>>25623327
If there are no plebs then someone without pity was strong enough to get rid of them and now no-one can pity again. If you are no fan of pity sounds like win win

>cries over a broken horse

>>25623402
I don't believe this ever actually happened

>>25623327
>I thought the benefit of natural selection was that it develops strength
This is the Social Darwinian view (not Darwin himself), and Nietzsche disagreed with it, asserting instead that natural selection developed adaptability, which is a soft feminine trait in Nietzsche's eyes (i.e., a weakening of masculine power, which is what his word "strength" was really synonymous with). His overmen were therefore antithetical to the process of natural selection; history stands against them, and vice versa. (Which complements the many times he was critical of traditionalism and conservatism.)

File: nitch.png (2 MB, 1672x941)

2 MB PNG

>>25623327
im probably going to butcher something so forgive me

nitch is somewhat torn between wanting to overcome the christian morality of the meek inheriting the earth while also not wanting to become the butcher and tyrant of the weak. he's not exactly some jocko-esc TND cynic, but he also wants the world to awaken into acknowledging the "void" and building their own values from it upon seeing it.

I'll explain this with the camel, lion, and baby
the camel is the mule, the meek obeyier that follows because it ought to. this is the average man for nitch.
the lion is the destroyer, and you would be probably see the "destruction of the weak" expression here the most. the lion is the violent man who destroys his mind of the previous thoughts and ideals. but this is not the final form of the superman.
that would be the baby, the figure that has destroyed what stood before them and, critically, built something anew on the rubble, and just as critically a joyful openness to the newfound liberation of life itself.

nietzsche doesn't call for you to gun down the camels and lynch the mules, he wants you to rebuild yourself and from the ruins make new pillars to control life on your own terms, in a sense.

>>25623327
>But why is it harmful that the weak are kept alive?

to make room for stronger higher beings, we've gone completely backwards trying to save everyone. anyone that tells you oh no he means something else blah blah is a dumb leftist trying to keep the edgy larp parts of Nietzsche's philosophy. The weak and the botched shall perish: first principle of our charity. And one should help them to it. What is more harmful than any vice? — Practical sympathy for the botched and the weak — Christianity.

>>25624619
I just don't see how it makes any difference whether the weak are alive or not. I don't see how it interferes with the process of creating higher types.

>>25623402
>gets duped over an obvious case of telephone

>>25623960
were you there?

>>25624670
Ok, now imagine saying this about the tropical races 200 years ago. Now we are going to be swamped and destroyed by them

>>25625358
>If one measures the effects of pity by the gravity of the reactions it sets up, its character as a menace to life appears in a much clearer light. Pity thwarts the whole law of evolution, which is the law of natural selection. It preserves whatever is ripe for destruction; it fights on the side of those disinherited and condemned by life; by maintaining life in so many of the botched of all kinds, it gives life itself a gloomy and dubious aspect.
Have you not read the text?

>>25625578
This is retarded. Humans are social animals. Even the weaker members of the tribe (typically the women) can contribute positively to the tribe's survival. Are all women "ripe for destruction?"
In fact without the tribe, there is no survival, as Nietzsche conveniently proved by dying prematurely. Fucking loser.

>>25624619
easily said, when you're some asshole who knows his sister has got his back, when he falls ill and needs help

>>25625578
fuck life
shit is massively overrated, anyways

>>25625790
>Humans are social animals.
Okay, and where did he suggest otherwise? Do you think it's pro-social to want to keep alive all of the weak and retarded faggots in your tribe? It's not. That's ANTI-SOCIAL behavior, not pro-social.

Pity is ANTI-SOCIAL. You need to be INDIFFERENT TO or outright AGAINST the welfare and prosperity of your tribe to feel it and make decisions based on it. If you actually cared about your tribe you wouldn't hesitate for a moment to eradicate the sick and mentally deficient degenerates from your gene pool.

