Nihilist Roll Call

[BellaBellucci]

ni·hil·ism noun \ˈnī-(h)ə-ˌli-zəm, ˈnē-\

Definition of NIHILISM

1
a : a viewpoint that traditional values and beliefs are unfounded and that existence is senseless and useless
b : a doctrine that denies any objective ground of truth and especially of moral truths
2
a : a doctrine or belief that conditions in the social organization are so bad as to make destruction desirable for its own sake independent of any constructive program or possibility

~BB~

[speedking59]

"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents."

and

"I saw a man pursuing the horizon
Round and round they sped.
I was disturbed at this;
I accosted the man.
'It is futile,' I said,
'You can never ------'
'You lie,' he cried,
And ran on."

so i vote yes.

[dderek123]

http://bavatuesdays.com/files/2011/01/ule_nihilist.gif
Nihilism is pretty exhausting :)

[maxpower]

Yeah, count me in. Do we get special hats?

[Quiet Reflections]

Yes.

[robertlouis]

If you vote "no", does it indicate nihilist tendencies? :p

[TempestTS]

I refuse to answer this because nothing matters anyway...

[Falling]

I vote yes!

[broncofan]

"Say what you will about the tenets of national socialism dude, at least it's an ethos"

"Ve believe in nushing Lebowski, nushing."

I actually believe in some system of value and think there are grounds for objective truth. So I'm disqualified.

[dderek123]

http://fuuka.warosu.org/data/tg/img/0256/77/1372347845494.jpg

[TatianaSummer]

Me no understand but you know I am with you.
Mami voy a toaaa!! :party:

[nysprod]

I suggest that by having this poll, your placing meaning on something where none exists...lol.

[speedking59]

I suggest that by having this poll, your placing meaning on something where none exists...lol.
you've pegged the dilemma of nihilism quite nicely. this dilemma was the impetus for the development of existentialism as a world view and philosophy.

Albert Camus wrote in a 1950 essay, "A literature of despair is a contradiction in terms... In the darkest depths of our nihilism I have sought only for the means to transcend nihilism."

[Merkurie]

No.
Nihlisim makes me sad.
So I choose to live life with purpose.

[Ecstatic]

I refuse to answer this because nothing matters anyway...

Best answer!

[trish]

Nihilism is objectively true and should be valued above all alternative philosophies.

[Stavros]

Nihilism is objectively true and should be valued above all alternative philosophies.

Nihilism is objectively false and has no value as an alternative to existing systems of belief precisely because it rejects objective truth -there may be some cases, for example gender and sexuality, in which the categories of identity and behaviour we know as Male and Female are more flexible than 'reality' suggests, that they cannot be objectively fixed. But you don't need to be a Nihilist to believe that. In other cases, such as those morals which enable us to live together by recognising in language, laws and behavioural norms our rights and responsibilities, Nihilism undermines security, safety and in general, decent behaviour. Nihilism appeals to disaffected people, usually young people who have yet to progress beyond adolescence, and who think it's cool to sneer at the politics and religion of their parents and the older generation, even if they themselves have nothing to offer as an alternative but their angst.

[trish]

Not to mention the strong form of nihilism is self-contradictory.

[Prospero]

Excellent responses from Stavros and trish

[Jamie French]

Philosophies are what we had before hard science stepped in and said, "Hey seriously guys, what you see out there is what there is."

Existential quandaries are a byproduct of the Neocortex bickering with the Limbic system in a mind that's still developing on an evolutionary scale.

People who say that a lack of meaning in the universe leads one to live a life where all manner of awful things are permitted are just as bad as proponents of the Ten Commandments being the only thing that separates civility from chaos.

Morals are what we call the instinctual urges to insure the well being and propagation of our species. Doing good by others is tied into our brains rewards centers. Goofy wiring through random mutation is what leads to bad behavior.

Existing is easy to figure out, so long as you don't have a fetish for a rewarding end game summation.

[trish]

And how does one interpret the phase, "Hey seriously guys," if not as: "It's objectively true people, what you see out there is what there is. You should value the truth, it's better than that philosophical bickering between the Neocortex and the Limbic system."? And that is exactly what nihilism isn't.

