Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Is Nietzsche's shade wandering in platonia ?
Hi Platonist Guitar Cowboy That fellow seemingly accepted all of Neitzche's views, as you seem to. I didn't say that one shouldn't endorse Nietzsche's views, that's your business, not mine. I don't, but that's my prerogative. I just just said that they are obviously incompatible with those of Plato. Note that also, later on in The Republic, Plato banned all poets, which was a strong suit of Nietzche's, he was masterly with metaphors. Overall, I doubt if Nietzsche and Plato would get along. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 11/7/2012 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Platonist Guitar Cowboy Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-11-07, 10:43:52 Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Is Nietzsche's shade wandering in platonia ? Hi Roger, If you have to quote Nietzsche enemies to make your ideological point, go ahead. This tells its own story, I don't have to comment further on. The Slave/Master thing boils down to something simpler than all this: do we want to rule ourselves or be ruled? Platonism he attacks insofar, as he points out that "too many, the herd, want to apparently be ruled" and do not want to step up to empower themselves genuinely, or fear doing so. This should not stop the affirmative spirit from reaching for more positive notion of ethics and politics. But if we don't fight for this affirmation, stand up to tyrannical ideas in an unbounded way, then we shouldn't scratch our heads at why we will remain slaves. Trivially, he speaks of honesty as recognizing power as the main currency of human: let us not kid ourselves here, the people that run things will continue to shape society's identity. To be able to affirm, we have to struggle to reach the child's "holy yes", but to do so, he thinks it inevitable that we've got to become Lions first. Whereby the Lion's "No!" is but means to the child's eternal unbounded "yes" as an end, and in no shape or form primary to him as your copied quote suggests. That's just plain wrong. The "Yes" remains primary throughout, but we have dirty work to do, is more accurate. And this grates with Platonism, in that he fears it lacks "lion", to achieve the affirmation it pertains to stand for. A "Yes-Person" without power is a slave to him. This makes people uncomfortable even today, I guess. This is no contradiction for me with Platonism; rather he updates its affirmative quality and relativizes its "we don't know, so we won't move" aspect; the donkey aspect of Platonism for him. Yes, he announces the Dionysian affirmation that no negation can defile BUT in less primary terms he denounces the affirmation of the platonist donkey who doesn't know how to say "No!". Nietzsche doesn't attack "human reason in itself" as your quote unwittingly states, he attacks blind faith in the reasoner: "go out and dance a little, loose yourself, get a bit high, make some sweet love, will ya, before you take yourself too seriously?" seems more accurate to me, than this platitude of attacking reason, like some highschool punk, via argument in transparent trivial contradiction. If the writer of the quote makes Nietzsche out to be that stupid, I rest my case, that your quote is ideological concerning Nietzsche, never having understood the kind of reasoning I am pointing towards. Cowboy, Jamaican Lion Style :) On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 3:10 PM, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Platonist Guitar Cowboy You're welcome to endorse Nietszche's attack on reason, but I can't see how anybody could be a platonist at the same time. Consider this (apparently by somebody else sympathetic to Nietzsche's views): http://groups.able2know.org/philforum/topic/1803-1 "In his book The Geneology of Morals Nietzsche attacks what he calls slave morality and advances what he calls master morality. Platonism, to Nietzsche is a version of slave morality and Nietzsche goes on to call Christianity "Platonism for the people". Slave morality is a morality which holds the good to be the highest point that humans could reach for and master morality is a morality that is created by the elite, aristocratic group within society and this master group holds the masses of the people under its inevitably oppressive rule. The masters of master morality make the rules because they alone have the capacity to be responsible. Nietzsche goes on to say that slavery in some sense or another must exist if any society is to approach greatness. The 'good' for Nietzsche lays in the hierarchical structure which gives absolute power only to those few who are capable of wielding it: the top most tier of the aristocratic hierar
Re: Re: Re: Re: Is Nietzsche's shade wandering in platonia ?
