Nietzsche As Biological Visionary?

[Regina]

Ok, so how would you describe Blake's intellectual fountain ? Ray Peat is pretty clear with the idea that the "Will" is something that doesn't really provide the philosophy to move towards higher degrees of development. Or for that matter, move forward in a humanistic way. The Will was something assertive. He tried to provide an example of the differences between the two view points.

Thanks jag2495,

I think Peat's quote, like all quotes, are frozen in time. A snapshot of that reality. When one is not a scatter-brain, one is attached to the moment that exist in its time. And changes, changes, changes. Does not get stuck. I think they both point to the moon (Peat/Nietzsche). With Peat excelling, at the very least, by not going bonkers), but people want to focus on the fingers.

 

[Regina]

there is nothing similar about Nietzsche and Peat. Peat takes a humanistic approach to life. While Nietzsche takes a egotistical, immoral, inhumane approach. I find it hilarious that people are so short sided to think of those two individuals as compatible. Even after reading Peat's take on Nietzsche. My guess is that people are so committed to their philosophical ideas that they project their views onto everyone else.

 

[Regina]

there is nothing similar about Nietzsche and Peat. Peat takes a humanistic approach to life. While Nietzsche takes a egotistical, immoral, inhumane approach. I find it hilarious that people are so short sided to think of those two individuals as compatible. Even after reading Peat's take on Nietzsche. My guess is that people are so committed to their philosophical ideas that they project their views onto everyone else.

Yea, that's my problem. I'm just too short-sighted.

 

[Dopamine]

there is a study in which Ray Peat cites in Mind and Tissue, which describes Nietzsche very well in my opinion.

The attempt on the part of the psychoanalysts to demonstrate that human impulses are bestial in nature cannot claim originality. The father of these man-hating views is Nietzsche. In thus Spake Zarathustra, the immoral essence of man is proclaimed. (18) We cite several characteristic aphorisms: "The earth has a skin, and the skin has sores. One of these sores is called man" (p. 181). "To him who is ridden by a devil, I will whisper this in his ear: you will do better if you make your devil grow bigger" (p.120). One must ignore the "rabble" who "babble in your ear about the folk and the peoples" (p,293); one must love peace "as a means to new wars" (p, 61). It is affirmed, by Zarathustra's words, that everything is permitted to the chosen, that it is necessary to overcome "the luck of the majority" (pp. 365, 367), and that compassion is shameful (pp. 365, 120).
- Freudianism, Microsociology, and Existentialism page 49

The difference between the Nietzschean apology for the devil principle in man and similar assertions by the Freudians and their fellow-travelerslies in the fact that Nietzsche seeks to liberate the bestial in man and lauds this in the name of enslavement of the weak by the strong (p. 293). He glorifies wars, cruelty, and affirms the right to trample on moral principles and to drive out the voice of conscience. - Freudianism, Microsociology, and Existentialism page 50

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.2753/RPO1061-0405040145


I agree with this statement. Nietzsche was no biological visionary. He was a psychopath who glorified the worst parts of society.

+1

What does that even mean? Have you even read any of his books? He is very easy to misunderstand when his quotes are taken out of context. The context of my post was addressing some of his statements relating to biology... did you even look at them?

This secondary literature is terrible by the way and is obviously the product of a butthurt christian that found Nietzsches work too offensive for his sensitive ears... I have read both Freud and Nietzsche pretty extensively and they are both brilliant and complementary intellects.

I know Rays views on Nietzsche and I disagree with him. He is too heavily influenced by Russian socialist/communist bullcrap in my opinion.

What you may look at as the worst aspects of man and society... the ugliest parts... Nietzsche would look at as the tension necessary for greatness, striving, and growth. If people were perfect there would be no reason to change and the world would become boring and stagnant. This is why Nietzsche loves the dark and ugly parts of man. The parts with the greatest capacity to stimulate change and development in the world. Every heroic story needs a villain to stir up trouble otherwise the story would not be worth listening to. Every man needs his dark side. Some people just can't bear to look at it. Nietzsche didn't just look at the dark and chaotic parts of man though- he also looked at the compassionate/social parts and saw value in both.

