The Value of Philosophy - Bertrand Russell kzread.info/dash/bejne/gYV7paWbnsfPh6w.html

@marketccess1

5 жыл бұрын

Thank you for this probing and thought-provoking posting. Though I don’t always agree with Russell, it’s pure pleasure to listen to the clarity and precision of his analysis.

@martenforsberg7359

5 жыл бұрын

Then someone answers with details, as in not understanding the wole picture. Didnt he say this or that? Like it matters. And even what he said - what that what he ment. People say things to get a message sent. Saying can someone use a metafor without being said they mean it...

@jamesreagan8808

4 жыл бұрын

Interesting!

@jimix8575

4 жыл бұрын

@@marketccess1 If you don't agree on Russell about philosophy it means you are probablly wrong. You probablly have read lots of books by Nietzsche and classical philosphy and you prefer to give value to your effort.. don't you?

@franktodd3247

3 жыл бұрын

Very nice upload. Many thanks!

“Are they the mere power fantasies of an invalid?” Oof that one stings.

@grosbeak6130

3 жыл бұрын

Stings to who? You're the one who's making this statement, so did the quotation somehow sting you?

@grosbeak6130

3 жыл бұрын

@@BeardLAD go back to sleep. Look at your own irony here since you're using that word.

@eastwood1941

3 жыл бұрын

It stings because it's true.

@rongvang6037

3 жыл бұрын

@@BeardLAD "hilariarse"? Do you mean hilarious?

@narcissesmith9466

4 ай бұрын

Such a small attack

"Aristocratic anarchism" - That basically sums up Nietzsche's world view accurately enough. Solid insights from Bertrand Russel here.

@jcavs9847

Жыл бұрын

a contradiction in terms. I guess this makes it a good fit for a nietzschean ideology

@juvenalhahne7750

4 ай бұрын

Que aliás anda meio esquecido também. Ultimamente vem sendo lembrado como um apêndice ou nota de roda pé de Wittgenstein. Ah, a moda! Da minha parte, aprendi um bocado com ele quando jovem!

@ghfudrs93uuu

2 ай бұрын

I'd add "Aristocratic anarchism for boring people", Sade made a much more honest and compelling argument for the same thing a century earlier.

Russell was such a wonderful, extraordinary person. I'm grateful to have such smart, kind people to look up to

@gforce4063

2 жыл бұрын

Make a god of no man

@Baggydawg1

2 жыл бұрын

@Vebunkd As gross as that sounds, I don't think that would be a bad idea, with what we're doing to other people, and the earth, currently. Might I add that should such a bizarre hypothetical ever become possible, I'd volunteer myself (and everyone I cared for) amongst the first on the cull list. Mali principii malus finis.

@AlbertAlbertB.

5 ай бұрын

These words encapsulate the very essence of slave mentality.

@Sure-wj1vf

5 ай бұрын

@@gforce4063I agree that worshipping people is not good, but this person only says they look up to him. Looking up to someone does not necessarily mean believing everything they say and unquestioningly following them.

@artlessons1

2 күн бұрын

I suggest you look inward, not upward, to an academic who never left the mountaintop to go down into the valley.

“HIs opinion of woman, like any man’s, is objectivication of his attitude towards them”.. Damn. Preach that shit Bert

@Chris_T_3rd_Ward_504

Ай бұрын

Well, it’s not like Nietzsche was wrong 🤷🏽‍♂️ Just imagine if he could see what Western females have become _today_

Thank you for uploading!

Very interesting, informative and worthwhile video.

"Just look at these superfluous people! They are always ill, they vomit their bile and call it a newspaper. They devour one another and cannot even digest themselves"-Nieztche

@charliemorris2338

4 жыл бұрын

He said the strong should drive their oxcarts over the bones of the weak and infirm.

@julesseyer1993

4 жыл бұрын

Different times in different eras would dictate philosophical views. To "run over the bones of the weak and infirm" would be to deny our humanity. Humanity is what distinguishes us from the animals

@goognamgoognw6637

4 жыл бұрын

@@julesseyer1993 There is absolutely no qualitative differences between human and animal only gradual differences. Evolution did not one day spit out a man out of nowhere that from then on could no longer be called an animal. Evolution does not proceed from magical apparitions. To think so, as your belief does, is childish, immature and even stupid.

@julesseyer1993

4 жыл бұрын

@@goognamgoognw6637 I agree that humans didn't magically appear. And yes it was a evolutionary process. I never said otherwise in my comment. However unlike other animals we are capable of abstract thought. Coexisting with one another by a consensus of behavioral norms. This we have societies capable of building great cities and industry. Language, science, mathematics, and yes even philosophical views. Some of which I do not share...like you're dogmatic approach to the philosophy of others or their ideas. I wonder if you have any ideas of your own. Or do you just plaggerize the work of others, and FEEBLEMINDEDLY try to pass on it off as your own ???

@jamesreagan8808

4 жыл бұрын

Puzzling you should subscribe it to Evolve! How well did that revolve for Fred, say in his upper fifties? Who was the rib? To claim something other than broken!

Fascinating. Way back when, I held the same opinion about Greek philosophy. I thought that way to. After reading so much of the pre-Socratics, and at the time, I kinda felt that pretty much the basics had already been done by the time of Socrates. It's simply been all pulled apart since then.

This is a chapter from Russell's "History of Philosophy" wherein each chapter is a philosophy.

@clockywork

2 жыл бұрын

@Jason Carpenter how so?

@LuisRios-bf9vn

2 жыл бұрын

I found this book for 25 cents at the flea market

@LuisRios-bf9vn

2 жыл бұрын

@Jason Carpenter still a good book what have you done

@LuisRios-bf9vn

2 жыл бұрын

@Jason Carpenter so what do you recommend I should read since your a very intelligent person

@spencerstephens7594

2 жыл бұрын

@Jason Carpenter You do sound like a student of Nietzsche 😂

I really like the idea of Nietzsche and Buddha having a sassy argument.

“For my part, I agree with Buddha as I have imagined him”

@jamesreagan8808

4 жыл бұрын

Seems our souls individually is where solace is to form itself! Journeying back at facts points back at near one conclusion, support and orienting towards getting "One" done! Shame pointed towards its resolution! It must be conviction!

@grosbeak6130

3 жыл бұрын

@@jamesreagan8808 oh stop it.

@jeffbogue4748

3 жыл бұрын

Jesus is the only way to make heaven your home

@dickmonkey-king1271

2 жыл бұрын

@@jeffbogue4748 Who the heck is this Jesus fella? Honestly, every comments section these days it's 'Jesus this' and 'Jesus that'... what's the big deal? Does he have a website? Instagram?

@matias12381

Жыл бұрын

@@dickmonkey-king1271 The Christians created the Magna Carta, the Scientific Method and Capitalism. Pride is the highest essence of atheists, because their economic, political and scientific systems are non-existent.

