suddenly don't like talking about what words mean? Then go away, dingus.
I've been a Leftist most of my life. I'm leaning away from it.
Lean a little harder, love. I'm English. I moved away from the Labour Party when I was then sneering at the working class.
Congratulations. Keep leaning; it is a real man who would realize he may have been mistaken and take action.
Shit, I'm 48 and can't take it anymore .
Its never too late mate! Take good care of urself, after that u will find out, no matter what ever world bring in front of u, ur stoic calm mind and healthy body will prevail and u will be successful. Never under estimate the power of hard work and dilligency in the long run. Im happy for u!
me too!
Emotionally; wounded, vulnerable, insecure all lead to being miserable and passive aggressive
This is probably a bit controversial but am I the only one who feels that autism has also been "weaponized"? A lot of the more extreme examples are clearly AS.
Female?
The Nietzsche "ressentiment" 100% explains SJWs / BLM movement etc.
It's pure nihilistic cringe, unthinking destruction and hatred of the good for being good.
This could not be more relevant at the present time.
Can it explain why women neglect their children I wonder?
Moral superiority replacing genuine care and concern.
Nailed it. When your morality becomes reduced to a single dimension such as racism, sexism, classism, etc. You can measure every cultural system with it and find it lacking. Hence the term "anti-racist". It sounds like an honorable calling but in reality it's just a way of shrinking the ruler.
The left is joyless.
That's a very key observation.
The left is GODless.
Ubu987 The left is pissed off for chosing a worthless degree that encourages unemployment. If they weren't so ignorant, they would have chosen a discipline that offers a career. Women and gender studies and sociology are for those who seek no career field except teach victimhood in public schools.
@@ryankc3631
Yep, and proud of it.
The only joy they have is in destruction
it's worth mentioning that Marx was a "wannabe rich" person who although poor, desperately tried to put on airs of being richer than he was. It is not hard to see how his envy for those who had more than him would have seeped into his work.
While his own children starved.
Man, that is a significant point.
He lived at the expense if his rich friend named engels. He didn't work and earn money. His ideas were half baked, immature and not thought through. Look at the damage he has created with his half baked ideas.
It's also worth mentioning that his father owned two vineyards, was well off, and sent him off to college only to get so sick of his son, Karl Marx, to refuse to apply himself and graduate. This led to Karl Marx being disowned and financially cut off. This is how Karl Marx became poor. He ran out of his father's money.
@@shishoka Thanks for this contribution. I've not read Marx's life. These first glimpses draw my attention.
Nietzsche did not tear down Christianity - he was simply an accurate and early observer of its tearing down (by science). Nietzsche's ethics are an attempt to 1) state the flaws of Christian ethics (and religious ethics in general perhaps) and 2) Build a secular ethic to replace the lost Christian ethic. The secular ethic which Nietzsche built, which I find most artfully expressed in "Thus Spake Zarathustra," is a fully conservative, or non-postmodern, ethic. "Thus Spake Zarathustra" could serve today as a moral handbook, a Bible, for a proselytizing, yet secular, Right wing political outlook.
Another example - the attack on "Power" from the Left. Nietzsche convincingly demonstrates that Power as such is neither good or evil, but beyond both. In fact, without greatness as such, that is, Power, neither great good nor great evil is possible. Power is not inherently evil, Power simply makes acts that would otherwise be either good or evil just more good or evil, it simply serves as a magnifier of moral action, it does not constitute morality itself. Actually, removing Power in order to prevetn great Evil also prevents the potential for great Good. Greatness, Power, is a two-edged sword, it cuts toward both Evil and Good equally, making both more powerful - Power in itself is neither good or evil. However, if you read postmodern literature for very long you will come to find that they believe that Power and Greatness are inherently Evil, are perhaps in fact the source of Evil itself. It is the same as trying to say that a handgun or a hammer is inherently good or evil - it simply displaces human responsibility onto an inanimate object that does not have any inherent moral status, likewise shunting the moral ills of the world off on Power is shifting the responsibilities of humans onto an idea which is no more inherently moral in its status than a hammer is.
“What I relate is the history of the next two centuries. I describe what is coming, what can no longer come differently: the advent of nihilism!
Nihilism stands at the door: whence comes this uncanniest of all guests?