And he's not talking about women there. Women obviously have a purpose: getting pregnant. That's all. They don't need to be brave, energetic, or intellectually curious. Their contribution to the tribe is having and taking care of kids, which is extremely important in its own right. He makes this quite clear in Thus Spoke Zarathustra and his other books, for example, when he shits on feminists like George Sand for leading women astray from their natural biological purpose.

And the funny thing is: not even women feel pity naturally! Women are even among the first in a tribe to want to execute the degenerates of the tribe, in order to protect their children. Men are sooner to forgive and to reduce the punishment to mere exile than women.

So, in other words, you're a fucking moron who doesn't read or understand anything. Probably Abrahamic and probably homosexual, too, but I repeat myself.

>>25626586
>Women obviously have a purpose: getting pregnant. That's all. They don't need to be brave, energetic, or intellectually curious.

This is entirely about bravely approaching an incel to extract some DNA from him, while potentially posing danger after the male has outlived his usefulness as the means. ('Love' is for the child, not the sperm-tank):

"Man is for woman a means: the purpose is always the child. But what is woman for man?
<...>
Too sweet fruits—these the warrior liketh not. Therefore liketh he woman;—bitter is even the sweetest woman.
<...>
In your love let there be valour! With your love shall ye assail him who inspireth you with fear!
In your love be your honour! Little doth woman understand otherwise about honour. But let this be your honour: always to love more than ye are loved, and never be the second.
Let man fear woman when she loveth: then maketh she every sacrifice, and everything else she regardeth as worthless.
Let man fear woman when she hateth: for man in his innermost soul is merely evil; woman, however, is mean."

>>25626586
>>25626675

>Women obviously have a purpose: getting pregnant. That's all. They don't need to be brave, energetic, or intellectually curious.
Those women who are as dumb as a 'goose' are discouraged from procreating by our lord and prophet:

"Worthy did this man seem, and ripe for the meaning of the earth: but when I saw his wife, the earth seemed to me a home for madcaps.
Yea, I would that the earth shook with convulsions when a saint and a goose mate with one another."

>taking care of kids
>He makes this quite clear in Thus Spoke Zarathustra
A child in Zarathustra is the reference to the Übermensch. Compare to the line "the purpose is always the child" in the post above.

"I would have thy victory and freedom long for a child. Living monuments shalt thou build to thy victory and emancipation.
Beyond thyself shalt thou build. But first of all must thou be built thyself, rectangular in body and soul.
Not only onward shalt thou propagate thyself, but upward! For that purpose may the garden of marriage help thee!
A higher body shalt thou create, a first movement, a spontaneously rolling wheel—a creating one shalt thou create.
Marriage: so call I the will of the twain to create the one that is more than those who created it. The reverence for one another, as those exercising such a will, call I marriage."

>>25626675
>But let this be your honour: always to love more than ye are loved
>>25626695
>Marriage: so call I the will of the twain to create the one that is more than those who created it.

The advice to a woman is *generic*, and is reiterated throughout the book to absolutely fucking everyone: love a thing that will surpass and replace you.

Ch. The Pitiful, general self-sacrificial rhethoric:
"But attend also to this word: All great love is above all its pity: for it seeketh—to create what is loved!
“Myself do I offer unto my love, and my neighbour as myself”—such is the language of all creators."


Ch. War and Warriors, gives a similar advice to men: serve a thing that will kill you:
"Let your love to life be love to your highest hope; and let your highest hope be the highest thought of life!
Your highest thought, however, ye shall have it commanded unto you by me—and it is this: man is something that is to be surpassed.
So live your life of obedience and of war! What matter about long life! What warrior wisheth to be spared!"


And it is plainly stated in The Prologue: serve the future and die:
"I love him who laboureth and inventeth, that he may build the house for the Superman, and prepare for him earth, animal, and plant: for thus seeketh he his own down-going."


>always to love more than ye are loved, and never be the second.
>and never be the second.

Ch. The Thousand and One Goals: the "never be second" is the characteristic of the Greeks.
" “Always shalt thou be the foremost and prominent above others: no one shall thy jealous soul love, except a friend”— that made the soul of a Greek thrill: thereby went he his way to greatness."

