I got that Idea of "The will to power" in a way that is not so wild. This applies to Nietzsche in general. On the first glimpse his philosophy is intimidating, beastly, inhuman but on the second and third glance this can completely reverse... In this context "The will to power" rather means to overcome oneself than others. Overcoming others is secondary and just a side effect of overcoming oneself... If you see it this way, the will to power is something that helps to redeem the individual. The question for me, personally remains, whether Nietzsche admired personalities who took that burden to life free and cut a lot of bonds or whether he lived that too and had an insight over it as "being right". In other words: "Freedom of individual" vs. "Freedom of all". Nietzsche would argue, that everyone has full responsibility over his degree of freedom. Thus freedom equals strength. Strength to say "No" to a lot of things and persons. Strength to overcome oneself....

@soundandsophia

Жыл бұрын

That's definitely a good interpretation. Thank you for that comment. I will contemplate on it.

@bottomtext

Жыл бұрын

This is my interpretation of WtP as well, glad to see it in the comment section

This was brilliant. I love the GoT v. LotR analogy. To summarize: Everybody’s selfish, everybody’s narcissistic. But that’s okay because it leads to advancement and strength. Is this correct?

@soundandsophia

Жыл бұрын

Thank you! Glad you enjoyed it. Yeah, i really like the will to power to analyze conflicts. Because if you believe that your enemy is the devil, you will probably missunderstand him. Well yes, through the worldview of the will to power I would say that your statement is correct.

@haybuhay1994

Жыл бұрын

@@soundandsophia Thank you for the confirmation and please keep doing what you do!

@soundandsophia

Жыл бұрын

@@haybuhay1994 Thank you! I will. I really do appreciate the support. Makes me want to keep doing good videos.

@alwaysgreatusa223

Жыл бұрын

If everyone is selfish, then real generosity does not exist. Whatever one does is for oneself, and nothing one does is for anybody else. But how then did the idea of 'generosity' arise in the first place ? Where was its example in nature ? From what sense impression did it arise ? Or, is it an innate idea that everyone simply chooses to ignore ? Why would such a completely ineffective innate idea even exist ? Or, if it were simply the clever invention of some charlatan, why would anyone ever believe in such an idea in the first place ? Who exactly would this charlatan be fooling ? Who was his first fool ? Everyone that he walked-up-to and tried to trick with his fake idea 'generosity' would already be completely selfish, so why would they ever believe him ? NO, it would be absurd ! No completely selfish person would ever believe in generosity because he had no such inclination in himself by which he could accept such an idea as being in any way real ! The charlatan would fool NOBODY ! Suffice to say, in a completely selfish world, the idea of generosity would never exist in the first place.

@alwaysgreatusa223

Жыл бұрын

Of course, a half-hearted narcissist would find some comfort and justification in believing he was not all alone in his selfishness -- "everyone is just as selfish as me !" But your FULL-FLEDGED NARCISSIST wouldn't give a damn ! In fact, he'd pride himself on being the ONLY ONE on the planet who is STRONG ENOUGH and SMART ENOUGH to be COMPLETELY SELFISH ! To him, everyone is just among the herd of sheep, and he is the LONE WOLF !

Why isn’t this not viral!!!?

@soundandsophia

Жыл бұрын

Haha, Very good question! Maybe it will become viral. I have definitely noticed a change in the statistics. But thank you for the support!

The comments on war were interesting. there is a book called "War! What Is It Good For?: Conflict and the Progress of Civilization from Primates to Robots" By Ian Morris. This book talks about how war in the long run, has been a good thing for humanity.

@soundandsophia

Жыл бұрын

Interesting! Thanks for the tip. Wonder if he was inspired by Nietzsche? There is another book that I've thought about reading, it's called something like "the sexual cycles of war" and it too discusses the importance war. Oh well, there just too much to read....

Leave it to Kant to make a muddle of something as obvious and fundamental as the will ! The Will is simply the ability to control oneself.

@soundandsophia

Жыл бұрын

Hmm, I'm not sure that I agree. Willing to do one thing and controlling oneself to do it should be different things right? I mean, I can feel a deep urge or a will to do many things. But I choose not to do them because it would be bad for me. The more basic a word is the harder it is to define them precisely. And I wouldn't discard a genius like Kant, that quickly.

@alwaysgreatusa223

Жыл бұрын

@@soundandsophia I am certainly not discarding Kant, but he often employs a technical terminology that makes philosophy appear to be utterly abstract. Nobody was ever more rational than Socrates, but he spoke in a plain language, and whenever someone misunderstood him, he found a simple way to clarify his meaning.

@soundandsophia

Жыл бұрын

Good point. I'm reading a lot of analytics philosophy at the moment, and they certainly are guilty of what you speak of haha. All though, I kinda like it. But I do get what you're saying. I think it was Roger Scruton who said that there is something wrong with a philosophical idea if you can't explain in to a 12 year old in less than 15 minutes.

@alwaysgreatusa223

Жыл бұрын

@@soundandsophia I actually admire Kant and Wittgenstein and Nietzsche... My criticisms of them are always meant in a half-teasing way... But I do disagree with them.. However, just because I disagree with them, it doesn't mean they are not still all GREAT... I just have my own point-of-view... I think that's called 'philosophy'.

