Jordan Peterson

>Clean your room.

>>3288928
My room is as clean as it has ever been haha

Dr Peterson is doing holy work, in the most sincere rational sense of the phrase.

Is he a postmodernist?

>>3288959
Well he actually despises postmodernists if u didnt know haha

>>3288923
his views on postmodernism are absolutely ridiculous. bet he couldn't name a single Derrida book.

>>3288985
Thats a pretty confident claim, anon

>>3288985
He talks about Derrida pretty often though

>>3288985
Hes pretty knowledgeable on derrida ya know

File: 1503532210375.png (2MB, 1024x678px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1024x678px

I'm glad I found him, he gave me a new prespective on relationships, jungian archtypes and religion.

May not be the thinker of the century but he presents very well concepts hard to explain by words.

I might participate in religion now because of his talks on religion.

>>3289013
Its amazing how many liberal atheists are starting to consider the evolutionary importance of religion because of his words. I say that as an atheist btw

File: 1503530970657.jpg (1MB, 1232x815px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1232x815px

>>3289023
Yeah I'm also an atheist but I've been reading on religion and I'm starting to agree with Peterson's positions as well

"Anus is a delicate structure."

-Jordan Peterson

Is this the guy who talks like Kermit the Frog? He's funny.

>>3289391
as if that's not a quote to stand by for centuries
>>3289453
kek i can't unhear it now

>>3289476
>>3289453
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0A7UJDN_hcU

File: 1479923947052.jpg (65KB, 411x412px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 411x412px

His videos are incoherent rants, I wonder whether he is on the schizo spectrum.

It's satisfying to hear him shit on SJWs and he can be eloquent in person, but his lectures are incredibly bad. Unstructured, incomprehensible nonsense that goes on and on for hours. He was recommended to me by one person, and that person regularly slips into psychosis and was unable to summarize any of his points for me, which sums it about up.

He says the most basic philosophical shit

And his life advice is shit you should already know

He's good if you never had a father I guess and are just starting to learn about philosophy

>>3288985
He could probably name them, doubt he's read any though

>>3288923
>>>/pol/

>>3289701
>>>/pol/

>>3289660
>He's good if you never had a father
Like 70% of men 18-25 nowadays?

no one will recognize the name jordan peterson in 2018

>>3289776
Fuck u, his teachings will resonate through the ages. The trans-battle rebuttals is nothing compared to his biblical lectures, legit as they already are

Nothing he has said is new, any triple digiter could tell you the far-left are extremists abusing causes like anti-racism and feminism, he is just good at presenting it in a way that appeals to you.

>>3289824
His words represent the enlightenment that moses found, the wisdom we already knew, but chose to ignore.

>>3289483
Sniggered

File: jordan-peterson.jpg (49KB, 900x360px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 900x360px

>Make sure to donate to my Patreon my based kekistani followers!
>You do want to btfo more SJW's don't you?

he's not 'extraordinary' per se, but he conveys helpful messages to that specific type of anxious, ennui-filled young person(especially male) that is so common nowadays.
obviously he isn't saying anything "new" but he fills a niche and does it well

>>3289887
>profound
Lol what? Please tell me this isn't real. And to think they were the ones calling peopl cucks

I believe this guy is a hack because his entire perspective is built on the understanding (rather than assumption) that free will does not exist.
As a Catholic this really shiggys my diggy.

I heard him talk on the Molymeme channel,he sounded pretty bluepilled on immigration.

he's the same sort of virtue signaling and shaming hack that the left has been churning out like hotcakes, only difference is that he virtue signals to middle class white kids with rich parents and shames the poor whereas the liberals shame the middle class white kids and virtue signal to the poor.

As a centrist I scoff and roll my eyes at both sides for being different flavors of the same collectivized conciousness that creates an "us vs them" mindset so that listeners can go out into the world and continue this virus of virtue signaling and shaming.

