Jump to content
CannyKenny

Nietzsche K

Recommended Posts

having read nietzsche for an assessment of moral agency to write an in depth philosophical paper i would have to say that nietzsche is not the best choice for a debate argument. First, I am not saying that Nietzsche is a nihilist; he is exactly the opposite. The more imporant distinction is the kriticism would turn itself. The action of the K influences the morality of the judge in the context of the round. This application of influence turns itself because you are asking the judge to identify your moral advocacy as his or hers. This means you are requiring a slave morality from the judge. Nietzsche followed the same lines as Kierkegaard in saying that you must determine your own moral code and live by it. The application of the K fails to remain consistent with the ideas Nietzsche suggests.

 

In response to the Scu i would not say that Nietzsche is inherently existential, but the nature of the master slave morality follows closely one of the major themes of the existential movement. Personally I fail to see the value of any existential argument in terms of the debate community, merely because of its focus on individualism.

 

There might be some good debate ground in Nietzsche's perspectivist arguments, I am not familiar enough with them to qualify that statement.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

in this recent post, i briefly went over the fundamental nietzschean underpinning to the majority of kritiks run in debate : http://www.cross-x.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1215811&postcount=25.

 

JOyceismyhero, clarify what you mean by the inconsistency - do you mean that the way debaters must treat the judge necessarily contradicts their in-round advocacy, i.e., the structure of debate itself precludes nietzschean ethics? (or is it something else?)

 

it seems that nietzsche wasn't saying we can't influence each other - or else the act of writing would also be performatively contradictory for him. isn't the way he looks at his readers akin to how debaters could look at judges? so who cares if you use the judge for your own purposes - isn't that just furthering your own will-to-power?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I were to ever hit this K, I think I would read a quote about Will to Power......

 

AND THEN SHOW IT WAS FROM HITLER!!!!!

 

 

Hitler went to Nietzsche to legitimize almost everything he did, including the holocaust. I think any impact is checked back when if we listen to Nietzsche (as the K asks us to) we legitimize the mass genocide of 6,000,000 people.

 

NOTE: I personally enjoy reading Nietzsche and have absolutely nothing against looking into his ideas, i'm just not sure the K would be very strategic or strong due to the use of Nietzsches work in history, particularly with Hitler.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If I were to ever hit this K, I think I would read a quote about Will to Power......

 

AND THEN SHOW IT WAS FROM HITLER!!!!!

 

 

Hitler went to Nietzsche to legitimize almost everything he did, including the holocaust. I think any impact is checked back when if we listen to Nietzsche (as the K asks us to) we legitimize the mass genocide of 6,000,000 people.

 

NOTE: I personally enjoy reading Nietzsche and have absolutely nothing against looking into his ideas, i'm just not sure the K would be very strategic or strong due to the use of Nietzsches work in history, particularly with Hitler.

nietzsche was actually a pretty big fan of the jews. he'd also think everyone in nazi germany was a stupid herd animal. the unfortunate association between nietzsche and nazis is mostly a product of his crazy antisemite sister who took all his notes after the fit of syphillitic insanity and laced them with propaganda and published them as "the will to power". it also bears note that when this said crazy sister married a prominent antisemite, nietzsche laughed his ass off and abandoned her, never seeing her with sane eyes again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest nomadology

in addition to what nick said, most of nietzsche's "attacks" on jews are more of an attack on judaism. his arguments were directed against religion as a whole. if you don't believe me, read the anti-christ. nietzsche rips judaism, christianity, even buddhism. anyone with even the slightest understanding of nietzsche would find it obvious that he wouldn't support the nazi party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've lost a good many rounds running Nietzsche, but I'm proud to say none of them have ever been on the cards that talk about Nietzsche justifying nazism. Those cards are warrantless and almost funny in the face of some decent answers. It really just isn't an argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
in addition to what nick said, most of nietzsche's "attacks" on jews are more of an attack on judaism. his arguments were directed against religion as a whole. if you don't believe me, read the anti-christ. nietzsche rips judaism, christianity, even buddhism. anyone with even the slightest understanding of nietzsche would find it obvious that he wouldn't support the nazi party.

 

I actually have read the Anti-Christ and i do realize that he does not attack the jews. His argument is most certainly against the religion itself. Although Nietzsche may not support the Nazi Party, he is arguably THE SINGLE most misunderstood author in history, and thus his writings were used to justify the actions of the Nazi Party. Whether or not he intended for his writings to be used in such a way, they were indeed used and the consequences of Nietzsche's writings still fall within the realm of Nazism Justification.

 

I've lost a good many rounds running Nietzsche, but I'm proud to say none of them have ever been on the cards that talk about Nietzsche justifying nazism. Those cards are warrantless and almost funny in the face of some decent answers. It really just isn't an argument.

