Nietzsche vs. Stoicism (and Why Epicureanism is Better)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 9 มี.ค. 2021
- In looking at Nietzsche and the Stoics it might seem that it is Nietzsche contra Stoicism based on some of his harsher words towards them. But that is not the case. When it comes to Nietzsche on Stoicism there is nuance. The simplest way of answering the question does Nietzsche hate the Stoics? is by recalling to mind that Nietzsche is a creature of nuance. He doesn't advocate for a Stoic life (despite the Nietzsche Martha Nussbaum sees as the great closet Stoic) in himself but that being said he can see that there are certain conditions under which it might be desirable to be a Stoic. However those seeking spiritual heights for Nietzsche Epicureanism is a better pursuit. Speaking of this philosopher in the garden Epicurus Nietzsche says in the Gay Science that his way is the way of all those seeking the way of the spirit. But for Nietzsche Stoicism Epicureanism is not a simple binary; there's much nuance in understanding why he chooses one over the other and when to choose one over the other. So as we'll see those who wonder why Nietzsche hated Stoicism have failed to read the great man closely enough.
#Nietzsche #thelivingphilosopy #philosophy
For me, Nietzsche is the hammer that every adult needs to equip himself with, thank you for the video, it's great.
Amazing! Loved this. A great accompaniment to my actual reading of Twilight of the Idols and the Meditations.
Thank you sir! Glad to see this is fitting in with your reading!!
For a young man the Dionysian attitude makes sense, as an older man in an age of decadence Stoicism starts to make sense to me personally.
That also make a lot of sense to me. I've been thinking about this episode recently and been thinking that I must interact more with Stoicism and with Epicureanism again. There's an important set of options to be considered with them with regards to modern life
Very interesting! I studied Stoicism for a couple of years & found it very helpful in many regards. Marcus Aurelius teaches to be independent & indifferent to external opinions, to be our own selves. And to also not fear for the future & to trust our weapons of reason & logic. Great wisdom really. Seneca teaches to enjoy the moment, because that's where true happiness lies. And that the greatest wealth comes from being happy with less desires. In other words, to focus less on wealth & material consumerism, and more on simple virtues or natural pleasures. Again, great wisdom. But some of the other Stoic concepts also seemed outdated, subjective & unfit for our more liberal modern societies. I found some of their teachings very judgmental, harsh & at times sanctimonious (particularly Epictetus who came across as unreasonably harsh), especially when it came to matters of love, sex & lust. Of course it makes logical sense to not be excessive or dependent on anything external for our happiness. But as a free, independent spirit who believes in love, familial relationships & enjoys our modern sexual freedoms & other civil liberties, I found some of the Stoics' philosophical views too conservative, close-minded & unappealing. Some of it really just comes off as philosophical dogma, not much different than oppressive religious dogma. So it's a mixed bag for me. Some Stoic principles are very positive, sensible & logical. They make sense & can be applied to become a happier & better person. Others though, are more subjective & conservatively dogmatic. The problem is we don't live in ancient times. The Roman & Greek concepts of morality & justice were vastly different than ours today. We can't just apply Roman morality to modern times, that makes no logical sense. And that is the fatal flaw in Stoicism that simply can't be ignored. Whereas I found Epicurean philosophy more open minded & relatable, at least to a certain extent. So to try and emulate the ancient Stoics in the modern world, without being nuanced & taking modern values & liberties into account, just seems very foolish & ignorant. My view is to learn, analyze & adopt from Stoicism (as well as other religions, philosophies, etc.) what makes sense to you & disregard what doesn't or what is unreasonably dogmatic. That's the only way anyone can truly be free & independent. And to also keep in mind that experiencing external pleasures & experiences are also valid sources of happiness, just like our own sense of inner peace & tranquility. To deny this reality in pursuit of some ideal Stoic virtues from the past, some of which are obsolete, just comes off as sanctimonious & unrealistic. There needs to be balance, nuance & moderation when applying any ancient philosophy to modern life.
