Why is Stirner never spoken of regarding Nietzsche's influences? Good work, Doc. Read 3 of your books. Was hoping to hear your thoughts on what he would think of the French post modernists who used his ideas. I personally think he would of regretted writing anything It's fair to say tho that a true Nietzschian wouldn't follow Nietzsche anyway. That being said, you can be a Nietzschian and use his work as a guide to self-improvement and individualism
Good stuff, fellas. Bear in mind: We're talking about a guy way ahead of his time trying to address atheistic nihilism in a way that spoke to mankind as a whole. It's a tall order. And Nietzsche the man was actually a good natured guy as I understand it. I think if he had gotten laid, maybe had a few kids, he would of been less of a nihilistic atheist himself. Which is why it's VITALLY important for anyone reading Nietzsche to follow it with Carl Jung, NOT Camus or Foucault. Nietzsche is a black pill, hard to swallow, but will both burn and cleanse your stomach. Jung is like your first solid meal after being sick a while. Nevertheless, Nietzsche was the man.
When you discover that Hebrew Cosmology is true then it makes sense why he said God is dead. Indeed God is alive and Earth is flat. "Ancient cosmologies"
Nietzsche's works will still be read and discussed long after Rand's writings have fallen into obscurity. After all, there never has been anything like a Friedrich Nietzsche Institute, funded by wealthy Nietzsche obsessives, to keep Nietzsche's books in print and make young people read them.
@@ChaBoi777 Did you read Hicks book, Nietzsche and the Nazis? He shows how Nietzsche was the nazis principle philosopher, but there are influences from Hegel, Marx and others too of course. Hegel gave them the idea of German supremacy and its right to rule, as well as the notion of the great man of history. Marx framed the evils of capitalism as stemming from Judaism. They were all statists, authoritarians and collectivists. The same three are still adored by the left today. That's partly Hicks point, you can cut the poisonous flowers, but if the plant is still alive it'll bloom again. He says if you value liberty, individualism, inalienable rights and so on, you won't be looking to.......the Germans. Funny thing about Nietzsche is that currently he's probably more beloved by the postmodernists than any other group. His status as a proto-postmodernist is probably correct. Foucault, Derrida and all the people someone like Jordan Peterson criticised, they are probably more authentic Nietzschians than him.. Hicks points out that Nietzsche is more of a collectivist than an individualist. So those who think he's a libertarian or individualist hero are off their chops... They're better off sticking to Rand haha Another thing Nietzsche helped perpetuate is non-essentialism. It probably started with Nietzsche and his lopsided interpretation of Heraclitus. It has thoroughly found its home in postmodernity.. The ground of Being (the Logos) has been removed from Heraclitus and its all Panta Rhei, all becoming and change with no unifying principle of Logos, like in a true reading of Heraclitus
@michael mcclure I'm a psychologist. No Nietzsche: no Jung Frued Adler. I read Stephen's books. I can't help what the Nazis did with his stuff and I frankly don't care. The postmodernists are the issue now. I just use nietzsche against them.
@@ChaBoi777 oh that's interesting. I can see that Nietzsche was also a proto-psychologist. Even his idea that a philosopher is their philosophy, (or their philosophy represents their psychology) is an interesting psychological insight. I'm not sure how strictly he applied that to himself, but others have haha How do you use Nietzsche against the postmodernists? I timk it was Foucault who said he was fundamentally a Nietzschian. Its interesting that Hicks has pivoted toward seeing the contemporary left as having more in common with Rousseauian socialism and not the Marxist variety. Many people equate socialism with Marxism and that's not true, socialism pre-dates Marx. This is why they struggle to see how the nazis were socialists. Anyway, it makes sense, especially as most postmodernists have come from France.. I often think someone like your fellow psychologist Jordan Peterson would be much better off going after real Neo-Marxists who blended psychology and Marxism together, people like Whilelm Reich for example, or Herbert Marcuse. Then he'd be on solid ground. Most postmodernists were basically neoliberals in the end haha
Great! I've learned alot! Thank you!
Great - learned a lot
What a brilliant talk!
Excellent.
#28👍🤔👏🤷🎉instructive talk worth the time and thank you!
Also on this channel is Stephen Hicks's *Nietzsche and the Nazis* audio-book: th-cam.com/video/a2C90l7YlT8/w-d-xo.html
I listened to it a while back. It was insightful just how nuts both of them are and why they self destructed in a sense.