>>3290082
http://www.betootaadvocate.com/advocate-in-focus/upper-middle-class-coward/

File: 1491566921614.png (1MB, 580x632px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 580x632px

>>3290082

2/10

File: 6859ebe4550dc929523fc5bab.png (880KB, 800x1000px) Image search: [Google]

880KB, 800x1000px

>>3290082
>As a centrist

Stopped reading right there

File: 1502931912493.jpg (2MB, 2066x1600px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2066x1600px

>>3289975
>his entire perspective is built on the understanding (rather than assumption) that free will does not exist

No it doesn't.
He says there are things not under your control. Which is true.

>>3290082
at least try to bait mane

This has been my impression so far: Peterson works on people on 4chan because he is edgy.
Sure, he never exagerates, but this is his shtick: believing in Christianity and trusting Jung seems something cool when he promotes it.

Here's my speculation: since his whole premise is built on his attitude, and since he is actually quite shallow in his understanding of most of the things he talk about, most of you guys will simply realize it all at once and drop him, just like you have already dropped 2 or 3 pseudo-intellectual gurus in the last 5-6 years. When you know absolutely nothing about philosophy, epistemology, theology and morality, people like Harris and Peterson just do the trick, but as soon as you actually start reading books on the topic, you will find their contents grossly insufficient and poor in their reasoning.

This is just a speculation, don't get triggered over it.

>>3290261
What you suggest then?

>4 people tell me Im baiting

Its the truth you fucking partisan hacks. He's just the conservative version of an SJW

>>3289642
You are just dumb

>>3290279
If his ideas interest you, just read the sources he is quoting: Nietzsche, Jung, Dostoevsky, Orwell, Browning and so on (I don't know about his psychology lectures, I've mainly watched lectures about philosophy and literature, fields in which JP should not be allowed to teach).
Also the problem of Peterson is that he talks to an uneducated audience, and as such he really has to polarize his judgements to mantain everything spicy. As a result you costantly see on /lit/ and /hi/ people reading Dostoevsky while thinking about responsability, or slaying the dragon. He basically puts you on a fixed path, and since his audience is uneducated, they cannot see it: you can always spot immediatly someone who reads books like Jordan Peterson.
As such, even if you love his ideas, it would be best for you to completely ignore and immediatly delve into his sources.

Apply what I've told you to 99% of the intellectuals that frolick on Youtube. If you agree with them, read their sources and learn the ideas they're proposing properly.

File: 1488610336155.jpg (34KB, 285x242px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 285x242px

>>3290261

>been in academia his whole life
>taught at Harvard and currently teaching at top-tier school
>has literally written a book on his subject matter

>shallow understanding

Okay anon

>>3290329
>appeal to authority fallacy

Its a good school so that means he's right

Guess noam chomsky is always right now because he teaches at harvard

>>3290329
>qualifications in psychology
>somehow this makes him qualified to talk about society and politics

fuck off.

>>3290329
I'm talking about his talks about philosophy, literature, psychoanalysis (he has formal education in these fields) and his general talks about morality.
We're on /his/ (&Humanities), not on /psychology/. The fact that he might be a great psychologist is absolutely irrelevant, for those were not the contents I was commenting on.

>>3290346

If you think an appeal to authority fallacy is relevant here, then you don't actually know what an appeal to authority fallacy is. I'm not arguing that he probably has more than a "shallow understanding" of his subject matter given his career and the fact that he's reached a pretty high point in his field.

>>3290347

I don't think anyone can have a "qualification" to talk about society or politics in that manner, and if such a qualification did exist, being a psychologist is up there.

>>3290347

And what exactly makes anyone "qualified" to talk about society and politics? He's been researching totalitarian political systems for a few decades now, I think that's as good a qualification as any.

File: Centrism.jpg (34KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 640x480px

>>3290082
>He is centrist

>>3288923
He's the very embodiment of a pseudo-intellectual.

>>3290350

What do you find wrong with his views on morality?

>>3290425
its called political science and sociology you hack, but considering his ideology discredits those entire fields it makes sense that you wouldnt trust the actual experts.