1. Point of departure: it is an error to consider 'social distress' or 'physiological degeneration' or, worse, corruption, as the cause of nihilism. Ours is the most decent and compassionate age. Distress, whether of the soul, body, or intellect, cannot of itself give birth to nihilism (i.e., the radical repudiation of value, meaning, and desirability). Such distress always permits a variety of interpretations. Rather: it is in one particular interpretation, the Christian-moral one, that nihilism is rooted.
2. The end of Christianity-at the hands of its own morality (which cannot be replaced), which turns against the Christian God (the sense of truthfulness, developed highly by Christianity, is nauseated by the falseness and mendaciousness of all Christian interpretations of the world and of history; rebound from 'God is truth' to the fanatical faith 'All is false'; a Buddhism of inaction).
3. Skepticism regarding morality is what is decisive. The end of the moral interpretation of the world, which no longer has any sanction after it has tried to escape into some beyond, leads to nihilism. 'Everything lacks meaning' (the untenability of one interpretation of the world, upon which a tremendous amount of energy has been lavished, awakens the suspicion that all interpretations of the world are false). Buddhistic tendency, a kind of yearning for Nothing. (Indian Buddhism is not the culmination of a thoroughly moralistic development; its nihilism is therefore full of morality that is not overcome: existence as punishment, existence construed as error, error thus as a punishment- is a moral valuation.)
4. Philosophical attempts to overcome the 'moral God' (Hegel, pantheism).
Overcoming popular ideals: the sage; the saint; the poet.
The antagonism of 'true' and 'beautiful' and 'good'."
~ Friedrich Nietzsche (1888)
It's the same reason why the mainstream media uses language like "stolen cars are an increasing problem in the big cities." Instead of saying the problem is car thieves. Implied in the statement that stolen cars are a problem, then the solution is less cars owned by people.
@@illwill2453 very good!
The master slave analogy is about the self. You're either a master to your self or you're a slave to everyone else
Skorost' agreed...he has interpreted Neitzsches Personal psychological insight to the realm of politics.
No, it's not that at all. If you'd read Nietzsche, then you would know that _Master_ morality vs. _Slave_ morality is the dichotomy between the prevailing types of historical moralities. Nietzsche believed that _Slave_ (Semitic) morality had ultimately won out over _Master_ (Pagan) morality, and is now so ubiquitous that we've accepted it as the _only_ type of morality. Therefore, Nietzsche hoped to transvaluate the _Slave_ values-humility, modesty, meekness, etc.-and force mankind to question the very worth of those values. Unfortunately, he suffered a mental breakdown before he could complete his Magnum Opus.
Only someone who understands Nietzsche via a few Wikipedia articles he's read would make a claim as silly as this. Nietzsche constantly referenced the 'herd' and was critical of the peoples of his time. The slave morality was Christian morality.
Skorost': That is the Stoic view, and is definitely an important perspective on personal, internal freedom. Everyone could benefit from it. But I think by the time of Nietzsche, a lot of that had been forgotten and Nietzsche was primarily thinking in terms of Hegel, and was doing his own riff on Hegel (see my commentary above).
Nietzsche goes very in depth in Master/Slave morality in The Genealogy of Morals, and elaborates further in The Antichrist. They're real things, not some conceptual existentialist nonsense.
Short, powerful and clear. Quite a skill. Thank you.
The democrat party, MSM and academia today.
jarinjove.com/2018/11/30/what-did-friedrich-nietzsche-mean-by-slave-morality/
Nope.
Add BLM to that as well.
Love these bite-sized philosophy series. It really puts into perspective the genesis of the social issues we're dealing with today.
Wow. In eleven minutes, you've done a superlative job of reaching into the heart and soul of the deconstructionist, thuggish Left that now rules all. Incredible. I'm saving this, to get my nephew to watch.
“If a temple is to be erected a temple must be destroyed: that is the law - let anyone who can show me a case in which it is not fulfilled!” (Genealogy of Morals, II: 24). The temple Nietzsche set out to destroy was that of morality. It is why this great spirit blasphemes, violates, and destroys first. Out of these ashes emerges a new spirit. The “transvaluation of values” has the destruction of morality as its precondition. Only in attacking morality does the individual find the strength and freedom to transcend morality, to create values. Strife is the medium for the actualization of virtue. Traditionally the classical hero was typically a warrior. “War educates for freedom. For what is freedom? That one has the will to assume responsibility for oneself,” Nietzsche insisted, and “the free man is a warrior” (Twilight of the Idols, Skirmishes of an Untimely Man, 38). “My philosophy aims at an ordering of rank: not at an individualistic morality. The ideas of the herd should rule in the herd-but not reach out beyond it: the leaders of the herd require a fundamental different valuation for their own actions, as do the independent, or the ‘beasts of prey’” (Will to Power, 287, 162).