 

I believe you'll have trouble calling a card where Hitler quoted Nietzsche in support of his regime warrantless. Yes, Hitler misused Nietzsche and Nietzsche most certainly would have laughed at most of the Nazi's and their action. (I personally believe he would have gotten along quite well with Hitler however) The fact still remains that despite Nietzsche's intentions, Naziism was justified by using the philosophy of Nietzsche and using Nietzsche will inevitably lead to future misuse which has been empirically proven to lead to mass religious genocide.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So... the kritik is bad... because someone might not understand it... and then it would lead to another holocaust. That is the stupidest fucking thing I've ever heard.

-Ray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hitler tried to use tons of different philosophies to justify his practices, saying we should abadon something because hitler tried it leaves us nothing and its just kind silly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So... the kritik is bad... because someone might not understand it... and then it would lead to another holocaust. That is the stupidest fucking thing I've ever heard.

-Ray

 

The K is bad because it's purpose will become lost and through misinterpretation legitimize another halocaust.

 

You blame the Nazi shitheads, not Nietzsche; who I doubt would like Hitler, or really much of any of the National Socialism schtick.

 

1-I blame Society for misunderstanding the purpose of Nietzsche. Since your Kritik will inevitably, in order to access any impacts, go outside the space of this debate round it will also inevitably be corrupted or misunderstood by society. Despite the original purpose of your Kritik and Nietzsche's work, it will be used to falsely legitimize a holocaust. however falsely legitimized, the genocide and impacts thereof still ensue.

 

2-Agreed, Nietzsche most likely would not agree with several of the National Socialist actions. And he would laugh in the face of everyone who fell under it's sway

 

3-I believe a debate is to be had as to whether Nietzsche would actually agree with Hitler or not. Some of Hitler's actions most likely would not please Nietzsche, however I believe that if you look to Hitler's eventual goal it was to obtain the most power and achieve the highest level. in essence, to become der übermensch. I would contend that Hitler's actions were aimed at tossing aside weakness to make room for the strong, very similar to the goal Nietzsche appears to extend for humanity in the early sections of The Anti-Christ. This issue i believe is an empty handed debate, for it seems to me to rely on whether Nietzsche would look to the means used, or the ends desired for the level of Hitler's life.

 

 

EDITED FOR PARTIAL GRAMMAR IN ORDER TO AVOID POSSIBLE MISINTERPRETATION

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The K is bad because it's purpose will become lost and through misinterpretation legitimize another halocaust.

This is just sillly, and you assume that when the judge votes they affect society, Nietzsche would never agree to effecting entire populaces, see Nietzsche's view on the herd mentality, so the smart negative just has the judge vote to affirm his own life.

 

I blame Society for misunderstanding the purpose of Nietzsche. Since your Kritik will inevitably, in order to access any impacts, go outside the space of this debate round it will also inevitably be corrupted or misunderstood by society.

I don't think Nietzsche being misinterpreted is really a legit argument, and it's a new link, evasion is a form of passive nihilism. Also we don't effect the entire population.. x/a from above.

 

Not gonna lie, nothing else you said was somethign I feel comfortable enough to respond to, or it was just vacuous.

-Ray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The K is bad because it's purpose will become lost and through misinterpretation legitimize another halocaust.

 

This is pretty absurd. Chattahoochee ran Schmitt this year, who was an overt Nazi apologist, and surprisingly enough, we debaters have yet to engage in a mass slaughter of our own ranks.

 

1-I blame Society for misunderstanding the purpose of Nietzsche. Since your Kritik will inevitably, in order to access any impacts, go outside the space of this debate round it will also inevitably be corrupted or misunderstood by society. Despite the original purpose of your Kritik and Nietzsche's work, it will be used to falsely legitimize a holocaust. however falsely legitimized, the genocide and impacts thereof still ensue.

 

Now I'm confused. Is your argument that misinterpretation of Nietzsche uniquely would justify a reoccurrence of the Holocaust? Millions were slaughtered in the name of misinterpretations of Marxism--does that mean we shouldn't run a Marxism K or any of its variants? That sort of argument would rule out more or less any criticism.

In addition, you seem to use absolutes to make ridiculous claims. This is a tendency many debaters have, so it's forgivable. Statements like "it will be used to falsely legitimize a holocaust" are unwarranted and empirically denied. Many contemporary authors, such as Foucault and Deleuze, have reread and reinterpreted Nietzsche in various ways, and I'm fairly sure that there are no psychotic dictators citing Madness and Civilization or Anti-Oedipus as their justifications for genocide.

Lastly, I won't repeat the arguments made above, but I think that you haven't really answered Smarkle's contention that Nietzsche's work was misused in a very specific and manipulated instance via his sister. Now that much of his work is widely available in original forms and often as open-source documents, it's unlikely that widespread misinterpretation of his thought would occur, especially if viewed through the lens of many postmodern thinkers.

