Is there a translation with Nietzsche talking as a normal human being? How do you read these kind of books without dying out of boredom
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
Is there a translation with Nietzsche talking as a normal human being?
Not likely to be seen again. Try the German
Philosophy isn't for you. Go back to Netflix
Hiring?
>How do you read these kind of books without dying out of boredom
Think about the prime bints you'll be able to impress with original quotes (and most importantly, saying out loud with the 19th century eastern german accent).
Luftschutzsirene
Brima
His writing style makes him one of the most enjoyable philosophers to read and furthermore his form is unseperable from the actual philosophical concepts. Maybe Anglo empiricism is more up your alley
>hurr durr a snake attacked me and I am going to die of poison. But I thanked the snake and this is how you should treat people who harm you
Pfffffffffffffffff nice allegory fricking idiot. I didn’t know I was reading a book for toddlers
Definitely. All the points Zarathustra make are boring to me. Im currently in chapter 2 and I still don’t get how he went from carrying a dead body, to suddenly talking all that nonsense about friends, women and death with nobody around. And suddenly there is a whole cult behind him. Why even bother with the story? Why make this stupid subplot if not even Nietzche bothers with it? Shit book
holy ngmi
Speak like a normal person already Nietzsche
>Complaining about the "plot"
>Reading "thus spake Zarathustra" for the plot
Its not a novel its philosophy. Imagine missing the point this hard.
>reading Zarathustra for the plot
Did I say that? You need to read posts slower
Based wiki then. I’m sure it’s impossible for two different persons to read this book and reach the same conclusion. Nobody here is discussing the book either, I’m pretty sure anons read a summary at best
>it’s impossible for two different persons to read this book and reach the same conclusion
You're braindead. The idea that it needs to convey one conclusion is an example of how braindead you are. I gave you some hints earlier but no matter how much is explained to you it wouldn't help. Do you have the needed grounding in history to relate to texts full of references written by a man who was considered one of the foremost historians in the world at like 20?
> The idea that it needs to convey one conclusion is an example of how braindead you are
The frick is your problem
> a man who was considered one of the foremost historians in the world at like 20
I don’t care how smart you think he is , or how smart people think he is, you don’t understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother.
>muh eagle, muh serpent, muh symbolism
Zarathustra went to the Tibet and came back speaking Mandarin, but he forgot I speak English
Nietzsche thinks he is the man of the allegory of the cave or something. Yet he died mad and with dementia lmao
Rankinston
That book is one of the most enjoyable philosophy book/essai, he purposely wrote it in a way, using proses and anathemas, to not bore the reader, maybe philosophy is not your thing
mögen
You will one day realize most philosophy is just a jerk-off session and the meaninglessly dense language just to say one idea is part of this
טעם
>Is there a translation with Nietzsche talking as a normal human being?
Is there a translation of a bible, as if written by normal human beings? Reverence, motherfricker, do you have it?
"The way in which reverence for the Bible in Europe has, on the whole, been maintained so far is perhaps the best piece of discipline and refinement of tradition for which Europe owes a debt of thanks to Christianity: such books of profundity and ultimate significance need for their protection an externally imposed tyranny of authority in order *to last* for those thousands of years which are necessary to exhaust them and sort out what they mean. Much has been achieved when in the great mass of people (the shallow ones and all sorts of people with diarrhea) that feeling has finally been cultivated that they are not permitted to touch everything, that there are sacred experiences before which they have to pull off their shoes and which they must keep their dirty hands off—this is almost the highest intensification of their humanity. By contrast, perhaps nothing makes the so-called educated people, those who have faith in “modern ideas,” so nauseating as their lack of shame, the comfortable impudence in their eyes and hands, with which they touch, lick, and grope everything, and it is possible that these days among a people, one still finds in the common folk, particularly among the peasants, more *relative* nobility of taste and tactful reverence than among the newspaper- reading demi-monde of the spirit, among the educated."