[BellaBellucci]

I suggest that by having this poll, your placing meaning on something where none exists...lol.

Ahh, but isn't that the true lesson of nihilism? That in the absence of intrinsic value, value is determined subjectively?


And how does one interpret the phase, "Hey seriously guys," if not as: "It's objectively true people, what you see out there is what there is. You should value the truth, it's better than that philosophical bickering between the Neocortex and the Limbic system."? And that is exactly what nihilism isn't.

I think she's confusing nihilism and perspectivism because they're both attributed to Nietzsche (as evidenced in my comment above). That said, I doubt Jamie understands Nietzsche.

~BB~

[runningdownthatdream]

Nihilism is objectively false and has no value as an alternative to existing systems of belief precisely because it rejects objective truth -there may be some cases, for example gender and sexuality, in which the categories of identity and behaviour we know as Male and Female are more flexible than 'reality' suggests, that they cannot be objectively fixed. But you don't need to be a Nihilist to believe that. In other cases, such as those morals which enable us to live together by recognising in language, laws and behavioural norms our rights and responsibilities, Nihilism undermines security, safety and in general, decent behaviour. Nihilism appeals to disaffected people, usually young people who have yet to progress beyond adolescence, and who think it's cool to sneer at the politics and religion of their parents and the older generation, even if they themselves have nothing to offer as an alternative but their angst.

Glad to see Trish managed to lure you back here from whatever part of life's woodwork you had retreated to!

[runningdownthatdream]

In calling oneself a nihilist one ceases to be a nihilist.

We humans tend to have a compulsion to categorize, proceduralize, and proselytize just about everything in our short lives. That seems to be our raison d'etre. When the individual tries to deviate from the pack (like contemplate 'nihilisim') somebody comes along to give a name to his random thoughts, codify it in works of grandeur, and then sell the idea (for profit or not) which just attracts disciples who aren't capable of coming up with their own philosophy. Before you could say 'the end is upon us' there's a whole gravy train created which just feeds the dense, dissolute, and dying with real and imagined products.

.......but i'm just mindlessly rambling

[trish]

Neitzsche was a perspectivalist. But he wasn't a nihilist (except in his blackest hours) and he persistently warned against nihilism. Philosophizing with a hammer means to to sound out all values as if with a hammer and tuning fork and testing which ring true and which ring false. Re-evaluating all values and being a creator of values is not the same thing as endorsing no value and not the same thing as subjectivism. Neitzsche certainly judged some values as being symptomatic of weakness and others of strength. He was not above making assessments (which he took to have the standing of truth) of virtues, of values, cultures, arts, writings etc. This is neither nihilism nor subjectivism.

I personally am not a nihilist because I think claims can be true or false (to within prescribed degrees of tolerance) regardless of the epistemological problem of ascertaining which are which. Moreover I think workable models of the world (among other things) have a universal (if not intrinsic) value to humans attempting to survive in the world. If man is the measure of all things, there are still natural constraints on the values attained by any given measurement. If you believe in a meaningful notion of truth and have a sense that some things (like nihilism) are just better than other things independently of individual whims, then you can't be a nihilist. This is not to say that morality is written into the fabric of physics. It isn't. We are not morally bound to each other by the particle interactions and exchange of morons and quantum moral fields. Humans determine what is morally right and wrong on Earth for humans, but not on the basis of individual whim nor individual subjectivities. Conjecturally I'll venture that valuations evolve within cultures, societies and higher structures encompassed by and eventually encompassing the whole population of the planet.

[broncofan]

I think there are certain things that are true regardless of our comprehension or belief in them. It doesn't require someone to believe that something is the case in order for it to be so.

It is possible that our understanding of the cosmos is so limited that unanimous agreement on a set of underlying principles is not feasible. Even when proof of a phenomenon comes in the form of empirical evidence, you still have people who engage in denial-ism of one sort or another. But by even discussing whether one party is right and the other wrong in such a conflict, you are accepting that there is an objective truth whether you know it or not.

As per the part about systems of value. Just because you cannot articulate a fully developed value system by which to live does not mean you do not have some moral precepts you are unwilling to abandon.