@alwaysgreatusa223

Жыл бұрын

@@soundandsophia From my point of view, you are confusing desire with will. I might desire to eat fast food, but I use the power of my will (or will-power) to eat healthy fruits and vegetables instead.

The Will to Power is definitely a metaphysical idea. But can it be proven ?

@soundandsophia

Жыл бұрын

Well, anything that is metaphysical, if you believe Wittgenstein, cannot never be proven for it a lies within the category that language cannot express. "Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent. What we cannot speak about we must pass over in silence." as he said in the tractatus. The interesting thing is that Nietzsche himself was very critical of any kind of metaphysics, all though "the will to power" has a metaphysical touch to it. who knows. maybe Nietzsche himself didn't believe in the idea 100%. He categorized himself as a poet. (Or I believe he used the German word "Dichter".) Which always gives us the problem of interpretation in his writings. And if I remember correctly he even spoke ill of the poets in one aforism. So what Nietzsche really meant with the will to power is hard to say. I've only given you one interpretation.

@alwaysgreatusa223

Жыл бұрын

@@soundandsophia yes, I know Nietzsche was critical of metaphysics... that's exactly why I made the comment... Like Heraclitus, Zarathustra always tries to have it both ways !

@alwaysgreatusa223

Жыл бұрын

@@soundandsophia Well, I certainly do not believe Wittgenstein... He always has a lot to say about 'what cannot be said' !

@soundandsophia

Жыл бұрын

Haha ouch, I love Wittgenstein. Oh well. But i will most certainly make a couple of episodes on him in the future.

@alwaysgreatusa223

Жыл бұрын

@@soundandsophia Yeah, Wittgenstein is Great.. he's just wrong from my view-point... But I am wrong from his... So, it seems philosophy is alive and well, after all, as the debate continues...

I'd like to invite you onto The Nietzsche Podcast for an interview. Interested?

@soundandsophia

Жыл бұрын

Wow, yeah! That sounds super fun! I'm definitely in.

Willen Macht is much more akin to "That which propels your will". Sure he mentions the concept of power at times, but the vast majority of his philosophy speaks of 'man as the evaluator'. That is not a power over others, but over oneself. This led to Jung's concept of being present - as most walk around completely unconscious - Nietzsche's herd beast... I hope that 'Will to Power' the work is not used (*I ask two questions: Can we tell what is FN and what is edit? Have you read all his notebooks as well? Having said yes to both I would agree to using the work, only in this case) that he himself did not want published is being used as the reference. Having studied Nietzsche for decades this is the worst trope I have seen. Also telling of those who have read his entire corpus, never mind understand it. Just beginning my watch, I am hopeful for a proper perspective of our propellants. * 9:20 Fred wanted us to revalue for ourselves - not he for us. * 10:30 - They substituted faith(Corinthians - faith hope and love(charity) for truth - but as Fred said - What is truth but agreement(also Will James) Faith shares meaning in Latin with trust - as Fred lays out the importance of - being a philologist this would be obvious to Fred and I expect he felt is should be obvious to us as readers. * 12:24 Yes! He says that we must create - Shatzen ist shauffen - Creation is, meaning is, is value - there is the true meaning of his... Like so many of his phrases - he says in German what can be read in a dozen ways - the translations say what the translator wanted to say. * 16:28 - This is an interesting take. I think it comes for the mistaken critiques of Buddhism by Fred, and the critique of Fred by people like Jung(in Liber Novus) - Fred felt there were far too few people who would live a life of selfless service for others. Jung and his friends felt that Nietzsche was not for the masses because of a similar strength of will that is required to carve your own path. This I feel is a misunderstanding of the sources that influenced these philosophers. The idea of charity is much more fully expressed in the Sanskrit - Dana - it is not blind or self harming charity - but a selfless selfishness that guides one with the understanding that we must all get along; to get along. Shakti in the atma if you will. A collective being in the personal being. Our soul is an interconnected force similar to the 'extra sensory consciousness' of William James's radical empiricism. That we are interdependent beings. Ripples in a lake. War is never good - never! The Baghavad Gita teaches this much more effectively that I could. The only true statement here was that if we were to work collectively we could accomplish great things. 'Great accomplishment' in Chinese is a hand grasping the moon - from the I Ching that influenced Jung. So the example is the moon landing(if you are not inclined to nonsense) as a great example of collective work without war... Read the art of war - first job is to win without a fight... Thus war is to be avoided at all costs. Please discuss this with a veteran before sharing such an opinion. War is never good, ever. Never. I believe, having read a dozen more quotes on war from Fred, that these are being read wrong. He speaks of war - but that is life - suffering - battle - war. He was traumatized by his experience in war - I cannot fathom he would be calling for hostilities - he only speaks to the tendency of man - and how in horror we see the best of us. Can we not see this growth without the tragedy? That is the question we must ask, a trans valuation of all values. * 17:10 oops, examples of the herd beast mentality on display - the solution is not blind faith(or trust or worse the 'truth' to some) the answer lies in millions of people having agency and doing the best they can, collective work individually - Fred did not despise socialism the concept - only the denial of the human instinct to ruin everything... As he said if we could all find a path that was beneficial to each other and ourselves - that is a selfish collectivism that makes sense. Unlike a blind faith in science, when they lack the action. The same hypocrisy is on display. Activists calling for people to avoid planes - only to burn more 'carbon' in their private jets than a small village. This blindness to optics has harmed the environmental movement more than any polluter could. Convictions being worse than lies as Fred said. The lesson here is not the lies and hypocrisy - the lesson is to realize that the hope in the solution is lost(like the loss of faith in God). We need to admit the failures where they are. Like Fred, and the kings on the back of an ass... Call it like we sees it... Or suffer the consequences: Personally and culturally.