Incidentally, just like the aforementioned 'child', the 'friend' is also a reference to the Übermensch (Ch. Neighbour-Love):
"Not the neighbour do I teach you, but the friend. Let the friend be the festival of the earth to you, and a foretaste of the Superman."

>>25623327
On the contrary pity is a way to assert strength.
There is nothing as humiliating as being pitied.

>>25626675
>>25626695
>>25626719
Way to overphilosophize to the point of retardation. I wasn't talking about the child symbol. I was talking about this:

>Everything in woman is a riddle, and everything in woman hath one solution—it is called pregnancy.

And this, from Beyond Good and Evil:

>It was to the benefit of woman when Napoleon gave the too eloquent Madame de Stael to understand: mulier taceat in politicis!--and in my opinion, he is a true friend of woman who calls out to women today: mulier taceat de mulierel.

>I have no doubt that every noble woman will oppose what Dante and Goethe believed about woman--the former when he sang, "ELLA GUARDAVA SUSO, ED IO IN LEI," and the latter when he interpreted it, "the eternally feminine draws us ALOFT"; for THIS is just what she believes of the eternally masculine.

It's not women's place to philosophize, be politically active, or be economically independent. Nietzsche's own words, in many more passages than just these.

Rest of your posts are irrelevant to the conversation.

This is some fucking chota bheem bullshit, why is Nietzsche this faggoted
Of course pity is a borrowed sentiment, if you grew up alongside a race of alien down syndrome people, and some of the in groups of that race looked even more alien and down syndrome, you'd end up pitying them. This is a classic example. It helps you survive, it's not something man-made but something man adjusted to

>>25626768
>It helps you survive
It helps the mediocre survive, but not the superior.

>>25626775
Yes that's the whole point isn't it, you need to will to power and remove that borrowed sentiment if you wanna proclaim yourself superior. Like that meme of the psychopath, schizo and normie. The collective psyche doesn't care about your superiority, it just wants humans to proceed forward and breed regardless of what traits we see as superior. And it wants them to not end up being too harsh to their nanny and causing harm or causing famines because it willed to power too much

>>25626785
What the fuck are you talking about, retard? Have you read his books at all?

>>25626749
>It's not women's place to philosophize, be politically active

This is from Beyond Good and Evil, too.
Women are expected to pull this shit by sheer instinct, while modern culture is exactly what ruins instincts:
" They want to make her in general even more “cultivated” and, as they say, make the “weak sex” *strong* through culture, as if history didn’t teach us as emphatically as possible that “cultivating” human beings and making them weak—that is, enfeebling, fracturing, making the *power of the will* sick always go hand in hand and that the most powerful and most influential women of the world (in most recent times even Napoleon’s mother) can thank the power of their own particular wills—and not their school masters!—for their power and superiority over men. The thing in woman that arouses respect and often enough fear is her nature, which is “more natural” than man’s nature, her genuine predatory and cunning adaptability, her tiger’s claws under the glove <...> And is this now to come to an end? Is the *magic spell* of woman now in the process of being broken? Is the process of making woman boring slowly coming about?"


Just like pre-Socrates master morality Greeks, who didn't need no education. (Twilight of the Idols):
"We see signs of Socrates' decadence not only in the admitted chaos and anarchy of his instincts, but in the hypertrophy of logic as well as in his emblematic rachitic spite."

"The most glaring daylight, rationality at any cost, a cold, bright, cautious, conscious life without instinct, opposed to instinct, was itself just a sickness, another sickness - and in no way a return to 'virtue', to 'health', to happiness ... To *have* to fight the instincts - that is the formula for decadence: as long as life is *ascending*, happiness is equal to instinct"

"Everything *good* is instinctive - and consequently light, necessary, free. Effort is an objection, gods and heroes belong to different types (in my language: *light* feet are the first attribute of divinity). "

>>25626744
Pity is not a useful emotion and so is not strong in that respect. It's a weaker emotion than pride in that it mimics pride but you aren't even grandstanding on something you've done, but what someone else has failed to achieve, like taking pride in what you aren't rather than what you are.