(Beyond Good and Evil, #263)
Why are you talking about the Bible? You dense motherfricker
because the anglo translators use the style of the King James Bible for Nietzsche translations. Maybe they do it because Nietzsche is slightly using Luther's style.
>Maybe they do it because Nietzsche is slightly using Luther's style.
"But in Germany (right up until very recent times, when a sort of platform eloquence started flapping its young wings timidly and crudely enough) there was really only one form of public speaking which *came close* to being artistic: what came from the pulpit. In Germany only the preacher understood what a syllable or what a word weighs, how a sentence strikes, leaps, falls, runs, and ends; only he had a conscience in his ears, often enough a bad conscience. For there is no shortage of reasons why it’s precisely the German who rarely, and almost always too late, achieves a proficiency in speaking. It is appropriate therefore that the masterwork of German prose is the masterwork of its greatest preacher: up to this point, the Bible has been the best German book. In comparison with Luther’s Bible, almost everything else is mere “literature”— something that did not grow in Germany and hence also did not grow and does not grow into German hearts, as the Bible has."
(Beyond Good and Evil, #247)
If you're trying to read Zarathustra without having already read the rest of his works you are an idiot.
>author try to make a point
>dude why didn’t you study his previous work yet
Perhaps Nietzsche doesn’t know how to explain for shit
He warns you that you won't understand any of it so you shouldn't bother.
I just looked at the wiki and it's glorious.
>He was aware, however, that readers might not understand it. This is possibly why he subtitled it A Book for All and None. However, as with the content as a whole, the subtitle has baffled many critics, and there is no consensus.
>there is no consensus with what Zarathustra means when he speaks
Reddit tier wiki editors forever filtered and mentally dominated by the ghost of a walrus.
What I learned from this book is that I didn't know enough stuff to read this book.
Like who is Zarathustra? I knew a little but also enough to know he's referencing it for a reason I didn't understand. I'm stuck on the third word of the title..
>Like who is Zarathustra?
"And ye also asked yourselves often: “Who is Zarathustra to us? What shall he be called by us?” And like me, did ye give yourselves questions for answers.
Is he a promiser? Or a fulfiller? A conqueror? Or an inheritor? A harvest? Or a ploughshare? A physician? Or a healed one?
Is he a poet? Or a genuine one? An emancipator? Or a subjugator? A good one? Or an evil one?
I walk amongst men as the fragments of the future: that future which I contemplate."
I appreciate it but the point is he is partly referencing Zoroaster the historical person and mythical influence which he also talks a bit about in good and evil. It feels like almost no matter how much I would study the book I would always be missing a mountain of references. This point helped me appreciate how much I must be missing in ancient texts like the Bible even when I think I'm getting it.
Zoroaster gave us binary thinking, an early form of boolean logic that has power over the world by simplifying it into manageable units. Heraclitus and the later Greeks expanded on it to create formal logic. Christianity was also influenced by the same ideas. These are basically the two pillars of all western thinking, Christianity and the ancient Greeks.
ITT: OP GOT FILTERED LMAAOOOOOOO
I bet this was OP's first philosophy book lmao
maybe Nietzsche is just not your kind of thinker, try German idealism.
maybe reading is just not your kind of activity, try homosex.
been there done that.
With it comes to Nietzsche, avoid all of Walter Kaufman's translations. The Penguin and Barnes & Noble translations I read were pretty decent.
It's not boring, but it's a load of bullshit
N is not for corpses. Try getting resurrected or reincarnated and then try again.
No. He writes like a 25 year old incel going through a manic episode and spamming you on Steam while you're trying to relax.
He's also very petulant and histrionic. Berates women yet brazenly proclaims that without music life is devoid of meaning! Ha! His entire outlook is the result of zealous self-righteousness.
have a nice day tripgay
Nietzsche was an incel autist.
Thonas Common's Zarathustra translation is very much an outlier. No other translation uses archaic kjv esque english. And Zarathustra itself is very different from nietzsche's other books.