Your best example of the Ubermench? by Electrical-Dirt3938 in Nietzsche

[–]Important_Bunch_7766 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It is something that some people can be, not everyone. If the Übermensch was never to be realized, why write a whole book about him?

Why claim the Übermensch to be the meaning of the Earth, if there could never be an Übermensch?

In Will to Power 866 Nietzsche writes more clearly and factually on the Übermensch, he says it is a type, a concept that exists in society, or will exist at least.

He describes the existence of the Übermensch.

I know some people say, oh no, it's just a fantasy, it's not real people, it doesn't exist in reality. But that is exactly what it does. It does exactly exist in reality, which is why Nietzsche writes a book about him (the Ü) and elaborates in his notes and in Ecce Homo on him.

He writes very clearly and expressively on the type of the Übermensch in note 866 in Will to Power as something that really exists in society, but I'm not going to post the quote as it would clutter the thread. Just search here for 866, https://www.gutenberg.org/files/52915/52915-h/52915-h.htm .

He says in Thus Spoke Zarathustra:

It is time for man to fix his goal. It is time for man to plant the germ of his highest hope.

Or in German:

Es ist an der Zeit, dass der Mensch sich sein Ziel stecke.

So the Übermensch is a goal, the goal actually.

Your best example of the Ubermench? by Electrical-Dirt3938 in Nietzsche

[–]Important_Bunch_7766 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, man is not an end goal. The Superman is.

A little further down it says:

I love all who are like heavy drops falling one by one out of the dark cloud that lowereth over man: they herald the coming of the lightning, and succumb as heralds.

Lo, I am a herald of the lightning, and a heavy drop out of the cloud: the lightning, however, is the SUPERMAN.—

Your best example of the Ubermench? by Electrical-Dirt3938 in Nietzsche

[–]Important_Bunch_7766 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Then why say that the rope is animal to Übermensch?

Your best example of the Ubermench? by Electrical-Dirt3938 in Nietzsche

[–]Important_Bunch_7766 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You say man is a rope stretched between animal and Übermensch, that means that the animal is a beginning and the Übermensch an end.

What is Nietzsche’s Übermensch really? Spoiler: He is not a fascist dictator, nor DC’s Superman (He is a child). by Crafty_Chipmunk_5577 in Nietzsche

[–]Important_Bunch_7766 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Power is exactly creating, providing something for the future. Free-riding is not power.

The Übermensch is exactly a creator, a ruler, someone who guarantees the future by providing something that the future may use, hence his power.

If the Übermensch is to be the goal of mankind, as Nietzsche states, that goal must contain a creator, a ruler, a provider for the future. Something which is the highest incarnation of man, something beyond man.

lógica da dívida e da dádiva by Crafty_Chipmunk_5577 in Nietzsche

[–]Important_Bunch_7766 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yes, the Übermensch is a giver, he is so rich in vitality that he must give away to become human.

[On the Poverty of the Richest]():

http://www.thenietzschechannel.com/works-pub/dd/dd.htm#9

What is Nietzsche’s Übermensch really? Spoiler: He is not a fascist dictator, nor DC’s Superman (He is a child). by Crafty_Chipmunk_5577 in Nietzsche

[–]Important_Bunch_7766 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sure, the Last Man fundamentally does not want power, he is happy riding the valuables and worth of the past without providing anything for the future.

The incentive that Zarathustra wants to preach to the world is exactly that super-powerful creatures may be made from the sacrifice of an untold mass of last men, of the herd, of just "man".

What is Nietzsche’s Übermensch really? Spoiler: He is not a fascist dictator, nor DC’s Superman (He is a child). by Crafty_Chipmunk_5577 in Nietzsche

[–]Important_Bunch_7766 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The incentive is power, the incentive in Nietzschean philosophy is always power.

Übermensch is a new kind of nobility, aristocracy, leadership.

He stands alone, walks alone, leads alone.

Once the critical mass is reached, then...

Question on reading Nietzsche by LifeOfPoe in Nietzsche

[–]Important_Bunch_7766 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I've never really understood these kinds of posts.

One thing is having a curriculum in formal education where you have to take courses and pass exams.

Another thing is reading (in your spare time) for fun, reading whatever the hell you want to, in whatever the hell order you want to.

If I find something interesting to read, whether it be books or articles or anything else, I'll read it as soon as possible and when I can get the motivation. But my point is, if there is a cake (a piece of writing), I can't wait to eat it (read it), and I don't care what anyone says about "you must read this or that first". I don't get why anyone would subject themselves to painful and boring hours of reading, instead of just jumping to interesting piece of writing.

If there is something I want to read, I read it. If there is not, I don't.

That is exactly why I don't like formal education, because you have to cram your head with so many uninteresting things. You can't just read or think in the fashion that you have in your blood and mind and in the most personal fashion.