 

2-Agreed, Nietzsche most likely would not agree with several of the National Socialist actions. And he would laugh in the face of everyone who fell under it's sway

 

Cool. I agree.

 

3-I believe a debate is to be had as to whether Nietzsche would actually agree with Hitler or not. Some of Hitler's actions most likely would not please Nietzsche, however I believe that if you look to Hitler's eventual goal it was to obtain the most power and achieve the highest level. in essence, to become der übermensch. I would contend that Hitler's actions were aimed at tossing aside weakness to make room for the strong, very similar to the goal Nietzsche appears to extend for humanity in the early sections of The Anti-Christ. This issue i believe is an empty handed debate, for it seems to me to rely on whether Nietzsche would look to the means used, or the ends desired for the level of Hitler's life.

 

Speaking of misinterpretations, I think you're misreading Nietzsche as far as his notions of power go. He makes it pretty clear in The Gay Science that using power to destroy others is another weakness and an illegitimate use of power. Furthermore, the superman for Nietzsche was never somebody like a sovereign who would subsume all other parts of society in the wake of their accumulation of power. Power produces new values, or a transvaluation of values. Much of Nietzsche's analysis with respect to the strong, the weak, and slave moralities is framed in terms of ressentiment, which throws an entirely different light on the issue you're noting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe you'll have trouble calling a card where Hitler quoted Nietzsche in support of his regime warrantless. Yes, Hitler misused Nietzsche and Nietzsche most certainly would have laughed at most of the Nazi's and their action. (I personally believe he would have gotten along quite well with Hitler however) The fact still remains that despite Nietzsche's intentions, Naziism was justified by using the philosophy of Nietzsche and using Nietzsche will inevitably lead to future misuse which has been empirically proven to lead to mass religious genocide.

If your only argument is that Nietzsche's works will be co-opted, you're missing a few internal links...

 

1. Non-unique: Nietzsche's works are printed in like...342360897 languages and there are lots of copies floating around. We're not a unique increase in his printed works.

2. Nietzsche's ethics DO NOT lend themselves to nazism. Period. The idea of affirming positive difference is the POLAR OPPOSITE of nazism which denies is in the worst possible way. Even if the works get co-opted, the ethics DO NOT.

3. By explaining Nietzsche we're more likely to prevent co-option

4. This isn't intrinsic to Nietzsche.

5. EVEN IF Nietzsche's WORKS get co-opted, your ethics and advocacy that deny positive difference LITERALY ARE nazism.

6. My impact comes before yours. Loss of life is nothing in the face of a denial of life and the existential anguish that results from negating difference as an offense to you and your life. It's better to die joyously affirming life than live a half-life.

 

 

The cards I've had read against me are warrantless ranting by angry idiots that paged through Beyond Good and Evil, read the words "master", "slave" and "jew" and assumed Nietzsche was a nazi. This is a terrible and indeffensible argument.

 

And Nietzsche would have hated Hitler, I'm fairly certain. Hitler's 'philosophy' was the ultimate denial of life. Nazism is the perfect example of a denial of difference taken to its end point, the final solution is the worldly expression of a people moved by absolute nihilism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The logical end to this sillyness is not teaching Darwin, because Hitler got inspired by that shit too. Whoever brought this crap up needs to be banished from the community of thinking people and put on an island with some nazis, and talkie about Nietzsche.

 

 

AND to anyone who rearticulates or has said this stupid crap, I say this..."what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3-I believe a debate is to be had as to whether Nietzsche would actually agree with Hitler or not. Some of Hitler's actions most likely would not please Nietzsche, however I believe that if you look to Hitler's eventual goal it was to obtain the most power and achieve the highest level. in essence, to become der übermensch. I would contend that Hitler's actions were aimed at tossing aside weakness to make room for the strong, very similar to the goal Nietzsche appears to extend for humanity in the early sections of The Anti-Christ. This issue i believe is an empty handed debate, for it seems to me to rely on whether Nietzsche would look to the means used, or the ends desired for the level of Hitler's life.

Just because Nietzsche uses the word weakness doesn't mean it's the same as the weakness of Hitler. Hitler's weakness had biological premises. If you weren't aryan, you were weak. For Nietzsche, weakness is a question of affirmation versus negation. Do you affirm life in all its positive difference, in all its pain, love, joy, sorrow, suffering etc etc etc or do you negate it by requiring certain external conditions to be 'happy'. There is no seperation of the ends from the means in Nietzsche, that's the point of the eternal return (only will what you would will in such a way that you would will it eternaly): when your happiness becomes contingent on some ideal success or some undesirable failure, you've already missed the boat on a joyous existence. The very idea that Hitler wanted to selectively 'breed'/exterminate humanity is itself an offense to Nietzsche's ethics. You're just wrong, on every account. I will maintain that ANY belief that Nietzsche's ethical stance has ANYTHING AT ALL to do with Nazism is a pathetic perversion of one of the most beautiful and, above all, loving philosophies that has ever come to exist. At the end of the day, Nazism is not a, but THE PERFECT EXAMPLE of what Nietzsche seeks to fight.