My favorite part was when he called Nietzsche a sycophant of the aristocracy. Or that the woman would take his whip and turn it on him. Damn, son! Shots fired.

@daviddawson1718

4 жыл бұрын

Tell us what you really think, Bert

@malikialgeriankabyleswag4200

3 жыл бұрын

He says there is an aristocracy if character, of which you're enobled by valiant and resolute suffering.. And was definitely not a collectivist by ANY means and would not have approved of any kind of attempt by a Nation State to design society by their interpretation of his books. He said his books are NOT for the many.. And the State is Vile. Russell was dealing with PTSD from the Wars that's why hes talking like this

@mikebb6639

3 жыл бұрын

Russell got a lot right, but the whip went over his head.. upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b7/Nietzsche_paul-ree_lou-von-salome188.jpg

@faithlesshound5621

2 жыл бұрын

Nietzsche lived in 19th century Germany, which was over-run by aristocrats and artists, many of them sickly from tuberculosis and/or syphilis. How many of them dreamed of trampling over the weak? His fans probably love Machiavelli and de Sade too.

@jefftheriault5522

Жыл бұрын

No, the woman would take the whip away before he does something thoughtless with it.

Have been reading Nietzsche for almost fifty years, and I still read and admire him. There are times, however, when he seems to be very much a lost Incel of the 19th Century.

@smkxodnwbwkdns8369

2 жыл бұрын

Why read the same philosopher for years? Haven’t you got his ideas already? Why not broaden your mind with other writers?

@scissors320

2 жыл бұрын

@@smkxodnwbwkdns8369 idk why you’re assuming that he hasn’t read about other philosophers lol

@baronmeduse

2 жыл бұрын

@@smkxodnwbwkdns8369 Some people can be read over a long period and change as you change and understand better. Often when you think you've 'got the ideas', you usually haven't.

@Abebe345

2 жыл бұрын

@@smkxodnwbwkdns8369 I'm guessing he does, and wants to reassess the original writing as he consumes more?

@Nothing_to_see_here_27.

2 жыл бұрын

Use of the word "incel" after more than fifty years of living? You must be joking so hard here.

so many ppl do not try to better them selves personally today.

The best style of writing in german language.

The typical academic’s misunderstanding of Nietzsche in a nutshell.

@user-lv8rn6vy3h

Ай бұрын

Hahahahahahahaha I like you ahahaha

@AyamineMISC

11 сағат бұрын

What do you mean by misunderstanding, I'd like to understand, as your post imply it's relatively common. At that point, what is stopping me from replying with "As opposed to the understanding of a youtube user?". I am genuinely curious.

I was expecting the worst when I began to read Beyond Good and Evil. At first I thought 50% fascist and 50% good. The 50% bad went done to 40% then 30% and so on until it almost dissolved. Nietzsche in his writing goes beyond his own ideologies. His female housekeeper asked him why he wrote so nastily about women; he took both her hands in his and said, "You must not believe what I write."

@juliusgroot4702

4 жыл бұрын

And he was lying to her

@dragonmartijn

2 жыл бұрын

Most people so also most women suck in the eyes of Nietzsche, notable exceptions are Lou Salomé and Cosima Liszt.

@omp199

2 жыл бұрын

Perhaps he meant, "You must not believe what I write, because if you do, you will stop working for me, and to be quite frank, working for me is the sole purpose of your existence."

@felixdevilliers1

2 жыл бұрын

@@omp199 -o. I now from my sudies of Nietszche that he meant it. e like being provocative and and said e hated literal truth and prerred to feel free to lie.

@omp199

2 жыл бұрын

@@felixdevilliers1 If you accept that he was not straightforwardly honest with people, then why would you believe that he was not misleading his housekeeper?

“Category: Gaming”

@GreenGiant400

3 жыл бұрын

@@notWaldont Nietzsche was an incel hundreds of years before people knew what that was.

Thankyou Bertrand, absolutely brilliant.

8:16 there i needed to stop to start watching slower understanding what a great pearl of internet i just found Halfdead hidden God bless you for adding this The greatest Polish of all time.

so interesting to hear this after Jordan Peterson. Russell does not sugar coat or soften Nietzsche at all

@longshotkdb

5 жыл бұрын

absolutely. do you think _peterson_ is intellectually dishonest? deliberately misrepresenting _nietzsche_ to those who have never and most probably will never read him ...

@spiralsone

5 жыл бұрын

@@longshotkdb I wouldn't go that far. I like Peterson a lot, but with a grain of salt and care to double check what he says. he is overconfident of his own beliefs, but is also very right on in a lot of areas too. his view of Dostoyevsky is solid.

@Kitties_are_pretty

5 жыл бұрын

​@@spiralsone He is certainly a fine practitioner of post-neo-modernist platonism, but his problem is he nests all of this within a Nietzschian psychological dynamic that ignores the Jungian frameworks we all base our framatistic perceptions on: he is the Jungian archetype of the nomad - parsimonious, ephemeral, quixotic. More a metaphysical mind than a man - but perhaps he can't escape his own Jungian expectations to see the platonomodernistic forest for the trees. And all of this is nested within a solipsistic antwork weaved into a logical fabric that we have to use to understand the world as it is.

@spiralsone

5 жыл бұрын

@@Kitties_are_pretty is this how you speak to people face to face? good god.

@Kitties_are_pretty

5 жыл бұрын

​@@spiralsone No, of course not. I never speak that way. Jordan Peterson on the other hand is only capable of speaking that way, so I thought you might like it. I guess not. Honestly I don't know why you didn't like that as it has all the ingredients of a Jordan Peterson paragraph. Namedropping philosophers constantly without actually talking about what they believed. Adding "post" before random words and "modern" after others. Beefing things up as much as possible with flabby, flowery language. Making large unjustified claims. It has almost everything.

It's important to keep in mind that Russell is commenting on Nietzsche based on bad translations and editing available before Walter Kaufmann (sp?) in the 1950s and 60scorrected a lot of the past mistakes. Also, Russell was (understandably) strongly influenced by the fallacious Nazi adoptions of Nietzsche's catch phrases. enabled mostly by Nietzsche's sister's misappropriation of his writing. Nietzsche delighted in pushing ideas that were intentionally open to interpretation, he was the philosopher of 'what if', he was intentionally contradicting and metaphorical. There is a lot to disagree with, most of which he would disagree with too. He also wrote how to be a philosopher is to essentially be proclaiming subjective and autobiographically revealing opinions; he often wrote of his regrets about some of the more cruel things he wrote, especially about women, that he attributed to his own rage and hurt from rejections.

@nik8099

3 жыл бұрын

Yeah I was gonna say if Nietzsche was sexist, but I guess later he he realized he made that mistake.

@jordanbell4736

3 жыл бұрын

Russell could not read ancient greek fluently, so some passages of Nietzsche he would need translated. But he could read and write German at a fluent academic level.

