|
In order to partially dissent and elaborate on a
previous comment yesterday about the "brilliant but controversial German
philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche".... JR echoed a commonly-heard PC (politically
correct) reaction: "Brilliant? In my opinion he was world-class jerk, and I
despise the notion "that suffering is good for people."
Ah...despise him if you must, but understand him first - isn't Übermensch (as FN envisioned it, not as the Nazi's distorted it) really the one-and-only 'final solution' to suffering... or would you have them (the little people) swell the blood-sucking "Idle-Rich-Class" and become the downfall of us all ? <big G> ...and just to be clear about how to best express quasi-cynicism in a vo-post, <big G> means an extra-large smiley - IOW "not to be taken at face value". Nietzsche was notoriously unread, even during his own lifetime, except by the other brilliant thinkers of the time. A list of his admirers reads like a who's-who of 20th century acumen. However, FN's ideas (in the geo-politics of the era ) suffered irreparable distortion in the hands of his own sister - who for her own purposes twisted his philosophy into full support for Nazism (Hitler had "Thus Spoke Zarathustra" issued to every soldier in the German army for a while). What a perversion! But not for the reasons you might surmise. Übermensch literally means "overman" but which is an earned (possibly engineered) achievement, not a prerogative of wealth or heritage [not to be confused with the man of steel, nor racial (Aryan) superiority]. The real perversion is that many of the Jewish thinkers of the time, and especially in Eastern Europe, were actually closer to the Ubermensch goal than their Aryan counterparts - its not about 'race'.... its about results. Side note - some of the Jewish intellectual superiority may indeed be a genetic "defect" which results in a mixed blessing. A team of scientists at the University of Utah has proposed that the unusual pattern of genetic diseases seen among Jews of central or northern European origin, or Ashkenazim, is the result of "natural selection" but for what - obviously not for illness but for enhanced intellectual ability, so treasured by this group. Very ironic in this revised context of "Aryan-inferiority", wouldn't you say? http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2005/06/researchers_say.php The rather short-sighted problem with any curt (but fairly accurate) appraisal of FN's misunderstood-elitism may overlook the fact that suffering is inevitable and endemic in a competitive animalistic world - and that "good for the individual" is far different from "good for the people" ... "people" being the species-ideal, or especially the emergent species (in an evolutionary sense). To overcome suffering in the long-term, we must elevate every individual to Übermensch - which is not the same as some kind of enforced suffering. And this is beginning to take on new meaning in the age of machine intelligence. Not to mention Übermensch is very, very ... neo-Buddhist in the post Zen tradition. Some of today's PC-problem with FN (for males) goes back to Bergson or to George Bernard Shaw, especially his well-known play "Man and Superman".... an articulation of the recurrent Shavian gender-perfectionist-theme: man being the "brains" and cerebral-substitute-creator, whereas woman is the earthy (are you really necessary?) life force which must always eventually triumph (and then denigrate the male) in an imperfect biological world. Very pre-Pygmalion-esque. GBS was called the "English Nietzsche" but that is inaccurate in details. Both were genius-level thinkers and cherished a similar dream of a "kind of Superman" but getting there was a divergent issue - Nietzsche being an aristocrat and Shaw the socialist. Both were possessed with enormous wit and intellectual curiosity masquerading as cynicism. Since GBS and his successors in theatre had the cultural imprimatur of most of us non-mutter-sprachers, the term 'Superman' has become hopelessly vulgarized.... even before Hollywood... and combined with Nietzsche's mis-identification with the Nazi ideal of racial "purification" - all this has come to mean that the no important figure in modern history has become so misunderstood as Nietzsche. Not that he was perfect.... he was not yet overman, just an aspirant. All the better, really... because Nietzsche... from the present revisionist-perspective... in the coming *AI-Age* which is not that far off - 10 years at most, will likely see an elevation to the penultimate level of admiration - but in a way he could have imagined. Ubermensch may become the new mantra for the next evolutionary jump (hybridized overman)... yet FN probably would have despised this further distortion. Nietzsche is/was an easy target - and has few admirers to set the record straight today, as in seeking objective truth, he has managed to alienate the left, the right, the working man, the priest, the atheist, the humanist and the libertarian. Almost everyone except the intelligentsia and the contrarian. The only problem is... he probably remains, after all is said and done, one of the most profound thinkers of all time and in a revisionist perspective may attain that status.... that is, if others will invest the time and effort necessary to read between the lines and understand what is meant by his objective perspective. Even scientists balk at giving up the cherished ideal of "species identification." To understand post Nietzsche revisionism, one must totally divorce oneself from the physical heritage of being biologically human - a representative of an animal species -99% ape. Hard to do as it throws science and religion into even greater conflict. Nietzsche's perspective, in its ultimate intent, should take us beyond mankind, and even beyond the human-overman - to the next evolutionary step, overman-plus?. The Wiki summary on the divinity-angle is not bad, except in its omission of the Buddhism connection: "Nietzsche's motivation for the claim 'God is dead' is the slow destruction of the real Christian conscience, i.e., a God-centered way of thinking." Only by breaking out of the idealistic but unrealistic norms can one aspire to become something greater. Tomorrow, Übermensch may evolve into something even old-Fred never imagined - a mix of biology and technology in one package. But the initial truth of Nietzsche's theology is that the church has become the exact opposite of what Jesus preached. Jesus preached love-not-war. The 700 Club, the immoral-majority in control of American politics, preaches war-not-love, guns-not-roses, and thinly-disguised racial hatred. According to Nietzsche, the reason behind this unholy situation with organized religion, and the historical events leading up to the destruction of the real Christian conscience, was initiated by the arrogant apostle, Paul. It was Paul who caused the perversion of Jesus' teachings into a remedy-punishment doctrine, who endorsed slavery and male superiority - problems amplified by Catholic Church which took up Diana-worship in the form of the Madonna, in order to compensate for Paul's obvious misogyny. All of this has become so layered and perverse - a man-made invention with the unintended side effect of enforced mediocrity in the guise of humanism - that there is no future for it (in FN's view). The only solution is to dump the old version - thus "God is dead" is misinterpreted and is not a call for lack of spiritual commitment. Zarathustra was the prototype for Nietzsche's overman - but what were the goals of that effort - then and now? The notions of "creative evolution" espoused by Henri Bergson are another impediment to understanding because of the Nazi backlash. If we want to breed a superior guard dog, say the Doberman [to keep things Aryan]... then to accomplish this - for many generations, one must cull-out and (if economics is an issue) put-down the lesser animals and save only the best - in order to force the breed towards the goal. Even if the "goal" is "cuteness" i.e. the lapdog, rather than prowess as a feared and obedient guard, the same "suffering" must be inured by the lesser of the species. We accept this with other animals but balk at anything reeking of Aryanism. Is there a middle ground or is this situation too polarized for any accommodation? Adding the semantically charged judgment "good" does not help in the ultimate evaluation. Either you want a superior breed (hybrid) or you don't. 'Good' and 'bad' are trite apologies for lack of will, according to Nietzsche. On that point he is decidedly correct.
Jones
|
- OT: Übermensch, Buddha and Superwench Jones Beene
- Re: OT: Übermensch, Buddha and Superwench Harry Veeder