[broncofan]

If you believe in a meaningful notion of truth and have a sense that some things (like nihilism) are just better than other things independently of individual whims, then you can't be a nihilist.
Very good litmus test right here. To say you do not is almost to accept that all you have is your opinion and that no truth exists apart from it. If that is the case, when engaging in an argument there would be no point bickering with someone else over what is the case. You would instead say, you have your opinion, I have mine and never the tween shall meet.

[BellaBellucci]

Neitzsche was a perspectivalist. But he wasn't a nihilist (except in his blackest hours) and he persistently warned against nihilism.

It would appear to me that he warned against nihilism not because it contained no truth, but because it did. He tended towards optimism, but the natural tendency of a person who sees no purpose for existence is towards pessimism or even justification for atrocity. 'In his darkest hours' is when he finally succumbed to this tendency, IMO.

Not to mention (and I had this out with my college professor with the support of another), I feel that the same optimism that he used to fill the void of nihilism was overcompensation for what we've now termed Depression, or maybe even Bi-Polar Disorder. I have first-hand experience with this. There's a reason philosophy and insanity often go hand-in-hand.

~BB~

[BellaBellucci]

Even when proof of a phenomenon comes in the form of empirical evidence, you still have people who engage in denial-ism of one sort or another.

To be fair, the nature of science requires doubt and constant re-evaluation.

~BB~

[broncofan]

To be fair, the nature of science requires doubt and constant re-evaluation.

~BB~
Einstein is reported to have said the following: "No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong."

This is why you can never be sure someone is engaging in denial-ism rather than reasoned skepticism. I think the essence of "denial-ism" is that you believe the person is engaging in bad faith, believing something a priori, and doing whatever they can to ignore contrary evidence. But being able to prove the distinction between these two is nearly impossible.

[BellaBellucci]

Einstein is reported to have said the following: "No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong."

This is why you can never be sure someone is engaging in denial-ism rather than reasoned skepticism. I think the essence of "denial-ism" is that you believe the person is engaging in bad faith, believing something a priori, and doing whatever they can to ignore contrary evidence. But being able to prove the distinction between these two is nearly impossible.

Welcome to my life. :lol:

~BB~

[joeninety]

I once held Nihilist views and found them to be true.......I then decided to shift away from that train of thought and found that reality becomes what you perceive it to be!!!!

[tsmirandameadows]

I actually believe in some system of value and think there are grounds for objective truth. So I'm disqualified.

Likewise.

[Jamie French]

Huh? What are you talking about? I'm not sure what you are trying to say about my post or if you even understood what I wrote. Please clarify.


And how does one interpret the phase, "Hey seriously guys," if not as: "It's objectively true people, what you see out there is what there is. You should value the truth, it's better than that philosophical bickering between the Neocortex and the Limbic system."? And that is exactly what nihilism isn't.

[Jamie French]

@ Trish: In all fairness, I can at least take a stab at a response based on what I think your understanding of my post was...

I wasn't making a case for nihilism. I was saying that any ism at all goes without merit in an age of scientific fact. I don't believe in any kind of truth with a capital T. I simply abide by the facts of the observable universe and stand by patiently as scientific mysteries are solved. My post wasn't even an expression of personal belief/truth. I was simply proposing a hypothesis born of a lifetime of observation, intuition and reading of the latest scientific findings from a myriad of disciplines.

Math is hard, a lot of scientific findings are confounding and thinking critically eats up more time than people might be willing to spare. Belief systems including nihilism are an easy way for people, (who at the end of the day don't really want to know how the sausage is made) feel like hard questions have answers they can understand.

[joeninety]

@ Trish: In all fairness, I can at least take a stab at a response based on what I think your understanding of my post was...

I wasn't making a case for nihilism. I was saying that any ism at all goes without merit in an age of scientific fact. I don't believe in any kind of truth with a capital T. I simply abide by the facts of the observable universe and stand by patiently as scientific mysteries are solved. My post wasn't even an expression of personal belief/truth. I was simply proposing a hypothesis born of a lifetime of observation, intuition and reading of the latest scientific findings from a myriad of disciplines.