Hi Roger, If you have to quote Nietzsche enemies to make your ideological point, go ahead. This tells its own story, I don't have to comment further on. The Slave/Master thing boils down to something simpler than all this: do we want to rule ourselves or be ruled? Platonism he attacks insofar, as he points out that "too many, the herd, want to apparently be ruled" and do not want to step up to empower themselves genuinely, or fear doing so. This should not stop the affirmative spirit from reaching for more positive notion of ethics and politics. But if we don't fight for this affirmation, stand up to tyrannical ideas in an unbounded way, then we shouldn't scratch our heads at why we will remain slaves. Trivially, he speaks of honesty as recognizing power as the main currency of human: let us not kid ourselves here, the people that run things will continue to shape society's identity. To be able to affirm, we have to struggle to reach the child's "holy yes", but to do so, he thinks it inevitable that we've got to become Lions first. Whereby the Lion's "No!" is but means to the child's eternal unbounded "yes" as an end, and in no shape or form primary to him as your copied quote suggests. That's just plain wrong. The "Yes" remains primary throughout, but we have dirty work to do, is more accurate. And this grates with Platonism, in that he fears it lacks "lion", to achieve the affirmation it pertains to stand for. A "Yes-Person" without power is a slave to him. This makes people uncomfortable even today, I guess. This is no contradiction for me with Platonism; rather he updates its affirmative quality and relativizes its "we don't know, so we won't move" aspect; the donkey aspect of Platonism for him. Yes, he announces the Dionysian affirmation that no negation can defile BUT in less primary terms he denounces the affirmation of the platonist donkey who doesn't know how to say "No!". Nietzsche doesn't attack "human reason in itself" as your quote unwittingly states, he attacks blind faith in the reasoner: "go out and dance a little, loose yourself, get a bit high, make some sweet love, will ya, before you take yourself too seriously?" seems more accurate to me, than this platitude of attacking reason, like some highschool punk, via argument in transparent trivial contradiction. If the writer of the quote makes Nietzsche out to be that stupid, I rest my case, that your quote is ideological concerning Nietzsche, never having understood the kind of reasoning I am pointing towards. Cowboy, Jamaican Lion Style :) On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 3:10 PM, Roger Clough wrote: > Hi Platonist Guitar Cowboy > > You're welcome to endorse Nietszche's attack on reason, but I can't see > how anybody could be > a platonist at the same time. Consider this (apparently by somebody else > sympathetic to Nietzsche's views): > > http://groups.able2know.org/philforum/topic/1803-1 > > > "In his book The Geneology of Morals Nietzsche attacks what he calls slave > morality and advances what he calls master morality. > Platonism, to Nietzsche is a version of slave morality and Nietzsche goes > on to call Christianity "Platonism for the people". > Slave morality is a morality which holds the good to be the highest point > that humans could reach for and master morality is > a morality that is created by the elite, aristocratic group within society > and this master group holds the masses of the people > under its inevitably oppressive rule. The masters of master morality make > the rules because they alone have the capacity to > be responsible. Nietzsche goes on to say that slavery in some sense or > another must exist if any society is to approach greatness. > The 'good' for Nietzsche lays in the hierarchical structure which gives > absolute power only to those few who are capable of wielding it: > the top most tier of the aristocratic hierarchy are the people who give > meaning and value to the society, > they are identical with the society's inner identity. > > But there is more to the story. Nietzsche also attacks the modern > philosophical systems such as Kant's. > He accuses philosophical system builders as being purveyors of slave > morality (Spinoza is excepted from these). > > Nietzsche essentially attacks human reason itself as being a front for > Christian ethics. > He attacks reason viciously. He states that great men don't need reasons > for their behaviour. > He equates human reason, as exemplified in Plato's dialogues and modern > philosophical systems, > with slave morality especially identifying them with Christianity. Here he > breaks very clearly with > Enlightenment philosophy. And almost all later, influential philosophers > agree with Nietzsche in his > placing psychology and power over the use of human reason. " > > > > Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net > 11/7/2012 > "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen > > > - Receiving the following content - > From: Platonist Guitar Cowboy > Re
Re: Re: Re: Re: Is Nietzsche's shade wandering in platonia ?