Why is Stirner never spoken of regarding Nietzsche's influences?
Good work, Doc. Read 3 of your books. Was hoping to hear your thoughts on what he would think of the French post modernists who used his ideas. I personally think he would of regretted writing anything
It's fair to say tho that a true Nietzschian wouldn't follow Nietzsche anyway. That being said, you can be a Nietzschian and use his work as a guide to self-improvement and individualism
@@ChaBoi777 haha. That makes a lot of sense
Good stuff, fellas. Bear in mind:
We're talking about a guy way ahead of his time trying to address atheistic nihilism in a way that spoke to mankind as a whole. It's a tall order.
And Nietzsche the man was actually a good natured guy as I understand it. I think if he had gotten laid, maybe had a few kids, he would of been less of a nihilistic atheist himself. Which is why it's VITALLY important for anyone reading Nietzsche to follow it with Carl Jung, NOT Camus or Foucault. Nietzsche is a black pill, hard to swallow, but will both burn and cleanse your stomach. Jung is like your first solid meal after being sick a while.
Nevertheless, Nietzsche was the man.
Doesn't matter what a person might have been. What matters is what they actually were.
@@thereignofthezero225 Amor Fati
Thank you for that. I think Nietzche got it quite right. We're a lot of "Last Men". 😢😮
When you discover that Hebrew Cosmology is true then it makes sense why he said God is dead. Indeed God is alive and Earth is flat.
"Ancient cosmologies"
Nietzsche's works will still be read and discussed long after Rand's writings have fallen into obscurity. After all, there never has been anything like a Friedrich Nietzsche Institute, funded by wealthy Nietzsche obsessives, to keep Nietzsche's books in print and make young people read them.
The only true Nietzsche obsessives to organise themselves were probably the inner circle of the Nazis.
What?
@@ChaBoi777
Did you read Hicks book, Nietzsche and the Nazis? He shows how Nietzsche was the nazis principle philosopher, but there are influences from Hegel, Marx and others too of course. Hegel gave them the idea of German supremacy and its right to rule, as well as the notion of the great man of history. Marx framed the evils of capitalism as stemming from Judaism. They were all statists, authoritarians and collectivists. The same three are still adored by the left today. That's partly Hicks point, you can cut the poisonous flowers, but if the plant is still alive it'll bloom again. He says if you value liberty, individualism, inalienable rights and so on, you won't be looking to.......the Germans.
Funny thing about Nietzsche is that currently he's probably more beloved by the postmodernists than any other group. His status as a proto-postmodernist is probably correct. Foucault, Derrida and all the people someone like Jordan Peterson criticised, they are probably more authentic Nietzschians than him..
Hicks points out that Nietzsche is more of a collectivist than an individualist. So those who think he's a libertarian or individualist hero are off their chops... They're better off sticking to Rand haha
Another thing Nietzsche helped perpetuate is non-essentialism. It probably started with Nietzsche and his lopsided interpretation of Heraclitus. It has thoroughly found its home in postmodernity.. The ground of Being (the Logos) has been removed from Heraclitus and its all Panta Rhei, all becoming and change with no unifying principle of Logos, like in a true reading of Heraclitus
@michael mcclure I'm a psychologist. No Nietzsche: no Jung Frued Adler. I read Stephen's books. I can't help what the Nazis did with his stuff and I frankly don't care. The postmodernists are the issue now. I just use nietzsche against them.
@@ChaBoi777 oh that's interesting. I can see that Nietzsche was also a proto-psychologist. Even his idea that a philosopher is their philosophy, (or their philosophy represents their psychology) is an interesting psychological insight. I'm not sure how strictly he applied that to himself, but others have haha
How do you use Nietzsche against the postmodernists? I timk it was Foucault who said he was fundamentally a Nietzschian.
Its interesting that Hicks has pivoted toward seeing the contemporary left as having more in common with Rousseauian socialism and not the Marxist variety. Many people equate socialism with Marxism and that's not true, socialism pre-dates Marx. This is why they struggle to see how the nazis were socialists. Anyway, it makes sense, especially as most postmodernists have come from France..
I often think someone like your fellow psychologist Jordan Peterson would be much better off going after real Neo-Marxists who blended psychology and Marxism together, people like Whilelm Reich for example, or Herbert Marcuse. Then he'd be on solid ground. Most postmodernists were basically neoliberals in the end haha
Since neither one of you is a genius or insane, maybe you should stop the chatter.