 

 

"I no longer feel as you do: this cloud which I see beneath me, this blackness and gravity at which I laugh-this is your thundercloud. You look up when you feel the need for elevation. And I look down because I am elevated. Who among you can laugh and be elevated at the same time? Whoever climbs the highest mountains laughs at all tragic plays and tragic seriousness. [...]You say to me "Life is hard to bear." But why would you have your pride in the morning adn your resignation in the evening?" Life is hard to bear; but do not act so tenderly! We are all of us fair beasts of burden, male and female asses. What do we have in common with the rosebud, which trembles because a frop of dew lies on it? True, we love life, not because we are used to living but because we are used to loving. There is always some madness in love. But there is also always some reason in madness."

 

How can you read Nietzsche and say, with a straight face and without malice that Nietzsche's ethics were anything but a cure for the disease of nazism and all the other ideologies that spawned from the nihilism that he fights? How can you truly believe that a philosophy that finds in difference the ultimate and supreme justification for existence any echos of an ideology founded on the absolute negation of and contempt for difference? How can you find hate in love or sorrow in joy? Nietzsche isn't out to get rid of the bad things in life (even if he were an anti-semite, he'd revel in the existence of the Jews) but in an affirmation of them, in staring at the horrible things around you, all the things that cause you pain, and laughing. He would dance till his pain was transmuted to joy. Nietzsche's philosophy is beautiful, I beg you not to mistake it for the wound it heals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was 4AM and didn't feel like typing the whole passage and I typed up enough to make the point I wanted to make.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i was about to believe in the project of american democracy... then i learned that thomas jefferson and most of the founding fathers advocated slavery... so then i couldn't.... then i found out that hitler believed in public education, so now i can't endorse that either, and suggest all of you drop out of skool immediately, considering its clear affiliation with nazism.

 

the question is: are we to forsake good ideas due to the faults of those who authored them, or are we to remain faithful to those ideas by correcting the mistakes of those who came before us?

 

that said, the hitlerean problem with nietzsche goes deeper than simplistic defenses would lead one to believe. nietzsche's concept of the uber-mensh ruling over the herd endorses an elitism that can quickly become fascism; in his notebooks, we also learn of nietzsche's endorsement of eugenical projects for advancing humankind, the kind of talk 'master race'-types can get behind.

 

while it's true that no philosopher is responsible for the ways in which their ideas are warped after their death (or else jesus christ would be the worst thinker in all of history due to the inquistion, the crusades, etc.), we must still evaluate those ideas honestly, fess up to their short-comings, if we ever hope of empowering ourselves to do better in the here and now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...in 'beyond good and evil', nietzsche calls spinoza 'a sickly recluse':

 

"...the hocus-pocus in mathematical form, by means of which Spinoza has, as it were, clad his philosophy in mail and mask--in fact, the "love of HIS wisdom," to translate the term fairly and squarely--in order thereby to strike terror at once into the heart of the assailant who should dare to cast a glance on that invincible maiden, that Pallas Athene:--how much of personal timidity and vulnerability does this masquerade of a sickly recluse betray!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Helen Zimmern translation from German into English of “Beyond Good and

Evil,” as published in The Complete Works of Friedrich Nietzsche (1909−1913).

 

 

219. The practice of judging and condemning morally, is the favourite revenge of the intellectually shallow on

those who are less so, it is also a kind of indemnity for their being badly endowed by nature, and finally, it is

an opportunity for acquiring spirit and BECOMING subtle—malice spiritualises. They are glad in their

inmost heart that there is a standard according to which those who are over−endowed with intellectual goods

and privileges, are equal to them, they contend for the “equality of all before God,” and almost NEED the

belief in God for this purpose. It is among them that the most powerful antagonists of atheism are found. If

any one were to say to them “A lofty spirituality is beyond all comparison with the honesty and respectability

of a merely moral man”—it would make them furious, I shall take care not to say so. I would rather flatter

them with my theory that lofty spirituality itself exists only as the ultimate product of moral qualities, that it is

a synthesis of all qualities attributed to the “merely moral” man, after they have been acquired singly through

long training and practice, perhaps during a whole series of generations, that lofty spirituality is precisely the

spiritualising of justice, and the beneficent severity which knows that it is authorized to maintain

GRADATIONS OF RANK in the world, even among things—and not only among men.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...