Hi Platonist Guitar Cowboy You're welcome to endorse Nietszche's attack on reason, but I can't see how anybody could be a platonist at the same time. Consider this (apparently by somebody else sympathetic to Nietzsche's views): http://groups.able2know.org/philforum/topic/1803-1 "In his book The Geneology of Morals Nietzsche attacks what he calls slave morality and advances what he calls master morality. Platonism, to Nietzsche is a version of slave morality and Nietzsche goes on to call Christianity "Platonism for the people". Slave morality is a morality which holds the good to be the highest point that humans could reach for and master morality is a morality that is created by the elite, aristocratic group within society and this master group holds the masses of the people under its inevitably oppressive rule. The masters of master morality make the rules because they alone have the capacity to be responsible. Nietzsche goes on to say that slavery in some sense or another must exist if any society is to approach greatness. The 'good' for Nietzsche lays in the hierarchical structure which gives absolute power only to those few who are capable of wielding it: the top most tier of the aristocratic hierarchy are the people who give meaning and value to the society, they are identical with the society's inner identity. But there is more to the story. Nietzsche also attacks the modern philosophical systems such as Kant's. He accuses philosophical system builders as being purveyors of slave morality (Spinoza is excepted from these). Nietzsche essentially attacks human reason itself as being a front for Christian ethics. He attacks reason viciously. He states that great men don't need reasons for their behaviour. He equates human reason, as exemplified in Plato's dialogues and modern philosophical systems, with slave morality especially identifying them with Christianity. Here he breaks very clearly with Enlightenment philosophy. And almost all later, influential philosophers agree with Nietzsche in his placing psychology and power over the use of human reason. " Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 11/7/2012 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Platonist Guitar Cowboy Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-11-06, 11:45:47 Subject: Re: Re: Re: Is Nietzsche's shade wandering in platonia ? Hi Roger, If you want to read him that trivially, go ahead. The constant, eternal revaluation of all values. This is just implied by asking "what's going on?". And yes, this is gently consistent with never ending platonic questioning + a popper style negation, even humor, on his own statements, that they are wrong, that they not be overly concretized. Nietzsche never "taught his own ideas", although he was active academically very early. If you'd open a single page, you'd see how conflicted he was about the transmission of fruits of introspection. But I wouldn't want to offend you with any of that, or that I think he anticipated the computer + its consequences more than once, as you already have made up your mind in a rather discriminatory fashion without reading the man/machine in his native language, so... I am not merely a platonist: also guitar cowboy and dance and jam in every realm I can and keep my platonism in check with my sense of groove and swing +? good steak, now and then. I have a taste for the Dionysian joys, for colors, and richness, variety as much as I love Platonia. But Platonia, in this abstract technical sense you imply, is pretty joyless and dull. Nietzsche is good antidote for that. On Kant he mused once: "What kind of a soul must build such an unassailable fortress of thought? What is it distracting itself from, building these labyrinths of descriptive power for a group of disciples it will never admit to itself, that it vainly wants to have? For why else build such fortresses?" For these reason I'd suggest for you to not read him, especially not in German. Right on with "garbage he taught", would be the first thing he'd admit and laugh. PGC On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Platonist Guitar Cowboy So what ? I have no stomach for the revaluation of all values and the other garbage Nietzsche taught. If you are truly a platonist, you would agree with me. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 11/6/2012 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Platonist Guitar Cowboy Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-11-06, 10:35:15 Subject: Re: Re: Is Nietzsche's shade wandering in platonia ? Hi Roger, So what? On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Roger Clough ?rote: Hi Platonist Guitar Cowboy By poet, I suspect that Bruno was attesting to Nietzsche's ability to think in terms of metaphors (such as Apollo and Dionysius i