@theshoes7488

3 жыл бұрын

@@nik8099 he wouldn’t care if people thought him sexist. Sorry English

@thomaswilliams1129

3 жыл бұрын

@@nik8099 Nietzsche was undoubtedly sexist and racist, he just wasn't an anti-semite. Russell's take (in the history of western philosophy) is famously not a great piece of Nietzsche scholarship

@montymonto6430

3 жыл бұрын

@edward young How do you know Russell read "bad" translations of Nitchez?! Russell was fluent in German and did not need to read bad translations. You think someone as brilliant as him would be influenced by Nazi adaptation as you call it? Have you considered why they adopted Nitchez ideas? Why didn't Nazis adopt Schopenhauer or other German philosophers?! Why is it so wrong to just say Nitchez was a piece of sh*t just like Hitler? Why apologize for him so sincerely and justify his bad ideas with mumbo jumbo?

ty for CC

Amazing!!!!!!!

"in 1888 be became insane" that made me laugh, like he made a conscious choice to go crazy.

@view1st

2 жыл бұрын

Some say it was due to syphilis, others that it was due to brain cancer.

@gforce4063

2 жыл бұрын

@@view1st Some say

@suumcuique4530

2 жыл бұрын

I have the feeling there are moments in everyone’s lifes where we can choose a path more likely leading to insanity and one less likely leading to insanity. but in that case nietzsche choose a path more likely leading to insanity very early in his life. of course it is questionable if we have the freedom to decide which path we go and it is questionable if nietzsche was conscious about the risk of the path he was going to take …

@nickregan2874

Жыл бұрын

The word became doesn't imply choice.

@personalsigh

Жыл бұрын

@@nickregan2874 Alan Partridge shrug gif

Marvelous, concise & so needed in these trying times

@AL_THOMAS_777

11 ай бұрын

🙌 👏 🙏 🤝 👍 he always thought for us all in ADVANCE . . . .

The most amusing feature of this video is the subtitles!

Damn, this is so good.

Although I shudder at the ruthlessness of Nietzche's ideal, he sure was a powerful and unique poet and visionary.

@WAZZA1235

2 жыл бұрын

Well, he kind of liked the unique minded. If you have a passion and belief that you believe from the bottom of your soul, you should follow it, even it makes you the enemy of the world. This was a part of Nietzche's superman. And this is something I can understand. Every self understanding individual finds himself in opposition to the herd of people at some point in his life. Nietzche pretty muchy was waring against the herd's anger and telling you to keep moving forward, even if the herd hated you for your convictions.

@AL_THOMAS_777

11 ай бұрын

🙌 👏 🙏 🤝 👍he was for sure the TRUE guardian for all rare and noble few souls . . . creaving for a NEW life . . . utterly away from the dumb crowd/flock

@joejohnson6327

10 ай бұрын

He had an extremely exaggerated sense of his own importance for someone who was a total loser at life.

@justaguy7732

10 ай бұрын

@@joejohnson6327bro never looked up the “things influenced by Nietzsche” article on wikipedia

@diegonunez1486

8 ай бұрын

@@joejohnson6327As opposed to the more noble self loathing most people have? And usually losers at life don’t end up being amongst the most influential people in history

This is fascinating and has helped me understand Nietzsche more than I did, so thanks.

@TheDonkeyHot

Жыл бұрын

rather misunderstand him. Bertrand had a lot of weird and superficial interpretations of Nietzsche's figurative, metaphorical concepts, also neglecting Darvin's influence on Nietzsche's way of understanding terms like Nobleness, Aristocracy and Individualism. Also Nietzsche never considered War in it strict and literal meaning, proclaiming only happiness, lightness and freedom which might not be found in religious doctrines he always criticized, which as itself during human history led to great deal of wars.

@AL_THOMAS_777

11 ай бұрын

@@TheDonkeyHot 🙌 👏 🙏 🤝 👍 simply a GREAT comment mate !! You most certainly are a true "lover" of Fredericks work . . .

Incredible

Seen this on a Star Trek episodeq. The guest was Recardo Montelbon.

Let’s not overlook the humour in Neitzschean maxims: ‘woman - young; a cavern decked about: old; a dragon sullies out’

@AL_THOMAS_777

11 ай бұрын

Now, compare this, to the average professors lecture on Nietzsche - and to add more credit, this is Russell's personal interpretation, not a patched copy paste.

@PIC18F

6 жыл бұрын

I agree with your first and third sentence. For your second, and don't know. It is his opinion after all - so I don't know if opinions can be wrong by definition. I think that several people will have several different opinions of my thoughts after all. Thanks for your reply.

@Wkkbooks

6 жыл бұрын

This is not an interpretation. This is a hatchet job.

@jonashjerpe7421

4 жыл бұрын

You cannot compare Bertrand Russell and the average professor. Bernie was on no way, shape or form an average philosopher or man. Do you often make silly comparisons in order to end up with an undisputable conclusion? Bernie never did.

@Zorkmid123

4 жыл бұрын

@@Wkkbooks Yes Russell’s writings about Nietzsche were particularly innaccurate.

@Zorkmid123

4 жыл бұрын

@@jonashjerpe7421 Nietzsche was not an average philosopher either. And you are the first person I ever heard call Bertrand Russell “Bernie.” I don’t know if he ever used that nickname. Maybe he did.

I remember the foreword in my copy of Bertrand Russell's History of Western Philosophy. (probably a dutch translation, I cant quite remember) From what I recall the philosopher that wrote it praises russels analysis in general and in particular of the classic period, but also warned that Russell was a man of his time too and that he got more biased regarding philosophers of (or close to) his own time. Particulary Nietzsche.

Perhaps Nietzsche’a idea was to martyr himself philosophically and present the most extreme set of ideas on the other end of the compassion scale, against which all others can be measured. Nietzsche seems to restrict himself to man whose only spur for action is the inclination to predate or dominate. This reduces man to a force of nature, as opposed to a conscious being with a sense of reflection. His moral “suffering has no meaning” is very profound. And Russell’s interpretation is very helpful and masterful.

@ghfudrs93uuu

3 ай бұрын

I don't think so. It is not like his ideas existed in a vacuum. People say he is not a political thinker, but you can see the politics of his time all over his work. He was responding to the much more pacific version of man put by illuminism and german idealism. His predatory idea of humanity is not that far from Hobbes. Difference being that he saw a constructive value in it, opposite to Hobbes who just wanted to contain it. He was asserting aristocratic values over any sort of egalitarian philosophy.

Thanks for adding this - loved it, Russell is brilliant.

@ahcensoufi9923

3 ай бұрын

Not on his analysis of an actual brilliant guy I'm afraid. A mere projection of his own twisted leftist poor ideas.

As someone who went through university, I'm very disappointed that I am unfamiliar with much of what is being talked about. Less so with the university, but more so with primary and secondary education.

4 жыл бұрын

Youre an idiot. Must have at least a masters..

