Why Nietzsche Hated Weak People
Summary
TLDRThis video explores Friedrich Nietzsche's critique of weakness, drawing from his works like 'Beyond Good and Evil' and 'Thus Spoke Zarathustra'. Nietzsche viewed weakness as a lack of willpower and dishonesty, leading to self-deception and bitterness. He opposed pity as a means of support, seeing it as manipulative and disempowering. The video also discusses Nietzsche's concept of 'amor fati', or loving one's fate, as a means to embrace life's struggles and become stronger. It critiques pessimistic philosophies for promoting societal weakness and unfulfillment.
Takeaways
- 😌 The film 'The Death of Stalin' critiques weakness as a trait that leads to untrustworthiness.
- 🧔 Friedrich Nietzsche viewed weakness as fundamentally dishonest, often leading to self-deception.
- 📚 In 'Dov's White Nights', weakness is portrayed as an inability to achieve one's will, often resulting in dishonesty.
- 😣 Weakness can manifest as an inability to overcome oneself, leading to bitterness and resentment.
- 😈 Nietzsche's 'Genealogy of Morals' suggests that the weak often demonize the qualities they cannot attain.
- 😩 The 'nice guy' archetype exemplifies resentful weakness, where rejection leads to denigration of the desired.
- 🤔 Nietzsche's concept of 'will' refers to the organization or disorganization of an individual's desires and intentions.
- 🔄 Weakness is also seen as a lack of commitment and decisiveness, which Nietzsche associated with a disorganized will.
- 🤝 Nietzsche valued magnanimity over pity, seeing the latter as a form of manipulation that increases dependency.
- 🚫 He criticized philosophies that devalue life, arguing they encourage a weak and pessimistic outlook detrimental to society.
Q & A
What is the main critique of weakness presented in the film 'The Death of Stalin'?
-In the film 'The Death of Stalin', the main critique of weakness is that it is equated with untrustworthiness, which is considered undesirable. The character Malanov is deemed weak and therefore not trustworthy to lead due to his wavering loyalties and inability to maintain a consistent will.
How does Friedrich Nietzsche view weakness in terms of honesty?
-Nietzsche views weakness as fundamentally dishonest because it often leads individuals to lie to themselves to ease the pain of unfulfilled desires. He criticizes this self-deception and believes that it is a deeper form of weakness where one fails to confront the reality that their will has been thwarted.
What is the relationship between weakness and the ability to achieve one's will according to Nietzsche?
-Nietzsche sees a direct correlation between weakness and the inability to achieve one's will. He suggests that weak individuals are unable to overcome themselves or control their will, which results in a lack of perseverance or self-overcoming, and ultimately, a failure to achieve their goals.
How does Nietzsche's concept of weakness relate to the idea of 'nice guys'?
-Nietzsche's concept of weakness is exemplified by the 'nice guys' who, after being rejected, demonize the person they desired and devalue the qualities that they believe led to their rejection. This behavior reflects Nietzsche's view of weakness as a form of resentment and dishonesty, where individuals fail to honestly confront their shortcomings and instead project their failures onto others.
What does Nietzsche mean by an organized will, and how does it relate to strength?
-Nietzsche uses the term 'organized will' to describe a will that is unified and directed towards a single purpose. This organization of the will is a form of strength because it allows an individual to make decisive actions and commitments, which in turn enables them to achieve their goals and desires.
How does Nietzsche's view on weakness connect to his concept of self-overcoming?
-Nietzsche's view on weakness is deeply connected to his concept of self-overcoming. He sees self-overcoming as the ability of the will to pull itself together and maintain focus on a single path. Weakness, in this context, is the inability to do so, leading to a disorganized will that lacks direction and the power to achieve one's goals.
What role does trust play in Nietzsche's critique of weakness?
-In Nietzsche's critique, trust is a crucial element that is undermined by weakness. He argues that weak individuals cannot be trusted either by others or by themselves because their inconstancy and lack of a strong, organized will make their words and commitments unreliable.
How does Nietzsche's philosophy view the concept of pity, and how does it relate to weakness?
-Nietzsche sees pity as a disingenuous tactic used by the weak to manipulate others into helping them without taking responsibility. He criticizes pity for being duplicitous and for creating a dynamic that is detrimental to both the pitier and the pitied, as it encourages dependence and undermines the development of independence and strength.
What is the connection between weakness and Nietzsche's idea of life-denial?
