Did Nietzsche say this?

If he didn’t, does it even make sense with his philosophy?
I googled it and it said this quote is either his or some pojeet mystic came up with it.
In either case, I find myself agreeing with it. Ugliness seems to be a physical manifestation of transcendental evil, and beauty seems to likewise be a physical manifestation of platonic goodness.
I think aesthetics can be used to inform moral judgments. In fact, perhaps all moral judgements are just extensions of aesthetic judgements. Is this thinking valid in your opinion?

The Kind of Tired That Sleep Won’t Fix Shirt $21.68

UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68

The Kind of Tired That Sleep Won’t Fix Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The Nietzsche X account has a checkmark so it is verifiably Nietzsche

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I agree with your assessment, and Nietzsche was on the right path. If you want to continue this line of thinking it might be worth reading Whitehead's "Process and Reality" to see a more complete metaphysical framework were Beauty is equivelant to Truth.
    Whitehead also said that false statements are more valuable than true statements if they are interesting, as only the clash of ideas can create novelty. Completely opposite of Russell, his friend.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Before Whitehead, Aquinas showed that Truth and Beauty are convertible terms.

      Somewhere in the treatise on the Trinity, of all places.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Aquinas showed

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Isn't that just Plotinus's reading of Plato? Beauty = Good = Form = Being = Truth. Kalokagathia.

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I think anesthetics having "moral value" probably would fit in with a certain conception of Nietzsches ideas, but I highly doubt he'd use an analogy about a wienerroach and a "beautiful butterfly" to describe any of it. I've seen lots moronic shit attributed to Nietzsche over the years.
    But the guy critiquing it is equally gay. "Oh you'd know on instinct" shut the frick up, fricking pseud. Nietzsche does have some genuinely gay lines. It wouldn't be totally out of the realm of his ideas.
    There are two Nietzsche pseuds I despise. The first one thinks the guy was writing some soft humanitarian shit that he wasn't writing, the Second thinks everything he wrote is some turdbrained unnuanced take on power. I intuit the guy tweeting thinks this wouldn't compute because "nietzsche would believe crushing butterflies is good because power!!!"
    Most people should not be allowed to read by law

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Why the frick does my shit autocorrect aesthetics to anesthetics. Why the frick does autocorrect correct words into other words.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        anesthetics sounds right since your post put me to sleep

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          So funny

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            cry more libtard

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          You should drink some coffee.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      He's right though, the quote sounds like something a fourteen year old thought up to sound deep. And "morals having an aesthetic criteria" in the sense its being used here is out of line with N's philosophy because it assumes a natural state of objective beauty, from which objective values are derived (while setting up an obvious moral negation of "wienerroaches are like, just as valid as butterflies you know?").

      N's view of morality was playing with Schoppy's views of art as potentially redeeming existence, where moral philosophy is the highest form of human achievement and capable of giving life intrinsic meaning in the absence of objective reality. There's no room in his philosophy for appeals to nature and "aesthetic criteria"

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      If anything I’d call Nietzsche “anti-dogmatic”, about the only adjective I’d ascribe to him

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Same

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >what doesn't kill you, makes you stronger
    Nietzsche couldn't have possibly said that. My instinct tells me so.

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >X post thread
    IQfy is dead

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I do not remember reading this particular quote, and a few searches all solicited results that do attribute the quote to him. He may have said it, he may not have, I cannot point to a book or passage where it is contained therein though. In so far as the question of whether it is consistent with his philosophy is concerned I suppose that depends on which aphorisms you are drawing on to make the assertion. The following is what struck my mind upon reading:

    >Around the hero everything becomes a tragedy; around the demigod everything becomes a satyr-play; and around God everything becomes - what? Perhaps a 'world'?-BGE

    The quote does seem to be Nietzschean in the sense that there is a sort of irony in the juxtaposition of the statements, and there is an undertone that the morality involved is just a matter of what someone deems to be aesthetically pleasing, and there is also a sort of presupposition caked in that enough people share a similar aesthetic that would result in the first 2 outcomes even though there may actually be no objectively decisive reason for this. If Nietzsche did say this then I would be inclined to say it might be early to mid Nietzsche in terms of his works, and likely one of his quotes that tittilates the pinterest and Facebook crowd, I do not necessarily mean this in a pejorative way, rather in a literal way.

