Thread replies: 6
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
Anonymous
Using "slave revolt" and "ressentiment" as ad hominems 2017-01-06 12:21:01 Post No. 8933796
[Report] Image search: [Google]
Using "slave revolt" and "ressentiment" as ad hominems 2017-01-06 12:21:01 Post No. 8933796
[Report] Image search: [Google]
File: 1383388387170.jpg (360KB, 706x800px) Image search:
[Google]
360KB, 706x800px
Using "slave revolt" and "ressentiment" as ad hominems
Anonymous
2017-01-06 12:21:01
Post No. 8933796
[Report]
This is a really stupid thing I see a lot of people who take themselves very seriously do and they need to fucking stop. Nietzsche's slave revolt is a necessary step in moral maturation in his genealogy - it's what raises the question of the value of values in the first place, and allows "rationality" and "introspection" to emerge as psychological faculties, and for the consequent development of people who exist as something other than the pleasantly idiotic "noble" blond beasts/masters. "Masters" figure into the Nietzschean moral hierarchy, construed as chronological stages of spiritual development and as a literal historical genealogy, on the BOTTOM, and people who contrast some behaviour as "slavish" in the Nietzschean sense in contradistinction to some "master" ideal are not only making fools of themselves by demonstrating an incredibly narrow reading of his genealogy, but are actually more likely to be commending the behaviour they're attempting to deride if their criticisms are taken on Nietzsche's actual terms.
Fuck you Brian Leiter.
>>
Please elaborate further.
>>
I didn't really understand your post OP, could you reformat a little?
>>
>>8933838
Masters have no reason to question the value of their own values because their values are exactly aligned with the nature of their historical context, in the sense that they get what they want with little resistance and thus have no reason to resent anyone, much less life itself. The development of morality begins for Nietzsche with a slave revolt, and while this path ultimately leads to nihilism, it also leads to creativity, which is the ultimate telos of Nietzschean moral philosophy and is impossible to attain without first engaging in a slave revolt of some form another.
Decrying someone's argument as being a "slave-revolt" or someone's political beliefs as being based on "ressentiment" is an increasingly popular tactic for people who want to invalidate some beliefs. For the reasons mentioned above, this is in fact a bad joke that they are playing on themselves, and the notion that ressentiment is something to be avoided in preference for master morality is not only completely backwards, but Nietzsche asserts is an actual historical impossibility for the historical context in which he is writing.
The basic idea is that you prefer "masterful" self-assurance to the sniveling "ressentiment" of people who are mad about not having what you have: the truth of Nietzsche's position is that masterful self-assurance exists only for aristocrats ruling over a slave-class, and then not as a preferable state of spiritual-development, but as a primordial and intellectually stunted beginning which needs ressentiment to begin the path to creativity.
>>
>>8933796
Nietzsche obviously preferred master morality, but you're right in saying that slave morality was a necessary step. Without slave morality as the antithesis to savage, simplistic master morality, nihilism and the revaluation of values, and by extension the Ubermensch could never happen.
>>
>>8933864
>Nietzsche obviously preferred master morality
This isn't true. He thought master morality was healthful and ressentiment was a sickness, but that the latter was ultimately more valuable than the former.
"never have I felt happier with myself than in the sickest and most painful periods of my life"
Thread posts: 6
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1