As far as Nietzsche is concerned, his concept of the Übermensch is interesting but too vague & undefined, unfortunately. There's nothing wrong with people developing their own personal philosophies, while rejecting the old traditional values & religious dogma, to try to evolve to a higher state of consciousness. In that regard, I actually agree with Nietzsche. But with that said, he never defined what an Übermensch actually looks like, so it's very open to debate & interpretation. And sadly it's also open to very dark & dangerous misinterpretations, much like the Nazis abused his teachings for all the wrong reasons. Anyway, just my thoughts. I appreciate the informative facts & perspectives here, it aided me in understanding more about Nietzsche & his criticisms of the Stoics. Nicely done! As with any religion or philosophy, I always encourage everyone to be critical, independent thinkers. We all have our own biases, subjective views, opinions & perspectives when it comes to the mysteries of life & the universe. We should strive to use logic & reason as best we can, but also humbly accept the reality that knowledge & wisdom also implies that there's also much we don't know & probably won't know also. Let's keep our minds open & our hearts free. Peace out!!
How very wise! Such a sophisticated comment, I‘m amazed and thankful at the same time to have read all that.
Amazingly clear. Bravo. No way was Nietzsche a closet Stoic, and no way did he hate them. I also find that Epicureanism is glanced over far too much. In a hyper civilized society, to ignore the communion of friends and the pleasures of excess is foolish. I also believe, one must, at least temporarily, dance with Dionysus to be truly human. Again, Bravo and thank you.
I’ve given Nietzsche and Schopenhauer a fair bit of thought. It seems to me that what’s truly missing from their approach to life is the very basic, simple humanity they seek to overcome. That could also be said of stoicism to a degree, but I, like him, see it as more of a temporary shield.
What I mean by that is that in spending so much of one’s time on analysis, lost in one’s own mind, human connection-relationships of all sorts-will naturally suffer greatly, and this itself will give rise to a type of sorrow it is impossible to defeat. So, as much as it is necessary to carry the shield of stoicism, it is equally important to craft and maintain the armor of supportive relationships. Perhaps much more so.
I bristle a bit at the suggestion that high pleasure must as an absolute rule bring with it high pain of equal measure. It seems to me like the theory of a man who is only able to speculate about such pleasures, not actually find them. Maybe the trick is to teach oneself to derive high pleasures from mundane things that can be reliably retained.
Edit: amending this a bit. An old, grandfatherly boss once said to me: “Tim, I’ve known you a long while and I’ll tell you what it is that will help you: you need something to hang your hat on. Some achievement that makes you feel extremely proud. Find that, and I think you’ll do great.” I’ve thought about that a lot, but now that I’m finally close to a few such achievements, it feels more like real wisdom. So, in addition to the pleasure of the mundane, I think we also need a few grand battles.
God you know the wisdom of this grandfatherly boss is so on point. I've been thinking about this a lot the past few years. I think that one big win has the capacity to transform your perception of yourself (and hence your neurochemistry) Wise old man right there! I think yeah gratitude and a few grand battles should be consumed as part of a balanced diet of life. It takes a good mix of things to make a good life and those are certainly two ingredients.
I know what you are saying about Schop and Nietzsche. I remember having this thought years ago that great philosohpers are like sex rejects like they seem to have bypassed some connection to the body and they seem to be floating up in some ethereal realm. That's something that fascinated me with Nietzsche's love of Dionysus. I felt like it was his unconscious trying to build that bridge. Like if he had a bit of a steady life with a good lady and some good food he would have been a lot more grounded and philosophy a good deal more earthy. It's something I like in Jung that he's much more rooted in the earth and strong in his Muladhara (to use the language of the chakras)
I remember in Martin Seligman's Authentic Happiness he talks about how much a good relationship is correlated with happiness and you just wonder how different these guys would have been if they'd had a bit more of a healthy relationship. I wonder if that's the times or their temperament that disbarred them from it. I also wonder whether we should wish that for them or be grateful that they didn't. It's a hard thing to evaluate really. I find Brene Brown's work on vulnerability a fine compliment to the ivory towers of the philosophers. The idea that true strength lies in the vulnerability of human connection.