The mysteries will never be solved ever, they will just evolve into next steps as the puzzle is infinite:confused:

[Ben]

~BB~

The Informers is a fairly nihilistic flick.
What other flicks are aptly titled: nihilistic???
I guess a slew of horror flicks like the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre....
Is the colossal cosmos absolutely pointless? Well, there's an argument there.
The singer/songwriter Robert Smith of The Cure pointed out that people have faith 'cause they're scared.... But, as Smith said, if you've no belief in your own existence after you die, well, everything is so hollow.
Well, is that nihilistic? Or just rational -- ha ha!
Well, even Noam Chomsky said belief in God or an afterlife is irrational.... Stephen Hawking, too, has pointed that out.

[trish]

@ Trish: In all fairness, I can at least take a stab at a response based on what I think your understanding of my post was...

I wasn't making a case for nihilism. I was saying that any ism at all goes without merit in an age of scientific fact. I don't believe in any kind of truth with a capital T. I simply abide by the facts of the observable universe and stand by patiently as scientific mysteries are solved. My post wasn't even an expression of personal belief/truth. I was simply proposing a hypothesis born of a lifetime of observation, intuition and reading of the latest scientific findings from a myriad of disciplines.

Math is hard, a lot of scientific findings are confounding and thinking critically eats up more time than people might be willing to spare. Belief systems including nihilism are an easy way for people, (who at the end of the day don't really want to know how the sausage is made) feel like hard questions have answers they can understand.

Nice post. Yes, I did mistakenly take your original post as a defense of a sort of nihilism. Sorry, my bad.

I applaud the position, "I simply abide by the facts of the observable universe and stand by patiently as scientific mysteries are...". Rather ending it with the word "solved" I would say "further illuminated" or "further explicated," but the spirit I think is the same.

This is not to say science or even ordinary observation can never reach a final answer on anything. Nor is it an invitation to say there is no such thing as truth, whether you spell with a capital or not. When a person (even a scientist) makes a claim she is laying claim (however tentative) to a truth.

I agree, most people don't really want to know "how to make sausage" and skip the real difficulties. But they're also missing out on a lot of delicious fun.

Thanks for your response.

[trish]

The mysteries will never be solved ever, they will just evolve into next steps as the puzzle is infinite:confused:What mysteries are you talking about? The strategy to tic-tac-toe? The search for the smallest odd prime number? What puzzle and how do you know it's infinite? Which infinity? Aleph naught? Aleph sub omega? Beth sub two to the omega power? What are you talking about? :?::?::?:

[broncofan]

What mysteries are you talking about? The strategy to tic-tac-toe? The search for the smallest odd prime number? What puzzle and how do you know it's infinite? Which infinity? Aleph naught? Aleph sub omega? Beth sub two to the omega power? What are you talking about? :?::?::?:
This is a side of you I've never seen before:):):). I won't elaborate on that, but I am amused and impressed.

[runningdownthatdream]

Nice post. Yes, I did mistakenly take your original post as a defense of a sort of nihilism. Sorry, my bad.

I applaud the position, "I simply abide by the facts of the observable universe and stand by patiently as scientific mysteries are...". Rather ending it with the word "solved" I would say "further illuminated" or "further explicated," but the spirit I think is the same.

This is not to say science or even ordinary observation can never reach a final answer on anything. Nor is it an invitation to say there is no such thing as truth, whether you spell with a capital or not. When a person (even a scientist) makes a claim she is laying claim (however tentative) to a truth.

I agree, most people don't really want to know "how to make sausage" and skip the real difficulties. But they're also missing out on a lot of delicious fun.

Thanks for your response.

Count me as one of those who don't really want to know "how to make sausage". When younger I thought a lot about truths and answers and solutions to problems. With age i'm less inclined to contemplate these things. I don't want to find the meaning of life nor do I hold a view that life is meaningless. I'm more content to just follow the path to the known conclusion - corporeal death. I'm not interested in trying to find out what happens after that either. The universe and everything within it is unchangeable. Perhaps there are greater truths - spiritually and physically - but what will knowing those truths ultimately change? I'm content to be an observer but I will say that sometimes it can be fun to chase after answers just for the joy of the ride.