Agape. The principal of first and second things.
The problem is that more often than not, these so called “social issues” are justifications for basic ill feels towards another. It eventually comes out in the rhetoric.
Nailed it Dr. Hicks.
ayn rand pfp🤮🤮🤮🤮
Berdyaev called socialism “an ideology of envy”.
Spot on, it seems.
You bet!
@@exnihilonihilfit6316
Same would apply to Capitalism based on envy as a means to enxourage self-advancement.
@@napoleonbonaparteempereurd4676 well, in all actuality all of economics is envy, that's how they function fundamentally. Even in economies where all hunt and gather for themselves, one will want more becuaee they want more then they used to have, they envy thier future self and try to out do thier past self.
@@napoleonbonaparteempereurd4676 the difference is that socialism envies the power that economy beings and not the money it brings. They wish for all to achieve the same "power" but through that they reduce everyone to nothing, they wish to stop envy altogether. Which inevitably leads to envy of those who are in line with the ideology, and want for something that is more in line with how they think, socialism is the gateway to capitalism ironically, as capitalism is the gateway to socialism.... as one will want more to better himself over others while they want him down with the rest. The real problem with socialism as an economic system is the flaw that humans are invariably envious of what they could be, and want to accomplish what they can, not what they should.
Capitalism could be called an ideology of GREED AND PRIDE .
I think one thing to note is that meekness and humility is not inherently a “bad” or “loser” quality. I think the issue is when that humility and meekness turn to pride. In Christianity, it’s taught that pride is the deadliest of all sins. When the soul becomes corrupted by pride, that’s when the meek and humble turn into weak and resentful people. They think “those things should be MINE” which is pride. These post modernists are not composed of meek and humble people. They are weak, prideful, and resentful people. When you look at saints, they are always meek and humble. They accept that not everything in their life is under their control and they LET GO of the things of this world. It’s also true in the case of buddhism. Both religions teach that we must let go of the attachments. This isn’t to mean we have nothing and no one to care or attach to, but it’s to say to not be materialistic. Being happy in the day is what is important. But postmodernists only desire what they don’t have and do not care to be great full for what they do have. It’s a terrible existence being prideful and bitter and resentful. If we let pride go, humility follows. Humility leads to happiness. I truly believe that. Marxists are not humble, but the embodiment of pride itself
I've started to say that Communists are people that believe they can play God. Socialists are people that believe the government can play God. Marxists fall into both categories, so no doubt the pride is off the charts, they believe they can re arrange human nature, that people will act upon their marxist desires with no incentive to do so, that everyone agrees with them, that all of the poor want to steal from the rich. Perhaps it's a mixture of weakness, pride, and arrogance, maybe some ignorance as well.
Thank you for your edification!
The word 'meek' has become misunderstood. The original Greek word it is derived from means 'He who keeps his sword sheathed'. It does not mean someone who is timid it means someone who is peace loving and prefers dialogue over violence but can still fight if he chooses to.
Gerald Joseph Well said !
jeperstone ........ Right..... so he who has his cloak taken, then gives his coat as well, he who returns good for evil, blesses them that curse him, prays for those who spitefully use him, does not ask things returned that have been taken from him, and turns the other cheek if struck upon one....... That all is condensed to “he who keeps his sword sheathed?”
Better take that “Greek” course again, buddy.
"Our freedom of speech is freedom or death. We've got to fight the powers that be. Fight the power!"
Nailed it. When your morality becomes reduced to a single dimension such as racism, sexism, classism, etc. You can measure every cultural system with it and find it lacking. Hence the term "anti-racist". It sounds like an honorable calling but in reality it's just a way of shrinking the ruler.
Duchamp was more of a joker. My understanding was he was questioning the authority of "the gallery" as an institution.
Does something become great art simply because it's in a museum? This is why he put the urinal there. It's about bursting a bubble of pretension. Not because he hated craft. His "nude descending a staircase No.2" shows he has great ability. It's a figure in space, multiple frames of movement. Further he worked on large scale sculptures for many years that were only discovered after his death. He also spent many years playing chess and there was uncertainty if it meant something, if he was messing with people or was sincere. This ambiguity was part of his charm.