I think your sentiment about deriving high pleasure from mundane things is very balanced and more suited to the Stoic/Epicurean (ah how they would laugh to see themselves lumped in the same category and yet! so valid) worldview. I think with Nietzsche it's worth looking at who embodies his philosophy and it makes me think of Jim Morrison a lover of Nietzsche and self-proclaimed disciple of Dionysus. The rock and roll rollercoaster is perhaps the suited thing. It's not conducive to a good life but perhaps to some great artistic creation musically.
@@TheLivingPhilosophy Excellent insights.
There does seem to be a time and a place for nearly every sort of philosophy. One story that has always stuck with me is that of the pirate captain, Black Bart. He didn’t set out to be a pirate at all! His ship was captured by some and, lacking a navigator, they pressed him into service on pain of death. And he could have done the “noble” thing and died, but he relented, having not been terribly happy with the state of his life anyway and figuring “Ah well, might as well spend the rest of it with this lot.” He took to the life so well that when it came time to elect a new captain, he won. And the things he did, while resigned to “go to the Devil”, were absolutely BRUTAL. There was ample reason to fear him, and he earned his ominous reputation. But what really struck me was this:
He declared a new motto: “A short but merry life, my boys! That is what we’ll have as the bland, lifeless suckers back home spend their days in drudgery and toil.” (I’ve paraphrased him.) So, for someone who’s been kidnapped and forced into a life of crime, I suppose the shift to total hedonism makes sense. And perhaps, as you say, if someone has a basic nature that makes human connection difficult, certain ways of thinking become more appealing. The question is always: should they fight this or accept it?
@@TimBitten Interesting story. There's a man who went into the chaos and never came back he decided to swim in it. Very interesting and I see how he got there and it's hard to say I wouldn't end up in the same place myself that's the damn challenge of it I guess. I feel like you need to keep moving with a lifestyle like that before conscience catches you and the underworld drowns you. There's a saying from Emerson that comes to mind "as in skating over thin ice our safety is in our speed"
@@TheLivingPhilosophy I feel it’s hard to separate the moral strength of a person from the ideals they ultimately end up serving. I don’t feel they’re one and the same at all. Again, just as you say, you or I or anyone, faced with similar choices, may end up going down the dark road. Perhaps it feels like the only choice at the time that is survivable. But hopefully, eventually, one is able to find an exit. By the way, are you on Twitter or Instagram at all?
@@TimBitten That's very true it's really just a rock and a hard place isn't it!? There but for the grace of god go I. And maybe you'd need to Ahab your personality into madness maddened just to plough on. Could help with a certain flavour of liberation in the end perhaps.
As for the social medias I am on twitter not so active these days I tried to keep up with in the early days of the channel but I am still there my handle is @platotes as for IG not much happening there I'm afraid it just never clicked with me! Facebook I'm trying to be a bit more active on these days with the group for the channel but yeah in general I'm kind of suckish at social media
I must expres my gratitude for your video explains some concepts I've been working on for months, trying to analyze, modernize and synthesize both these schools of thought ; your content was unexpected but of great help ! Thx sir , and well done !
Ah wonderful! Delighted to hear it Pierre!
Very fascinating and on point as always, thank you.
I must admit that, as I grew older (and perhaps as the world became more unstable), my acceptance of great pain for the sake of great joy has somewhat diminished, and I find Stoicism increasingly appealing.
But also, I have always admired Marcus Aurelius and his love for Nature. There is something there there is deeply emotional, not just stone-cold logical.