[trish]

Count me as one of those who don't really want to know "how to make sausage". When younger I thought a lot about truths and answers and solutions to problems. With age i'm less inclined to contemplate these things. I don't want to find the meaning of life nor do I hold a view that life is meaningless. I'm more content to just follow the path to the known conclusion - corporeal death. I'm not interested in trying to find out what happens after that either. The universe and everything within it is unchangeable. Perhaps there are greater truths - spiritually and physically - but what will knowing those truths ultimately change? I'm content to be an observer but I will say that sometimes it can be fun to chase after answers just for the joy of the ride.

Unless, I mistook Jamie again, I think "knowing how to make sausage" refers to knowing the nuts and bolts of any given any issue, rather than to philosophical generalities like "what is truth?" I don't spend a lot of time on the meaning of life either. I prefer thinking about sausages...hmmmm...and how they're made.

[joeninety]

What mysteries are you talking about? The strategy to tic-tac-toe? The search for the smallest odd prime number? What puzzle and how do you know it's infinite? Which infinity? Aleph naught? Aleph sub omega? Beth sub two to the omega power? What are you talking about? :?::?::?:

One day Trish, you will never see, the all in nothing and the nothing in me......seriously just let go and wander;)

[Jericho]

....

[trish]

Wow man!

[broncofan]

The mysteries will never be solved ever, they will just evolve into next steps as the puzzle is infinite:confused:
Whether a puzzle is soluble does not necessarily relate to whether there's an objective truth. It relates more to the epistemological problem we have of establishing any particular truth. You cannot definitively establish any maxim by pure induction, that is by simply observing sequences of events and deriving laws from them. You also cannot use deduction to explain the world unless there are maxims that can be used as starting points to do so. But how would these maxims be generated except by induction? So proving anything beyond any doubt is very difficult.

However, I believe some truth exists outside my ability to prove it or make others accept it.

Edit: I also want to point out, in a rare moment of humility, that there are also truths that I am unaware of and would probably not grasp if brought face to face with.

[joeninety]

Like I said to Trish, and say to you in another manner let go of those firmly held beliefs of what you think you know and wander........

[joeninety]

Edit: I also want to point out, in a rare moment of humility, that there are also truths that I am unaware of and would probably not grasp if brought face to face with.

This is also true, but I hope that one day if you ever see them, that you will be able to recognise them and understand them for what they are:praying:

[CORVETTEDUDE]

Deny everything and admit to nothing!!!

[runningdownthatdream]

Ahh, but isn't that the true lesson of nihilism? That in the absence of intrinsic value, value is determined subjectively?



I think she's confusing nihilism and perspectivism because they're both attributed to Nietzsche (as evidenced in my comment above). That said, I doubt Jamie understands Nietzsche.

~BB~

Nietzsche was a lonely, emotionally insecure man though clearly possessing a brilliant mind. His view of himself and how he fit into the times, I think, influenced his writing. To better understand his writing, I think you also have to have a good understanding of that era during which he lived and especially that period in Germany. To read his work and try to pick out the philosophy solely on the writing really doesn't do him justice. That he grappled with the question of being human (with our good and bad traits) while aspiring to be super-human (by amplifying the good to achieve tangible results) is obvious to me. The catalyst for his break from our reality - the episode with the horse in Turin - really shows that struggle IMO.

Curious thing: though there is no evidence that Nietzsche read Dostoevsky and specifically The Idiot, his episode with the horse in Turin - after which he spends the rest of his life in a sanatorium - closely mirrors the ending of The Idiot as Myshkin also rushes out into the street and breaks down weeping at the sight of a horse being whipped by it's owner. Myshkin too winds up 'insane'.

[trish]

Nietzsche's Will To Power refers to Dostoyevsky at least six times(in sections 82, 233, 434, 740, 788 and 821). To Nietzsche, Dostoyevsky is a symptom of pessimism and nihilism. It is said his insanity was the onset of late stage syphilus. The parallel between the horse in Turin and the horse in The Idiot is indeed striking. I never picked up on that before.

[Jamie French]

Thank you, just remember - It's not the job of science to find a "final answer" and/or to discover meaning. Meaning is a human construct. As I've said before; a fight between the Neocortex and the Limbic System.


Nice post. Yes, I did mistakenly take your original post as a defense of a sort of nihilism. Sorry, my bad.