>>3290431
your stupid meme picture definitely makes me want to develop a cult-like following for one party or the other despite neither of them having my personal interests in mind.

File: 1496988748534.jpg (16KB, 496x233px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 496x233px

>>3290447

The overwhelming majority of politicians don't have political science or sociology degrees. Given that they're literally the people running society/politics, how does that square with the assertion?

>>3290467
why do you make the false assumption that you have to be a leader in order to study something? The basis of your "argument" is a logical fallacy. NASA scientists are the experts on space travel, you dont see actual scientists getting in those rockets.

Youre willing to dismiss the actual experts in favor of an expert in an entirely different field that has a vendetta against said experts.

Youre being brainwashed, turns out both sides attempt to brainwash, not just liberals.

>>3290431
Blimey, I've just realised trying to form my opinions on individual issues based on the best facts available is completely foolish and I should just consider myself part of some kind of political tribe and choose my opinions from a list! Thank you for your incredibly incisive and cutting meme!

>>3288923
He actually just speaks common sense. It's the insanity of the age that in comparison makes him look like a deep thinker.

Humans are born male and female is not a deep thought.

>>3290543
Whatever your opinion on the transgender stuff that is not a true statement. There's absolutely no doubt that some people are genuinely intersex.

File: 1492800254267.png (10KB, 754x406px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 754x406px

>>3290490

Your post has nothing at all to do with anything I've argued. You're not arguing with me, you're arguing with a strawman. Where did I state, or even imply, that you have to be a leader in order to study something? Where did I dismiss "actual experts"?

You said that because he has a psychology degree and not a pol sci or soc degree he's unqualified to speak about society or politics (unless you meant something else by "qualifications in psychology" vs qualifications in the others). I point out that very few politicians have qualifications in pol sci or sociology, so therefore, according to you, they don't have a leg to stand on when discussing society or politics, which is of course ridiculous, and I'm trying to point out that requiring someone to having qualifications in soc/pol sci as a prerequisite to discussing politics or society is silly. So what exactly are you on about?

>>3290572
This is the insanity I'm talking about. You're the insane background in front of which Peterson appears like a genius.

>>3290586

Not that guy, but 99.7% of people are born male or female; there are genuine intersex people (think hermaphrodites), but they're a tiny, tiny minority, far fewer than it seems given the ruckus they cause on the national scale.

>>3290594
what ruckus? I don't think intersex people are even a big part of the trans movement

>>3290594
I'm going to burn 99.7% of your body with acid.

Do you think the .3% that is not burned with acid will provide you with relief?

Or perhaps when I say "I'm going to burn your entire body with acid" 99.7% suffices?

It is this insanity that focuses on the .3% in your example that is driving people mad.

File: 20689971_2007109126185138_4604694084608247065_o.jpg (717KB, 1442x1614px) Image search: [Google]

717KB, 1442x1614px

>>3290594
>Even if 99.7% of people are born with two eyes it is false to say humans have two eyes!

>>3290602
What are you talking about? The statement I made that there are genuine intersex people is true and I specifically isolated it from the transgender issue.

Pulling out bonkers, completely over the top rhetoric doesn't change facts.

>>3290606
seeing that anime grill being raped by the physical embodiment of post modernism makes me thirsty

>>3290612
It's EXACTLY what I'm talking about, and why your generation is INSANE.

You cannot take a bland true statement like "Human beings are born male and female" and just fucking accept it as true.

You have to find a freak, and then somehow, based on the freak, say human beings are NOT born male and female.

And in THAT insanity, Jordan Peterson appears as a sage.

>>3290624
Quench your thirst on this!

*unzips dick*

>>3290625
It's not true, the actual figure is between 1/50 and 1/100 that are born intersex, despite what the random anon posted earlier.

>>3290582
politicians are fucking mouthpieces, they dont know shit about politics. Our fucking president couldnt point out half his own allies on a map, politicians are not fucking politicial/social experts
Your argument is a dogshit logical fallacy and you know it.

>>3290606

It makes an absolute statement of "humans are born with two eyes" false.

