PDA

View Full Version : Nietzsche on God



dianna
30th March 2014, 21:20
Nietzsche Made God His Bitch
By Gary ‘Z’ McGee
http://www.wakingtimes.com/2014/03/30/four-ways-nietzsche-made-god-bitch/



“We stumble on; the Übermensch plants a foot where there is no certain hold; and in the struggle that follows, the whole of us get dragged up.” –William James



http://www.critical-theory.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/nietzsche-god-is-dead.jpg

Friedrich Nietzsche ... a fascinating philosopher ... for his audacity alone. And his ruthlessness was no joke. Knocking gods off pedestals was second nature to him. With merciless glee, he stormed in where other philosophers feared to tread. Through poetic prose, brutal honesty, and venomous wit, he brought us a way of thinking that still has people’s brains doing backflips in their heads and their hearts doing somersaults in their chest. A God-fearing man probably couldn’t get through a single paragraph of Nietzsche without collapsing into a fit of: “Blasphemy!” this and “Satan incarnate!” that. Not realizing that there is gold gleaming in the darkness of his words and unaware that his surfaced soul is a brilliant diamond shining in the rough texture of his prose. So in honor of that God-fearing man pitifully writhing on the floor, and with a healthy dose of mockery, here are four fascinating ways that Master Nietzsche made God his bitch.


Anti-Christ Superstar


“One must not let oneself be misled: they say ‘Judge not!’ but they send to Hell everything that stands in their way.” –Friedrich Nietzsche


Nietzsche was the original Antichrist. He wrote the book on it, literally. The Anti-Christ was a smash-mouth, no-holds-barred grudge match between Nietzsche and Christianity. And Nietzsche came out of it with nary a scratch, while all of Christianity lay bleeding and bruised at his blasphemous feet. For decades fundamentalist Christians reeled from the merciless body-blows dealt by the tiny book that made the bible look like the Goliath to its David. Of course the Christians were eventually able to incorporate it all into their religion while conveniently ignoring this and expediently hiding that, and so the blind-faith machine rolled on, but they inadvertently spread Nietzsche’s gospel rather than squashed it, and so it is still very much alive today.

Some of the more delicious morsels in Nietzsche discourse were as follows: he spoke of the Christian God as a “… declaration of war against life, against nature, against the will to live.” Proclaiming that the Christian God was “… the sanctification of the will to nothingness!” and “…this entire fictional world has its roots in the hatred of the natural (—actuality!—).” Nietzsche opposed the Christian concept of God because it “…degenerated into the contradiction of life, instead of being life’s transfiguration and eternal ‘Yes’!” He declared that the Christian God was “… the sanctification of the will to nothingness!” Wow! Put that in your invisible pipe and smoke it, God.

God is dead!


“Whither is God? … I will tell you. We killed him –you and I. All of us are his murderers… What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festival of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it? There has never been a greater deed; and whoever is born after us – for the sake of this deed he will belong to a higher history than all history hitherto.” –Nietzsche, Parable of the Madman

With this bold declaration Nietzsche reached skyward, pulled God from his celestial throne, and in one fell swoop declared the now earth-laden body a corpse, bringing down with it the entire apparatus of institutional Christianity. Talk about audacious. It’s especially daring when you consider the religious atmosphere during the time when he lived. The man’s insouciance knew no bounds. He called it like he saw it, peer pressure be damned.

Later in the text of the Parable of the Madman, Nietzsche’s protagonist visits various churches saying nothing but:
“What after all are these churches now if they are not the tombs and sepulchers of God?”

The Übermensch


“Behold, I teach you the overman. Man is something that shall be overcome. What have you done to overcome him?.. What is the ape to man? A laughingstock or a painful embarrassment. And man shall be just that for the overman: a laughingstock or a painful embarrassment…” –Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

The Übermensch, or overman, is Nietzsche’s cosmopolitan vision of human excellence, his epistemological elite. In many ways he is the replacement for God, the courageously moral substitute for the pitiful decadence of the Christian deity. A self-actualized, fully individuated, enlightened master prepared to take on all comers.

More importantly, the overman has the power to pull the head of man out of the clouds and bring it down to earth. Nietzsche goes on to say, “The Übermensch is the meaning of the earth… I beseech you, my brothers, remain faithful to the earth, and do not believe those who speak to you of otherworldly hopes,” and, “Once the sin against God was the greatest sin; but God died, and these sinners died with him. To sin against the earth is now the most dreadful thing…”

It’s almost as if Nietzsche foresaw the calamity of our time, heralding the call of the overman for a future time when he would be needed to get us back in touch with Mother Nature, and to reconnect the severed umbilicus before it’s too late.