-Nietzsche connects weakness to life-denial by suggesting that weak individuals are more likely to reject life and its struggles, leading to a philosophy that devalues existence. He argues that embracing life, even in the face of suffering, requires strength and self-mastery, which he sees as virtues that weak philosophies often lack.
How does Nietzsche's view on weakness influence his thoughts on societal values and morality?
-Nietzsche believes that weak individuals can influence societal values and morality negatively by promoting life-denying philosophies and fostering resentment. He thinks that these attitudes can spread and create a culture of pessimism and unfulfillment, which he sees as detrimental to societal health and human potential.
Outlines
😌 Weakness and Untrustworthiness
The paragraph begins with a scene from the movie 'The Death of Stalin', highlighting the execution of Lenti Barrier and the ensuing political dynamics. It introduces the concept of weakness as a trait that is directly linked to untrustworthiness, contrary to the common perception of weakness as a neutral characteristic. The discussion then shifts to the philosophical views of Friedrich Nietzsche, who is noted for his disdain for weakness. Nietzsche's critique of weakness is presented as fundamentally dishonest, using the narrative from Dostoevsky's 'White Nights' to illustrate how weakness can lead to self-deception and a failure to confront reality. The paragraph concludes by emphasizing the importance of Nietzsche's ideas on honesty and strength in modern contexts.
😠 The Resentment of Weakness
This section delves into Nietzsche's view that weakness can manifest as bitterness and resentment, especially when individuals are unable to achieve their desires. It uses the concept of the 'nice guy' archetype to illustrate how rejected suitors may demonize the qualities they initially admired, reflecting a dishonest coping mechanism. Nietzsche's critique extends to group dynamics, where he suggests that weak individuals, rather than striving for their goals, often devalue the very things that could lead to success. This behavior not only limits personal growth but also contributes to a societal cycle of resentment and weakness. The paragraph also touches on Nietzsche's evolving concept of weakness in his later works, linking it to a disorganized will and the inability to commit to actions decisively.
🤔 The Organization of Will
The focus of this paragraph is on the internal aspect of weakness as described by Nietzsche, particularly in terms of the organization of one's will. It contrasts a disorganized will, which hinders decisive action and the attainment of desires, with a will that is unified and directed. Using historical figures like King Edward II, the paragraph illustrates the consequences of a weak and inconsistent will. Nietzsche's concept of the Übermensch, or 'overman', is introduced as an ideal of strength and self-mastery, where one can create values and principles to guide one's life. The paragraph emphasizes the importance of having a strong, organized will to overcome nihilism and to achieve meaningful actions, which Nietzsche sees as essential for human fulfillment.
😓 The Destructive Nature of Pity
Nietzsche's critique of pity is explored in this section, where he views pity as a disingenuous tactic used by the weak to manipulate the strong. It discusses how the desire for pity can be a form of power play, where the weak attempt to incite help without taking responsibility or incurring debt. The paragraph draws parallels between this dynamic and abusive relationships, where the abuser gains power by fostering dependency. Nietzsche advocates for magnanimity over pity, suggesting that true strength is shown in helping others increase their independence and power, not in undermining them. The paragraph concludes by emphasizing Nietzsche's belief in the importance of honesty and the dangers of the pity dynamic in both individual and societal contexts.
🧐 The Philosophy of Life and Weakness
This paragraph examines Nietzsche's views on life-affirming philosophies versus those that encourage weakness and life denial. Nietzsche's concept of 'amor fati', or love of one's fate, is introduced as a means of embracing life's struggles and finding meaning in them. The paragraph contrasts this with philosophies that devalue life, such as certain interpretations of Christianity and the pessimism of Schopenhauer, which Nietzsche saw as promoting a weak and undesirable attitude towards existence. The discussion highlights Nietzsche's belief that weak philosophies not only harm the individual but also spread a passive nihilism that can lead to societal collapse. The paragraph concludes by reflecting on the influence of pessimistic attitudes on society and the importance of philosophies that encourage strength and the affirmation of life.