The bicycle wheel on a stool sculpture likewise showed postmodernism in the sense that found objects are combined in absurd ways to create new forms. As I was taught it, there was no political ideology taught along with it. That seems to have changed. Most postmodern influenced faculty in my time as a student 17 years ago had read some of it, pretended to know what it was about, but when asked would really not be able to say much. Saussure was more of an influence than Derrida and Foucault if I recall. There is a place for tradition. But art can try out different ideas. It should feel like it belongs to this moment it's said. Doing weird things, or traditional things, or unusual combinations, all should be ok. What becomes concerning is when someone's political identity totally overrides their personhood and everything they create has to be some kind of ideological dog whistle.
This content commentary is 100% spot on,Bravo man
Why not on national TV.
- Ofcourse he speaks the truth, we can't have that.
I'm currently reading ''The Genealogy of Morals'' (because I found it on Jordan Peterson's list of book recommendations, and I was personally interested in Nietzsche) and it is overwhelmingly unbelievable how Nietzsche was so ahead of his time. It's truly fascinating...
How was he?
@@Menapho Well, I didn't finish the whole book, unfortunately, but I've read his 2 essays about ''good and bad vs good and evil'' and ''good and bad consciousness''.
@@Menapho The ''good and bad vs good and evil'' part of the book really stood out to me, because it perfectly describes today's culture of victimhood, as well as it describes the interchangeable utility behind the word ''good''. In the book, the noble and the strong consider themselves as ''good'', whilst considering their subordinates as weak, and therefore ''bad''. Simultaneously, the ''bad'' praise their lack of proclivity for aggression through strength and consider themselves as ''good'', while the nobles are considered ''evil'' for their oppressive tendencies.
Shut up with the Jordon Peterson references! Omg. How many robots are there ?
@@bardoface doesn't matter what came from reference is, just focus on Nietzsche
Fear leads to hate, hate leads to suffering, suffering, leads to the dark side.
No luke, I am your father
Pretty good insight here. Nietzsche pokes fun at religion but not spirituality. His writing do have a very deep spiritual aspect to them and use many insights from myths and parables to make his points. But what people gloss over is that he ALSO pokes fun at materialism devoid of spirituality, or actions that are entrenched in German Idealism and Nihilism that reduces everything meaninglessness. Taken as a whole Nietzsche seemed more interested in virtue as self awareness evolving through endless battle or a journey rather than an end goal. It may seem strange, but Robert E Howard's, Conan is probably the ideal Nietzschean hero. And this is the strange irony, Nietzsche was a hyper-individualist and not social utopian. The entire desire for utopia as either a collective institutional or pursuit would have been abhorrent to him.
Good comment.
Bruh Nietzsche was literally proto-post modernism
fantastic rebuttal of the arguments laid out in the video
What?
I was a leftie till my mid 20s when I developed skills I could market.
As soon as I entered the world, I became conservative.
Not because I hate anyone but because I love the system, values and country that has allowed me to develop myself and make an independent living.
I don't want to destroy a vehicle that lifts us from poverty, simply because it cannot hold everyone.
Life is a competition we don't all win.
The current model encourages weakness and excuse making rather than innovative solutions and new ideas.
We only grow strong in suffering and discipline
Same here. I hear a lot of ppl saying that the conservative party is doomed because people are becoming more liberal but I don't think that's entirely true. When people get older, they tend to become more conservative
@@austingulick which is why Democrats would make sure people do not have money
I believe we can maintain the vehicle yet have it lift more people. It is unsustainable to forever have the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, and it will not self-correct. Such a system is destined for collapse. It is the left that is the concerned about this, w/ or w/o a debate of the morality of such a system. It seems to me this right-wing perspective only considers poverty and death to be bad when it happens to the individual/self. We should care for no one but ourselves, be maximally selfish and ruthless, and it'll all somehow work out best for everyone relative to anything else we might try (like mandating some sort of decency). Seems the description of Rand's philosophy being summarized as "I got mine, Jack" is fairly accurate. Beyond that, it seems to construct a philosophy around our own greed and selfishness so that we can feel good about ourselves while being terrible people. I can see the appeal, for sociopaths and narcissistics anyway (just as much as post-modernism appeals to the narcissist as well, just from the other side of the tracks). The more I see both sides, the more I see the value toward the center. Socialism is not the antidote to capitalism nor vice versa. Socialism is the dressing on the salad of capitalism. Without it, the product is dry, rough, and unpalatable to most.
Basically bums with money lol aka "hipsters"
Don't forget luck is a factor in you succeeding in life.
Genealogy of Morals is one of my favorite books.