Perspectivism


“In so far as the word “knowledge” has any meaning, the world is knowable; but it is interpretable otherwise, it has no meaning behind it, but countless meanings.—Perspectivism.” –Nietzsche, The Will to Power

Perspectivism implies that no way of seeing the world can be taken as absolutely true. But it does NOT necessarily entail that all perspectives are equally valid (and so should not be confused with relativism). With this idea Nietzsche didn’t necessarily make God his bitch, but he did create a good tripwire to trip him up with. For if everybody has a different perception of the concept of God, however minute that difference, then God can never just be one almighty being we can all agree on, it can only ever be a smeared-out energy, at best; an idea or a conceptualization, never a definitive truth.

Nietzsche wants us to be honest with ourselves, and then with each other, about the fact that we are all interconnected, while at the same time we all have our own personal experiences. There are over 7 billion people on this planet, and every single one of us has a different psycho-physiological reaction to any given stimuli. Our “reactions” to things are as unique as our own fingerprints. If I say the word “fork” it creates a different psycho-physiological reaction (however minute) in you than it does in me, than it does in her, than it does in him. We all have different experiences, different memories, different ideas, regarding the concept of “fork,” even though we can all agree that we’re looking at a fork. The same thing applies to everything: a spoon, a tree, the concept of love, even the concept of God. In the end, we just need to be brutally honest with each other: we’re our own gods. But, as Nietzsche warned, “Against boredom even gods struggle in vain.”

Cardillac
31st March 2014, 13:15
"Nietzsche Made God His Bitch"- everyone has whenever a religious belief system takes over human sanity!; even a denial of God means that one has an initial acceptance of the existence of God-

anytime a religion is politicized it becomes a political movement and no longer a religion; one then worships a political movement-

I'm a die-hard Agnostic and believe in a supreme positive force but NOT in the way it's portrayed by (above all) the three Abrahamic religions (which is why I don't 'do' Churchianity)- Nietzsche was a supreme intellectual but he extrapolates endlessly upon the negative forces around us (which I think are very valid) but ignores completely the purpose of our existance: LOVE-

obviously the negative forces around us do not want to achieve our goal but Nietzsche has completely ignored what the negative forces are trying to block-

Larry

crosby
31st March 2014, 13:36
personally, i feel that Nietzsche was way ahead of his time. he loathed the aspects of what humanity actually was and i believe he could see where humanity was heading. his extrapolations were perhaps based on the views surrounding him and what he felt was happening. being an intellectual of the highest caliper - why not challenge the systematic dogma in place? on love, he was quoted as saying this:

"Love has been falsified as surrender (and altruism), while it is an appropriation or a bestowal following from a super-abundance of personality. Only the most complete persons can love; the depersonalised, the 'objective', are the worst lovers (- one only has to ask the girls !)." ~Frederick Nietzsche

warmest,
crosby

Cardillac
31st March 2014, 14:16
@crosby

hey, crosby, I hope this finds you well- I agree with you totally that Nietzsche was way ahead of his time-

on your provided quote of Nietzsche (provided it was really from him) his concept of the most "complete persons" is up for debate: who is a complete person?: my personal take on this: only those who follow their heart/instinct and those who refuse to let manipulated society influence their true gut instincts;

of course Nietzsche was influenced by his environment (aren't we all?)- then throw in for good measure the bogus concepts of Sigmund "Fraud"; the validity of psychiatry is subject for another endless thread; I just feel both were cut from the same mould; although both have valid concepts on the earthly plain I just feel both have ignored (taught that?- both had "edumacations") the basic drive of the human race: love-

enough for now-

Larry

crosby
31st March 2014, 14:53
while it is true that Nietzsche's words for many are quite subjective, and up for debate, - (again, my opinion is just as well) - i believe the complete person never existed. the closest i can get in my mind is a child. i believe that he was very aware that it was an impossibility and that any lifestyle (even our personal take on the complete person) did not exist and that mankind needed to open his eyes to why this was so. what better way to smack a smirk off of somebody's face (like Frued) than to let them know (as he was certainly not shy about doing) that they ultimately mean nothing - and any allegorical speculations about life's true meaning that they develop are just that. developed to ease the traumatic pain of non-existence. just a thought. thanks for the great conversation.;)
warmest,
crosby

winston smith1971
1st April 2014, 19:18
We believe in God but does God believe in us? :angel: I Wish You Would Lyrics - Dj Khaled not my particular taste in music but a good line.;)

Milneman
1st April 2014, 20:44
There are, of course, problems with Nietzsche.

Oh no Dianna, I'm unpacking again. ;)

“One must not let oneself be misled: they say ‘Judge not!’ but they send to Hell everything that stands in their way.” –Friedrich Nietzsche

Uhm...pot, kettle, nuff said? ;) What a lot of people don't realize is Nietzsche started out a seminary student in a Lutheran seminary. And again, society in Germany...well it wasn't really Germany, it was a bunch of disjointed states with some things in common, but there was this incredible societal upheaval going on. Naturalism and the Enlightenment was starting to end, modernism was just starting, and people, especially philosophers (and prussian/german philosophers in particular) were struggling to come up with ideas that would help to bring some understanding to what was going on. Nietzsche in effect is trying to bring some understanding to why his world is collapsing around him, and in part, he's blaming the organized insert organization here. Church, State, Blah, Blah, und Blah.