🤨 The Dangers of Weak Philosophies
The final paragraph discusses the broader societal impact of weak philosophies, as perceived by Nietzsche. It emphasizes how pessimistic or life-denying philosophies can spread and infect societies, leading to widespread nihilism and unfulfillment. Nietzsche's disdain for these philosophies is linked to his belief that they reflect and encourage personal weakness, which in turn can lead to societal decay. The paragraph also touches on cultural observations about pessimism and the social stigma attached to optimism, suggesting that a pessimistic outlook can be more accepted and even expected than a positive one. Nietzsche's views are summarized as advocating for personal strength and the rejection of philosophies that undermine life's value, with a cautionary note about the influence of weak ideologies on both individuals and society.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Weakness
💡Strength
💡Trustworthiness
💡Dishonesty
💡Self-Overcoming
💡Will to Power
💡Pity
💡Magnanimity
💡Nihilism
💡Amor Fati
Highlights
The film 'The Death of Stalin' critiques weakness as a limiting property associated with untrustworthiness.
Weakness is traditionally viewed as neutral, but the film suggests it can lead to negative traits.
Frederick Neitzsche's perspective on weakness is explored, emphasizing its link to dishonesty.
In 'White Nights,' weakness is portrayed as an inability to achieve one's will, leading to self-deception.
Weakness can manifest as an inability to overcome oneself and control one's desires.
Weakness can turn individuals bitter and resentful, as seen in Neitzsche's 'Genealogy of Morals'.
The 'nice guy' archetype is used to illustrate resentful weakness in modern context.
Weakness can lead to devaluing the qualities that lead to success, as a coping mechanism.
Weakness is associated with a disorganized will, making decisive action difficult.
Neitzsche criticizes hedonism as a reflection of a disorganized will.
Commitment and the ability to create values are key to overcoming weakness, as per 'Thus Spoke Zarathustra'.
Weakness can lead to a passive nihilism, where life lacks meaning or direction.
Weakness is seen as dangerous because it can be weaponized through morality.
The film 'The Death of Stalin' uses political comedy to teach a lesson about the dangers of weakness.
Weakness is not just undesirable but can be actively harmful to society, according to Neitzsche.
Pity is criticized as a duplicitous method of gaining power and is seen as encouraging weakness.
Neitzsche advocates for magnanimity over pity, as a genuine form of strength.
Weakness is linked to philosophies that devalue life, which Neitzsche sees as self-defeating.
The concept of 'amor fati' or loving one's fate is presented as a way to overcome weakness.
Transcripts
what is bad whatever Springs from
weakness at the end of Armando ianucci
the death of Stalin the chief of the
secret police lenti barrier has just
been executed for his various crimes
against the people of the Soviet Union
and the other high-ranking members of
the Soviet political class are standing
around his body one of them is visibly
distressed he was the acting leader
malanov who was not in favor of this
prosecution but broadly went along with
it as he was a bit of a pushover the new
leader kushev turns to kaganovich and
asks can we trust malanov to which he
replies can you ever trust a weak man
this line has been running through my
head for probably years now we normally
think of weakness as a basically neutral
property you can have weak people who
are good and you can have weak people
who are bad just as you can have strong
people of either persuasion as well but
in the death of Stalin a critique is
being made of weakness directly as a
limiting property it is identified with
untrustworthiness which is normally
considered an undesirable trait for
pretty obvious reasons I'm telling you
this long-winded diet tribe about one of
my favorite films because today we are
going to criticize weakness and
specifically we will look at the points
made by the German philosopher writer
and ill-tempered Mustachio Fredick Neer
famously he abored weakness but in
exploring why we will uncover a whole
new way of looking at terms like
weakness and strength that will be
incredibly valuable for our own lives
and of phenomenal Phil philosophical
interest get ready to learn why weakness
breeds unhappiness why you cannot be
truly kind except by being strong and
what NE thought about the importance of
honesty as always bear in mind that this
is not a complete account of n's ideas
on this topic and I've specifically
selected these criticisms for their
applicability in a modern context
however let's begin by looking at the
basis of ne's entire critique of
weakness that it is fundamentally
dishonest one
weakness strength and Truth in dov's
white nights we follow a young man who
has become romantically obsessed with a
young woman named nastinka they talk
over a number of nights and she confides
in him that she is in love with another
man who she believes has abandoned her
during their time together nastenka
really grows to care for our narrator
and is on the verge of being with him
instead yet at the last minute her lover
returns and she runs away in the night
leaving our protagonist alone and
dejected when he is reflecting upon this
experience the narrator pretends to have
made peace with this but it is clear
that he still feels very strongly for
nastenka he tells himself that it is all
okay because at least she will be happy
now but at some level he still wants to
be with her and is suffering deeply