I applaud the position, "I simply abide by the facts of the observable universe and stand by patiently as scientific mysteries are...". Rather ending it with the word "solved" I would say "further illuminated" or "further explicated," but the spirit I think is the same.

This is not to say science or even ordinary observation can never reach a final answer on anything. Nor is it an invitation to say there is no such thing as truth, whether you spell with a capital or not. When a person (even a scientist) makes a claim she is laying claim (however tentative) to a truth.

I agree, most people don't really want to know "how to make sausage" and skip the real difficulties. But they're also missing out on a lot of delicious fun.

Thanks for your response.

[Jamie French]

I saw that something name dropped me as not being able to understand my ol' friend Freddy. Having that person and a few others blocked, I do not know what the context of the jibe was but rest assured I was reading the guys work at 17. Going over every footnote and annotation that poor Walter Kaufman so valiantly put together. It was incredibly hard for Walter to translate Nietchze's perfect use of the German language to English in a way that did the philosopher's work any justice. From The birth of Tragedy to Ecce Homo, Human All Too Human, Thus Spake Zarathustra and all books in between... I have read, studied and own them all. It's not light reading and it can take years to grasp the man's finer points. Especially over a lifetime of shifting from one definitive viewpoint to another... Reading Nietzche's complete body of work is so much more a case study of a brilliant and broken man than an account of any relevant philosophy. Hell, towards the end you can almost smell the syphilis coming off the pages.

[runningdownthatdream]

Nietzsche's Will To Power refers to Dostoyevsky at least six times(in sections 82, 233, 434, 740, 788 and 821). To Nietzsche, Dostoyevsky is a symptom of pessimism and nihilism. It is said his insanity was the onset of late stage syphilus. The parallel between the horse in Turin and the horse in The Idiot is indeed striking. I never picked up on that before.

Didn't read Will to Power - it was assembled by that idiot sister of his who was a virulent racist. She was the one that coloured his philosophy with the idea about the superman being Aryan/Germanic. She and her husband had very close links to the Nazis and much much earlier societies engaged in the distribution of racist - and specifically anti-semitic - literature at the turn of the century. Fascinating trivia about her: she helped sponsor an expedition of German 'pioneers' in the late 1880s to Paraguay. They founded a settlement called Nueva Germania with the express purpose to propagate a pure German/Aryan race. Sadly, the settlement has survived to this day albeit full of deformed, semi-mutant people since they refused to inter-marry with any non-germans!

[trish]

Didn't read Will to Power - it was assembled by that idiot sister of his who was a virulent racist. She was the one that coloured his philosophy with the idea about the superman being Aryan/Germanic. She and her husband had very close links to the Nazis and much much earlier societies engaged in the distribution of racist - and specifically anti-semitic - literature at the turn of the century. Fascinating trivia about her: she helped sponsor an expedition of German 'pioneers' in the late 1880s to Paraguay. They founded a settlement called Nueva Germania with the express purpose to propagate a pure German/Aryan race. Sadly, the settlement has survived to this day albeit full of deformed, semi-mutant people since they refused to inter-marry with any non-germans!
Yes the abuses to which Nietzsche is put began with his sister; unfortunately they don't end there. Ayn Rand refers to businessmen as Ubermenschen for fuck's sake. When Nietzsche spoke of the transformative nature of severe self-love it wasn't the greed of selfishness and competitive capitalism to which he referred. But as Jamie mentions, Walter Kaufmann is the Nietzsche interpreter and translator par excellence. He does a great job with the Will To Power. I recommend it.

[runningdownthatdream]

Yes the abuses to which Nietzsche is put began with his sister; unfortunately they don't end there. Ayn Rand refers to businessmen as Ubermenschen for fuck's sake. When Nietzsche spoke of the transformative nature of severe self-love it wasn't the greed of selfishness and competitive capitalism to which he referred. But as Jamie mentions, Walter Kaufmann is the Nietzsche interpreter and translator par excellence. He does a great job with the Will To Power. I recommend it.