 

[jaguar43]

Yea, that's my problem. I'm just too short-sighted.

that statement was directed towards the OP, if you haven't notice we have debate in the past about Nietzsche. His fundamental argument was that Nietzsche is Compatible with Peat. Regardless of what Peat said in that interview. I disagreed, I thought what Peat said was pretty straight forward. trying to change the meaning of what people say is an example of a dishonest person. He went so far as to say that you couldn't have the intellectual fountain without the "will". And other straw man arguments. I am sure it's somewhere in the forum.

 

[DaveFoster]

How do you go from a quote by Ray Peat on Mormonism to the topic on Nietzsche ? You don't even bother to try to connect the two.

It was about intention; the application of intention, which some may argue would be synonymous with "assertiveness."

 

[DaveFoster]

What does that even mean? Have you even read any of his books? He is very easy to misunderstand when his quotes are taken out of context. The context of my post was addressing some of his statements relating to biology... did you even look at them?

This secondary literature is terrible by the way and is obviously the product of a butthurt christian that found Nietzsches work too offensive for his sensitive ears... I have read both Freud and Nietzsche pretty extensively and they are both brilliant and complementary intellects.

I know Rays views on Nietzsche and I disagree with him. He is too heavily influenced by Russian socialist/communist bullcrap in my opinion.

What you may look at as the worst aspects of man and society... the ugliest parts... Nietzsche would look at as the tension necessary for greatness, striving, and growth. If people were perfect there would be no reason to change and the world would become boring and stagnant. This is why Nietzsche loves the dark and ugly parts of man. The parts with the greatest capacity to stimulate change and development in the world. Every heroic story needs a villain to stir up trouble otherwise the story would not be worth listening to. Every man needs his dark side. Some people just can't bear to look at it. Nietzsche didn't just look at the dark and chaotic parts of man though- he also looked at the compassionate/social parts and saw value in both.

I have also noticed that Peat borrows a lot of influence from Bolshevism/Communism. I think that Peat realizes that the world isn't perfect, but I perceive his argument to be as follows:

If we understand the body, and we supply to it all of its needs, including nutrition, love, stimulation, and creativity, then we can maximize individual human potential and mitigate the problems of a degenerate culture, (collectivism, authoritarianism, etc.)

Peat is all about self-growth, personal fulfillment, and actualization. I think Nietzsche had the same ideals, but he masked it with horrid depression and disillusionment at the world around him, and to no surprise; I don't think the proto-nationalist WWI Europe is comparable to an ideal place for individual development.

I think Nietzsche and Peat both recognize the dark, but the latter understands it to the extent where he can avoid it altogether. Nietzsche had to live with his inner darkness.

 

[jaguar43]

What does that even mean? Have you even read any of his books? He is very easy to misunderstand when his quotes are taken out of context. The context of my post was addressing some of his statements relating to biology... did you even look at them?

There is nothing to misunderstand. He said what he said, you can check the references if you like.

This secondary literature is terrible by the way and is obviously the product of a butthurt christian that found Nietzsches work too offensive for his sensitive ears... I have read both Freud and Nietzsche pretty extensively and they are both brilliant and complementary intellects.

Disagree on both statements. I am not sure what Ray Peat thinks of Freud though.

I know Rays views on Nietzsche and I disagree with him. He is too heavily influenced by Russian socialist/communist bullcrap in my opinion.

Ok so you knew what Ray Peat thought of Nietzsche, why create this thread in the first place ? And for that matter why participate in the forum at all ? I mean, the only bullcrap that is here is your post on Nietzsche. Since this is the Ray Peat forum, after all.

What you may look at as the worst aspects of man and society... the ugliest parts... Nietzsche would look at as the tension necessary for greatness, striving, and growth. If people were perfect there would be no reason to change and the world would become boring and stagnant. This is why Nietzsche loves the dark and ugly parts of man. The parts with the greatest capacity to stimulate change and development in the world. Every heroic story needs a villain to stir up trouble otherwise the story would not be worth listening to. Every man needs his dark side. Some people just can't bear to look at it. Nietzsche didn't just look at the dark and chaotic parts of man though- he also looked at the compassionate/social parts and saw value in both.

You can't grow from being assertive or as Nietzsche describes the "Will to power". Because to have "will" means your being stops functioning. What defines humanity is who people are. Nietzsche said what he meant, he was literal philosopher. I think it's interesting how people try and change what he says to prove their argument.