@alohm

Жыл бұрын

Macht noun, feminine (plural: Mächte) power n (of) (plural: powers) Die Macht lokaler Politik wird unterschätzt. The power of local politics is underestimated. Er missbrauchte seine Macht nie. He never misused his power. Ein ehrlicher Politiker würde seine Macht nie missbrauchen. An honest politician would never abuse his power. might n Ein weiser Abenteurer respektiert die Macht der Natur. A wise adventurer respects the might of nature. strength n Der Löwe ist ein Symbol der Macht. The lion is a symbol of strength. force n Das Buch beschreibt die Mächte des Guten im Kampf gegen das Böse. The book describes the forces of good battling evil. sway n Wir wollen eine Demokratie aufbauen, um die Macht des Herrschers zu verringern. We want to establish democracy to reduce the ruler's sway. potency n less common: authority n · leverage n machen (etw.Akk ~) verb make (sth.) v (made, made) Ich mache eine Liste mit Themen für die Konferenz. I will make a list of topics for the meeting. Er machte mir ein verlockendes Angebot. He made me a compelling offer. Taktlose Fragen machen mich wütend. Tactless questions make me mad. do v (did, done) Als Kind musste ich immer meine Hausaufgaben sofort machen. As a child, I always had to do my homework straightaway. Man kann nicht alles auf einmal machen. You cannot do everything at once. render v (rendered, rendered) Salz und Pfeffer machten das Steak genießbar. Salt and pepper rendered the steak edible. perform (sth.) v Der Wissenschaftler machte ein Experiment in seinem Labor. The scientist performed an experiment in his laboratory. come to v (came, come) less common: go v

@alohm

Жыл бұрын

Willen noun, masculine will n Er trat dem Militär aus freiem Willen bei. He joined the military of his own free will. willingness n Willen noun, plural wills pl · intentions pl Wille noun, masculine will n Er trat dem Militär aus freiem Willen bei. He joined the military of his own free will. less common: wish n · intention n · willingness n · purpose n · volition n · mind n

@soundandsophia

Жыл бұрын

Whoops, alot to digest there. I'll see if I'll have time to properly respond to it all. But thank you for taking the time to write all that.

@alohm

Жыл бұрын

@@soundandsophia I enjoyed your video take immensely. I am of the Mortimer Alder school of learning - so I take notes as a way to integrate the content. It also helps to understand other perspectives, and sometimes see how often the context can confuse the intended meaning. I expect this might be a part here, but comments can often help illuminate the content. Similar to commentaries on great books... *It took a couple minutes while watching? I expect this might be the amount of passive watchers vs active... Questioners have more answers than the herd...

@soundandsophia

Жыл бұрын

Thank you. Yes, I agree. Every perspective is important and discussion more so. Especially when it comes to texts that can be interpreted in many ways.

No single philosophy can ever take full account of life.

@soundandsophia

Жыл бұрын

You're probably right. That's why I'm moving forward to another philosopher. 🙂

@aakkoin

Жыл бұрын

Taoism comes pretty close.... Judeo-Christianity also, but that philosophy is based on the idea that we CAN'T understand the full account of everything, because we are mere mortal humans, only God knows everything, and man can not be God.

If everything is Will-To-Power, how arises the idea of its contrary ? How arises fear and timidity ? A creature completely motivated by the Will-To- Power will be COMPLETELY DOMINATED by his WILL-TO-POWER, and, therefore, NEVER feel anything else ! He might choose to avoid a stronger opponent until he himself becomes stronger, or figures-out another way to defeat his stronger opponent by some clever tactic, but he will not fear him. If he is truly COMPLETELY DOMINATED by his WILL-TO-POWER his whole mind will be filled with hot aggression and/or cool calculation, and there will simply be no room for anxiety or fear to enter. NO, there must be another motivation in men that makes them sometimes feel apprehensive, anxious or afraid. Some men must sometimes actually desire more life and more love over the possibility of simply acquiring always more power. FOOLS!

@soundandsophia

Жыл бұрын

Like I said in the beginning. The will to power is a contentious subject and I undrestand that you don't agree. But thank you so much for all your comments! I highly appreciate you taking the time in writing them.

It was all good as I understood the book , but as soon as I heard climate change, well ... had to go

@soundandsophia

Жыл бұрын

Alright, can't please everyone. But still, thank you for watching that far into the video!

@sumanshuborkar5788

Жыл бұрын

🤣