because of it this story illustrates one
way in which n uses the term weakness
and also the dishonesty he often thinks
comes with it this critique is probably
most prevalent in thus bakes Zyra and
Beyond Good and Evil but you certainly
see precursors to it in ne's earlier
works here weakness is Loosely used to
mean an inability to achieve one's will
bear this in mind because it is quite
different to how nature will come to use
the term weakness elsewhere this is also
probably the most common sense meaning
nature uses for weakness there is an
agent who has a goal and for whatever
reason they are powerless to achieve
that goal therefore they are weak in
itself nature does not necessarily have
a problem with this one of the
characteristically strong figures in
Beyond Good and Evil is Napoleon and
famously he did not quite achieve his
goal of making a glorious and Lasting
French Empire instead the thing that n
seems to really dislike about weakness
here is that it leads to dishonesty we
see this in the narrator from White
Knights at the end of the novel he is
clearly trying to convince himself that
he is okay with his situation which he
most definitely is not n views this as a
much deeper kind of weakness and this
time it's one has intense scorn for
rather than facing up to the harsh
reality that his will has been thwarted
and dealing with that the narrator is
lying to himself to try to ease the pain
he is escaping into fantasy rather than
confronting the cold hard facts of the
situation he is neither persevering in
his attempts to win nastenka over nor is
he practicing self-overcoming by
controlling and consciously changing his
will he is just pretending that he no
longer wants nastenka rather than
genuinely learning to let her go or
better yet fulfilling his desire in
other ways say with a different person
here we also see another way that n uses
the term weakness this time to mean an
inability to overcome oneself and thus
control or organize one's will put a pin
in that as it's going to be very
important in the next section at its
extreme end n thinks that these sorts of
weaknesses can turn someone bitter and
resentful in his genealogy of morals he
posits that unable to achieve what they
actually want power or claim or love or
Independence people often decide to
demonize those qualities instead so
rather than admit that we have failed we
will say well I didn't want that anyway
and then devalue the very thing we
previously desired the example I often
use to illustrate this point on the
channel is the internet archetype of the
nice guy this is someone who will
declare their affection for their
beloved touting all of their good
qualities to do so and insisting that
they are not like those other guys who
of course they are morally Superior to
however upon being rejected they lash
out calling the person they previously
said they wanted all manner of insults
from saying they are ugly to mocking
their weights to Casting aspersions upon
their sexual morality above all they
will lament that their beloved never
goes for nice guys like them but rather
[ __ ] I think this is probably the
most familiar model example of nitian
resentful weakness in action I recently
watched an excellent video by YouTuber
the authentic Observer on this very
topic I'll link it in the description
and I really do encourage people to
check it out it's what made me make the
link between Nan weakness and this
modern concept of the Nar the resentment
here runs in two directions firstly
having failed to achieve what they
ultimately desire the nice guy demonizes
the person they are pursuing rather like
esops Fox who fails to reach an alluring
bunch of grapes and so declares that
they must be sour the nice guy insists
that the person they were idolizing only
moments before four must be defective it
smacks of that dishonesty and
self-deception nature is so critical of
but Additionally the nice guy also
devalues the qualities they think would
have brought them success with their
Beloved the people who are considered
more attractive or confident or
otherwise romantically successful are
labeled [ __ ] the nice guy wields
morality as his weapon of choice to say
sure I may have been turned down but at
some level I am better than the person I
would have had to be to be accepted this
according to n is just cope and horribly
dishonest cope at that in fact this
rather strange interaction between the
nice guy and the object of their
affections is almost a microcosm of what
n thinks weak people do in groups rather
than honestly attempt to achieve their
goals they devalue the things that would
have fulfilled their wants while at the
same time decrying anyone who does
achieve their desires as evil the reason
n hates this is because he thinks it
encourages is those who truly could find
fulfillment to weaken their own Wills to
blend him with others so as to not incur
their wroth and condemnation but this is
just a vicious cycle since strength in
the form of being able to attain one's
aims is being demonized yet there is
also no real attempt at overcoming
oneself and learning to have perfect
control of one's will either as in the
case of ne's later figure of the
aesthetic all this does is create more
weak resentful people who then repeat
the process until we are flattened into
a dissatisfying winging Mass complaining
about how anyone happier than us is
immoral or at least that's ne's Theory
you certainly don't have to agree with
it this resentful use of morality is one
reason ner sometimes calls himself an
immoralist he is signaling his open
Rebellion against this use of moral
ascriptions however so far this is only