Yeah I think it's good to have the choice and different speeds for different phases and more than anything I 100% agree about that Stoicism has ended up being misrepresented as being stone-cold logical
Ketika anda kagum pada orang orang orang bijak zaman dahulu karena keteguhan dan disiplin mereka, lalu anda melihat diri anda sendiri yang berfisik lemah, sakit sakitan, bahkan rasa sakit yang anda derita begitu dahsyat dan nyata (seperti migrain atau rasa sakit di bagian tubuh lain) sehingga membuat anda hampir kehilangan kewarasan anda, maka anda akan mulai membenci cara hidup dan prinsip para filsuf kuno yang seolah olah menanggung rasa sakit itu mudah. Ada rasa iri yang muncul sekaligus rasa kesal karena prinsip prinsip mereka terdengar seperti omong kosong dan tidak masuk akal.
I’m new to philosophy. Thank you for reminding me that it’s not a religion where I have to choose one. It’s a tool box.
Great way of putting it Jake! Glad the videos are of some help!
That's a great way of looking at it. Pick the tool that works for you when you need it and avoid the one that doesn't work.
Wow, great video man. I'll stick around for more wise stuff like this.
I advise anyone to read Seneca's De Otio, in which he discusses the necessity of incorporating some aspect of epicurean philosophy into stoicism. Seneca addresses a lot of the problems of "hardcore" stoicism and finds the answers in the epicurean worldview.
Beautiful interpretations as usual.
Although, I would recommend you to add the images without the filter. The images you choose to present the topic are really accurate with the subject-matters and It’s delightful to watch the video while gazing on them occasionaly. But I think, those filters ruin that feeling a little.
Thank you for the amazing content,
Have a nice evening.
Thanks a million Yusa! I rewatched the video again and I do see your point I think it was a new trick I'd learned and I got a bit carried away!! I've moved away from it more recently. I really appreciate the feedback top quality thank you!!
Thank you for sharing your analysis and insight.
Thank you for watching Hecmar!
I really enjoyed this.
I particularly enjoyed how it presents a non-exclusiveness of ideas; there is not the premise of a philosophical zero sum game, at least when you contrast all of his writings.
An interesting expansion on this might be how this can be applied on a societal level. I get that one person might fluctuate of differ but how can we best operate as a group with this being the case (I might be exposing my proclivity towards Stoicism here 🙂). I suspect I am slipping into ideas of the dialectic but my pool of philosophical knowledge is too shallow to go beyond that for the time being.
Thanks for watching I'm glad you enjoyed it! You raise a really interesting thought there. I do wonder how these we would look applied to the societal level. Certainly it seems that peacetime societies slide towards hedonism (though of a more decadent than ascetic epicurean variety) and you certainly see the need for a more Stoic ethic in times of war that's just one application that comes to my mind but certainly it's something I can see swirling deeper into my mind
OK, that's some quality content. Definitely subscribing!
Ah thank you kindly! That is much appreciated!
Really great vid:)
Video title about why Epicurean is better was not communicated but enjoyed your talk anyway.
Banger. Well said
The man who believe that thinking like Nietzsche will not make him behave like Nietzsche would sounds for me crazy. His biography doesn't look like one of ubermensch.
In contrast, Napoleons view was close to stoicism, especially this of Epictetus when he went for power.
Well stated
I just discovered your channel, thank you for taking the time to make these videos. In this video, you mentioned that Nietzsche didn't intend for his philosophy to be universal, but for a specific kind of person. Are you saying here that a person who needs a "crutch", like religion, would not be the intended audience for his philosophy? My apologies if my question is elementary, I'm just now on my journey into Philosophy.
Im not a english speaker so correct me if I'm wrong. I disagree with Nietzche final statements....What I understood. Stoicism is not about reduce as much pain as possible by not "risking" in our lives, in favour of Epicureaism! Is about embrace it and accept it as inevitable at some point, prepare to sail the sea with and keep the pleasures on check. For me, an utterly misunderstanding in which nietzche's conclusion throws at us.