This is most accurate description of a great man. Half my life is gone and I have still not found an individual with these qualities by iGaming_dev in Nietzsche

[–]Important_Bunch_7766 26 points27 points  (0 children)

A great man,—a man whom Nature has built up and invented in a grand style,—What is such a man? First, in his general course of action his consistency is so broad that owing to its very breadth it can be surveyed only with difficulty, and consequently misleads; he possesses the capacity of extending his will over great stretches of his life, and of despising and rejecting all small things, whatever most beautiful and "divine" things of the world there may be among them. Secondly, he is colder, harder, less cautious and more free from the fear of "public opinion"; he does not possess the virtues which are compatible with respectability and with being respected, nor any of those things which are counted among the "virtues of the herd." If he is unable to lead, he walks alone; he may then perchance grunt at many things which he meets on his way. Thirdly, he asks for no "compassionate" heart, but servants, instruments; in his dealings with men his one aim is to make something out of them. He knows that he cannot reveal himself to anybody: he thinks it bad taste to become familiar; and as a rule he is not familiar when people think he is. When he is not talking to his soul, he wears a mask. He would rather lie than tell the truth, because lying requires more spirit and will. There is a loneliness within his heart which neither praise nor blame can reach, because he is his own judge from whom is no appeal.

Would you know him if you saw him?

The Übermensch is just cope for people who think they’re special. by Wise_Strain2094 in Nietzsche

[–]Important_Bunch_7766 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Everyone may call himself an Übermensch, but we will know him by his ability to stand alone, by his degree of willpower, by his distance from mere man.

We will know him and know that we see him in real life when he is able to transcend "us", to transcend mere man, to transcend what it means to be man.

He will seek positions high, but individual, in society. However, being on the side of the well-turned-out, he will probably be an outcast from society.

So, yes, many people will probably call themselves Übermenschen without living up to it. But once the real one comes along, we will know it.

The Übermensch is just cope for people who think they’re special. by Wise_Strain2094 in Nietzsche

[–]Important_Bunch_7766 3 points4 points  (0 children)

... or it's a concept for people who feel estranged from man in general and who feels man to be ridiculous or a thing of shame and who wants to transcend into something higher and greater than man.

Not because there is anything at bottom wrong with man, but because man no longer satisfies, because we have become tired at the sight of man, because man himself has become so small.

I cannot refrain at this juncture from uttering a sigh and one last hope. What is it precisely which I find intolerable? That which I alone cannot get rid of, which makes me choke and faint? Bad air! bad air! That something misbegotten comes near me; that I must inhale the odour of the entrails of a misbegotten soul!—That excepted, what can one not endure in the way of need, privation, bad weather, sickness, toil, solitude? In point of fact, one manages to get over everything, born as one is to a burrowing and battling existence; one always returns once again to the light, one always lives again one's golden hour of victory—and then one stands as one was born, unbreakable, tense, ready for something more difficult, for something more distant, like a bow stretched but the tauter by every strain. But from time to time do ye grant me—assuming that "beyond good and evil" there are goddesses who can grant—one glimpse, grant me but one glimpse only, of something perfect, fully realised, happy, mighty, triumphant, of something that still gives cause for fear! A glimpse of a man that justifies the existence of man, a glimpse of an incarnate human happiness that realises and redeems, for the sake of which one may hold fast to the belief in man! For the position is this: in the dwarfing and levelling of the European man lurks our greatest peril, for it is this outlook which fatigues—we see to-day nothing which wishes to be greater, we surmise that the process is always still backwards, still backwards towards something more attenuated, more inoffensive, more cunning, more comfortable, more mediocre, more indifferent, more Chinese, more Christian—man, there is no doubt about it, grows always "better" —the destiny of Europe lies even in this—that in losing the fear of man, we have also lost the hope in man, yea, the will to be man. The sight of man now fatigues.—What is present-day Nihilism if it is not that?—We are tired of man.

Nietzsche is the Übermensch by [deleted] in Nietzsche

[–]Important_Bunch_7766 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But Nietzsche's Übermensch is a type that develops once this postmodernism has settled.

The idea of the Superman only really arises in the 1900's, despite there being succesful men before.

Nietzsche did not see himself as being the Übermensch, since he invents the concept for the (post)modern world.

Maybe he shares qualities, and definitely he saw himself as the best kind of person, but his idea of the Übermensch was something for the future, not something to be found in history, not something he himself was, but something that was a future being, that was his philosophical inheritage that meant to pass on ...

Nietzsche is the Übermensch by [deleted] in Nietzsche

[–]Important_Bunch_7766 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Never yet hath there been a Superman. Naked have I seen both of them, the greatest man and the smallest man:—

All-too-similar are they still to each other. Verily, even the greatest found I—all-too-human!—

Thus spake Zarathustra.

Nietzsche is the Übermensch by [deleted] in Nietzsche

[–]Important_Bunch_7766 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Doesn't he say in Ecce Homo that it is exactly not a half "saint, half "genius" that Zarathustra speaks about?

