What differs Nietzsche's "The bermensch" from Stoicism?

What differs Nietzsche's "The Übermensch" from Stoicism?

  1. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    They don't have much in common at all tbdesu

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      Any explanation as to how? Nietzsche warns of an aimless post god society, of which he creates The Übermensch to be in the place of god so humans are able to form their own morality, meanwhile Stoicism also gives purpose in life.

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        absurdism gives purpose that dont mean its the same as platonic purpose 4 example

  2. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    You have to understand that Nietzsche is an atheist, a nihilist, a postmodernist which appeals to a lot of liberals and other deeply neurotic teenagers because Nietzsche is the achievement of the secular humanism which booted Christianity out of power. Nietzsche is overtly anti-christian, and it permits to all the atheist bug men to actually see themselves as the righteous resilient guy who create his own values.
    In effect trannies are the best ubermen ever: they hate to see themselves as they really are, so they change both their neurotic spirit and also their body to match the narrative of the ubermen and even better, they impose their values to non-trannies. Same thing with feminists and all the idolized minorities in Humanism.

    Naturally, the atheists cant know right from wrong, so their mental gymnastics about the uberman is flawed. The uberman is actually the last man: the uberman despises so much reality after seeing nihilism, that out of resentment for reality, the uberman CHOOSES to sink further in his delusion by building a narrative where he is not the last man, but actually the opposite, ie the uberman who creates his own values, ie cooming by living in own brain farts until he dies.

    Oh and by the way only atheists take him seriously in the first place. Atheists love him because according to them, he found a way to be nihilistic without leading to suicide. In order to avoid being called a nihilist, friedrich PUSSY nietzsche re-defined nihilism to be 'not living in the present moment', which applies to christianity.
    .

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      So now atheists dont say they are nihilistic, they say they are vitalist. And as a bonus they get to shit on christianity (their perpetual enemy that they defeated centuries ago, yet they still beat a dead horse to smugly fill up their days). You have to understand that atheists are braindead hypocrites so even when they say they are vitalist instead of nihilistic, they still remain 100% hedonistic and they still dont know what not do with their lives beyond making up self-aggrandizing narratives to feel justified for wanting to and actually doing coomming all day long

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        Atheism is a hylic religion

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      stoicism rejects religion

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        Christianity is the culmination of Stoic thought. Praise the Logos! John 1:1

  3. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    The only reason nietshit ever came into the public consciousness is because hitler liked him. He is trash and his books should be burned for enabling rightism.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      thats his sisters fault ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

  4. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Nietzsche is a stoic
    >Nietzsche is a nihilist
    >Nietzsche is a postmodernist
    The absolute state of LULZ

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      Nietzsche killed god, but pop culture killed Nietzsche.
      RIP moustacheman.

  5. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    stoicism is a rationalist view about the cosmos, the uberman is jsut a guy who wants to feel good while saying nihilism is awesome

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      > Nietzsche was heavily opposed to nihilism, you never read him did you..

  6. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Nietzsche hated stoicism

  7. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    The ubermensch chooses his moral ideals by himself and is fully aware of that, while the stoic feels compelled to follow a set of moral ideals which he believes are universal.
    In terms of normative ethics there's a lot in common, but the metaethics are opposite to each other.
    There.
    /thread

  8. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    > stoicism comes down to not letting the suffering of the world consume you by not reacting to the world

    > the ubermensch is more a symbol of an indivuated or self-actualized person who is 100% authentically him or herself and is no longer led by their animalistic drives
    > reaching the ubermensch is impossible but by doing so anyways one lives a better life strategy than sheer nihilism

  9. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    >So you want to live “according to nature?” Oh, you noble Stoics, what a fraud is in this phrase! Imagine something like nature, profligate without measure, indifferent without measure, without purpose and regard, without mercy and justice, fertile and barren and uncertain at the same time, think of indifference itself as power – how could you live according to this indifference? Living – isn’t that wanting specifically to be something other than this nature? Isn’t living assessing, preferring, being unfair, being limited, wanting to be different? And assuming your imperative to “live according to nature” basically amounts to “living according to life” – well how could you not? Why make a principle out of what you yourselves are and must be? – But in fact, something quite different is going on: while pretending with delight to read the canon of your law in nature, you want the opposite, you strange actors and self-deceivers! Your pride wants to dictate and annex your morals and ideals onto nature – yes, nature itself –, you demand that it be nature “according to Stoa” and you want to make all existence exist in your own image alone – as a huge eternal glorification and universalization of Stoicism! For all your love of truth, you have forced yourselves so long, so persistently, and with such hypnotic rigidity to have a false, namely Stoic, view of nature, that you can no longer see it any other way, – and some abysmal piece of arrogance finally gives you the madhouse hope that because you know how to tyrannize yourselves – Stoicism is self-tyranny –, nature lets itself be tyrannized as well: because isn’t the Stoic a piece of nature? . . . But this is an old, eternal story: what happened back then with the Stoics still happens today, just as soon as a philosophy begins believing in itself.
    1/2

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      >It always creates the world in its own image, it cannot do otherwise; philosophy is this tyrannical drive itself, the most spiritual will to power, to the “creation of the world,” to the causa prima.

      Also to all the retards ITT who think le uberman is just le creator of his own morals or that nietzsche wants a society with such people, refrain from reading him from now on.
      2/2

Your email address will not be published.