really dealing with the outward effects
of weakness n's treatment of the subject
contains numerous nuances and subtleties
whereas we have been broadly t about
external weakness we will now move on to
discussing internal ones if you want to
help me make more videos like this then
please consider becoming one of my
wonderful patrons to get access to
exclusive content the link is in the
description two organization and will
one of the general mischaracterizations
of nature that pings around the internet
is that he was a hedonist and to be fair
he does sometimes say quite hedonist
adjacent things he talks about
shamelessly pursuing one's own goals and
does not appeal to the usual concerns of
morality and the well-being of others in
his critique of Hedonism rather he
criticizes it as reflecting a
disorganized will I want to preface this
section by saying that what n meant by
will and his general theory of will is
highly disputed and he often does go
back and forth on some of the details
even some of the quite major ones so
this is just my interpretation and it's
probably wrong in many of his final
works and his postly published notes
nich's use of the term weakness has
changed quite a lot here he tends to use
it much more to refer to an internal
property that is the relative
organization or disorganization of the
will in a lot of his later works n has a
pretty unique way of conceiving of the
will and freedom he almost pictures the
human agent as a collection of forces
Each of which may be pulling them in a
slightly different direction at any time
this can sound rather abstract but I
think it Chimes rather well with our
everyday experience at any given moment
I might want to make a cup of tea or
cook some baked beans or go to the shops
to get some Jammy Dodgers to use some
predictably British examples if these
urges do not find agreement and instead
persist in tugging me in different
directions then my will would be
considered disorganized disorganized
Wills make it very difficult for us to
act decisively since we cannot decide on
a particular course of action and then
stick to it we can immediately see how
this coheres somewhat with the
definition of weakness in the previous
section if you cannot make commitments
to actions then almost by definition you
will be very unlikely to do much to
attain your desires and at the extreme
end you may fall into a passive nihilism
since there are no organizing principles
to your decisions or your life the king
of England Edward II had an awful lot of
raw power but not much control over his
mind he was led this way and that way by
his favorites at court and became
horribly inconsistent and as a result he
lost his crown and was killed shortly
after that possibly by a hot poker up
the bottom but more likely by one of the
more standard murder methods an
underrated of n's philosophy as a whole
are his ideas about commitment we see
this in thus SP zarathustra where the
final stage of the Uber mench is called
the child who is able to create values
for themselves values here is largely
used to mean principles for guiding
decisions and actions here the Uber
mench can choose and originate their own
values and use them as the North Star
for their life thus they avoid both the
kind of nihilism where you fail to act
at all and the kind where your will is
so disorganized that you never commit to
a single course of action for any time
and sort of Flounder unsuccessfully in
every direction like ne's Parisian
youths this form of weakness also ties
in very strongly with n's idea of
self-overcoming this again is a slightly
difficult concept to get your head round
since n uses the term in a variety of
subtly different ways but in essence
this is the ability of the will to pull
itself together to collect in a single
Direction it is self-overcoming because
it is the will exerting Force upon on
itself nature here has begun to use
terms like power and weakness in a
relatively esoteric way power is now not
just the ability to achieve goals but to
overcome resistance including internal
resistance so it is the ability to keep
the will or as much of it as possible
fixed on a single path I sometimes like
to think of this as the Persistence of
intention or the consistency of the will
to return to the case of malanov in the
death of Stalin he was deemed weak
because of his wavering loyalties
between different factions in the
government he was easily LED and his
will was changed numerous times by
different people in this way he
displayed a very nitian form of weakness
his will could not overcome much
resistance and was not even organized
enough to be properly called his it was
just lent out to whoever had spoken to
him last this is also just in the film
I'm not trying to make a point about
Russian history n condemns this sort of
weakness partly for the same reason the
characters in The Death of Stalin do it
means they cannot be trusted either by
other people or by themselves their
inconstancy means that their words no
longer holds very much weight as is
persuasively argued by buun Han trust is
used to bridge a gap that opens up due
to lack of information or control we
often cannot directly control other
people and do not know for certain what
they will do trust is then how we learn
to rely on others despite this their
words become an important indicator of
their future actions and we begin to
believe their commitments this also
benefits the person deemed trustworthy
because they are allocated more external
power and influence which nature thinks
all of us secretly desire in malankov's
case he was not deemed an appropriate
leader for the Soviet Union because of