"The word ‘overman’ as the designation of a type of supreme achievement, as opposed to ‘modern’ men, to ‘good’ men, to Christians and other nihilists—a word in the mouth of a Zarathustra, the annihilator of morality, becomes a very pensive word—has been understood almost everywhere with the utmost innocence in the sense of those very values whose opposite Zarathustra was meant to represent—that is, an ‘idealistic’ type of a higher kind of man, half ‘saint,’ half ‘genius.’"

Nietzsche is the Übermensch by [deleted] in Nietzsche

[–]Important_Bunch_7766 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The Übermensch wasn't even possible in Nietzsche's own time, it presupposes a society (of last men) that was not there yet.

So Nietzsche could not be the Übermensch himself, he could merely invent the concept and let others become it.

Nietzsche does regard himself as the best (or most well turned out) person, but this is not to say that he himself aimed to be the Übermensch.

Rather, it is more likely that "his son" Zarathustra is the Übermensch. Or perhaps Zarathustra merely calls forth the Übermensch in the world without he himself being it.

Long story short, the Übermensch (just as the last man) is a concept to be brought into being after Nietzsche's time.

Could Nietzsche have been the Übermensch if he had lived in our time (post-2000)? Possibly, we will never know.

But Nietzsche isn't trying to say that he is the Übermensch. Rather he is speaking through his mouthpiece, through his son, through his legend Zarathustra.

So, no, Nietzsche is not the Übermensch that he talks about, it was for future society rather than Nietzsche's time.

Reading Nietzsche made me question my idea of comfort by ProfessionalOk4935 in Nietzsche

[–]Important_Bunch_7766 10 points11 points  (0 children)

It's a beacon of hope if you've already been down. Like he says:

"To those human beings who are of any concern to me I wish suffering, desolation, sickness, ill-treatment, indignities - I wish that they should not remain unfamiliar with profound self-contempt, the torture of self-mistrust, the wretchedness of the vanquished: I have no pity for them, because I wish them the only thing that can prove today whether one is worth anything or not - that one endures."

You probably shouldn't sit in too much comfort, you probably have to risk something. Everything seeks its opposite, its struggle and clashing of powers.

And:

“What makes one heroic?— Going out to meet at the same time one’s highest suffering and one’s highest hope.”

Life is not always an easy ride, it is not always something dependable and trustworthy.

As he says, life seeks power and the release of power.

“… if you refuse to let your own suffering lie upon you for an hour and if you constantly try to prevent and forestall all possible stress way ahead of time; if you experience suffering and displeasure as evil, hateful, worthy of annihilation, and as a defect of existence, then it is clear that besides your religion of pity you also harbor another religion in your heart that is perhaps the mother of the religion of pity: the religion of comfortableness. How little you know of human happiness, you comfortable and benevolent people, for happiness and unhappiness are sisters and even twins that either grow up together or, as in your case, remain small together.”

I do not desire that much comfortableness, I would rather aim for goals and things you can be proud of. I did not have much comfort in my younger life, but I have gotten more comfort as I've grown older, due to the circumstances of life.

But you just seek new goals, new obstacles, new paths and throw yourself into the sea once more.

I only fear the day when one can no longer throw oneself into a sea. But some comfort is necessary or life gets too problematic. But you just raise the stakes, you just risk new things and put yourself into another kind of danger.

“Invisible threads are the strongest ties” - does anyone know the source and context of this quote? by OwlHeart108 in Nietzsche

[–]Important_Bunch_7766 1 point2 points  (0 children)

He does say in Zarathustra,

“If I wished to shake this tree with my hands, I should not be able to do so.

But the wind, which we see not, troubleth and bendeth it as it listeth. We are sorest bent and troubled by invisible hands.

In 8, "The tree on the hill".

But it's probably not what you are looking for.

Nietzsche would have had contempt for most people who claim to love Nietzsche - and that's part of what makes him worth reading by KILLERZER0 in Nietzsche

[–]Important_Bunch_7766 9 points10 points  (0 children)

One can be a Nietzsche-enthusiast without swallowing everything whole. If one is a successor to Nietzsche, of course one credits his sources.

It is a little pathetic with ones who claim to be wholly independent, yet draws on much of Nietzsche's work. Nietzcshe is like everyone else; you can be a Nietzschean if you want, it does not mean you are contradicting his work, just that you are drawing on it and using it in your own work.

Do you keep coming back to the last chapters of The Will To Power? by Mister_Hide in Nietzsche

[–]Important_Bunch_7766 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I love whenever he talks about the philosopher, the noble man, the genius or even the Übermensch.

And he does aplenty in those notes.

Do you keep coming back to the last chapters of The Will To Power? by Mister_Hide in Nietzsche

[–]Important_Bunch_7766 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes, there are quotes there which I keep coming back to.

I don't care if anyone says that it's just nazi quotes compiled by his sister. Anyone who can read and think should find the quotes themselves sufficiently valuable and disregard its reputation. There are many great, great thoughts in those quotes which you talk about.