>>3290602

The point was that those people actually exist.

>>3290637

Okay gentle anon, you keep thinking whatever you like.

>>3290630
source? I'm pretty sure I've seen it being lower than what either one of you said.

>>3290645
keep deflecting retard muh politicians are political experts, what a fucking joke.

>>3290625
>Implying proof by contradiction is an invalid form of argument
Get fucked, brainlet.

File: think-hand.png (9KB, 160x160px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 160x160px

>>3290639
>It makes an absolute statement of "humans are born with two eyes" false.

Yes I know basic logic, that's not the point. Human communication, thinking, and language does not work in binary logic. So humans can use language, say formally logical flase statements and, in the human experience still be true.
Is like saying women are shorter than men, but stronger in "trueness".

>>3290646

http://www.aissg.org/PDFs/Blackless-How-Dimorphic-2000.pdf

File: 1496989405457.jpg (184KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 600x600px

>>3290649

Nah you're right. I concede anon. Politicians know nothing about politics and have no authority to comment on politics or society. If only they had a pol sci/sociology degree, then finally they'd be able to.

>>3290639

So deep in your madness that no light will penetrate.

Humans are born with two eyes.
Humans are born male and female.

All humans have two eyes.
All humans are either male or female.

Can you even pretend to see the difference between those statements, or are you too far gone?

>>3290600

They're pointed to as example of ambiguity in terms of gender identity.

>>3290666
satan trips, full of shit. what a surprise


Not XX and not XY one in 1,666 births
Klinefelter (XXY) one in 1,000 births
Androgen insensitivity syndrome one in 13,000 births
Partial androgen insensitivity syndrome one in 130,000 births
Classical congenital adrenal hyperplasia one in 13,000 births
Late onset adrenal hyperplasia one in 66 individuals
Vaginal agenesis one in 6,000 births
Ovotestes one in 83,000 births
Idiopathic (no discernable medical cause) one in 110,000 births
Iatrogenic (caused by medical treatment, for instance progestin administered to pregnant mother) no estimate
5 alpha reductase deficiency no estimate
Mixed gonadal dysgenesis no estimate
Complete gonadal dysgenesis one in 150,000 births
Hypospadias (urethral opening in perineum or along penile shaft) one in 2,000 births
Hypospadias (urethral opening between corona and tip of glans penis) one in 770 births
Total number of people whose bodies differ from standard male or female one in 100 births
Total number of people receiving surgery to “normalize” genital appearance one or two in 1,000 births

File: 1485296094764.jpg (15KB, 250x240px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 250x240px

>>3290675

Jesus fucking christ I can see the difference between the two statements you faggot, my original comment was just to point out that a TINY, TINY MINORITY of people are genuinely not male or female.

>>3290679

>provides source
>waaahhh I don't like it!!!
>waaahhh
>waaaah
>waaaahhh

>>3288923
He's a pretty basic thinker, combining a basic reading of Dostoyevsky with some psychology. Honestly, his persona as someone who seems very sincere (and his adorable accent making him sound super vulnerable) probably make people listen to him a lot more than his actual ideas

>>3289660
My step dad is asian who didn't even had a son with my mom I am literraly "a wife son "
I wanted a hapa brother

>>3290490
His ideas are all derivative shallow crap. Petersonheads respond by saying that he has this and that degree and that he taught in this and that university. You tell them that he has no qualification in these fields. They respond by saying that formal education is not necessary to be a philosopher, an historian, a psychanalist and a literary critic.

Fucking pseuds.

File: Cause+my+autism+meter+says+you+belong+here+now+get+_1d88094f9e0a43f7815397694055ed8d.jpg (9KB, 326x190px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 326x190px

>>3288923
This whole thread... image related
4chan because reasons. Link not related:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hDmPZj6ym9U

>>3289642
As much as I like Peterson I disagree with his critique of people like Dawkins/Harris. Peterson claims that undermining the societal bedrock that is faith is reprehensible, when in fact morality is not something which should be taught from archaic books and does not have a place in progressive human development

>>3290672
they really dont, and anyone that looks to politicians as authority figures on political discourse is a fucking idiot. They do everything they can to shit all over real politics and simplify everything for a campaign platform they dont even fully support themselves but that was constructed by actual political scientists to appeal to the most people.