4 жыл бұрын

The "education" system is more concerned about indoctrinating children on sexual dysforia than the 3 Rs. And unlike the guilds of old where one is trained to excel at something and supplement with the other scholastic fundamentals; the "modern" just makes one generally shitty at generally everything.

@laidbare819

2 жыл бұрын

@faust p Maybe he should start by spelling his name properly first before having an opinion 🤷‍♂️ It aint just a word but a name and if you will quote such half nonsense then spell his fxxxing name correctly first you brats. NIETZSCHE.

@apollontheintp3257

2 жыл бұрын

@@goognamgoognw6637 And these days he is in oblivion because he is a white man. Btw, what do they actually teach these days in philosophy classes in the US? Anyone left?

@goognamgoognw6637

2 жыл бұрын

@@apollontheintp3257 they give scholarship to brainwashed youth to 'study' and validate degenerate theories of gender and rewriting history against white people (when really most evil in history came from banking thugs). The western spiraling down in moral stems from a minority of intelligent evil thugs controlling the currency printing presses. As long as they have that, they can corrupt anybody by cutting funds. All battles are pointless as long as they have that power and they know it.

You can add "Savage Music Critic" to Nietzsche's resume.

I prefer happiness for the sake of happiness and what happiness is but not what is not happiness.

This sounds good. I may give Bertrand Russell's book a go one day.

@goognamgoognw6637

4 жыл бұрын

Yes it's good but only as a journalist, not a philosoph. He is like a fly that circles around Nietsche's system of thoughts trying to scrutinize, taste it and do an autopsy but has no ideas of his own to oppose. The modern philosoph assumes he can just be an observer and synthesize others but it's not the proper way to oppose ideas. He will be forgotten while Nietzche's ideas won't.

I can almost admire Nietzsche for being an unironic supervillain.

@AL_THOMAS_777

11 ай бұрын

@tangerinesarebetterthanora7060

9 ай бұрын

He was no more a villain than a hero but your comment gave me a chuckle.

@TheJustinJ

8 ай бұрын

If you follow the logical conclusion of his general take on philosophy you will see that indeed he is/was a villain. To the extent you convince another person to do evil you are also evil.

@Flux_40

8 ай бұрын

all crooks try to justify their immature self importance.

@deaddocreallydeaddoc5244

8 ай бұрын

@@TheJustinJ So Christianity and its "teacher" Jesus are totally evil.

Only I could say is and it would side with nietzsche's view I believe but it's the idea of competition, like sports for example? Competition can be "cruel" sometimes but it's amazing when you push the human body mentally and physically against other people.

I don’t know who Stoica Nicusor is, but I like his reading of the thoughts and words of Bertrand Russell. I don’t like that Russell smoked a pipe, but admit that I have smoked quite a few in my time, and that I am also a peacenik, and have always loved the peace lovers throughout history. It seem’s like Putin is an admirer of Nietzsche, and the suffering of the plebs means nothing to him…that he considers himself a great man altering the course of history. I hope he can be put in his place by peaceful means.

I ADORE READING

@quin2392

2 жыл бұрын

Good for you 👍🏼

@8nansky528

2 жыл бұрын

@@quin2392 good for u too

My goodness this is quite brilliant. This marks the day I became a fan of Bertrand Russell.

@Johnconno

6 ай бұрын

You'll come to curse that day.

@narcissesmith9466

4 ай бұрын

the word "brilliant" is nonsense

here a Nietzsche follower, and no professor Russel, it is not coming to and end

@vp4744

4 жыл бұрын

Can you write a simple declarative sentence properly? WTF are you saying?

@paulsotelo4010

4 жыл бұрын

can you be polite for one fcking time in your life?

Thank you!

I read Beyond Good and Evil 53 yrs ago at age 16. Huge influence on me but in some ways made me too confident.

@mercutiomurphy2743

Жыл бұрын

Why would you regret having been confident

@worldorthoorthopaedicsurge6147

Жыл бұрын

@@mercutiomurphy2743 Just too confident at times when I should have been more cautious.

@AL_THOMAS_777

11 ай бұрын

WOW ! I began with it almost 25 years later. I simply had NO overtime before . . .

I sincerely hope you would, at least, provide the source of this audio, book, etc.

@StoicaNicusor

6 жыл бұрын

Here's the complete version bit.ly/2w9ormO

@colinsilver1041

6 жыл бұрын

Stoica Nicusor Thank you, you awesome person.

@edwardjones2202

6 жыл бұрын

Colin Silver He does a chapter on hím in "History of Western Philosophy" i think ...

@hugglewrumpf

6 жыл бұрын

Stoica Nicusor “link not found”

@hugglewrumpf

6 жыл бұрын

Colin: good idea. Please search and share with us. The link given is broken.

Nietzsche had serious health problems for much of his life and struggled mighty with his Danish Publisher Brandies to promote Book Sales and earn Money via lectures to keep his head above water financially. He walked his talk, applying his Will to thrive through great adversity. We hear much of Nietzsche Philosophy, little about how he lived his life.

@griiseknoen

2 жыл бұрын

Like so many believers in the idea of übermenschen and untermenschen - he thought of himself as an example of the former, but in reality more resembled his own definition of the latter.

@michaelmcgarrity6987

2 жыл бұрын

@@griiseknoen Despite serious health problems, Neitzche continued a gruelling Presentation Schedule for Years. From Denmark to Italy his Show was on the Road, filling up mostly University Auditoriums. Whatever people may think of his Philosophy, Nietzsche himself was an incredibly Tough and Willful Person.

@michaelmcclure3383

Жыл бұрын

@@michaelmcgarrity6987 and what happened, it all broke down at 45 under the immense strain? There is much I truly dislike about Nietzschian thought, but I do admire his yes saying in spite of incredible adversity.

@michaelmcgarrity6987

Жыл бұрын

@@michaelmcclure3383 He was tough. I don't know how much of his Kool aid he really believed in. I have a Book of Correspondence between Nietzsche and his Danish Publisher Brandies. There's nothing about Philosophy in the correspondence. It's mostly about Chaotic events in Europe at the time such as the Burning of Prague. Making Money off of Book Sales and Speaking engagement ticket seems a full time Job for Fred. Through all the Correspondence, I've never seen Nietzsche gripe about any of the serious Issues he had. He kind of bucked up and Walked his talk. I shall dig up the Book and read it again. Europe appears to be heading into a Crisis period again. Maybe there are Rhymes of History to be found? I personally find Nietzsche Philosophy hard to understand. I've been through Geanilogy of Morals a couple times and find it very cryptic. Perfectl to Hawk speaking engagements to explain what it all means and sell Merchandise.

Does anyone know where this recording is actually from? I would love to hear Russel read the rest of the book.

I wonder if Bertrand Russell got his Nobel Prize for looking smart in KZread comments-

@ishmaelforester9825

6 жыл бұрын

He didn't. What's your point?