Now I am beginning to understand the Left v. Right better. Very enlightening commentary on our current crises in the US.
Seven years later, this essay is still 100% true and relevant. Likely it will remain so for years to come.
Very articulate, logical, with excellent supporting examples.
This is an amazing video. Thank you for doing it. It is extremely helpful for clearly understanding
what is going on in the world.
Patience and humility only works in fellowship with Christ.
Merely your opinion - and perhaps your experience. However, I suppose you have so little experience outside of “fellowship with Christ” that you cannot accurately judge anyone or anything beyond such fellowship. I personally have cultivated some humility, which, along with my unusual level of reflection & limited expectations, makes me quite unusually patient. Perhaps I have a sufficient relationship with Christ, but I do not believe so. You see, “humility” is technically a kind of emptiness or or lowliness that would prevent you from asserting that everyone must have the same kind of relationship with Christ as you have. To say that patience & humility come only from believing what you believe is not humility at all.
I see a common comment on all these videos about society. “This is more relevant now than ever”. Everything is happening always. You could have said that 10 years, 100 years ago and 100 years from know if we haven’t destroyed ourselves
For the record, it was Duchamp who put the mustache on the "Mona Lisa," not de Kooning. As for de Kooning's contribution, Robert Rauscheberg asked de Kooning for a drawing, and de Kooning, created it with materials difficult to erase: pastels, pencils, crayon, charcoal and ink. Rauschenberg then erased it and the piece was subsequently put on display as art.
I can't think of something worse than Postmodernism that happened to humanity
Captilism
thats cuz u are the worse thing
Remeber how in Zarathustra, Zara points out how pity is acutally and emotion that makes you feel superior? The lefts entire shlick is the same vibe
Those who think that Nietzsche would be a fan of the modern right or left are delusional.
Exactly.
My favorite saying is I'm neither right, or left, because I'm kind of smart and don't like being wrong half the time.
@@Erl0sung Yeah. Jordan may mean well and is extremely bright. But he takes Nietzsche's existentialist wisdom and philosophy and twists them to fit Dr Petersons religion in order to get people back to Jesus. Because we live in a generation of science and reason and he knows that the bible alone wont influence them in this generation.
@ZA_Bra must have misunderstood him.
@@padraig5335 He would probably be proud of modern day hermits and the people making money off the left and right.
Herbert Schlossberg also explores "resentiment" as well as "Shadenfreude" in an epic book called "Idols for Destruction." it's written in a Christian / biblical worldview. highly recommended.
As someone who has read almost all of Nietzsche's work, it's scary how prescient he was. Also slave morality isn't just the domain of the left. I see it all the time on the right, too, but it's been particularly amped up lately on the left.
"Pain has hitherto advanced mankind the furthest!"
Thank you Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche!!!
So more Communism to kill more people?
3:19 I was homeless three and a half years ago. For 9 months I stayed in a small sanctioned tent city in Seattle, living among a revolving cast of people who generally saw themselves as "morally superior" to the generous but misguided folks who actually allowed us to be there.
The donations would come in and then the residents complain about what they were receiving. They would drop off clothes, food, gave us a generator, they bought the gas, and one day a 65" flat screen showed up.
Being kind and nice is NOT the answer. That adolescent philosophy is the result of a non religious society that we have now, lacking a true morale center coupled with white guilt. And all of it was virtue signalling. Total narcissism. It just enables the parasites, and then you end up with shit on your doorstep. And you are lucky if that's the worst of it.
Big fan of Mr. Hicks though!
Valuable history you have. Good job getting out of it!
One thing I want to point out is that most postmodernists come from upper or upper- middle class, and they are very reluctant to discuss or attack class, as that would undermine them by exposing their privilege.
Pretty sure Nietzsche would’ve seen both sides guilty of Ressentiment... Most of us are one way or another.
Master says: I want this and therefore is good. Slave says, the master wants it and therefore it is bad.... In other words, slave does not have a capacity to even define what is good for him. Slave can only define what is bad: what the master wants
Weird thing is : people keep predicting those things YET SOCIETY DOES NOTHING TO PREVENT IT.
For those who have watched this, do not delude yourself into thinking becoming right-wing is “better” in the eyes of Nietzsche. He would say that the right has its own form of slave morality. Going from left to right simply means that you are still controlled by society. You need to create your own values.
You can't create values. Values just are, eternal and united, or they are not values.
You can explore values, you can articulate values, you can take one value and smoke a whole carton of it until your nauseous.