his unreliability and his weakness it's
a philosophy lesson via political comedy
the other reason n condemns this sort of
weakness is that he thinks an organized
will is key to overcoming nihilism and
achieving many of the great works that
he thought Justified human existence and
separated us from the rest of the
animals one of Nature's obsessions is
with Humanity fulfilling its potential
and one aspect of this is to get all of
the different facets of our Wills
pointing in a single Direction he
thought it was very difficult for a
given person to lead a meaningful life
without their will both strong and in
their control part of this is just
empirical as we said without this people
won't trust you and you'll have a much
harder time achieving what you desire
but it is just as much a philosophical
Point without a powerful and organized
will nature thinks the slightest
suffering or struggle will push us
towards nihilism and a rejection of life
we will return to this point near the
end as there is an awful lot to this
idea and it's very important in Nature's
philosophy this also brings out how
weakness may not be as harmless as we
often think it is in a way that's
actually very familiar to a modern ear
it is all well and good having a
disorganized will but it not only means
that no one else can rely on us we
cannot even rely on ourselves and
continuing upon this theme we will expl
explore one of Nature's most
controversial positions that human pity
is not nearly as innocent as it may seem
and sometimes is disastrously
destructive three the Dark Side of pity
on average our moral systems are
relatively keen on pity we are told to
look after people weaker than ourselves
and the mechanism chosen to do this
tends to be pity and contrary to popular
belief nature was not actually a fan of
going out of your way to be cruel to
people who have less power than you he
tended to think this signaled a sort of
lack of self-confidence like a grown man
who feels the need to beat children at
tennis that being said he had a real
problem with pity as the method for
encouraging people to help one another
since he saw it both as duplicitous and
having awful unintended consequences as
with everything in N this is all
incredibly controversial and while there
is probably something to it don't feel
like you need to agree with all of it
despite what some people will tell you
just because n said something doesn't
make it true in n's picture of human
psychology a primary role is taken by
the human wish to accumulate power
either internal power or external power
this will to power as it's often known
was thought to explain all manner of our
behaviors from aspiring to a high social
status to accumulating wealth to
asceticism and martyrdom nature thought
these were often aimed at either
mastering ourselves or gaining influence
over the world and other people
importantly he also thought that
solicitations of pity were run through
with these sorts of power considerations
for nature if someone does not have much
power then pity can sort of become their
weapon deprived of the ability to
honestly influence the world they try to
recruit others to their aid but this is
very different to requesting help from a
friend or making a deal with a peer
rather they try to solicit help without
taking any responsibility or incurring
any sort of debt by encouraging other
people to take pity upon them they play
the role of an infant who is not only
unable to help themselves but unable to
even take ownership of their requests
for Aid we again see the underlying
value that nature places on honesty of
course his full thoughts are more
nuanced and subtle a lot of this is from
thus zarathustra and the second half of
Beyond Good and Evil if anyone wants to
check it out fich the person seeking
pity is a bit like the man in that tweet
who kept picking a fight with people
bigger than him and then saying oh no
don't hit me I'm just a small guy and
also it's my birthday how can you hit me
on my birthday it's a dishonest tactic
to try to manipulate and control the
actions of others for personal benefit
so he criticizes pity for two reasons
the first is the afor mention dishonesty
but the second is that he thinks this is
a terrible Dynamic for everyone involved
while n thinks that getting pity is a
reasonably decent short-term strategy
for the weak person he is very skeptical
that it will grant them fulfillment in
the long term it is a bit like what he
said earlier about people devaluing what
they desire when they cannot achieve it
while the pitiful person might be making
the best of a bad situation it is still
undeniably a bad situation on the other
hand he views the show of pity from the
more powerful person to be sort of
condescending he draws a distinction
between this and magnanimity magnanimity
is when someone feels so self assured
and Powerful that their cup overfloweth
and they are quite happy to help others
whereas the granting of pity is a much
more underhanded move nature thinks that
the pier encourages the pitiful person
to rely on them and so implicitly limits
the other person's development sure this
may be coming from a position of power
but it is still dishonest and nature
seems to hold anything that even sniffs
of dishonesty in real contempt again the
malicious aspect of the pier is probably
best illustrated by an analogy one of
the tactics someone in an abusive
relationship might use to control their
partner is to make them increasingly
dependent on them they might downplay
their partner's abilities and insist
that they need them or else they would
simply not be able to cope in doing this
they gradually sap their partner's