You do realize that a politician is a mouthpiece for an entire TEAM of actual experts, right? You understand that a politician is to his staff what a late night show host is to his writers, yes? The actual experts are involved in politics, theyre just not running themselves because politicians are basically models and the experts are their agents.

>>3290792
>morality is not something which should be taught from archaic books and does not have a place in progressive human development
Are you saying that morality does not have a place in progressive human development, or that archaic books don't have a place? If the former, what the fuck. If the latter, why not?

>>3290245
That is not what free will means you retard

File: d3600e145a14eca692d432821106e4ce13f331c97c0049047576e99926a4ec43.png (287KB, 2518x1176px) Image search: [Google]

287KB, 2518x1176px

lmao what a fag

>>3290792
Yeah, I don't think that's what he's saying, at all.

He's more-or-less arguing that society requires a base mythology, some kind of performative embodiment of the culture's collective consciousness, history, and values. By participating in the performative elements of a religion, you reinforce within yourself the underlying ideas that the practice embodies. It's worth noting that the communists, despite the rationalist basis for their ideology, inevitably created their own mythologies in the form of proletariat martyrdom, worker heroes, and leadership cults. Hell, many countries, although the American version is probably the most advanced, have their own secular cultural religion in the worship of their cultural and political icons.

Ultimately, what he's arguing is that a culture needs a unifying element, a common mythology with a common set of traditions and practices is necessary to hold the thing together. You seem to be implying that he argues the bible, or other religious texts, are the source of morality; given that his lectures include commentaries on emergent moralities in dogs and rats, I'd say that's clearly false. The religious texts, at least the old testament and other ancient stories, are instead describing the emergence of complex morality in a symbolic fashion; they're descriptive rather than prescriptive. Even the story of Moses and the Ten Commandments, he argues in his lectures, is probably the story of a man, or many men that have been reduced to a single individual for the sake of the narrative, creating the first example of common law. By examining all of the cases he had been judging, Moses, in his contemplation, was able to decipher a basic list of guiding principles that unified his people.

>>3290883
>>>/pol/

>>3290693
And your source was debunked as including far more things than hermaphrodites.....

>>3290683
and therefore INSANE IDIOTS LIKE YOU suddenly start saying that little babies need to grow up before they can tell you WHETHER THEY ARE MALE OR NOT

File: mfw no meaning.png (461KB, 469x526px) Image search: [Google]

461KB, 469x526px

>>3288923
I like his motivational speaker stuff but it seems to me that he has just decided that "Religious substructures" are correct because they're old and so when he reads the bible he just has that presupposition, then starts interpreting the book in a way where it becomes perfect and he just keeps doing that and then proclaims that his interpretation is correct. So in the sodom story for isntance he underplays the on the face shunning of homosexuality and replaces it with something else because he needs to in order for it to fit his narrative.

His whole idea of "I avoid to fall into that trap by applying five levels of analysis" doesn't seem to apply anymore. And what bothers me with this is that he could pick up the quran tomorrow and do the same thing and he'd come up with a supermoral book of his own interpretation, meanwhile it says right there in the text some truly heinous immoral stuff that 99% of people reading it would understand it as, but he insists on that his own unique interpretation is the correct one as if that means anything.

File: 1503083377406.jpg (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

>>3290848
That's my claim, retard. That that is not free will. Read a bit closer before posting a reply, retard.

>>3291187
>he could pick up the quran tomorrow and do the same thing
I think that's pretty clear from the things he says, he does not claim that the bible is superior to other religious books.

File: Peterson.jpg (158KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 1920x1080px

Peterson circa 2015 was pure kino. Insightful like now but far more humorous and focused. He didn't weigh in on every subject under the sun, he wasn't anyone's internet dad, he didn't really talk about contemporary issues, he just had interesting lectures on personality and and the nature of belief systems in context of psychology.