If I could drag myself to get back into reading, I will certainly pick it up. That and the Aslan book you and Prospero mentioned. the little reading I've done in the past year - for some strange reason - has been around the late Medieval Period in Europe: the Heptameron, the Decameron, and now slowly making my way through Barbara Tuchman's A Distant Mirror. I should read Malleus Maleficarum again too - it helps make sense of nonsense i.e.: Catholicism

[trish]

Distant Mirror's on my to read list. So many books..so little time.
Good night all.

[Prospero]

"A Distant Mirror" is a fine work o history - through the sheer grimness recounted by Barbra Tuchman becomes rather repetetive. The best book on medieval history I have ever read is "Montaillou" by Emmanual Roy Ladurie - based on the written records kept of the Albigensian inquisition. An astonshing picture of village life in medieval France emerges.

[robertlouis]

"A Distant Mirror" is a fine work o history - through the sheer grimness recounted by Barbra Tuchman becomes rather repetetive. The best book on medieval history I have ever read is "Montaillou" by Emmanual Roy Ladurie - based on the written records kept of the Albigensian inquisition. An astonshing picture of village life in medieval France emerges.

I've read both too. It's a sad irony of history that we would never have gained that insight into mediaeval french life without the horrific excesses of the church's prosecution of the Cathars, as it's largely based on transcriptions taken from the Inquisition.

You're certainly in for a fascinating read, Trish. When it comes to Barbara Tuchman I can also heartily recommend The Guns of August, about the early rumblings of the First World War, and The March of Folly which focuses on the great mistakes that have shaped history through the ages.

[Prospero]

Both excellent books... The Guns of August is published also as simply August 1914... I'm not sure which is the US title.

She also wrote an excellent book called The Proud Tower about the state of the world in the early 20th century... before the tragedy

[robertlouis]

Apropos of nothing else, how are you getting on with the Leigh Fermor biography?

[Stavros]

Glad to see Trish managed to lure you back here from whatever part of life's woodwork you had retreated to!

Life's woodwork -a close relative came through a grim ordeal with cancer so I took her off to Switzerland for some revivifying rest; coincidentally, in light of the comments on Nietzsche, we stayed near the Villa at Tribschen where Wagner lived in the 1860s before moving to Bayreuth; on whose staircase a small group of musicians played the Siegfried Idyll on Christmas morning as Cosima's birthday present; and where Nietzsche was a regular visitor before the two fell out -Nietzsche's bedroom was on the top floor which isn't open to visitors whereas the dining room and the music room are; the location by the lake with the mountains at the back is breathtaking.

Nietzsche is mostly remembered as a philosopher of individualism whose loathing of Christianity derived from his hostility to the humility and pacificism of Christ which Nietzsche saw as a form of weakness and subjugation to forces which in fact, Nietzsche says, are in control of man the individual. He wanted to replace the notion of subservience to God with the promotion of the self as the driving force of (personal) history -whereas Schopenhauer saw this 'will' as being the futile search for a meaning and ultimate satisfaction with material life that can never be realised, Nietszche saw it as the release of man from the shackles of organised religion -a sympathy shared by Wagner (and incidentally, Verdi)- and is a reason why libertarian economists and some anarchists have been drawn to his Wagnerian prose.

Nietzsche remains one of the most acute critics of Wagner, who could never let go of his attachment to Schopenhauer. Nietzsche was appalled by the idolisation of Wagner that he saw at Bayreuth in 1876, Richard and Cosima's anti-semitism, and the associations with the growth of German nationalism which Nietzsche also felt alien to. After his rejection of Wagner, Nietzsche went to see Carmen and was so overwhelmed by it he went back and saw it 40 odd times -but then it seems Nietzsche, whose syphilis was his era's version of HIV/AIDS and caught from a myriad of European prostitutes- was overwhelmed by the slightest things.

And how gratifying it is to see a positive reference to The Turin Horse (Bela Tarr, Hungary 2011).

[joeninety]

Yes the abuses to which Nietzsche is put began with his sister; unfortunately they don't end there. Ayn Rand refers to businessmen as Ubermenschen for fuck's sake. When Nietzsche spoke of the transformative nature of severe self-love it wasn't the greed of selfishness and competitive capitalism to which he referred. But as Jamie mentions, Walter Kaufmann is the Nietzsche interpreter and translator par excellence. He does a great job with the Will To Power. I recommend it.

