Is Nietzsche an edgelord of unfathomable dimensions? Or a man

There is literally nothing "edgy" about Nietzsche.

"Edgy" persons who have poor reading comprehension abilities prescribe this fallacy to Nietzsche all the time.

It is a projection of themselves.

Am I a pleb?

Just give it to me straight doctor

Cuz that's how I'm reading it.

Official /lit/ guide to critiquing philosophy:
1. Call it edgy
2. Go back to pretending to have read Infinite Jest

>>8781395
And what else have you read by him? If the answer is none then you are doing it wrong.

>>8783019
Yeah that is where I started. What should I have done differently?

I'm still enjoying it, mind you.

Neitzsche is not edgy, hes pretty grounded desu. Its the philosophers who followed him that are edgy

>>8781628
I agree, I always see him described as 'edgy' and I simply don't understand why.

>>8783121
Everyone hears the "god is dead" quote and assume he must be some sort of nihilist edge lord celebrating the death of religion, when in fact he was mourning it, and was quite opposed to nihilism

>>8783078
Yeah that was a mistake, and one which is made on this board pretty frequently. Thus Spoke Zarathustra is not only his most difficult work, but is also the climax of his middle period works. Without knowing the concepts he worked to develop up until that point, I don't think you have much of a chance (other than getting those good ubermensch feels). I would highly recommend starting with The Gay Science

>>8783129
Okay I'll do that today. What should I do after Gay Science?

ls there a /lit/ approved Nietzsche chart/guide lying around somewhere?

>>8783078
It should be one of the last things you read by him. You are going to so immensely misunderstand everything! (that is no exaggeration) that I would be hard pressed to say if you knew more or less about Nietzsche having read it.

There are lots of ways of tackling Nietzsche. If you want a grand tour in as few pages as possible I would recommend BGE. If that is too confusing there is On the Genealogy of Morality which acts as an introduction for BGE. If you wanted a more comprehensive view starting with Daybreak or Human all too Human and moving forward chronologically or near enough so. If you have decided to love Nietzsche and want to know everything about him start with The Birth of Tragedy and move forward. Leave later books like Twilight, Antichrist and Ecce Homo until later.

>>8783141
Beyond Good and Evil isnt particularly hard imo as long as you have a basic understanding of philosophy

>>8783126
I would be highly suspect of using the word mourn to describe his attitude towards it. I think to use such words implies that his philosophy is a consolation for existing which is untrue. I think it is more accurate to say he merely described what he saw as the conclusion to a premise that was developed during his time, where no one else understood the implications of that premise.

BOT >>> OGOM >>> BGE >>> DB/HATH >>> TGS >>> TSZ >>> All other stuff??

Is that a good rough rough summary of what you're advising?

>>8783154
I agree it was the wrong word. He didnt mourn religion but he feared what would replace it

>>8781395
By the standards of his time he was "edgy" in the sense of being a bit subversive, but certainly not by today's standard.
Not that edgy is a valid criticism of anything, just like "pretentious" it's used by mostly unintelligent people to leverage themselves to justify their lack of "getting it" by acting like there's "nothing to get"

>>8783141
From there On the Genealogy of Morals, Beyond Good and Evil, Twilight of the Idols, and Human all too Human are all good places to go. He wrote books 1-4 of the Gay Science then wrote Beyond Good and Evil before coming back to book 5 of the Gay Science, so there's that.

Three kinds of people who have read Nietzsche:

>babby who can't understand him
>fedora/resentful beta mouthbreather/full-on 1488 freak who worships him
>sensible person who recognises Nietzsche's critical skill and canonical significance while realising that he's pretty loopy

>>8783156
I wouldn't recommend starting with The Birth of Tragedy. The first 10 sections or so are great, but after that it has a lot of stuff that Nietzsche rejected, so if you read it without context, it might confuse your understanding of N. If you have the Kaufmann translation he does a pretty good job of pointing out places that Nietzsche would later backpedal.

>>8783196
Okay. Should I go with Kaufmann across the board?

>>8783186
Oh I didn't know that. Thanks

>>8783262
Kaufmann is good. There are some errors like any translation, but he is the standard. I have a friend who swears by the Cambridge editions, but honestly I don't think it makes a huge difference. Kaufmann has a tendency to excessively footnote just so he can add his own 2 cents which can be annoying sometimes but is admittedly very helpful if you haven't read any Nietzsche.

>>8783281
Alright. I was reading a KJV sounding translation for free so probably anything is better.

>>8781395
I think Kaufmann´s book on Nietzsche is the best you can start with

>>8783292
Is there a bundle I can snatch up or do you recommend just cop them individually on Amazon?

>>8783289
The Cambridge Gay Science is online in a PDF for free.

http://www.holybooks.com/wp-content/uploads/The-Gay-Science-by-Friedrich-Nietzsche.pdf

>>8783303
Thanks senpai

>>8783298
When i said Kaufmann´s book on Nietzsche i meant Nietzsche:
Philosopher, Psychologist, Antichrist

>>8783298
http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10109.html>>8783298

>>8783369
Yeah kek I just figured that out a second ago. Looks promising. Thank you

>>8781395

Thus Spake Zarathustra is a joy to read even if you barely understand whats going on, and without having read his other work i'd say thats likely to be the case.

A lot of people say never read it first, which I dont necessarily agree with - though i can't call them wrong exactly.

Zarathustra is sort of his magnum opus. Everything before was building up to it, everything afterwards is clarifying and refining it.

If you're enjoying reading Zarathustra, i see no reason to stop. I read it first and its what gave me the fascination to read his other work to better understand that book.

Overall though, Nietszche's message is surprisingly simple and un-edgy.

'The world is objectively meaningless and horrible. Make your own meaning and love it' just about says it.

Can't think of much edgy about a guy who spent far more time talking about his joy and his love and his boundless passion for the world than he ever did lamenting it (though he occasionally did that too).

>>8783410
I enjoy it okay but more for the one liners and quotes. Which probably isn't ideal. I think I'm okay dropping it for now if only because this Thomas Common translation maybe isn't the best to start with anyway. Thanks for the context though I shoulda done more research before diving into this guy.