@XXX-tw6zm

5 жыл бұрын

@@ishmaelforester9825 you made it for him...

@vikare7849

4 жыл бұрын

Russell seems like the type of guy that likes listening to himself talk, reminds me of Richard Dawkins

@mator2339

3 жыл бұрын

@@vikare7849 absolutely not. Far more smarter than Dawkins. Read his principia mathematica, treatise on logic.

Splendid...

Make no mistake concerning his premature death: The hostile church he hated so much sent him an infected whore. He was killed by design . . .

Thank you so much

This is such a one-sided, sophistic interpretation of Nietzche which was constructed only in justification of the Nazi ideology. For example, the dialogue Russel constructs of what Buddha would supposedly say in response to Nietzche was often exactly what Nietzche himself preached (i.e., of loving your enemy, which he described as noble in Thus Spoke Zarathustra). Meanwhile, Russel presents Nietzche as consistent (at least moreso than Schopenhauer), while his inconsistency might be in fact the most consistent thing about him - this itself could have made a better rebuttal, but Russel completely missed it.

My boy Bertrand sounds a bit scared of this fear-driven Nietzsche, no?

@AL_THOMAS_777

11 ай бұрын

He was a VERY secret (very hidden) DRAG QUEEN ! -> Fear of Fredericks shere masculinity !!

works well on x0.75 speed. well enough to keep up.

Ahhh Freddy N, the 19th century's very own Gamergater.

Thankfully one of the few accounts of Nietzsche that doesn’t uncritically accept his philosophy but dissects its weaknesses. And it does acknowledge some of its predictive strengths.

@AL_THOMAS_777

11 ай бұрын

🙌 👏 🙏 🤝 👍 but mind you: Even so called "weaknesses" could be occult (hidden) s t r e n g t h s !!!

Nietzsche read the Aeneid, the Odyssey, the Iliad, all the old songs of heros and monsters. Than he looked at the men of his time, their weakness their vices. And than, he came to greatest question of all time "What happened to Garry Cooper, the strong silent type?!"

@supdude6968

Жыл бұрын

I heard Gary cooper was gay.

@moviereviews1446

3 ай бұрын

Guy was an interior decorator

‘If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?’

Very instructive! For me, the heart of Russel's analysis is to be found here: King Lear on the verge of madness said : "I will do such things, what they are yet, I know not, but they shall be the terror of the Earth". This is Nietzsche's philosophy in a nutshell. It never occured to Nietzsche that the lust for power, with wich he endows his superman, is itself an outcome of fear. Those who do not fear there neighbors, see no neccessity to tyranise over them. Men who have conquered fear have not the frantic quality of Nietzsche artist tyran and heros who tries to enjoy music and massacre while their hearts are filled with dread of the inevitable palace revolution. The thing that Bertrand Russell fails to see is that unsatisfatoriness, cruelty and an appetit for destruction is at the heart of every dynamic, vibrant healthy nations. No nation or empire were ever built on compassion and pardon. These are good values for established societies framed by laws and administrative forces which are the ossified remains of true free energy and vitality. Nietzsche isn't concerned with maintaing our society as it is. And for our enjoyment, he's pointing in a new direction, which is a breath of fresh air compared to the same abramanic religion overworn soporific themes. You can build on love though. Love is the only all encompassing positive value. I fall for Buddah's conclusion. I believe Russell's insight that Nietzsche philosophy is built on fear, which makes it a little less appealing to me now. Nevertheless, all evolution on a path or another is made of destruction, and wether anyone likes it or not, humans are full of love but also the most vile, cruel and unforgiving of all creatures, which is confirm everyday by our position in the natural order of thing nowadays. Very few philosopher dwell on the violence contained in human nature. Nietzsche is one of the few who acknowledge our darker qualities to show a path that is probably closer to the real human nature and which makes innumerable aspects of his philosophy still very appealling, modern and topical to this day.

@HorukAI

2 жыл бұрын

Nietzsche power is not power over someone, but only yourself.

@AL_THOMAS_777

2 жыл бұрын

@@HorukAI You made my day ! He is a real friend. . . writing to strenghten the individual - opposed to the group !

In the end, Nietzsche will defeat them all no matter what "criticism" they offer. Fifty years from now, Nietzsche will be proven mostly right and be alive, and no one will really know or study Russell. After I read Nietzsche, and read other "philosophers" or "thinkers" I realized my time and effort to understand things would be much better spent re-reading Nietzsche. All subsequent "writers" (whatever the hell that really means) and their topics, Nietzsche treated them much better, deeper, and ANTICIPATED them by a century!! The point is to take the time over and over and over to UNDERSTAND Nietzsche. Take a "simple" issue, the VALUE and UTILITY of Truth; and examine it and see where it leads, it's incredible how deep he goes into it in ONE paragraph!! STARTING WITH WHAT "IS" TRUTH.

@jamesreagan8808

4 жыл бұрын

Perhaps your finial analysis of truth falls off on its consequences that rest only with shame to truthfully underpin it! Without emotion one could hardly claim Human! I hope that this has not fallen as permanent upon You Man!

@ggrthemostgodless8713

4 жыл бұрын

@@jamesreagan8808 "I hope that this has not fallen as permanent upon You Man!" ??? What is "this" in your sentence?? And wherefrom is it "permanent"? Do yo mean "this" as in what you imagine my beliefs are??

@jimbo43ohara51

4 жыл бұрын

You may be right, there is no doubt Russell's value judgements are entirely misplaced and misleading. Let the reader form his own opinions, without this Continental vs British bias.

@ggrthemostgodless8713

4 жыл бұрын

@@jimbo43ohara51 The search and seeking of truth by itself is a horrible thing to face, it will make one grow somehow, though it is and might be an extremely "ugly" finding for our ears and minds in the soft modern eras. A person doesn't have to LIKE the truth, but he must recognise it and accept it if truth is what he or she is after. He wasn't kidding when he said he is dynamite!!

@ggrthemostgodless8713

4 жыл бұрын

@@dancingbanana627 Yes you can READ both, but you cannot accept both. Not without obvious contradictions and judgement, one is deep the other is deepest so far. No other thinker philosopher even comes close, or I would love to hear WHO is deeper than N. in fact I have been waiting and looking for those. In a sense you can find deeper and furthering concepts but not in philosophy, but in other areas like film or good tv series treating the sinful concepts of the recent past, the sinful concepts of the antiquity past have already been proven wrong or useless. Thus exploring the utility of sin and truth or falsehood is a great starting point if you don't go too far into relativism. Nietzsche says if you're going to think you're going to have to make judgements, there is no other way to live as a self aware being.

Anyone who thinks a mustache should resemble some kind of shelter has lost it.

i like views of nietzche which are expressed in the video....

Who was more afraid? Who’s philosophy was predicated more on fear? One feared weakness above all else, while the other feared power. Both fears are necessary in balance.

