Completely random passage by Nietzsche

Thrasymachus wrote:

Interpreting Nietzsche as naive "might makes right" (as "whoever wins in any conflict of any kind is necessarily right, because he won") is not only the stupidest way to interpret Nietzsche, it is also the death of the mind as such, the death of philosophy itself.

Agree. The winners are not always the guys who wear the white hats. Remaining true to one's values is a win, IMO.

kami3 wrote:

This is how its work

We do not understand the universe completly, so after the transvaluation of all values, the values become measurable by their strenght/power, by their ability to resist against other values.

The winning value posses supremacy until a new superior value come to take over.

There is no eternal fact as there are no absolute truth so we have to use "natural selection." dixit permanent conflict ! That's why "Man shall be trained for war".

Good way of viewing this. And I must agree as the universe is constantly changing.

kami3 wrote:

Quote :

Nice to see you are an optimist.

Well we have to undergo the ultimate consequences of our actual system first....

Yeah, I sometimes refer to myself as an optimistic realist.

Sisyphus wrote:

Thrasymachus wrote:

Interpreting Nietzsche as naive "might makes right" (as "whoever wins in any conflict of any kind is necessarily right, because he won") is not only the stupidest way to interpret Nietzsche, it is also the death of the mind as such, the death of philosophy itself.

Agree.  The winners are not always the guys who wear the white hats.  Remaining true to one's values is a win, IMO.

Right. And Nietzsche was not so stupid to not know this. "Winning" has far more to it than whoever ends up with the larger army or more skilled tactician or rhetorician. Look at Marxism as an example, it "won" to a large extent in the world and still is winning, yet that doesn't make it right. There are reasons why it won, just as there are reasons why it is not right. Nietzsche's own historical naturalistic perspective refutes any attempt to read Nietzsche as a pure relativist, such as "might makes right" interpretations do.

Let me clarify here: a historical naturalistic approach does not imply or necessitate relativism, quite the opposite. Historical and naturalistic means to examine real situational, specific, contextual causes and reasons, and such causes and reasons extend beyond themselves into the objective. In fact, historicism and naturalism is just a method of moving into the more objective from the less objective.


All forms of relativism are deeply anti-historical and anti-naturalistic. Evolution itself isn't "relativistic" at all.

Absolutely correct. Nowhere does Nietzsche allow for any relativism of preference. The idea that whoever is most efficient is superior is absurd, as maggots and the malaria virus would have to be held in the highest esteem.

As N says in that quote, he is full of contradiction. It takes a nuanced reader to appraise his position.

N makes it abundantly clear that the final criteria are taste and smell.

the "win" that i seek is based on the collective intellectual integrity

kami3 wrote:

the "win" that i seek is based on the collective intellectual integrity

I don't know what that means. Also you didn't address the point Fixed and I made.

Quote :

Interpreting Nietzsche as naive "might makes right"

From my point of view, he is right, there is no mistakes in those books, he is an ubermensh 10x smarter than Einstein.

but that's my interpretation, "the might makes right" is on me, not on Nietzsche.

Thrasymachus wrote:

Right. And Nietzsche was not so stupid to not know this. "Winning" has far more to it than whoever ends up with the larger army or more skilled tactician or rhetorician. Look at Marxism as an example, it "won" to a large extent in the world and still is winning, yet that doesn't make it right. There are reasons why it won, just as there are reasons why it is not right. Nietzsche's own historical naturalistic perspective refutes any attempt to read Nietzsche as a pure relativist, such as "might makes right" interpretations do.

Let me clarify here: a historical naturalistic approach does not imply or necessitate relativism, quite the opposite. Historical and naturalistic means to examine real situational, specific, contextual causes and reasons, and such causes and reasons extend beyond themselves into the objective. In fact, historicism and naturalism is just a method of moving into the more objective from the less objective.

All forms of relativism are deeply anti-historical and anti-naturalistic. Evolution itself isn't "relativistic" at all.

Interesting thoughts on relativism. I'm sure I have thought and said something like "Everything is relative." But that's not true of a value oriented philosophy, is it?

But then, I do shy away from suggesting any absolutes.

There must be a rather fine line between the objective a relative. Maybe there isn't even a line.

Fixed Cross wrote:

N makes it abundantly clear that the final criteria are taste and smell.

And both of those are subjective, not objective.

kami3 wrote:

the "win" that i seek is based on the collective intellectual integrity

I don't talk much about "collective" anything. (Might have something to do with my Anarchist philosophy.)

Quote :

I don't talk much about "collective" anything.

The smartest people tend to converge their thoughts, if you and me, right now by magic would get extra 400 IQ, our way of thinking would have high probability to become very similar and that very quickly.

The smarter we will get trough time, the more connected we will become through the full understanding of the underline wheels of human general behavior.

kami3 wrote:

Quote :

I don't talk much about "collective" anything.

The smartest people tend to converge their thoughts, if you and me, right now by magic would get extra 400 IQ, our way of thinking would have high probability to become very similar and that very quickly.

The smarter we will get trough time, the more connected we will become through the full understanding of the underline wheels of human general behavior.

Fair way of looking at it. I willingly share my mind. And I accept whatever from others I feel will be useful to me.