nietzsche: a geneology of morals...

[country doctor]

this might be his strongest writing in the doc's opinion...what he lays out here for the reader is such a powerful narrative for what 'truth' is and the why's and wherefore's of that 'truth'...

just finished essay number three this morning...it's been the doc's early morning nourishment w/ his pot of tea for awhile now...working through kaufman's compilation, and although it's all good, this was extremely so...

looked for a thread about this work on the search function and nothing came up, so the doc had to start one...

any fellow readers out there? thoughts?

[ralfyman]

From what I remember, it is probably the basis for Foucault and other thinkers.

[country doctor]

the definition of 'good'...the definition of 'evil'...their meanings have changed over time...in his eyes, not for the better...the chasm between 'healthy' and 'sick'...

and 'truth'? nothing is absolute...

[Cunninglinguist]

and 'truth'? nothing is absolute...

Mmm... is this a truth? Seems like we've gotten ourselves stuck in a paradox.

[country doctor]

nietzsche has your answer for you from his perspective...third essay, beginning w/ section 23...

[Dodo25]

To me, this book is great not because it gives 'answers' or a consistent moral framework (it doesn't), but rather because it presents an interesting just-so story about morality, and even though it might not have happened for the reasons Nietzsche suggested, the presented reasons themselves are psychologically and philosophically revealing. Also, the analysis of Christian doctrine and its critique is brilliant. Last but not least, there seems to be some truth in his claim that 'ascetic ideals' are often inherent in a philosopher's character, the elaboration thereof was fascinating.

As 'problem-oriented' philosophy, the book is imo overrated. As a historical and personal (subjective) analysis, it is brilliant.

[Theunderground]

For once i agree with dodo!
This is a brilliant book which i often dip into. It is posssibly his easiest to understand book linguistically,but paradoxically it is very easy to misunderstand for a first time Nietzsche reader.
It was written as an exposition of 'beyond good and evil' which was in turn written as an exposition of Zarathustra.
This book shows the power of words,ideas,actions and concepts in shaping man and i think its
a very good psychological analysis of certain types of people and mentalities,and a brilliant thesis on the religious and 'democratic'/scientific mindset.
Nietzsche doesnt want you to take it LITERALLY though. Ruminate over it read his other works post zarathustra as well.
There really has been no western thinker so on the ball as this guy still is.

[Uberzensch]

Mmm... is this a truth? Seems like we've gotten ourselves stuck in a paradox.

Really? This tired argument agin? We must do better than this. You. Can't so flippantly write this off...

[G L Wilson]

I remember the book being brilliant in every aspect - that is all.

[country doctor]

i remember the book being brilliant in every aspect - that is all.


roar!

[country doctor]

...

...

[G L Wilson]

There is a difference between a slave and a free man - humanity!

[Dialectic]

Nietzsche was certainly a philosopher for the future. Every thinker since has had to address, in one form or another, the claims and arguments he laid out in his works.

[G L Wilson]

Nietzsche was certainly a philosopher for the future. Every thinker since has had to address, in one form or another, the claims and arguments he laid out in his works.

John Carroll's The Wreck of Western Culture stops at 1900, and, who would deny that the twentieth century was entirely the century of reactionary forces?