Nietzsche was the original Antichrist. He wrote the book on it, literally. The Anti-Christ was a smash-mouth, no-holds-barred grudge match between Nietzsche and Christianity. And Nietzsche came out of it with nary a scratch, while all of Christianity lay bleeding and bruised at his blasphemous feet. For decades fundamentalist Christians reeled from the merciless body-blows dealt by the tiny book that made the bible look like the Goliath to its David. Of course the Christians were eventually able to incorporate it all into their religion while conveniently ignoring this and expediently hiding that, and so the blind-faith machine rolled on, but they inadvertently spread Nietzsche’s gospel rather than squashed it, and so it is still very much alive today.



Not entirely. Actually not at all. The late Bishop Fulton J. Sheen used to say that Nietzsche went mad because he violently offended Christianity...others pointed out it was syphilis, so he must have been living quite the immoral life; truth is he probably contracted it during the Prussian war. He was a medic...so as a soldier, he actually saw the raw, blood and bone brutality of war first hand not for a few days, but weeks..months...years possibly. Add this to his questioning, if there is a God how is it possible that this could happen, why would a God of Christianity ALLOW this to happen?

I hardly think he walked away from any of it without a scar. I also think the author of this article clearly needs to stick to writing fantasy novels. Confident people don't need to be worried about their faith, and here's why:

Nietzsche said there was only one Christian, and he died on the cross.

What Nietzsche failed to realize is that if he had really thought this through, it seems to me he could also say that the ubermensch could just have as easily been the one on that same cross. I bring this as a point of postulation, not as evangelization. Keep that in mind.

It’s almost as if Nietzsche foresaw the calamity of our time, heralding the call of the overman for a future time when he would be needed to get us back in touch with Mother Nature, and to reconnect the severed umbilicus before it’s too late.


Ja. Ja. and that's one of the reasons his sister actually tampered with Nietzsche's original writings. See, once Nietzsche pet the horse on a public street, collapsed, and ended up spending the remainder of his life in a padded room naked in his own feces, his sister, who was married to a proto-nazi, started to market his writings. Low and behold...along comes this little political party that later became known as the National Socialist Party of Germany and wonder of wonders.... His sister didn't live to see Hitler's rise to power, but she definitely did rise to the occasion to profit from her brother's works.

Nietzsche wants us to be honest with ourselves, and then with each other, about the fact that we are all interconnected, while at the same time we all have our own personal experiences. There are over 7 billion people on this planet, and every single one of us has a different psycho-physiological reaction to any given stimuli. Our “reactions” to things are as unique as our own fingerprints. If I say the word “fork” it creates a different psycho-physiological reaction (however minute) in you than it does in me, than it does in her, than it does in him. We all have different experiences, different memories, different ideas, regarding the concept of “fork,” even though we can all agree that we’re looking at a fork. The same thing applies to everything: a spoon, a tree, the concept of love, even the concept of God. In the end, we just need to be brutally honest with each other: we’re our own gods. But, as Nietzsche warned, “Against boredom even gods struggle in vain.”

Sooo....it seems to me that a universal category that is recognizable by everyone is less Nietzsche and more....hmm...I Kant remember his name. ;)

Here's the skinny. We come to these universal categories one of two ways. Evolution, or.....

The problem with evolution as it's generally considered to be understood in a scientific/naturalistic framework is that natural selection is an unguided process. Basicly a creature mutates, and if that mutation is beneficial it's passed on to it's offspring until the entire given population of that species retains that mutation, and then we start all over again. Simple right?

WRONG.

See the problem with an unguided process as detailed by Dr. Alvin Plantinga is that a random mutation doesn't really require thought of any kind to make that mutation significant. So for example, a frog flicks out its tongue and catches a fly. This is a process that was once a mutation, if we are to believe in the naturalist's evolutionary theory, and blam...fly dead, good for the frog. But the frog could be thinking any number off things. It could be thinking "ooo dinner", it could be thinking about metaphysics or quantum mechanics. The issue is not what the frog thinks: the issue is that given these criteria for natural selection being an unguided process, what the frog thinks isn't RELEVANT to it's evolution.

Which means if these categories, the ones people like Kant and Nietzsche believe we share, are a result of natural selection, then our ideas have a very low probability for being true: Naturalism + Natural Selection/Evolution = Defeater for Rational Thought grounded in our cognitive abilities: namely, those abilities that in great part we derive our experience in an empirical way...smell, taste, etc. In other words, any rational thought, including the idea that our thoughts might not be rational, has a chance (according to Plantinga) of being right in the range of 1:1,000,000 given this group of postulations.

So if you want to go along with the idea off the ubermensch, you better make sure that his coming about is guided by a rational, thinking being outside of the evolutionary process because in my understanding at least, it seems that would mean his cognitive abilities would be not very uber at accurate understandings of his surroundings at all!

Maybe that's the problem!!

Maybe we should be looking for the UberFrauline!!!

Your milage may very. ;)