Once Peterson got internet famous in 2016 alot has changed in a very short time. He looks sickly(although he's mentioned in the past that he's changed diets), he goes off on tangents that are increasingly sounding bitter and pedantic, throwing his considerable weight into every subject you can think of.

>>3290852

*Dies of AIDS*

>>3290898

No, not like me. You're arguing with a strawman. Keep going though, you're sure tearing it to bits.

>>3288985
-stopped reading right there

You only like JP because you're too pussy for the actual right.

>>3290572

They're also a vanishingly small minority, and don't really have anything to do with the issue at hand, that being that of biologically male and female people arguing gender fluidity and other such pseudoscience and trying to enshrine their position into law through compelled speech.

File: 1377285996453.jpg (93KB, 634x900px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 634x900px

>>3289028
>>3289023
I'm starting to think that in the next century or two a new belief system will emerge that's a syncretism between European Christianity, which already syncretized the Greco-Roman canon, and Darwinism (i.e. Darwinism as applied to ideas and sets of ideas). Progressive religion (axiom of equality, tabula rasa) filled the vacuum left by the death of God and is causing turmoil within society. Something more in harmony with the laws of nature will supplant it eventually. Rome in its transition from paganism to Christianity likely followed a similar process.

>>3292668
I find it quite unlikely that Darwinism will make a comeback, much more likely that a more idealist and less aggressive egalitarianism will take the place of our current materialist egalitarianism

>>3292687

If only. Materialism has been the status quo since the beginning of the industrial revolution, and I don't see that changing.

File: 1500197229963.png (75KB, 390x310px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 390x310px

>>3291355
>if i change the definition of the words i automatically win

>>3292696
I'm surprised it hasn't changed already, modern materialist thought essentially tells you to be perpetually unhappy. I feel like there's gonna be a sea change at some point in the near future

>>3289483
Thank you

>>3292687
Doesn't Peterson argue that Christianity embeds some aspects of a "less aggressive egalitarianism"? Ideas such as everyone serving a valuable role in God's creation, prince or pauper.

By Darwinism, I don't so much mean the hard social Darwinism of the early 20th century, but a Darwinism applied to ideas which would give justification to Christian stories absent faith in a deity. Peterson seems to be attempting to argue for the validity of Christianity through this lens.

>>3289660
This. Wtf is this thread, all he talks about it common sense shit. I bet if any of you told him 'wow you're one of the greatest thinkers of our times based on your videos' he'd ask what the fuck you're talking about

>>3289660
or never had a good father
which is most people

>>3292713
>Doesn't Peterson argue that Christianity embeds some aspects of a "less aggressive egalitarianism"?
no idea, i only saw one of his lectures and was thoroughly unimpressed, but i can easily see that he would make that point.
>Peterson seems to be attempting to argue for the validity of Christianity through this lens.
This also seems accurate to me, which is actually one of the reasons i find him disagreeable

>>3289824
>>3289834
He's repeating old truths that we've known since the beginning of time but are too stupid to remember for longer than a few decades at a time.

>>3290346
appeal to authority is listening to a celebrity's view on politics
recognizing relevant accolades as signs of recognition by his field is basic competence

>>3290346
Chomsky might be wrong, but yea he's probably still smarter than you

>>3290431
>I worship corporations and the military or the state and minorities
>why don't you?

File: 1498708122509.jpg (69KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 1000x1000px

Why do people constantly overlook the fact he is an unwitting dualist in the Cartesian sense with no theory of interaction between subject and object, and thus internally inconsistent?

>>3292729
Why is that disagreeable to you? Genuinely curious.

>>3292749
He takes Nietzsche's view of the truth you fucking retard - it's true enough if it brings us to a higher form of existence.

Like every other modern thinker he only uses the subject/object split as a verbal crutch because language hasn't caught up to our understanding yet.

You're a pseud.