There never has been nor ever shall be a radically new innovation in values. Ever.
There is only value and non value.
Heaven and earth and all that dwell there in, and the devouring dragon of nillism.
@@christophersnedeker2065 that is what both Jung and Jordan Peterson claim, but they are wrong. They are both too focused on Being (because their interpretation of Being is static in time and eternal like heaven), but they do not realize that Being is only a part of Becoming. For Nietzsche, we are in a constant changing state of Being. Values have changed over time and it has never been about uncovering them. That said, if you really want to cling to Jung, then we can just agree that it takes a tremendous amount of effort to uncover those values. Whether it’s creation or “uncovering”, in practice it is almost the same.
@@vulnerablegrowth3774 whence do you derive this claim that being is only a part of becoming? What can one become except a being? What can become except a being?
@@vulnerablegrowth3774 my claim is that even if "values" in a more narrow sense can change, values in a broad sense remain common threads though time.
You might have one wife or ten, but you can't have any woman you want.
You might kill your enemies without mercy but you don't kill your neighbor.
When has cowardice and hypocrisy ever been something to brag about? Can you really conceive of anyone suffering guilt and shame for not running away in battle in the way we feel about desertion?
We see common human values expressed in culture after culture across time and continents. Different cultures may express values in different ways but they have they same common thread running through them.
@@christophersnedeker2065 your values are within the limits of lived societies, seems way too constrained to me. You are putting yourself in a box you don’t need to be in. It’s sad and unfortunate. At some point, those values you point to (which are not universal btw) were created by someone and others followed suit. Saying that we quickly passed by the possibility of all values so quickly seems naive to me.
Excellent. Despite some of the (expected) negative comments below, your analysis is spot on!
Wow, you're a skeptical and critical viewer...
A lot of people don’t realize that Nazi stands for national socialist and that Hitler was actually a communist before he founded national socialism.
Mussolini also was the editor of a communist newspaper before he invented fascism, which is basically national socialism without the emphasis on race
Nietzsche Scoffed at antisemites- as he undoubtedly would have scoffed at those two had you been able.
Hitler’s appropriation to himself as being the Uber man, shows you how dangerous nature philosopher can be and the one serious flaw - people like hitler and Leopold and Loeb will fancy themselves as Superman
Makes sense and fits right in to what we see happening on college campuses, large cities, trendies...
wow.. There is SO much packed in this vid that applies to multiple societal woes right now. I will keep it in my play list. It warrants multiple hearings....found a new person to explore! Thanks Hicks.
Well this aged nicely.
In history the strong and successful killed the weak at the first notion of ressentiment. This is the price to pay of letting the weak (ie ressentiment) grow.
To manage ressentiment is the most difficult question nowadays.
The "gleeful dismissal of Shakespeare" phrase struck me. I've been ignored, mistreated, and "gleefully dismissed" by people who didn't like something I'd said. It hurts to be ignored because it's you saying something rather than that something being absurd.
So what happens when the “stronglings” have been sufficiently undermined by the “weaklings”? Could you do an analogy of how the “strong” psyche responds when undermined, shamed, and hampered at every turn?
Collapse. Anarchy. Then literal Darwinism comes back in to play (which is currently completely subverted) and the weak are culled, the strong compete and a new order is established. We're just clever chimpanzees at the end of the day ..
wozzlepop So it stands to reason that the strong should cull the weak before it gets to the point of societal collapse?
Lore of Stephen Hicks: Nietzsche Perfectly Forecasts the Postmodernist Left momentum 100
Very valid argument, regardless of the painting mishap, but the ones that need to hear this won't understand most of what you are saying. 😂
Nothing the rich fear more than equality.
Left wing. Right wing. No longer mean anything. Both sides are controlled by the powers that be.
said the leftist
@@livercat8817
exactly LOL
people who think Left and right are two sides of the same coin simply have no clue.
Left is the new right.
Mackenzie Jefferson Congratulations. The only thing worse than being alone is being surrounded by sheeple.
Mackenzie Jefferson Me too. The only thing that scares me more than being basically alone the rest of my life is being around people.
how often have you heard, "i could be rich, if i was as greedy and corrupt as them."
that's actually hilarious, the left always uses their own sins as a form of easy virtue signalling while condemning others.
They use their slothness, to show that by not working hard that they are not greedy.