Despite everything else. Fantastic video
This is excellent content; a worthy topic explored without being pedantic or judgmental.
Now, as your audience grows, be mindful of your eyes (as you have been with your voice). Engage me more with your eyes. The constant darting about is nervous distraction. Not calm.
The podcast is heading into a new phase where experimentation and identity issues are mostly resolved. Your focus may express that finely wrought determination of purpose.
And, happy Easter. Everything is coming up roses, yes? Thorned though they may be.
Haha thanks Ted! This was actually before the days of the teleprompter so it was still a very loose style hence the eyes darting about. Might be worth a remake because I was really proud of the reserach that went into this video so might be worth polishing it up and sending her out in the world again at some point. Thanks for the support (thorns and all!)
@@TheLivingPhilosophy
The idea of a do-over on this one is worth thinking about. The content is rich. Maybe even expand on N’s view. And, a bit more of what the Stoics say, as opposed to just N. Or, simply move forward and leave the show as a record of what the LP was. Do a brand new episode, in which you revisit and add to an earlier episode. That’s not a do-over, but a Part II. Something you can then do with any other episode.
@@wrsouth Food for thought!
J-go through and delete my suggestions on the show itself-any and all. Going forward, I’ll put them in code. Ok? Including this one. I actually had thought to use patreon, and simply didn’t. From now on, patreon plus code.
@@wrsouth Haha I'm not too worried about people seeing the thought process. God knows they'd have to dig around to figure it out. Codes and Patreon also sound fun though
This video’s take on Nietzsche’s view of Stoicism is, in my not so humble opinion, about as good as it gets. I love Nietzsche’s quotes found in the video. They are truly exhilarating and profound.
Excellent
Thanks Eric!
Can you do a review of Pierre Bourdieu book “The political ontology of Martin Heidegger “? It sheds more light on Neitzian tradition from the other side of the bank!!
Man, getting cooler and cooler. But this is just a suggestion... but had you ever thought to do a video on philosophers that had professions that seems a little bit out of character ... like a soldier?? or a video of a slave becoming free.. or something?? or maybe like a guy that looks like a greedy guy but actually used his economic philosophy... like his ideas created and his understanding of the use of money.
Thanks Maksymilian! Interesting thought...do you mean someone like Nasim Taleb who are unorthodox philosophers or people who wouldn't necessarily identify themselves as philosophers but who have living philosophies we might aspire to?
Aurelius, Epictetus & Seneca?
I suggest you put subtitles on your videos
Grazie.
Grazie mille Umberto
Thank you James!
@@TheLivingPhilosophy
Thank you - as always - James @@TheLivingPhilosophy
Great vid, i tend to agree with nietzche here
Thanks. I cannot see full-on Nietzsche. Epicurianism is my next stop in the Twilight Zone.
Stoicism is a Faith for the patrician, Christianity is a faith for the commoner.
Why not combine both Philosophies and even more from other ancient books of wisdom.
Nietzsche was upset he could not be emperor
DUDE 💀
Great video, much appreciated you breaking it down for the great unwashed…….i.e Me
thanks sir! where are you settled sir?
My pleasure! I be in Ireland in a city called Limerick. And yourself?
@@TheLivingPhilosophy thanks sir, I live in Amsterdam and stay in Limburg, but I'm a cosmopolitan , like you. I really enjoy your discussions and certainly many others do.
@@fraidoonw Ah lovely place beautiful city. Never heard of Limburg before looks like it's straddling the German border. Welcome to the channel thanks for watching and thanks for the comment - always a pleasure to interact!
@@TheLivingPhilosophy Yes Nature is beautiful and inspiring. We should be thankful. Amsterdam is a good city, ever been there? be my guest if you visit here.
@@fraidoonw I have indeed once as a kid three times as an adult and each time got something different out of it. Absolutely love the place. Bit expensive for living but maybe someday. Perhaps I shall pop over for a visit at some point for Amsterdam trip #5! The invitation is much appreciated!