>>3292759
I see the view that "religion is important for a social role regardless of actual faith in the divine" as both depressingly cynical on a personal level, but I also think it completely misses the essential traits of religion. It's basically the character Shatov from Dostoyevsky's novel Demons (which for all his praise of Dosto, I guess peterson has never read); he views religion as an important social glue but lacks personal faith in God, and this paralyzes him when he needs to take action. The relationship between the individual and the eternal that faith offers is something I can't imagine living without

>>3292759

Not him, but it seems a bit disingenuous. You can validate any tale through the essential truths embedded in the narrative's substrate. You have to make a statement of Christianity's value beyond this basic level, or it's obvious you're just validating your pre-existing biases.

>>3292785

>it's true enough if it brings us to a higher form of existence

I'm not familiar with Nietzsche, but that seems like circular reasoning. Can you briefly elaborate, or should I just go read him?

>>3292799
If you're the same anon that I just replied to, then please stop talking about things that you don't understand.

Yes, just go read Nietzsche. Start with the Geaneology (fuck spelling I'm drunk) of Morals. Move on to Beyond Good and Evil. Finish with Thus Spake Zarathustra. Then read whatever.

Your life will then be different, probably for the better.

You might want to read Beyond Good and Evil twice back to back. Trust me, it's worth it.

>>3292813

Not that guy, just curious. And thanks. Is there any other reading outside of his work I should look at first to help understand his writing?

>>3288923
He's a scholar, not a philosopher. He's somewhat knowledgeable and practical but his philosophy is not original or revolutionary in the slightest.

>>3292877
It would help to have a passing familiarity with the people he mentions. Its a pretty basic crowd: Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Christ, St. Paul, St. Augustine, Descartes, and Kant are probably the most important.

The most important are Socrates, Plato, Christ, Paul, Descartes, and Kant. Though it won't be comprehensive, a quick read of their Wikapedia articles should give you a basic understanding of who they were. Read Plato's allegory of the cave and the Apology of Socrates.

The basic gist of what you should be aware of is the place of "reason" in the history of Western thought. Nietzsche was among the first wave of Western thinkers who were starting to question the heavy reliance placed on reason. They thought it was to the detriment of the rest of the human being.

Nietzsche traces it back to Socrates, who he points out was asking noble men of instinct to articulate a justification for themselves. That's symbolically the point when the idea that "reason", or in other words, that which can be brought within the light of consciousness and examined, was not only a tool, but the highest moral good. Plato and Aristotle developed that idea in their own ways. Rome came and went. Christianity picked up those torches, which led to the Rationalism of the Rennaisance and the utopianism of the Englightenment. However, the ferocious onslaught of reason was such that it eventually undid its own foundation within Christian Civilization, the Christian faith, ushering in an age of confusion as Europe began to discover that it's fundamental assumptions of reality, and more importantly, their own nature, were entirely wrong.

Nietzsche was one of the few thinkers who were undeterred by that, and he resolved to explore the depths of humanity and Western history to discover new truths, or at least to discover a way to reach those new truths. My use of that word is inadquate, however, as Nietzsche will demonstrate in the first section of Beyond Good and Evil.

>>3290883
Have you ever read grant morrison that's one of his key themes with superheroes, we've basically replaced the gods of old with new gods and myths. Like instead of the cunning Hermes it's Bateman. Super man smashing thugs instead of Thor crushing trolls.

>>3288923
What do you guys think of his 2016 new years video?

>>3292583
Not everyone has to be destructive. Destruction has its place in the world but if that's all you had you'd have nothing.

>>3291355
Well see that's the problem though because the bible and the quran have some pretty horrific shit, but if you decide that it's all good because it's old and goes under the "Religious substructure" umbrella so it must be true according to him, so then he tries to find reasons why it is true. So when he gets to passages that condone slavery in the bible he's going to have to jusify that being true too in some way. You see the problem here?

File: IMG_20170110_112243.jpg (482KB, 2048x2048px) Image search: [Google]

482KB, 2048x2048px

>>3292933
>Bateman
Zozzle.