>>25626791
Okay.

>>25626789
Either way, what's your point?

>>25626586
>Pity is ANTI-SOCIAL
No it ISN't you capital-posting FAGGOT. Pity is related to the nurturing instinct which cultivates tribal cohesion.
Even the "weak and retarded" are capable of gathering food, cooking, or minding the kids, all of which helps secure the survival of the tribe.
>Women are even among the first in a tribe to want to execute the degenerates of the tribe
You have never met a woman. And you will never see one naked.

>>25627245
huh

>>25623327
>Nietzsche says pity is harmful
He never said this.

>>25627258
>What is more harmful than any vice? Active pity for the ill-constituted and weak, Christianity.

>>25624619
What if someone is "botched and weak" in one sense, but noble in another? Take Stephen Hawking, for example. Physically, he was a potato who was held together by the marvels of modern medicine. But mentally, he was a genius and one of the greatest physicists in the history of the field, and contributed greatly to humanity's knowledge of the universe, which is surely of at least some use to the highest and most noble. So what would your system say we do with Hawking? In one sense he was clearly weak and his survival unnatural. But that survival allowed a truly great mind to flourish. Surely mercy has some use by allowing those weak in one area to be allowed to be strong in another.

>>25623327
>Nietzsche says pity is harmful because it diminishes strength on the part of the one that pities. That much I can understand.
"And not to him who is offensive to us are we most unfair, but to him who doth not concern us at all.
If, however, thou hast a suffering friend, then be a resting-place for his suffering; like a hard bed, however, a camp-bed: thus wilt thou serve him best.
And if a friend doeth thee wrong, then say: “I forgive thee what thou hast done unto me; that thou hast done it unto thyself, however—how could I forgive that!”
Thus speaketh all great love: it surpasseth even forgiveness and pity.
One should hold fast one’s heart; for when one letteth it go, how quickly doth one’s head run away!
Ah, where in the world have there been greater follies than with the pitiful? And what in the world hath caused more suffering than the follies of the pitiful?
Woe unto all loving ones who have not an elevation which is above their pity!
Thus spake the devil unto me, once on a time: “Even God hath his hell: it is his love for man.”
And lately, did I hear him say these words: “God is dead: of his pity for man hath God died.”—
So be ye warned against pity: From thence there yet cometh unto men a heavy cloud! Verily, I understand weather-signs! "

>But why is it harmful that the weak are kept alive?
" Zarathustra made no answer thereto, but went on his way. When he had gone on for two hours, past forests and swamps, he had heard too much of the hungry howling of the wolves, and he himself became a-hungry. So he halted at a lonely house in which a light was burning.
“Hunger attacketh me,” said Zarathustra, “like a robber. Among forests and swamps my hunger attacketh me, and late in the night.
“Strange humours hath my hunger. Often it cometh to me only after a repast, and all day it hath failed to come: where hath it been?”
And thereupon Zarathustra knocked at the door of the house. An old man appeared, who carried a light, and asked: “Who cometh unto me and my bad sleep?”
“A living man and a dead one,” said Zarathustra. “Give me something to eat and drink, I forgot it during the day. He that feedeth the hungry refresheth his own soul, saith wisdom.”
The old man withdrew, but came back immediately and offered Zarathustra bread and wine.
“A bad country for the hungry,” said he; “that is why I live here. Animal and man come unto me, the anchorite. But bid thy companion eat and drink also, he is wearier than thou.”
Zarathustra answered: “My companion is dead; I shall hardly be able to persuade him to eat.”
“That doth not concern me,” said the old man sullenly; “he that knocketh at my door must take what I offer him. Eat, and fare ye well!” "

>>25627259
>Was ist schädlicher als jede Lasterhaftigkeit? – Praktisches Mitleid mit den Missratenen und Schwachen – das Christentum.

>>25627245
I'm married to a woman, homo. Just got done boning her, too!

>Pity is related to the nurturing instinct
As a negative mutation of it. The nurturing instinct evolved for... guess what? YOUR FAMILY. YOUR TRIBE. Not someone else's, and certainly NOT to protect those who threaten your family and your tribe.