Thats true, if you are rich and didnt screwed anybody over, you had it done for you, like jeff bezos. If you didnt depend solely on talent and discipline for your job, like a famous artist or athlete, you probably had to be ruthless to get where you are. Hell, even they are screwed up people. Money, like everything, is key in moderation, not in excess. It makes you stale and suspicious of everyone around you, and you will never know if people like you for you or your enormous bank account. You think elon musk got that grimes chick because of his "incredible personality"? Dudes is bland as it gets.
PI - best ever clip perhaps...Hicks a great guy.
Nietzche actually was referring to christian morality when he spoke of this slave morality.
Shhhhh Don't tell them , It makes it funny
Lol, that was a whole lot of words for, "people who don't have, find themselves frustrated..."
Oh my, I should have never watched this. It verifys my every thought
Every breath is a tiny "mmkay". That's all I can say. I can't unhear it.
LMFAO, mmkay?
Funny he said seething when that is now what best describes their emotion.
The great thing about merit is, it always shows up in the end... Even if it's digging potatoes out of the earth...
Postmodern philosophers followed in Nietzsche’s footsteps. Nietzsche wasn’t talking pro-Capitalist. Don’t fall for this. Besides, Nietzsche’s slave morality was against Christianity.
Christianity may have given rise to todays leftism but todays Christians or Christian sympathetics are far less defined by slave morality than todays left. They generally don’t hate billionaires simply for being billionaires. Plus he saw the preachers of equality as pharisees because he believed the immoralism of capitalists was universal it was just that the weak didn’t have the power to wreck things at the expense of others. The leftists demoralized Americas Christian free market lockeanism for generations and they didn’t get socialist Revolution or utopia they got free market participants without respect for free markets, fake Christians, and degenerates. Yesterdays elite university communists are todays rapacious capitalists and despite minor improvements on some social issues it’s not easy to make the case they’re less predatory than their predecessors…
Few people realize he was the father of modern psychology Adler, Jung and Freud would have had nothing without him.
Yep! Nietzsche is the father of modernity. People should have more respect. Was he a great dude? Nope. But everything comes back to him.
@@karlnord1429 i think nietzsche was an exemplary man and he promoted possibly the greatest life philosophy on earth
By patience he probably meant procrastination. Patience it self is a difficult thing and therefore a virtue but simply letting things slide thinking „I will do it tmrw“ or „one day it will get better“ is the real issue.
Stephen, another brilliant explanation of the self destructive nature of our young and naive today...
Postmodernists, and neomarxist that cite Nietzsche have either never read him, or completely misunderstand him.
Yes of course, this is obviously true
Neoliberalism, as an economic and political ideology, has been criticized for several negative aspects. Here are some of the key criticisms:
Inequality: Neoliberal policies often prioritize deregulation, privatization, and free markets, which can lead to increased income and wealth inequality. Critics argue that these policies favor the wealthy and corporations, leading to a concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a few while the majority of people see little benefit.
Erosion of Public Services: The push for privatization under neoliberalism can result in the erosion of public services like healthcare, education, and social welfare. As these services are privatized, access to them may become more unequal, with those who can afford them receiving better quality services while others are left with inadequate or no services.
Reduced Labor Rights: Neoliberalism often emphasizes labor market flexibility, which can lead to weakened labor protections, reduced job security, and lower wages. Workers may face harsher working conditions and have fewer rights in the name of economic efficiency and competitiveness.
Environmental Degradation: The emphasis on deregulation and economic growth in neoliberalism can lead to environmental harm. Companies may prioritize profit over environmental protection, leading to pollution, deforestation, and other forms of environmental degradation.
Democratic Deficit: Critics argue that neoliberalism can undermine democracy by prioritizing the interests of corporations and the wealthy over those of the general public. The influence of money in politics can lead to policies that favor business interests rather than the needs of ordinary citizens.
Economic Instability: Neoliberal policies, particularly financial deregulation, have been linked to increased economic volatility and crises, such as the 2008 global financial crisis. Critics argue that the lack of regulation in financial markets can lead to risky behavior by financial institutions, resulting in economic instability.
Cultural Homogenization: Neoliberalism's emphasis on globalization and market-driven policies can lead to the erosion of local cultures and traditions. The spread of multinational corporations and global consumer culture can diminish cultural diversity.
Reduction in State Sovereignty: Neoliberalism often promotes free trade agreements and international institutions that can limit the policy-making autonomy of individual nations. Critics argue that this can undermine the ability of governments to address local needs and priorities.
