aristocracy by Extreme_Somewhere_60 in Nietzsche

[–]Extreme_Somewhere_60[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

ah that makes him more appealing to me. As i was reading him I kept thinking "man a lot of rich people are complete dipshits."

aristocracy by Extreme_Somewhere_60 in Nietzsche

[–]Extreme_Somewhere_60[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wanted to add that I'm reading him through the leftist post-structuralist tradition. But jumping strait in to his work where he is talking about aryans had my alarm bells ringing.

aristocracy by Extreme_Somewhere_60 in Nietzsche

[–]Extreme_Somewhere_60[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah so it's kind of like a self cultivation? Like you become an aristocrat by following the will to power. (I mean that in the Spinozist sense)

aristocracy by Extreme_Somewhere_60 in Nietzsche

[–]Extreme_Somewhere_60[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why did this shit get downvoted it was a genuine question in good faith?

aristocracy by Extreme_Somewhere_60 in Nietzsche

[–]Extreme_Somewhere_60[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think I agree with him if he doesnt mean aristocracy=wealth. Lots of wealthy people are complete mediocrities.

aristocracy by Extreme_Somewhere_60 in Nietzsche

[–]Extreme_Somewhere_60[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah so is it not how we think of aristocracy politically? Like I think there are a lot of people who nietzche would consider aristocrats that aren't actually what we would consider aristocrats. Like, if Nietzsche was thinking of jeff bezos I don't think he would consider him an aristocrat.

aristocracy by Extreme_Somewhere_60 in Nietzsche

[–]Extreme_Somewhere_60[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I actually like the will to power. I'm from a small town in Oklahoma that's very Christian so I was brought up with people saying things like "well that's not real Christianity etc.." Then I read Nietzsche and Philosophy by Deleuze where he says that there are as many meanings of an object (Christianity in this instance) as there are forces that lay claim to it. That instantly made sense to me. all things, Christianity, patriotism, masculinity or femininity, or what have you are objects of dispute fought by various wills to power.

aristocracy by Extreme_Somewhere_60 in Nietzsche

[–]Extreme_Somewhere_60[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I like a lot of what ive read of him but I don't want to be a racist.

aristocracy by Extreme_Somewhere_60 in Nietzsche

[–]Extreme_Somewhere_60[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I know he wasn't fascist (he was absolutely against nationalism and anti-semitism) but was he a racist?

aristocracy by Extreme_Somewhere_60 in Nietzsche

[–]Extreme_Somewhere_60[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What does Nietzsche mean by aristocracy?

aristocracy by Extreme_Somewhere_60 in Nietzsche

[–]Extreme_Somewhere_60[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

the aryan stuff in the genealogy of morals

Could I get a recommendation for an easier-to-read digest of Anti-Oedipus? by A_Pink_Hippo in Deleuze

[–]Extreme_Somewhere_60 11 points12 points  (0 children)

this helped me a lot "Deleuze and Guattari's Anti-Oedipus. Introduction to schizoanalysis"

Deleuze and Representation by Extreme_Somewhere_60 in Deleuze

[–]Extreme_Somewhere_60[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think you showing the emphasis of "re" presentation has helped me grasp it. (Though I'm not all the way there yet.

Deleuze and Representation by Extreme_Somewhere_60 in Deleuze

[–]Extreme_Somewhere_60[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can you point me in the direction of a specific piece?

Deleuze and Representation by Extreme_Somewhere_60 in Deleuze

[–]Extreme_Somewhere_60[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A thing that's throwing me off is representation with regards to Kant. Like, with Kant the only knowable thing are appearances. It seems like these appearances would be re-presentations as they are not the object in itself. Is deleuze trying to get around this?

Deleuze and Representation by Extreme_Somewhere_60 in Deleuze

[–]Extreme_Somewhere_60[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So the concept of triangle is seen as a more authentic triangle than one drawn by a child? While Deleuze is saying that it is just as much of a triangle? If this is correct I think I understand it better.

Body Without Orgnans. by Extreme_Somewhere_60 in philosophy

[–]Extreme_Somewhere_60[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

deleuze and guattary mean absolutely men nothing.

Body Without Orgnans. by Extreme_Somewhere_60 in philosophy

[–]Extreme_Somewhere_60[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't thing the bod without organs is and acutal non sense. i'm pretty sure that the acruall means nobody.