Independence since their partner is
prevented from doing anything for
themselves they too become convinced
that they are incompetent after all they
have no recent evidence to the contrary
thus the abuser uses an underhanded
tactic to increase their own power and
disempower their victim it seems like we
would still have a problem with this
Dynamic even if the victim had
themselves initially decried how
difficult they were finding life and had
asked the abuser to take pity on them we
tend to recognize that the healthier
thing to do would be to help out but
also gently encourage the partner to
take charge of their own life growing
their independent power bit by bit the
abusive situation is a bit like what
nature thinks the pitier gets out of the
arrangement they agree to Grant the less
powerful person their aid but it is a
loan with a steep rate of interest sure
I'll help you they say but only because
it will cause you to rely on my help and
thus increase my power over you this is
in stark contrast to ne's new
philosophers which make an appearance in
Beyond Good and Evil their job is partly
to help craft the new values for a
future Society but also to encourage
people to unlearn the virtue of pity and
instead help all to embrace their own
Wills to power this is also one of
zarathustra's injunctions to his
followers nature would view what the new
philosophers were doing as magnanimous
rather than pitying because this is not
an attempt to manipulate the weak but
rather to genuinely Aid them to increase
their independence and their strength
it's a subtle distinction but again the
difference between the abusive and the
healthy partner is a good analogy to
bring some of the Dynamics at Play Down
to Earth nature thinks that this whole
dynamic emerges because of weakness on
the one hand there are the people
seeking pity who are then dependent on
pity to recoup a scrap of power in the
world but on the other there are the
piers themselves if they were truly
strong in the way n wanted people to be
then they would be magnanimous rather
than duplicitously exploiting this coh
here with what he thought was the
highest form of power which was to be so
self assured independent and strong that
you do not feel the need to assert this
on others just to remind yourself that
it exists it is there you are certain of
it and you are not threatened by the
power of others and may even appreciate
their rivalry thus you are much more
likely to truly help other people rather
than secretly try to undermine them
famously Johan Von Gerta was the closest
n thought anyone had ever come to being
an Uber mench and yet he led no armies
instead he was a unique creative genius
who revolutionized Europe with his
writings I partly bring this up to
dispel the image many of us may have as
n as inherently Pro despotism but lastly
I want to examine the most significant
reason n hated weakness so much and it
helps illustrate a unique incredibly
interesting vein of his philosophy four
life denial philosophy and the origins
of ideas here's a question we don't
normally ask how should we judge a
philosophy of Life a great many will say
we judge it on the basis of whether it's
true and nature is not by any means
anti-truth but he thinks that
philosophies about the value of life or
how to live it cannot be evaluated like
this because we are all biased parties
when we walk around pontificating on how
life actually is we forget that we only
ever have access to our own life and we
cannot even take an outside objective
view on that this was part of why n
turned against pessimism and its
associative philosophies he concluded
that making claims about how life is as
a whole as if it can be judged
separately from people's individual
perceptions of their own lives was
pretty silly so if we accept that we
cannot rationally or objectively judge
life's value nature thinks we are
presented with a choice we can either
decide to reject life and so deem it a
negative or we can embrace it and deem
it a positive the trouble with the first
path is that it is self-defeating and
the trouble with the second is that it
is really unbelievably difficult this is
where we encounter a fascinating aspect
of n's philosophy his radical notion of
amor farti or loving your fate it's an
idea that had drifted up from stoic
philosophy but nature would push it to
its extreme he wanted to know how we
could love and cherish life even when it
is horribly unpleasant this was not just
a theoretical exercise for him nature
was played all through his life with a
painful chronic illness which made him
bedridden for months at a time in eom we
discover how he leared to appreciate
this State against all the odds and
arguably against rationality he used it
as the fuel for his thinking and his
philosophy which he valued above pretty
much all else this was his way of giving
his suffering meaning and eventually
rejoicing in it it was what helped him
love the pain but n also thought that
doing this took an awful lot of power
this time he was definitely not talking
about external power but rather the
internal self-overcoming kind this was
one reason he ended up deeply admiring
Jesus despite his broad critiques of
Christianity he saw Jesus as someone who
displayed an incredible level of
self-mastery anti- resentment and a
touch of amarati even as he was being
whipped within an inch of his life Jesus
was no conqueror or Emperor but ner
nonetheless considered him incredibly
powerful in this crucial Way by contrast
ner thought that philosophers and
thinkers of far weaker dispositions did
incredible harm not just to themselves
but also to the society's they inhabited