But isn't that kind of the point it is "his" interpretation of Nietzsche work, you may well like his interpretation as it sits well with your notion of what you have read, but is it really what Nietzsche meant or has a lot of his meaning been lost in translation via an interpreter.

Interpretation of events and written works is a highly subjective individualistic matter, many people will view the same event differently due to how they interpreted it. Is one of them right and the rest of them wrong.....or are they all seeing a piece of the event, so when put together, the event can possibly be better translated......or are they all completely wrong..........or are two of them spot on and 4 completely wrong, throw in a complete lack of evidence who would you assume was correct the majority or the minority, and on and on and on.

Nobody for the most part truly knows what another is thinking, written works that have been interpreted without the backing of the voice of that author have medium-low meaning as far as I am concerned.........

[trish]

Don't be so tied to the issue of authenticity. Just let go and wander.

[joeninety]

Don't be so tied to the issue of authenticity. Just let go and wander.

Touche Trish...... So how is wandering working out for you, have you seen any truths about reality?

[Prospero]

Apropos of nothing else, how are you getting on with the Leigh Fermor biography?

Taking it in my suitcase next week

[BellaBellucci]

This thread is gold. Thanks, everyone, for the leads on follow-up research. :)

~BB~

[runningdownthatdream]

Life's woodwork -a close relative came through a grim ordeal with cancer so I took her off to Switzerland for some revivifying rest; coincidentally, in light of the comments on Nietzsche, we stayed near the Villa at Tribschen where Wagner lived in the 1860s before moving to Bayreuth; on whose staircase a small group of musicians played the Siegfried Idyll on Christmas morning as Cosima's birthday present; and where Nietzsche was a regular visitor before the two fell out -Nietzsche's bedroom was on the top floor which isn't open to visitors whereas the dining room and the music room are; the location by the lake with the mountains at the back is breathtaking.

Nietzsche is mostly remembered as a philosopher of individualism whose loathing of Christianity derived from his hostility to the humility and pacificism of Christ which Nietzsche saw as a form of weakness and subjugation to forces which in fact, Nietzsche says, are in control of man the individual. He wanted to replace the notion of subservience to God with the promotion of the self as the driving force of (personal) history -whereas Schopenhauer saw this 'will' as being the futile search for a meaning and ultimate satisfaction with material life that can never be realised, Nietszche saw it as the release of man from the shackles of organised religion -a sympathy shared by Wagner (and incidentally, Verdi)- and is a reason why libertarian economists and some anarchists have been drawn to his Wagnerian prose.

Nietzsche remains one of the most acute critics of Wagner, who could never let go of his attachment to Schopenhauer. Nietzsche was appalled by the idolisation of Wagner that he saw at Bayreuth in 1876, Richard and Cosima's anti-semitism, and the associations with the growth of German nationalism which Nietzsche also felt alien to. After his rejection of Wagner, Nietzsche went to see Carmen and was so overwhelmed by it he went back and saw it 40 odd times -but then it seems Nietzsche, whose syphilis was his era's version of HIV/AIDS and caught from a myriad of European prostitutes- was overwhelmed by the slightest things.

And how gratifying it is to see a positive reference to The Turin Horse (Bela Tarr, Hungary 2011).

Nice of you to help someone revivify........ although it compromises your curmudgeon status ;)

You and the Turin Horse are forever linked here after your debates with Prospero about Bela Tarr and that work of his specifically. I'm somewhat embarrassed to admit that I recalled that discussion while writing the previous post :smh

[Stavros]

No need to be embarrassed. As for being a 'curmudgeon' this is somebody else's fantasy that has nothing to do with me. I could also point out relevant to the previous discussion that Dostoyevsky also has a dream sequence in Crime and Punishment in which Raskolnikov imagines a horse being flogged by drunken peasants in his childhood village.

There is an interesting discussion of Tarr's film in the link -the critic sees it as the last six days of mankind as a riposte to the six first days of creation; he is slightly wrong -the walls of the house in which the two people live are not bare -there is a portrait of a woman, presumably mother/wife (Virgin Mary?); and the voice over is not unusual as it is used throughout Satantango and is a direct quotation from the book by Krasznahorkai on which the film is based.

http://theseventhart.info/tag/erika-bok/