>Even the "weak and retarded" are capable of gathering food, cooking, or minding the kids, all of which helps secure the survival of the tribe.
So long as they don't procreate themselves, fine, let them work. In ancient history, these people were slaves, and they contributed to the tribe this way. But if they procreate, then they haven't helped the survival of the tribe at all — they've diluted it.

>>25627245
>>25627459
And by the way, up until the advent of homosexual Abrahamic morality and recent innovations in medical treatment, most degenerates died during infancy or in early childhood. Because nature itself agrees that the weak and the botched should perish.

>>25623327
Because the weak are... ~~LE BAD~~ LE UNHEALTHY.
>>25626744
I'm sure he's had this on his mind while writing of pity, since he was always ill and probably pitied by friends and family.

>>25627459
>I'm married to a woman, homo. Just got done boning her, too!
Pics or it didn't happen.
>The nurturing instinct evolved for... guess what? YOUR FAMILY. YOUR TRIBE.
Guess WHAT, that's EXACTLY what I was TALKING about FAGGOT.
>But if they procreate, then they haven't helped the survival of the tribe at all
Find out what a gene pool is and STFU.

>>25627769
>that's EXACTLY what I was TALKING about
Then why even reply? We already were in agreement, then.

>Find out what a gene pool is
It's something that gets worse when the genetically inferior reproduce in abundance.

>>25627800
The gene pool is the tribe. If the tribe is genetically inferior it will die out. If superior, it will prosper.

>>25623327

I'm not familiar with whatever details Nietzsche may have suggested, but the objective harm in protecting the overtly weak, to the point of uselessness, is because too many weaklings literally threaten to take down an entire family, tribe or community as the community itself is preyed upon by outsiders who don't fuck around and take advantage of every weakness in a state of nature, and the ancient world was still fairly close to a state of nature in its political organization and in its relatively modest technical development. This is why birds kick runts out of the nest, and it's why ancients simply disposed of plainly defective children. Modern christian-inflected sensibilities denounce it is cruel, but there is a valid reason for eliminating invalids in the ancient context: survival. We can toy with these things a bit more in post-industrial society, but tribes couldn't afford to fuck around back then.

>>25627817
I already said this, so not seeing your point.

>>25623327
You've never actually read Nietzsche, have you?

>>25623327
For Nietzsche, the sole purpose of humanity is to produce its highest examples (great artists, philosophers, and creators). A system that prioritizes the survival and comfort of the majority hinders the emergence of these rare geniuses

When a society centers itself around a promoting a comfy middle class life like the Simpsons, Family Guy, Married With Children, or any other sitcom (preserving, coddling, and elevating the weak -- a comfortable, risk-averse creature who desires nothing but safety, equality, and mediocrity), it consumes the cultural energy that should be used to foster greatness.

letting the weak "survive" through a culture of institutionalized pity is dangerous because weakness is contagious. If left unchecked, the collective weight of mediocrity inevitably smothers excellence, turning society into a stagnant swamp that is inefficient for producing legends of humanity (great artists, philosophers, and creators).

Nietzsche prioritized power, struggle, and self-overcoming (will to power) over peace, safety, or contentment. He viewed contentment as a symptom of stagnation and a desire for comfort rather than greatness.

Friedrich Nietzsche expressed a complex fascination with the rigid, martial structure of ancient Sparta—particularly in his early essay "The Greek State"—where he viewed the Spartan system (the Lycurgian constitution) as an example of a society organized to forge a military genius or sustain a high, aristocratic culture.

The Case for Spartan Hierarchy: Nietzsche argued that high culture, art, and philosophical greatness require a foundation of economic and physical toil—often maintained through a subordinated class or state-managed slavery—freeing a privileged few to strive for excellence. He saw the Spartan state as an instrument designed to create the conditions for human superiority and hardness rather than comfort or equality.
.

File: 1773251203717.png (3 KB, 500x252)

3 KB PNG

>NIETZSCHE SAID-