Any of you ever read "The Gay Science"? It's credited

>>9731813
just wait until it gets gay

>>9731813
Nietzsche is very different from most philosophers. He's also much "easier", except you'll paradoxically lose a lot of nuance if you read him without much philosophical background, and think you understand things you don't.

Also
>gay
>>>/r/eddit

>>9731817
can't wait
>>9731820
Yeah. I don't want to lose any nuance, so therefore I got a little uneasy about some of the more common chapters. I will say that he has a very poetic style of prose, not at all helped by the classical English. I find myself having to backtrack a bit

>>9731813
You should have started with other works, desu. Birth of tragedy, genealogy of morals, beyond good and evil.

>>9733352
in that order?

>>9733380
No. I'd say to sart with birth of tragedy

>>9733352
Browsing /hm would probably help too

What do you find common sense about it? The writing is clear but the ideas themselves are not easy to interpret. I found a lot of his ideas to be pretty extravagant.

I will say that Book 1 is not as extravagant as the latter sections. He introduces some pretty original ideas about truth and knowledge starting in Book 3

"big ideas" is what nietzsche tried to avoid during positivist middle phase, including GS, although there are already traces of transition to new idealism.