These criticisms highlight the potential social, economic, and environmental costs of neoliberalism, leading many to advocate for alternative approaches that emphasize social equity, environmental sustainability, and stronger public services.
After years of wondering how the complexities of postmodernism work, I now see that its just jealousy in a beret
lol
well, this notion of 'postmodernism' is very reductive and doesn't apply to most thinkers who are dubbed as postmodern necessarily.
Wow......helps explain alot of the present day craziness. Thank you.
The ultimate stage in anti reason.
Excellent!!! Thank you
Sigh, its becomes more evident everyday. Now more than ever
The next 7 weeks before the elections are gonna be intense. If you live in the US, take good care of yourself and your loved ones
“Ressentiment” is practically translated to “to feel again” and has a very important temporal relationship.
idk how to put this... every iconic postmodernist was a nietzschean
How does this explain the “postmodernists” who are more successful than, for lack of a better term, the non-postmodernists? Who are not acting out of envy or spite?
Acting out of self-preservation perhaps. To look like part of the revolution so they don't get attacked
The reasoning behind post-modernism would either:
a) Make those who are "more successful" in life still resentful or feel inadequate on other things, no gratitude attitude. (_success_ is a relative term; there's always a way even for a billionaire to see how inadequate life is);
b) Those once post-modernists people are lumped together with the oppressor group by their friends, regardless how hard they worked for their gain in life.
@@user-fs7dv3bq2v Okay but what about all those deconstructionist disruptors in Silicon Valley? They all are pretty liberal. They are what the Right would label as "social justice warriors". Are they only that way because they're seething with envy and spite?
@@user-fs7dv3bq2v How do you explain Quentin Tarantino--the ultimate postmodernist? Hailed as one of the greatest directors of all time. Are his postmodern takes on classic genres of film the result of him being unable to produce anything as good as the filmmakers he is deconstructing?
@@randytran6561 I'm not sure you could even define the silicon Valley ceo's as postmodernist/deconstructionist. The lower people cranking out the code & the heads making grand moves aren't the middle manager HR types who push the deconstructionist narratives through the silicon Valley hierarchy.
Tarrentino too, he is maybe somewhat postmodernist but I'd say rather that he's a metamodern artist. This being because his movies are a tangled web in the same way that postmodern works are, but you will find a grander narrative in the chaos instead of a message of meaninglessness. He also rarely does a true "deconstruction" of the movies he draws from. It's not critique, it's loving homage.
Edit: I should add that there is a difference in being liberal/center left & being a postmodernist/deconstructionist. There are more deconstructionists on the left and it's "baked into the pie" so to speak, but there are even deconstructionists on the right. It's not a "liberal/conservative" dichotomy.
This is music to my ears. Exactly my life observations.
Nietzsche himself can be characterised as one of the first postmodern thinkers though…
For the anti-postmodernism folk: watch yourself to make sure, you are not incurring into the same mistakes, just in the oposite direction. I think its important to propose more than to opose. That is also harder though, but that comes as no surprise.
To those who fight monsters, be weary lest you become a monster yourself. Well said!
This is the best explanation of their mindset I have ever heard
Yeah? Who is "they" exactly?
My favorite part is his subtle, ‘mkays’ after some sentences! The info in the video was interesting too
Ayn Rand foresaw this too, but unlike Nietzsche, she understood that people aren't just 'weak' or resentful inherently, it's a self-made condition. She called it "Hatred of the good for being the good", which is exactly what it is.
The weak: "You only won by cheating! Actually, I am superior. I will tear down anything I cannot live up to."
Beautifully, beautifully explained with simplistic crystal clear clarity. Thank you.
Love how Stephen describes Neitzche's ‘Slave Morality’ as a “rationalization”. Nice Twist.
Slave Morality was about how Christianity promotes the virtues of being weak.
Obedience
Forgiveness
The meek shall inherit the earth
And all the other religious nonsense
It seems you have a warped notion of what christian virtues actualy entail.
For instance, the Bible's idea of "meekness" is having a sword and knowing how to use it, but choosing to keep it sheathed.
A virtuous christian may be obedient and forgiving (when it is moral to do so), but he is not weak. If he were weak, it would disprove his claim to virtue.
@@teteudeu that is Nietzsche's reduction however.
@@JS-dt1tn
I really should have used "weak of character" instead of just "weak".
The thing is nowadays Nietzsche would be in the side of Christians because they don't follow the slave morality in a sense the woke people do.
@@dohlecarnett1866 thats a false dichotomy.