 

[Dopamine]

I have also noticed that Peat borrows a lot of influence from Bolshevism/Communism. I think that Peat realizes that the world isn't perfect, but I perceive his argument to be as follows:

If we understand the body, and we supply to it all of its needs, including nutrition, love, stimulation, and creativity, then we can maximize individual human potential and mitigate the problems of a degenerate culture, (collectivism, authoritarianism, etc.)

Peat is all about self-growth, personal fulfillment, and actualization. I think Nietzsche had the same ideals, but he masked it with horrid depression and disillusionment at the world around him, and to no surprise; I don't think the proto-nationalist WWI Europe is comparable to an ideal place for individual development.

Good points, I think Nietzsche may have had bipolar depression alternating between periods of depression and mania. I believe he wrote Zarathustra in a day or something haha which seems like a manic episode. Some of his work is too deeply embedded in his own psyche for people to understand. Lost in translation in a sense. I think he struggled to express his views in a way that would be understood and accepted by the common reader.

Peat and Nietzsche had the same ideals in my opinion- just different ways of comprehending/expressing it and that's OK.

 

[tara]

Have you even read any of his books?

I have not. My opinion is based on a number of quotes and interpretations by others in various secondary sources.

This secondary literature is terrible by the way and is obviously the product of a butthurt christian that found Nietzsches work too offensive for his sensitive ears...

Argumentum ad hominem. I don't agree with that generalisation; the criticisms I've read have I think been more humanist than religious, and have been in various sources. Quite possibly some of the secondary literature is terrible, but I don't think it all is. I guess this thread is secondary literature.

He is too heavily influenced by Russian socialist/communist bullcrap in my opinion.

As compared to the sensible and benign US capitalist machinery?

This is why Nietzsche loves the dark and ugly parts of man.

Can't say I find that terribly inspiring myself.

The parts with the greatest capacity to stimulate change and development in the world.

Or justify subjugation, theft and destruction.

Peat is all about self-growth, personal fulfillment, and actualization.

And organising and teaching people via setting up a university, spreading his ideas to other people rather than just keeping the benefits to himself, making people aware of the systematic power imbalances that distort society.

 

[Dopamine]

There is nothing to misunderstand. He said what he said, you can check the references if you like.



Disagree on both statements. I am not sure what Ray Peat thinks of Freud though.



Ok so you knew what Ray Peat thought of Nietzsche, why create this thread in the first place ? And for that matter why participate in the forum at all ? I mean, the only bullcrap that is here is your post on Nietzsche. Since this is the Ray Peat forum, after all.



You can't grow from being assertive or as Nietzsche describes the "Will to power". Because to have "will" means your being stops functioning. What defines humanity is who people are. Nietzsche said what he meant, he was literal philosopher. I think it's interesting how people try and change what he says to prove their argument.

I feel like I've argued with you before about Nietzsche? Anyways you haven't even discussed the topic of the thread which I wanted to discuss (Nietzsches quotes on biology). How do you feel about his quotes on metabolism, nutrition, etc that I posted?

 

[jaguar43]

I have also noticed that Peat borrows a lot of influence from Bolshevism/Communism. I think that Peat realizes that the world isn't perfect, but I perceive his argument to be as follows:

On one hand you go to Peat for advice about starting a new religion and take his advice about nutrition and health and so forth. ON the other hand you criticize him for things that he has said about politics? I think thats highly hypocritical. Whats more surprising is that you feel entitled to the point out that he shouldn't have his own politic beliefs. But it's ok to take all his other advice ? You have no shame and you are full of contradiction.

If we understand the body, and we supply to it all of its needs, including nutrition, love, stimulation, and creativity, then we can maximize individual human potential and mitigate the problems of a degenerate culture, (collectivism, authoritarianism, etc.)

Ok, so you directly state that collectivism is part of a degenerate culture. And in your first paragraph, you stated that Peat borrows from Bolshevism/Communism ? Which we know that those political theories advocate collectivism. Are you saying that Peat is a degenerate ? Or maybe half way. Again. it's hilarious how some people believe that others shouldn't think like this or like that just because they don't agree with it. More shame and more contradiction.