Ah I see you're an artist! A painter calligrapher poet!? That's awesome!
"There is nothing better or more delightful than when a whole people make merry together" (Homer's Odyssey book IX)
N is not the greatest philosopher, just the most controversial one.
Lol oh boy I just had the thought what if we sat down Nietzsche and schopenhauer and have them dabble in the interests and importance (if it has any) of stoicism.
Let the pessimism commence 👏💯
I’m not sure Nietzsche read Epicurus correctly.
I spy on that bookshelf a copy of The Portable Nietzsche. Edited and translated by Walter Kaufmann.
Excellent . . I think I'll stick with the stoics.
Why
@@rundemcheeks1639 It is in the first few minutes of the video, I am an atheist with an uncomplicated view of our place in the Universe. Nietzsche is too complex in his writing and thinking for me to easily digest. To say the Stoics have stood the test of time is an understatement. My understanding of Philosophy is simplistic, but no worries.
He mainly got both Stoicism and Epicureanism wrong. Remarkable.
Could maintaining the opposites of joy and suffering not in itself be a stoic practice, perhaps it is true stoicism.
Definitely moreso than the Epicurean reduction of pains and pleasures but still Stoicism attitude to the passions is that they are indifferents so it's not a perfect match
9:16
Ef Nietzsche!
To be a stoic is to suffer silently. You worship what you fear and for all the tough talk of stoicism what it fears most is the thought of suffering, the anxiety that suffering is always bound to appear. So the stoics perpetually pre-suffer to magically ward-off some imagined, future suffering.The stoics figure they can repress the thought of suffering by silently worshipping suffering: sympathetic magic. This their strategy The epicureans didn't see any suffering. Who is suffering? I'm obviously not a fan of stoicism or any repression dressed up in party clothes. Great show!
What is the difference between the two philosophies according to you?
The Epicureans still regard pleasure (though the easily attained kind) to be good and pain to be bad. Stoicism argues that the attainment of pleasure and avoidance of pain are dependent upon external circumstances. Therefore, they are neither good or bad as if we assign positive or negative judgements to anything outside of our complete control, we are bound to be impeded and suffer. They don't suffer by this realization but are freed by it, realizing that we only suffer when we assign positive of negative judgements to what is not up to us.
By attaching happiness to external things, Epicureans are destined to suffer when inevitably fortune abandons them... this is its fatal flaw. If you really take the time to understand it, Stoicism doesn't CAUSE suffering, it gives us complete control over if mastered. Stoicism, in essence, is freedom from negative emotion and freedom to do as we please. Virtue is just a natural byproduct of having overcome all external desires that would otherwise compel us to do evil or selfish acts.
@@neovi6424 yeah I think a key thing to consider when critiquing or even just exploring philosophy and especially its application to ways of living is whether or not people today are either misrepresenting it or are using it as a way to bypass and ignore uncomfortable emotions/circumstances. While I don't think stoicism was/is meant to be some super disciplined, cold approach to life and how you organize it, I do see how it looks constricting and can easily slip into sort of self punishment and suffering.
May be relevant to mention that I originally got interested in stoicism because I was noticing it becoming super popular and was curious about it from a more psychological/sociological perspective to understand what people today are trying to gain from it. Only got interested in it philosophically a couple years ago and still need to do more in depth reading from more primary sources. Keep getting distracted by other philosophers lol
We suffer more in imagination than in reality. Seneca. That stoic solid quote contradicts your opinion on pre-suffering, it is actually the opposite of what you wrote.
@@neovi6424 you nailed it spot on mate!.