and the people of the World At Large
this comes out particularly strongly in
Twilight of the idols where he launches
an extended attack on one of
philosophy's most venerated figures
Socrates he criticizes how Socrates
reacted to his prosecution and eventual
death because of how this made him talk
about life in Plato's Pho Socrates says
that for a true philosopher death is
nothing to be afraid of in fact it is a
release from the indignity of living in
a physical form this Rich tradition of
philosophy using reason to devalue life
was then found in schopenhauer who
broadly speaking described life as an
unbearable trial and something we just
had to get through before the piece of
non-existence if he were alive today n
would have almost certainly criticized
antinatalists for the same th as they
suggested that life was not worth
starting because of its inherent
suffering for nature these philosophies
were both inherently weak and encouraged
weakness they all suggested the same
thing that life was somehow undesirable
and robbed of value because of the
struggle involved in living this is the
opposite of n's desired attitude of
amarati rather than a dogged commitment
to loving life it was an intellectual
commitment to rejecting it but so what
if a few philosophers want to reject
life why should we care well nature
thinks that these ideas slowly begin to
poison any society they inhabit and
eventually sew the seeds for its
collapse this is what he thought
particular strains of Christianity had
done in Europe whereas he admired Jesus
n had a real B to pick with St Paul and
all of his praise of celibacy and
self-denial he also hated the conception
of this life as a precursor to some
greater more important existence in the
vast Beyond he saw all of this as
encouraging life- denying weakness in
wider Society it reassured people that
this life did not matter and was far
less valuable than the one to come he
saw the denial of our basest and deepest
instincts as robbing us of the Primal
natural urge we had to survive and
wrestle with life in short he thought
that the philosophies made by people he
saw as weak also made other people weak
again this ties back with what we were
saying earlier about resentment and the
devaluing of strength there's a real
vein of misery loves company to ne's
philosophy and he thought anyone who was
weak either internally or externally
would probably encourage others to
become so as well one way this happened
was the above mentioned weaponized
morality but another was teaching people
that life was not that valuable in the
first place if life does not not matter
all that much then why bother trying to
make the most of it why should you care
about mastering your will or making your
life meaningful or acting or even
getting out of bed in the morning
essentially n thought that these
philosophies of weakness which did not
Embrace Life Would proliferate passive
nihilism and unfulfillment wherever they
went he saw them as more properly
analogous to diseases than philosophies
and so deserved his unmitigated scorn
and while I don't necessarily agree with
n wholesale here for instance I'm highly
critical of his interpretation of
Socrates I do think there is something
in his overall point I live in the UK if
you couldn't tell from my near parodic
accent and a certain sort of pessimism
just hangs in the air here in my
experience there is a general skepticism
about being too enthusiastic about life
or any sort of activity that goes too
far against the grain of habit it is
often far more socially respectable to
be a pessimist than an optimist and
anyone with a noticeably sunnier
disposition is often looked at as as if
they are stupid or otherwise
irredeemably naive but beyond any sort
of cultural observation we can see this
on a small scale in Social Circles it
only takes a particularly cynical or
pessimistic person to make whole groups
feel as if they cannot express a more
positive outlook it is far easier to
mock someone who Embraces life than
someone who rejects it and this is
partly why nature is so worried about
the prevalence of philosophies like
pessimism and according to him it is all
because the pessimist is just not strong
enough enough to Bear the unpleasant or
unfortunate aspects of life for him when
they put forward a philosophy of Life
they think they are commenting on the
world but they are really only
reflecting themselves and a lot of n's
criticisms of weakness come down to this
he would not mind it as much if they
kept to themselves but this is broadly
not the tendency instead he thinks they
venture out into the world full of
resentment and envy impossible to trust
demanding pity and insisting that no one
should care that much about about life
itself for him they are like the crabs
at the bottom of a bucket refusing to
let anyone else climb out this is why he
abor weakness because in his view it is
not just unpleasant not just a shame but
it is terrifyingly dangerous so how far
do you agree with him but if you want a
totally different perspective on many of
these issues then check out this video
to explore dov's radical philosophy of
selfless spiritual love and stick around
for more on thinking to improve your
life
関連動画をさらに表示
Nietzsche's Most Controversial Idea | Beyond Good and Evil
Becoming Who You Really Are - The Philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche
Nietzsche's Theory Of ‘Finding Yourself’: It’s Not About Self-Discovery
PHILOSOPHY - Nietzsche
8 Stoic Habits for Becoming Your Best Self
Nihilisme Membunuh Nilai Tradisional | Filosofi Friedrich Nietzsche | Philosopher #1
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)