Peat is all about self-growth, personal fulfillment, and actualization. I think Nietzsche had the same ideals, but he masked it with horrid depression and disillusionment at the world around him, and to no surprise; I don't think the proto-nationalist WWI Europe is comparable to an ideal place for individual development.

Just because someone is depressed doesn't mean they can assert themselves onto everyone else. Which is what Ray Peat says the "will" does. That is in it self authoritarian.

I think Nietzsche and Peat both recognize the dark, but the latter understands it to the extent where he can avoid it altogether. Nietzsche had to live with his inner darkness.

Not really an argument, but ok.

To summarize my argument I think you use Peat for advice and then insult the man behind his back. Instead of being an open person you say smirkish remarks about his political beliefs. Which for future reference we don't know what they are.

 

[DaveFoster]

On another note, Blake assuredly had Grave's disease.

 

[michael94]

 

[Dopamine]

As compared to the sensible and benign US capitalist machinery?

Yes. Not perfect but better than socialism.

Can't say I find that terribly inspiring myself.

Fair enough. I do.

Or justify subjugation, theft and destruction.

The world would be pretty boring without a little destruction. Maybe i'm just a psychopath

And organising and teaching people via setting up a university, spreading his ideas to other people rather than just keeping the benefits to himself, making people aware of the systematic power imbalances that distort society.

Nietzsche was a university professor and author.

 

[Regina]

that statement was directed towards the OP, if you haven't notice we have debate in the past about Nietzsche. His fundamental argument was that Nietzsche is Compatible with Peat. Regardless of what Peat said in that interview. I disagreed, I thought what Peat said was pretty straight forward. trying to change the meaning of what people say is an example of a dishonest person. He went so far as to say that you couldn't have the intellectual fountain without the "will". And other straw man arguments. I am sure it's somewhere in the forum.

Darling, I have dyslexia. Let me try to keep up with this. I don't know what is "OP".
I don't have some Nietzsche thing. I am a relatively recent member and thought simply to find the commonality in Peat and Nietzsche. As a riddle. It seemed to be thrown out there. Well yes, this in itself is something I might be prone to. You know, "Let's knit anything together," like a ludicrous quilt club. Is that a philosophy??
For me, Nietzsche became a pandora's box. He was so so hated. I just had to have a look. But like a detective. Let me go interview the prisoner. (my Dad was a detective).
Dad would say, "He's not a bad guy." and "ah geez, knucklehead."
Anyways, in my investigations into Nietzsche (i.e., not 3rd party heresay), I found many pearls and rubies filled each bin.
I consider him to be a transitional figure. He was pointing at something. Something important. It's nuanced. Not black and white. Not authoritarian. He was pointing at the heart of the problems of dualistic thinking. And he's pithy and funny about it.

I don't really have any stance? If that makes sense??

 

[Dopamine]

So far nobody has discussed the quotes that I took time to compile... I guess arguing is more interesting.

 

[Regina]

omg, hahahahah I got to go to sleep but would love to play with you all. Cuddles!

 

[Regina]

So far nobody has discussed the quotes that I took time to compile... I guess arguing is more interesting.

Genau!!!!! Face-palms stopped the lovely cuddly convo.

 

[Dopamine]

Darling, I have dyslexia. Let me try to keep up with this. I don't know what is "OP".
I don't have some Nietzsche thing. I am a relatively recent member and thought simply to find the commonality in Peat and Nietzsche. As a riddle. It seemed to be thrown out there. Well yes, this in itself is something I might be prone to. You know, "Let's knit anything together," like a ludicrous quilt club. Is that a philosophy??
For me, Nietzsche became a pandora's box. He was so so hated. I just had to have a look. But like a detective. Let me go interview the prisoner. (my Dad was a detective).
Dad would say, "He's not a bad guy." and "ah geez, knucklehead."
Anyways, in my investigations into Nietzsche (i.e., not 3rd party heresay), I found many pearls and rubies filled each bin.
I consider him to be a transitional figure. He was pointing at something. Something important. It's nuanced. Not black and white. Not authoritarian. He was pointing at the heart of the problems of dualistic thinking. And he's pithy and funny about it.

I don't really have any stance? If that makes sense??

OP means original poster.

I always appreciate when people are open minded and I agree with what you have to say about him. He is easily misunderstood and looked over- just like Peat.