Hahahahaha a closet Stoic xD just as Seneca was a closet Epicurean (Going over to the enemy camp not as a deserter but as a scout my ass)
Pshyco guys rant against boring people
Nietzsche misunderstood Stoicism as did most of western history. Nietzche's brilliance shines despite this confusion about emotions and having a stiff upper lip. If Nietzsche had had the good fortune of reading Pierre Hadot's book "The Inner Citadel"...then there alignment with thought would be smooth....plus "Amor Fati"...begins with The Stoics and Nietzsche runs with it....for me they both are marvelous.
Interesting perspective Melville I've had Hadot on my list for a very long time since my old favourite lecturer recommended it to me. What's interesting is that amor fati has become so associated with stoicism because of Ryan Holiday as far as I can tell. Its a Nietzschean term applied to a stoic theme
@@TheLivingPhilosophy Yes.....he took it deeper....Pierre Hadot's contribution is more towards practicing philosophy as a "Way of Life" versus academic philosophy i.e. struggling with issues, definitions and meanings.....(though somewhat useful) it was not the main understanding of philosophy -- as a way life in daily living.
My feeling is that The Stoics had more influence on Nietzsche, Michel de Montaigne and a few others.
@@mralexander99 ah yeah thats me to a tee (hence the name the living philosophy) I think because my journey in philosophy began with camus nietzsche and the ancients I took this to be what philosophy was and so felt out of place in academia though I never did lose my conviction that philosophy is something you live. I gotta read Hadot.
I think in this sense nietzsche is kin with stoicism and was certainly influenced by the stoics though he's certainly far from a stoic himself.
@@TheLivingPhilosophy Hadot will make your mind soar, for he shows what philosophy is for - not unlike Nietzsche’s hammer analogy……it is a way into - the everyday sublime.
Im too stupid to grasp these but i appriciate that there is so much information out here
Me too 🥴
Honest feedback. Can't watch this stuff anymore. Personally so over it. There is no void and God is real. Peace out!
Watcha mean? Lot of big statements in there. No void and god is real? What do you mean by this and how does it relate to the vid?
@@TheLivingPhilosophy It's a difference of opinion, but one that I'm long over. Needless to say, though, he is not the greatest philosopher, he's just another Holden Caulfield who writes his angst into poetry. His life was a disaster by his own making, and his philosophy is raw violence. Albert Camus was better at projecting dispair, but in The Stranger, he states plainly what happens to a mind that has given up on the Spirit: "Meursalt" hates his mother, is cruel to women, and gleefully violent. Why, because Love is absurd. I have no time for that. Got a song to sing and life that matters, because "everything - every single thing - matters." But that's just me. We're all engaged with a great Mystery, but she only asks, Yes? or No?
Still, again, much respect for the great work and level responses.
Also, Stoicism of Seneca and Marcus Aurelius cannot compare.
Ah that makes sense. Haha the reference to Holden Calufield is hilarious. I'm obviously not on the same page about the value of his writings. Not that I think his life is anything I'd personally like to emulate but neither is Elon Musk's though I'm grateful someone is doing it. But yeah with Nietzsche I find that there is such an originality and for me it's not in the agreement but in the novelty of perspective the honing of one's thinking skills by wrestling with new thoughts this is the kind of thing I love about him and why I find him to be a gift that keeps on giving.
I think in terms of how we live our life and approach life I'm on the same page as you and it's always fun to find a fertile patch of disagreement eh!!
Also quick question about Seneca and Marcus Aurelius when you say their Stoicism cannot compare you mean to each other or to Nietzsche?
PS apologies for the delayed response time!!
@@TheLivingPhilosophy Thanks for your thoughts. I overreacted, and am much humbled, and gratefully so! Nietzsche, once again, got the best of me. The dude stokes the emotions. I Love and hate the channel. Holding my nose and marching along with your strange Pepper band. Not much else to add other than Rock On, and thanks for reading his long books and reporting with equal poetry. Also, I hope you stub your toe and feel nothing.
@@TheLivingPhilosophy - just rather be a Seneca or Marcus. Being Nietzsche would hell. Pass.. :-) Rock on. Great work. Love this channel!!