@ghfudrs93uuu

2 ай бұрын

The true words of someone who doesn't know two craps about Russell. His philosophy little has to do with fear and power.

I have read lots of Russell but this is an introduction to Ntetzche which is very good!

@avocatiasilungudragos9600

6 жыл бұрын

Read Nietzsche.....an than...you don t need to read any other philosophers....It seems that Nietzsche read all the literature from all time !! Was helped by his first profession - philologist. In relation to this profession he says (in Ecce Homo ......? - A medium-sized philologist has to scroll through 200 books a day ! - Of course....that doesn't mean ,,read 200 a day" but he seems to read all greek - latin - french ....and many other (The laws of MAnu..) both philosophical and other fields - psychology .... literature ... poetry ... I know that seems incredible.....But anyway -- he has a beautiful and powerful writing ... I started to read B. Russel - The problems of philosophy...It s ok until now...I have great expectation....Because Nietzsche opera was stopped arround 1890 ....an i want to what is after that.....I know - at first time i thought - How can someone to say ,,read Nietzsche - it's enough - he cover up all..." ??(because someone told me the same...and i was distrustful. I thought that is necesary to read all authors and than to compare.....On the other hand - it is impossible to read all the authors...I don t know - Maybe that science, philology has a secret method .... With shame I admit I'm totally unknown this science...

@Zorkmid123

4 жыл бұрын

Chandra Raj This is a terrible introduction to Nietzsche. Few misunderstood Nietzsche as badly as Russell.

@osculocentric

3 жыл бұрын

Neitzche's ideas were inspired by the laws of Manu from India. He even stole the words like Tschandala (to describe a lowly person) which was a derived from the word 'Chandala' used to describe the untouchables or shudras in Hinduism. Neitzche's ideas were completely delusional and no doubt only a person like Hitler could only resonate with him. Manusmriti has already been disregarded in India and has proven to be an inefficient philosophy if the ultimate goal of it is for human progress. Ambedkar has written an excellent critique on his ideas. velivada.com/2017/06/02/dr-babasaheb-ambedkar-said-nietzsche/

@peterfarrell66

2 жыл бұрын

@@osculocentric Thanks for the link but it’s not much of a critique. It just says his ideas were co-opted by Nazism and how members of his family supported Hitler. 🤔 I certainly agree with you that Nietzsche’s philosophy was a cartoon of an elitist paradise, written by a virgin bookworm who hated his own weakness and dreamed of being a wise, strong soldier and leader.

Nietzsche and his enthusiasts are a bit like holy books and their readers: he's to be taken literally when it suits, but not when it doesn't.

@ahmadaam12

4 жыл бұрын

jonathanjonathan You do realize that you're acting exactly like what he describes Nietzsche's fans to act? Lol

@SoiBoi_Kelda1059

2 жыл бұрын

Well, few literary matters are to, or not to, always be taken literally

@AbAb-th5qe

2 жыл бұрын

He's only a man with opinions that reflect the culture at the time. Why should anyone be considered to be flawless?

I've read some of the comments & realise I'm not qualified to comment. ..i like to think of Russells narration or his thoughts as the number one comment by far .....

Thank you

Random thought. Has anyone considered the possibility that Nietzsche was influenced by William Blake? In "The Marriage of Heaven and Hell" Blake says, "Prisons are built by stones of law, brothels by bricks of religion" which sounds a bit Nietzchean. Blake also said, "One law for the lion and ox is oppression" which definitely sounds Nietzchean.

@houdinididiit

5 жыл бұрын

Actually it is well known that Nietzsche was highly influenced by Ralph Waldo Emerson. But what no one seems to talk about is that Emerson was greatly influenced by India’s masterpiece the Bhagavad-Gita! In the Gita the main lesson is the ending of duality. Food for thought

@rustyjohnson5018

5 жыл бұрын

He was inspired by Emerson for sure.

@charliechaplin7959

5 жыл бұрын

Nietzsche and Emerson both greatly admired Montaigne. Nietzsche specifically singled him out for praise and Emerson wrote an essay about him called The Skeptic. Did Nietzsche ever mention Emerson by name?

@deathwarmedup73

4 жыл бұрын

In "The Marriage of Heaven and Hell" Blake says, "Prisons are built by stones of law, brothels by bricks of religion" which sounds a bit Nietzchean. i think it sounds a lot better

@leomitchell4907

3 жыл бұрын

@@charliechaplin7959 'Praises him as a master of prose in the Gay Science and makes an epigram for the same book out of a quote from his History essay. Needless to say Nietzsche held great admiration for him and alot of his ideas of the overman, academics and christianity ressemble what is seen in Emerson's essays (Nietzsche's copy of the first and second books of Essays is still extant with many marginal notes). Although he makes more reserved claims of Emerson in his later work he was very infuential for his early life

by far the best analysis of Nietzsche I've ever come across, and thanks

Thank You

Looking at this comment section. Good to know I'm not the only one who has the urge to go full on gibrish mode after listening to Russell for half an hour

19:25 - that's an interesting point

@johnjustice8478

2 жыл бұрын

Jeez, that's a funny username, you've got! Really funny. Hahaha

@Unfunny_Username_389

Жыл бұрын

@@johnjustice8478 Was it the 389 that got you?

What a magnificent language. I have Russell's book in my possession and I intend to read it upon my graduation from PhD 🤣🤣 (the second sentence is my poor imitation of Russell's academic style, lol)

@apollontheintp3257

2 жыл бұрын

It's a normal sentence

@Timmerdetimmerdetim

2 жыл бұрын

nice

Very insightful.

Frederick for sure is the TRUE guardian for all rare and noble few souls . . . craving for a NEW life . . . utterly away from the dumb mob/crowd/flock. . .

@AL_THOMAS_777

9 ай бұрын

Ha ha, hows that NOT going fore me . . . .

@AL_THOMAS_777

9 ай бұрын

@@MitchJacob-ur6fp Counterquest: have you ever read Frederick ?

Nietzsche was precisely against this British style sentiment. It's explained painfully clearly in his books, and would come as no surprise to him. Bertrand Russell is proving that even as an atheist, he is capable of defending Christian values.

@ishmaelforester9825

6 жыл бұрын

In a way, so did Nietzsche. His philosophy ends up a tremendous atavism and re-imagining of radical and original Christianity.

@BobanOrlovic

6 жыл бұрын

That's a funny observation and you're right. Russell is the typical victim of Nietzsche's rants, even down to being English.

@ishmaelforester9825

6 жыл бұрын

Of course the late Nietzsche has the ridiculous notion, as he puts it, 'I uncovered Christian morality.' That is patently absurd. There is nothing in earlier Nietzsche that is not in the profounder Christian psychologists - many English divines - apart from the atheism. The truth is you can take or leave God; if what you say is relevant or true, it simply is, no matter how you say it. Christianity is a mere formality, a sort of fashion: there were English Christians saying much of what Nietszche considered his great insights centuries before, if not in the same dress. Russell had a similarly foolish conceit, as though he were some kind of great moral vanguard because he decided there was no essential principle of being or God. Neither of them understood original Christianity or the metaphysical symbolism of the Bible anyway as is patently obvious from their writings.

@ishmaelforester9825

6 жыл бұрын

People overrate modern philosophers on ethics and psychology a) because of a prejudice against religion and God, and b) because they have simply not bothered to read the Christians. I can read Earles, a devout Christian from the seventeenth century, and find a great deal of Nietzsche at his best in his witty asides. I am being deadly serious. Not that Christianity is true, only that modern rebels are deluded in their pretensions to stunning originality and insightfulness when it comes to history or human nature. But nobody reads the likes of Earles anymore.

@ishmaelforester9825

6 жыл бұрын

I like Nietzsche, I admire Nietzsche - Zarathustra is one of the great books - but the slavering over him of English readers is absurd. Russell does not really understand him but I cannot help but enjoy his near contemptuous dismissal; it is almost fitting considering the ridiculous hype and overrated reputation Nietzsche has somehow accrued, and more especially Nietzsche's own laughable pretensions in his late works. I have come to understand those declamations as the sprouting of the illness that turned him into a vegetable. They are certainly not worthy of the younger Nietzsche.

I wonder if someone can help with my confusion... Russell says that from Nietzsche's perspective "In a fight of all against all, the victor is likely to possess certain qualities which Nietzsche admires, such as courage, resourcefulness and strength of will. But if the men who do not possess these aristocratic qualities (who are the vast majority) band themselves together, they may win in spite of their individual inferiority. In this fight of the collective *canaille* against the aristocrats, Christianity is the ideological front, as the French Revolution is the fighting front. We ought therefore to oppose every kind of union among the individually feeble, for fear lest their combined power should outweigh that of the individually strong." However, my understanding of Nietzsche is that he takes the opposite view of Christianity; that it produces servile individuals, content with characteristics that should be rejected as vices, promoting them as virtue. So what is it? Does Christianity produce of class of beta men, who value weakness (as meekness), servility (as forgiveness). Or does it, coversely, produce the ideological basis upon which lesser men may - as a collective - overthrow their masters? My understanding is the former, but Russell seems to argue the latter.

@DuncanL7979

5 жыл бұрын

I don't see them as mutually exclusive concepts. An ideology could produce both weak individuals and a cohesive, strong collective.

@k20z3keith7

5 жыл бұрын

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe he does view Christianity as a weakness but more so a will to power. How he describes holy men as the ultimate power seekers. They want to be God

@AL_THOMAS_777

11 ай бұрын

@@DuncanL7979 🙌 👏 🙏 🤝 👍

Can you list in the description the date of the recording so it can be determined if this perception and analysis is pre WWII, pre other early/mid century events that should have colored his analysis.

@otto_jk

4 жыл бұрын

It's post second world war because he mentions the concentration camps and their existence was known/fully comprehend only after the war.

Bertrand Russell clearly is not a Dionysian

@dbass4973

2 жыл бұрын

also a sophist who speaks in half-truths which is even worse. imagine being as arrogant as to put own thoughts in Buddha's mouth

@mindinnocent5930

Жыл бұрын

Russell hated Nietzsche so much that he betrayed his own moral belief by creating a divine court while himself is an atheist.

@AL_THOMAS_777

11 ай бұрын

@@mindinnocent5930 One look at Russel is enough for me . . .

18:03 maybe except Goethe!

@johndowns3839

4 жыл бұрын

He also liked Emerson. Whitman has Nietzschean elements, but with the hatred drained away.

We are now in a world where only the fittest can survive. With Nietzsche I may resist my fate, whereas with Russel I may end up as an object of others' will.

@shovonhasan7404

3 жыл бұрын

best comment

@kazkk2321

3 жыл бұрын

Why and how? This is an interesting comment.

@kumarmangalampatravali660

3 жыл бұрын

@@kazkk2321 I thank you for the reply! The very fact that you and I are "using" KZread bears a testimony for the fact that we are being in some sense "objects of foreign will". I mean it in a broader sense.

@aminaaminabb7897

3 жыл бұрын

​ @Kumarmangalam Patravali Yeah , that's might be righ ,but when talking about Nietzsche in the long run of history , his envious and tyranious way of thinking will lead to distruction not construction .Everyone will care about himself ,but we forget that there is the upcoming generations whom will have to take the message up .I like russel when said that the task of Philosophy is to explain the world rather than giving answers .Whenever we attempt to give answers we endup with an disastrous ideology ,in fact ,devastating.One when he or she is reading to Nietzsche has to be critical and not go blind.

@kumarmangalampatravali660

3 жыл бұрын

@@aminaaminabb7897 Thank you for your interesting reply! I never said to follow Nietzsche blindly.

from where is this taken?

I'd love to have seen Bertrand Russell debate Christopher Hitchens...

@GeoPePeTto

Жыл бұрын

Why would they debate? Maybe having a conversation, you mean?

Shocking to see a thinker as effective as Russell deconstruct the great Nietzsche like this, but also very sobering.

@oxytocin1989

2 жыл бұрын

It’s lowered my opinion of Nietzsche tenfold. I think his theories on morality are impressive, but his conclusions are simply very caught up in the trend of Darwinism (which he didn’t fully grasp, but the gist is there)

@macbrewster9977

2 жыл бұрын

@@oxytocin1989 It's also easy to get caught up in Nietchze's obvious passion, especially for younger people looking for some philosophical model to appropriate. But I now believe that Nietzche's physical illness and rejection from women colored his thoughts a bit too much. I think many of Montaigne's Essays (which I'm currently now re-reading some of) are much better for young people to try and digest, especially today.

@gforce4063

2 жыл бұрын

@@macbrewster9977 Really

@statu-palma-barba-cot3075

2 жыл бұрын

1. Russel: `I agree with Buddha as I have imagined him`. Thats one way to say I agree with myself, or with my own imagination. 2. In this analysis of Nietzsche, Russel refers only to the ethics of the former, and utters not a single word of roots out of which this ethics grows, that is nietzsche's philosophy of the wholesome, undivided and unconditional love of life. He was not capable of understanding it. Russel was still a pleb in his soul, despite being a `Lord` in title.

@macbrewster9977

2 жыл бұрын

@@statu-palma-barba-cot3075 1. Russell asked if each of these arguments "could either appeal to the impartial listener" and that "I do not not know how to prove I am right" so it was just an experiment. 2. I think he understands and agrees other than essentially valuing moral happiness as the superior happiness.

Bertrand is very clear and his criticism is accurate to his knowledge. Today would yield even more support for the fact that success of races, nations and individuals have been proven to be primarily due to proximity to opportunities and not some innate superiority. The worship of "winners' is seriously misplaced, then and now. The idea that the warrior or billionaire "winner" with their obsessiveness, ruthlessness and lack of empathy represents an ideal we should strive to attain is just wrong. This stance doesn't mean one is pro-Christian values, on the contrary, much of Nietzsche's critique of Xtianity is accurate and agreed on by Russell. But science is now adding to our understanding of what makes for healthy minds and healthy cultures. Clearly Nietzsche was a tough talking sycophant of the "winners" and the world he promotes makes little sense as an ideal. Besides we no longer live in that type of world. Ours grows smaller and other humans are our primary environment. Nietzsches condescension of women says everything about him. He refuses to except the environmental factors leading to the situation and then blames the less fortunate instead of recognizing that the "fortune" is the primary factor in everything he wants to place the praise and blame on the "will" of the individual. Like Christians blaming sin or New Agers blaming your karma for your plight. Yet he is blind to the fact that the "will" is just another environmental factor of "fortune" which can be changed. As Russell points out, Nietzsche is arguing from an emotional place, not a factual one and in my opinion puts him closer to the religious argument than a rational one. Russell points out the difficulty in supporting the opposing idea, but today there is much more weighty information.

@michelangelope830

2 жыл бұрын

The success or lack of victimhood of humanity, the little there is, is due to honesty. Honest societies are knowledgeable, prosperous, wealthy, healthy, happy. Being honest is understanding that in a race only one can win regardless of effort or natural capabilities therefore being successful is doing what you can with what you got for the wellbeing of life impossibility possible miracle God. I think therefore i exist, therefore i was created or always existed and the creator was created or always existed, therefore impossibility possible miracle God exist. I have discovered the nature of God and i can prove my claim collapsing mortality rates and skyrocketing life when my theory is known. Would you accept as a miracle the saving of infinite lives? We are God, ourselves for eternity til endless death when all life die.

"As I grew weary of the search and chase/I learned to find/And since the wind blows in my face/I sail with every wind." ("The Gay Science")

Nietzsche did not smoke (or drink), and saw such escape methods as crutches that prevented a person from reaching the Übermensch. Therefore Nietzsche gave up the lesser for the greater addiction; he may as well have smoked.

@donthesitatebegin9283

Жыл бұрын

He didn't need to smoke to look cool, the moustache spoke volumes! You may not have the looks, you may not have the cash, but you'll win your share of girls, if you only have a moustache!

@AL_THOMAS_777

11 ай бұрын

It is rumored though, that he had a whole bunch of SEVERE medications in his toilet . . .for his "migraine- headaches " . . .

This was back before many of his undoctered writings were recovered and released. It was mostly right but on the Jewish thing...he actually talked about the jews being superior to the Germans, his longest lasting best friend was Jewish, he basically unfriended Wagner because of his Christian semantics and his antisemitism. He called Wagner a jew both comparing him to the original immerging of Judaism which he thinks corrupted the morality of the masses, and to poke fun at Wagners own antisemitism, which neitzsche abhorred. He loved his sister dearly but then basically disowned her after she expressed antisemitic views for a while and then married a prominent antisemite. Also he jokes and intentionally shocks riddles and SOMETIMES definitely says the opposite of what he means. He very much so PLAYS with opposites. Or he might say WORKS with them....I don't know of any other philosopher that can make almost anyone feel inspired, comforted, and connected yet also feel discouraged, uncomfortable and alien. There's something there. It's hard to cast aside and my main problem with what russel says is his complements...I do not see nietzsche as that cohesive or systematic. He constantly talks shit about his last book in every book. He's very organic and open to contrarys.

@NordsMcGourds

2 жыл бұрын

strong and thoughful analysis. Thanks!

@gaminawulfsdottir3253

2 жыл бұрын

I was looking among the comments for someone to point this out. Thank you for commenting.

@gforce4063

2 жыл бұрын

FOff

@mazdakite2826

2 жыл бұрын

There's actually recent work that challenges the view you're putting forth, which was first introduced by Walter Kauffman in the 50s and 60s. Much of the 'doctored' work, was penned by him, most especially the WIll to Power--one of his most race focused work. He just never got to finish editing it before he went insane. The main argument his academic apologists raise is that he went on to reject the views of that book while he was still lucid.

@mazdakite2826

2 жыл бұрын

The hatred of liberals, socialists, and misogyny, have never been really doubted at any point though, to my knowledge, at least.

Russell and Nietzsche were in essence dealing with double edged swords, as all philosophers must. The idea of universal love is double edged since loving an enemy can enable him to continue his brutality . But herein lies the a potential synthesis: it is in HOW we “love” our enemy -tough love may be the solution . To abandon an abuser may wake him up. The aristocracy theme too is a double edged sword ⚔️. How can N both so beautifully liberate us from ourselves yet also agree with a slave master Paradigm ? Mediocrity can be found in both slave and master , as well as brilliance . Herein lies my attempt at synthesis: new education models that incorporate all ways of learning, more freedom of self exploration , more hands on project oriented learning and reverence and care for the natural world as a key component of curriculum . I am afraid that as much as N steered his readers from dogma he at times created a new one breaking his own rules . As with his views on women pettiness is often a symptom of early childhood deprivation of authentic education and religious programming . Another double edged sword he wielded at half the worlds population. I call this double edged sword the mechanistic vs organic (spontaneous) view of human experience.

@tranglomango

2 жыл бұрын

Very well said

@abcrane

2 жыл бұрын

@@tranglomango thank you

Awake-state of being is a higher level of consciousness. The ego is a zombie-like state of unconscious. A method to awaken is through Spinoza’s acknowledging of our understanding: great effort is required for its improvement. WayofSpinoza.com #Gurdjieff #Spinoza #Einstein

@thenowchurch6419

4 жыл бұрын

Lewis Almeida. You are into Spinoza and Gurdjieff. Good stuff. Ever looked into Emanuel Swedenborg ?

could you give the name of the narrator?

I'd rather hang out with Bert over Fred any day.

@AL_THOMAS_777

11 ай бұрын

You are just a coward. A real "homme" with testicles would hang out with BOTH of them !!

Nietzsche is the heavy metal of philosophy and is fun to read. He's fuckin' nuts, though. Russell's ideas make sound moral and logical sense, and I would love to see them fully implemented in society. Nietzsche's ideas? Uh...not so much.

@benjaminr8961

2 жыл бұрын

Coward.

@WiseOwl_1408

2 жыл бұрын

@@ArtistinDeadlight777 seems extreme.

@andrjuska9556

2 жыл бұрын

Interesting, because I found Nietzsche, although often provocative and may be even radical at times (especially in his later books), to be quite logical and spot on especially concerning the human psychology. He was far, far away from being 'nuts' if we exclude his unfortunate fall into madness in the last stage of his life.

@AL_THOMAS_777

2 жыл бұрын

@@andrjuska9556 👍👍👍

@nathanielhellerstein5871

2 жыл бұрын

@@andrjuska9556 "If". How insane was he before?

Source please.