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    http://www.nietzschesource.org/#eKGWB
    Can't find it (searched all variations of schmetterling)

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Nietzsche is an atheist, so only stupid people care about what he says.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >is
      He's dead.

      https://i.imgur.com/DXZYwR9.jpeg

      If he didn’t, does it even make sense with his philosophy?
      I googled it and it said this quote is either his or some pojeet mystic came up with it.
      In either case, I find myself agreeing with it. Ugliness seems to be a physical manifestation of transcendental evil, and beauty seems to likewise be a physical manifestation of platonic goodness.
      I think aesthetics can be used to inform moral judgments. In fact, perhaps all moral judgements are just extensions of aesthetic judgements. Is this thinking valid in your opinion?

      Wouldn't have said it but his theory about morals having aesthetic genealogy is highly influential maybe read some of his stuff dig.

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    He did say it, look in his lectures on Philology where he's talking about Aeschylus.

  10. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Nietzsche doesn't write about "beautiful butterflies."

  11. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    a good 1/3 of those images containing quotes are fake

  12. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Even if it’s a fake quote, it still accords with his philosophy. Objective beauty is a marker of innate superiority

  13. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Appealing to pleb norms to make a declaration about what is moral using English conventions established by The Simpsons in 1995.

  14. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why should we waste our time arguing about what other men thought? How does it help anyone? It’s just dicksucking rotting corpses. Just stupid.

  15. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >perhaps all moral judgements are just extensions of aesthetic judgements
    No clue about Nietzsche, but this is definitely the case. Think about your preferable societal utopia. It's an aesthetic. All aspirations are to reach some aesthetic you find enjoyable. Maybe it's a typical family life. Maybe you want to be a monk. Maybe it's the egalitarian dream with minimal suffering. It's all aesthetics, what you personally find beautiful.

    Politics is strife between clashing aesthetics end-goals.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Confusing aesthetics with virtue/ideals
      ngmi, filtered

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I think you're confused to think ideals, virtue and aesthetics come from a different sources.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Nope

          Think about it like this: Virtues and ideals are aesthetic end-goals to strive for. Your sense of aesthetics dictates which man-made virtues and ideals you resonate with.

          If your end goals are for things to look pretty you were born with a woman brain or you are playing a word game with the definition of aesthetics.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >look pretty
            You discredit aesthetics. It's a taste. Taste is the source of your preferences. A taste is more than just being pretty, it's all positive preferences.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I discredit aesthetics because you are using the word to mean "how things look". Aesthetics isn't about what should be, but how it should look. A virtue ethic might say to build a hospital at some place, aesthetics says if it should be modern or Gothic architecture

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Evoking music isn't seen, it's heard. Same for great food. If these aren't aesthetic judgements, what are they? In the same way, one can think that the method of virtue ethic is "beautiful", in a sense that it's appealing. This appeal you find in a method is what makes you prefer it in the first place, affecting the placement of a hospital for example when followed.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >A hospital is good because it is beautiful
            In a morally (duty or virtuely) fuffilling way or an aesthetic one?
            If you genuinely believe that how something looks or how it changes your emotion is morality you are a woman.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            If you're asking my take, a hospital is good because health is beautiful.
            You also discredit emotion, as it's the ultimate source of initiative. Obligation is an emotion as well. It isn't referred to as a "sense" of obligation for nothing.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Health is a moral good, not an aesthetic one. You are word gaming.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Aesthetic and morality have vastly different connotations. I think of health as good in the same way as I think something fitting my eye is good, so it makes sense to group them under aesthetics. Saying that something looks morally good doesn't really fit.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Think about it like this: Virtues and ideals are aesthetic end-goals to strive for. Your sense of aesthetics dictates which man-made virtues and ideals you resonate with.

  16. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Beauty is nature's thorns rearranged to fool the peculiarly social. You're stupid if you think they inform of anything greater or less ugly.

  17. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You wouldn't download a wienerroach

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *