Timeline for Did any philosophers defend Slave Morality?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
29 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 10, 2023 at 14:28 | comment | added | haxor789 | Let us continue this discussion in chat. | |
| May 10, 2023 at 14:27 | comment | added | haxor789 | @άνθρωπος Interesting but also kinda sketchy. Like do you have any sources for that? I mean Nietzsche didn't even use "human" but "Mensch" which is apparently derived from just "man" though used both to denote a male and a human. Needless to say he didn't like that either. Human apparently actually has similarity with humus, though I've no idea why. Are these creatures that live upon and from humus or compose to it? Was it a way to denote agrarian as those that ate from (stuff planted in) humus? To see it as humans being compared to humus is one interpretation but far from being the only one. | |
| May 10, 2023 at 6:11 | comment | added | άνθρωπος | the cause that every animal consider the normal that was imprinted while it born. And only "Man is able to born twice", 'first time in-from culture environment as social personality', 'second time - alone, as Person that have Name'. 'You' have a big problems with second born. Because all concepts that you ll express are based on inverted logic of Underworld. | |
| May 10, 2023 at 5:35 | comment | added | άνθρωπος | « Si la société de consommation ne produit plus de mythe, c’est qu’elle est elle-même son propre mythe. À un Diable qui apportait l’Or et la Richesse (au prix de l’âme) s’est substituée l’Abondance pure et simple. Et au pacte avec le Diable le contrat d’Abondance. » La Société de consommation est un ouvrage Jean Baudrillard | |
| May 10, 2023 at 5:35 | comment | added | άνθρωπος | i don't think that it can be called lying. But it is like bubbles, some areas when you have inverted logic, inverted to outside(or inner) bubbles. It is not about religion, or moral, it is just a method to separate Wheat from Chaff. It is the method to detection Contract. | |
| May 10, 2023 at 5:22 | comment | added | άνθρωπος | And also the image of SoL is modern view on Gekata's statue. Gekata Luciferia, in Eng Liberty Enlightening the World. But classical Gekata the goddess of crossroads that leads in underworld, that why she needs torches. And ect. For me this facts in single case are senseless, but in complex i look not on the facts, but on logic. All logic is inverted to logic that was before. Where man was free man, not culture man, man under culture - human. That what your freedom is. And ofc it is connected to economics and politics realizings | |
| May 10, 2023 at 5:11 | comment | added | άνθρωπος | Hu is reduction from humus, fertile part of the earth, that is good for to grow plants. Next a word is culture, culture is borrowed from plant cultivation, culture plant - good plant. As before wise men grew plants, nowaday they grew humans. That fun and looks like joke, but it so straight in logic). There are also fun other words, like homo sapience - homo=slave sapience first meaning is tasty, sensitive = tasty slave, good slave, useful slave. Ofc you should to consider all of this as my joke. About symbolic. Statue of Liberty(Freedom) - we not need libertatem if we was "free". | |
| May 10, 2023 at 4:56 | comment | added | άνθρωπος | in this view point - yes, freedom concept is fiction. Why? Because thou doest not need be free to art, but you need free from other "I" to act. Thou as out of free, beyond free part of mind was cut in 19th century (this process was strat at 16th). So you have only you. You are never not alone from others. Others is objective reality, world of things, and subject - you - should to be under objective reality laws. So you got strange and inverted causal structure of mind, where subject is under will of many objects. This subject become to call hu+man. What is hu+? | |
| May 10, 2023 at 0:20 | comment | added | haxor789 | @άνθρωπος Though yes I see your point, individual would be fitting but subjective in that meaning of submission is kind of antithetical to the concept that I tried to express. | |
| May 10, 2023 at 0:16 | comment | added | haxor789 | @άνθρωπος Sorry being silent is nothing personal, I was just unable to respond and later forgot about it. Yes I am of that meaning of the word as well as the fact that "sub - ject" literally means "to throw under" and I usually don't like calling things an "etymological fallacy" especially when the etymology is still relevant. But in this case I think it kind of misses the point. The point was precisely that the subject has agency, so to redefine it as not having agency is a semantic argument not really a logical one, right? | |
| May 9, 2023 at 6:05 | comment | added | άνθρωπος | And here you make one more smart trick. You say, you may not follow the rule, but you got this then - so it is rule for rule cancelling. All system of object world founded on this principles, tricks, logic fallacies - you are free when you are playing in our game by our rules. You are free to win. Oh, stop stop, you have chance to win. NVM just continue playing, rules are fair trust it, if rules are not fair look point 1. We not need God to create fair laws, but thy may not to create self rule because, you are subject under rules.. and ect and same | |
| May 9, 2023 at 6:00 | comment | added | άνθρωπος | In true that subjection have two levels. Sensitive reflexes level, and law-rules reflexes - this part you call consequence or objective reality. But thay are reflexes too, emotions are reflexes. So you got true subjective - inner world based on self sensitive, and smart subjective based on world of things and meanings, rules that was designed by another - God, unknown Lord, experts society ... Especially new laws tendencias based on non-authority of rules , but they have support of many other good people - experts of some clubs or societies. But you still say about subject under law power. | |
| May 9, 2023 at 5:53 | comment | added | άνθρωπος | You go silent. You think that i try to confuse you? Or i have a mistake? Probably, but i find only that i have no mistake. "It is not my words" i find it in etymology dictionary and it is not conflict with logic, and more, it put all on their places. early 14c., "person under control or dominion of another," - etymonline.com . | |
| May 6, 2023 at 11:05 | comment | added | άνθρωπος | Subject is an action agent, only because an agent is under sir power, power conductor. Don't look at semantic, look at causes. In this cause both subjective agents and objects-wordless slaves are the lord's subjects. Lord is not an object and not a subject - he have Name, not an individuality or nominative, you d confused in semantic wordplay, don't look at semantic, it causeless, semantic have only sense meaning. You missed that major SM is "sir-minister-slave or power-agent-subject" - not master-slave - that is incomplete picture. | |
| May 6, 2023 at 10:49 | comment | added | haxor789 | @άνθρωπος You seem to operate with a different semantic meaning, I mean subject in the sense of the distinction between a subject (an acting agent) and an object (a thing). And individual in the sense of a particular thing, a single object or person. Like Nietzsche is criticizing uniform, universal, fit-all moralities because they don't fit those who don't fit in the template. And so he's arguing in favor of a individualism, in favor of breaking the mold. Which is ambiguous in terms of good and evil as it's both life affirming and destructive and cruel. | |
| May 6, 2023 at 10:30 | comment | added | άνθρωπος | In this domination doctrine, Subjects can't mind about moral or it causes , they can only react on good or evil, sensing, and if you look in nowadays this reactions are calls emotions. All this system subordinated by emotions and predefined chooses: likes, voting, preferences, fashion, trends, PR, propaganda, information... Nothing about causal of something, only meaning. In language this calls semantic, where the word is a sing, not named cause. True is a sing on some evidence, no cause true. Nietzsche tried to invented something new, but found causes of "brave new world", that is now | |
| May 6, 2023 at 10:08 | comment | added | άνθρωπος | Man is someone in Eng that not a slave and not a master, but human is someone inscribed in major SM in roles slaves or overseers. | |
| May 6, 2023 at 10:06 | comment | added | άνθρωπος | i understand that you try to say, but as ive got understand, words subjective and individual are definitely not that words that you can use to describe this problem, doesn't matter what semantic meaning you try to give them. Because subjective is a thing under force, that mean subjects are same as slaves, but force can be not only physical also moral(at the first moment) cause of slave is a subjective existence of the thing, slave is not being, slave is a thing. also the individual "single object or thing" that get meaning "a single human being". An here ass you see a man become a hu+man | |
| May 6, 2023 at 9:03 | comment | added | haxor789 | @άνθρωπος The German language is ambiguous in that regard. Good is both the one part of "good and evil" which characterize slave morality, but the master morality nonetheless creates edge cases of desirable and undesirable which Nietzsche calls "good and bad". Or "vornehm (noble) and verächtlich (contemptible)". Though that should not be confused with "good" and "noble" in the framework of "good and evil", they aren't universal or dogmatic but subjective and self-defined by the individual. | |
| May 6, 2023 at 6:20 | comment | added | άνθρωπος | o this from nearest question about joke "Despised by me are following and leading." Both followers and leaders are at Despised of (Ubermensh)xD. So, this is the mistake to interpret SM as something belong to UM or especially(!) think that master good morality can be preceding at something to Ubermensh. Because good is more worst then evil, evil is a clear and notable bad, good is an undetectable bad. | |
| May 6, 2023 at 6:05 | comment | added | άνθρωπος | And second argument that in esse homo he said that Ubermensh is at opposition stance to good people(christians and nihilists doesn't matter), as Zaratustra est at opposition to any morality. That mean that Ubermensh is not ever master or belong to major Slave morality complex. The cause of Ubermensh is not ever in good motives or good beginnings, not vornish(?). Because both good and evil are belong to SM, Ubermensh cases are not begin for the good or from at evil intentions, but they can be a cause of both good and evil | |
| May 6, 2023 at 5:52 | comment | added | άνθρωπος | I have doubts about your assumption that vornehm morality is the Übermensch cradle, in spite of it opposition to slave morality(nehmen). Because minority slave morality ofc is moral of nehmen, but major cause of Slave morality is system of cooperation between master and it's slaves, through servants or ministers. Whole system have a view sovereign/sir-minister-slave or power-agent-subject. If you reject subject from the system all system will not able to exist, that is a problem, that Nietzsche didn't solve, when he tried to realize his Ubermensh. | |
| May 4, 2023 at 12:13 | comment | added | haxor789 | While on the other hand it can be quite easily read as an endorsement of some "Darwinism", "prosperity gospel", "eugenics" aso. Where through constant struggle, "the best" is crystallize out. Which results in his Übermensch (super human) to be somewhere between a obsessed loner and a genocidal tyrant. So not actually defining Übermensch is conjectured to be deliberate as any definition would be like the term human itself, be an attempt to uniform a group, rather than affirm individuality. So technically vornehm would be a characteristic of the master morality which breeds the "Übermensch". | |
| May 4, 2023 at 12:03 | comment | added | haxor789 | @άνθρωπος Reading further "vornehm" might also refer to "taking first" or "taking (nehmen) before (vor) others", in the sense of a privileged position, so nobility might actually fit. Either way he's using it as a positively connotated synonym for "good" in terms of master morality. One interpretation of Nietzsche's work is apparently as a rejection of universal morality and uniformity which he contrasts with hyperindividualism Which is ambivalent as it in on the one hand can be read as radical endorsement of life and creativity to fill the void left by the rejection of morality ... | |
| May 4, 2023 at 1:51 | comment | added | άνθρωπος | is vornehm same as Übermench? | |
| May 3, 2023 at 19:52 | comment | added | haxor789 | @άνθρωπος sounds like a simplification with regards to that being the entire morality, but I can certainly see that in that description (freedom to and freedom from). And yes it's beyond good and evil but he still uses "gut" und "schlecht" for the master morality. | |
| May 3, 2023 at 17:22 | comment | added | άνθρωπος | And good is not that word because Jenseits von Gut und Böse | |
| May 3, 2023 at 16:54 | comment | added | άνθρωπος | Master morality is an initial point for the oneself action - "freedom for (good)", slave morality is guide to the reaction - "freedom from (evil)". | |
| May 3, 2023 at 14:45 | history | answered | haxor789 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |