Just curious what atheists think of Nietzsche

[salvationfound]

Question for atheists

Friedrich Nietzsche is a well known atheist who has been known to make
some pretty strong statements about his views on the world.

One of them being that there is no such thing as truth. All our experiences
and beliefs are arbitrary.

Another being that what humans do is useless since humanity will eventually
die out and our actions will have little to do in the grand scheme of things.
So anything we do is useless.

A third is that there is no universal morality. That some moralities may be
good for one person but not good for another person depending on the
situation.

I'm just curious how atheists view these thoughts on our world. This is what
I get from his writings if I'm wrong then feel free to correct me.

1. There are no truths. (Which kind of sounds like a contradiction)
2. Anything we do is useless.
3. Nothing is truly right or wrong. (Sounds like this even would have to
include rape, murder, etc.)

Mainly I'm just curious if this is the general world view of atheists. What is
your take on Nietzsche?

[Jayrok]

I disagree with him on all accounts. There is truth, we are just trying to find it!

seriously, there is truth. 2+2=4, that is true.

And what we do does positively and negatively affect our environment and the future of our world. We are very useful in the furthering of our planet.

But then again.. I'm not really atheist.

[Duder]

Question for atheists

Friedrich Nietzsche is a well known atheist who has been known to make
some pretty strong statements about his views on the world.

One of them being that there is no such thing as truth. All our experiences
and beliefs are arbitrary.

Another being that what humans do is useless since humanity will eventually
die out and our actions will have little to do in the grand scheme of things.
So anything we do is useless.

A third is that there is no universal morality. That some moralities may be
good for one person but not good for another person depending on the
situation.

I'm just curious how atheists view these thoughts on our world. This is what
I get from his writings if I'm wrong then feel free to correct me.

1. There are no truths. (Which kind of sounds like a contradiction)
2. Anything we do is useless.
3. Nothing is truly right or wrong. (Sounds like this even would have to
include rape, murder, etc.)

Mainly I'm just curious if this is the general world view of atheists. What is
your take on Nietzsche?

I can't speak for atheists, but I'll chime in anyway.

Nietzsche was an excellent writer, and I enjoy reading him. I want to scream in disagreement, but only a great writer can make me do that!

I don't believe that Nietzsche would have agreed that there is no truth. Certainly there is some actual, cosmic state of affairs - and Nietzsche wouldn't have denied it. The cosmic state of affairs is constantly in flux - going this way and that in a willy-nilly manner. For Nietzsche, the most important thing in all of creation is the will of conscious creatures. The universe really has no intrisic value, except for what these conscious creatures do with the universe in the excersize of will. What men should do is not to observe a randomly fluxualting world and go along with the directionless flow, but rather to improve our subjective experience of the world with willful action - to "make something" of the world, to give it meaning to the world with great projects of willful action.

Nietzsche wanted to improve humanity - to leap to the next phase of evolution - which he called the Overman. The Overman would take more and more conscious control over the mindless universe with greater and greater projects. In this way, the universe would gradually change from a useless, undirected, random, swirling blob into something organized, usefull, and indicative of conscious design. It is true that for Nietzsche there was no distinction between good and evil already "written in the stars". It is easy to see how some of Nietzsche's readers, such as Bismark and Hitler, would mistake Nietzsche and try to build great iron-fisted empires of blood and guts. And one can see echos of Nietzsche's Overman in Hitler's master race. But Nietzche was a gentle and deeply compassionate man, and he had no truck with cruelty. He would have attacked Hitler with even more vitriol than he attacked Christianity.

Nietzsche saw Christianity as an impediment to achieving the Overman. It keeps men small and bound to a fictional overlord named God. It makes them content with their lowly and humble status with pie-in-the-sky promises of greatness in the afterlife. He spoke of Christianity in such disparaging terms that it is often comical.

Poorly as he esteemed the religion of Christianity, he had a great respect for the person of Jesus of Nazareth.

[LGM]

Question for atheists
Friedrich Nietzsche is a well known atheist who has been known to make
some pretty strong statements about his views on the world.

{..snip a gross misrepresentation and oversimplification of Nietzsche’s philosophy…)

I'm just curious how atheists view these thoughts on our world. This is what
I get from his writings if I'm wrong then feel free to correct me.

You are wrong to oversimplify and misrepresent his work with this summary.

Perhaps it would be best if you pick one specific philosophical concept, such as his challenge to traditional philosophic views of morality, or his superman concept, then quote him directly, say from Thus Spoke Zarathustra, or from Beyond Good and Evil, in context, instead of misrepresenting him like this.

Mainly I'm just curious if this is the general world view of atheists.

The “general world view of atheists or theists” is a useless oxymoron.

What is the “general world view of people who believe or don’t believe in UFOs?”

Perhaps if after you quote a philosophy of Neitzsche directly, then you might ask what other people think about it, whatever their beliefs.

What is your take on Nietzsche?

My take on Nietzsche is he was a complicated, insightful, counter culture philosopher who’s writings have unfortunately been cherry picked and abused by the Nazis, and Christians, (and now you), alike. You can not have his myriad writings summed up in a few short lines.

I appreciate him deeply for his poetic exposure of man’s enormous ego, hubris, and anthropocentrism, and one of its main vehicles of expression: the various religious dogma espoused as “absolute truth”.

Once upon a time, in some out of the way corner of that universe which is dispersed into numberless twinkling solar systems, there was a star upon which clever beasts invented knowing. That was the most arrogant and mendacious minute of "world history," but nevertheless, it was only a minute. After nature had drawn a few breaths, the star cooled and congealed, and the clever beasts had to die. One might invent such a fable, and yet he still would not have adequately illustrated how miserable, how shadowy and transient, how aimless and arbitrary the human intellect looks within nature.

There were eternities during which it did not exist. And when it is all over with the human intellect, nothing will have happened. For this intellect has no additional mission which would lead it beyond human life. Rather, it is human, and only its possessor and begetter takes it so solemnly-as though the world's axis turned within it. But if we could communicate with the gnat, we would learn that he likewise flies through the air with the same solemnity, that he feels the flying center of the universe within himself. There is nothing so reprehensible and unimportant in nature that it would not immediately swell up like a balloon at the slightest puff of this power of knowing. And just as every porter wants to have an admirer, so even the proudest of men, the philosopher, supposes that he sees on all sides the eyes of the universe telescopically focused upon his action and thought.

...from On Truth and Lies in a Nonmoral Sense

LGM
…and yes…we all know he is dead, and your god is still alive…

[kendemyer]

Here is my favorite comentary on Nietzsche taken from the Geisler-Till debate:

GEISLER

"Nietzsche said this: "If you can prove this God of the Christians to be, I would believe him all the less." I commend to you that disbelief is not rational; it's volitional. Disbelief is not because of people don't have enough brain power; it's because they don't have the will power. The evidence is there. It's valid, it's historical, and it's ample. If someone rejects it, the consequences are theirs. It's not because of lack of evidence; it's because of their choice to disbelieve the evidence that is there."

see: http://www.infidels.org/library/mode.../question.html

Sincerely,

Ken

[Seasanctuary]

I get the strong impression that Nietzsche wrote a lot of things that he didn't really believe just to put the ideas on the table.

I get the same impression reading Plato's Socrates character.

I do enjoy reading Nietzsche, but I think it's a mistake to try to harmonize all the stuff he wrote into a "Beliefs of Nietzsche" list so we can see if we agree with him or not.

[salvationfound]

LakeGeorgeMan,

You didn't pay attention to my post. I said this is what I get when I read
his writings. If I'm misinterpreting what he is writing then my bad. But all I
said was this is what I get from his writings and what do you think about it.

But ok I'll give a couple quotes that I've read because you asked.

There are many kinds of eyes. Even the sphinx has eyes-and consequently there are many kinds of 'truths' and consequently there is no truth.
April-June 1885 34 [230] (The Will to Power, 540)

To me this sounds like he is saying there is no such thing as truth.

And I get the opinion that he is saying that without God there are no moral
beliefs here.

there is nobody who commands, nobody who obeys, [and] nobody who trespasses. (From the Gay Science)

Another quote
We have arranged for ourselves a world in which we can live...without these articles of faith nobody could endure life
(From The Gay Science)

If there is no truth there is no morality there is no reason for living and
nothing we do matters.

This is what I get from reading him. If I'm not reading him the way you want
me to well then tell me how I'm misinterpreting him.
But this is what I get from reading him. I get
that there are no truths, there is no morality without God, and nothing we
do matters.

[Duder]

You are wrong to oversimplify and misrepresent his work with this summary.

Perhaps it would be best if you pick one specific philosophical concept, such as his challenge to traditional philosophic views of morality, or his superman concept, then quote him directly, say from Thus Spoke Zarathustra, or from Beyond Good and Evil, in context, instead of misrepresenting him like this.


The “general world view of atheists or theists” is a useless oxymoron.

What is the “general world view of people who believe or don’t believe in UFOs?”

Perhaps if after you quote a philosophy of Neitzsche directly, then you might ask what other people think about it, whatever their beliefs.


My take on Nietzsche is he was a complicated, insightful, counter culture philosopher who’s writings have unfortunately been cherry picked and abused by the Nazis, and Christians, (and now you), alike. You can not have his myriad writings summed up in a few short lines.

I appreciate him deeply for his poetic exposure of man’s enormous ego, hubris, and anthropocentrism, and one of its main vehicles of expression: the various religious dogma espoused as “absolute truth”.

Once upon a time, in some out of the way corner of that universe which is dispersed into numberless twinkling solar systems, there was a star upon which clever beasts invented knowing. That was the most arrogant and mendacious minute of "world history," but nevertheless, it was only a minute. After nature had drawn a few breaths, the star cooled and congealed, and the clever beasts had to die. One might invent such a fable, and yet he still would not have adequately illustrated how miserable, how shadowy and transient, how aimless and arbitrary the human intellect looks within nature.

There were eternities during which it did not exist. And when it is all over with the human intellect, nothing will have happened. For this intellect has no additional mission which would lead it beyond human life. Rather, it is human, and only its possessor and begetter takes it so solemnly-as though the world's axis turned within it. But if we could communicate with the gnat, we would learn that he likewise flies through the air with the same solemnity, that he feels the flying center of the universe within himself. There is nothing so reprehensible and unimportant in nature that it would not immediately swell up like a balloon at the slightest puff of this power of knowing. And just as every porter wants to have an admirer, so even the proudest of men, the philosopher, supposes that he sees on all sides the eyes of the universe telescopically focused upon his action and thought.

...from On Truth and Lies in a Nonmoral Sense

LGM
…and yes…we all know he is dead, and your god is still alive…

LGM -

That's a wonderful Nietzsche quote - thanks for taking the trouble to type it out for us.

If Nietzche is right, if consciousness is like a little spark that flashes and dies once in a while here and there in the universe, then the greatness Nietzche would try and foster in humanity is ultimately futile - it is like the mouse who stands defiantly and "flips off" the eagle that is swooping to devour him (you may remember that image from the the classic T-shirt).

Nietzche could be right. Maybe the feeling that we all have of the eyes of the universe telescopically focused upon our lives is but a psychological abberation. I used to think so, back when I first left the Christian faith, and I took some pride in holding this prickly, tough-guy philosophy. But now I am not so sure. Along with Carl Jung and Joe Campbell, I suspect that the "watched" feeling is like a memory of something real. In that feeling, consciousness gleans something of its origin and of its destination.

[LGM]

You didn't pay attention to my post.

Of course I did, I chastised you for trying to summarize the myriad philosophical writings of a complex, misunderstood, and abused genius, into a 3 line, PowerPoint slide, where you didn’t even bother to quote him, or a specific work, directly.

Is that more clear?

I said this is what I get when I read
his writings. If I'm misinterpreting what he is writing then my bad. But all I
said was this is what I get from his writings and what do you think about it.

What “writings” have you actually read of his and how recently? Have you actually read the entire “The Gay Science”?

While its been well over a decade since I read Thus Spoke Zarathustra, it was a deeply moving experience that I could not possibly do justice to in less than several pages…

But ok I'll give a couple quotes that I've read because you asked.

Sorry to have to make such unreasonable demands on you when discussing someone’s literature…

There are many kinds of eyes. Even the sphinx has eyes-and consequently there are many kinds of 'truths' and consequently there is no truth.
April-June 1885 34 [230] (The Will to Power, 540)

To me this sounds like he is saying there is no such thing as truth.

The irony here is deep and nourishing to the LakeMan…like the proud Emperor enraged with the simpleton who dares to claim his beloved, and vain, “absolute truth clothes” may be an illusion of personal perspective, ego and laziness…

I wonder if you have ever thought where your “truth” comes from SF? I wonder if you have ever contemplated your ancient ancestors who were so certain their eyes and brains knew THE truth…Or what a generation 10,000 years from now will think about your version of the “truth”. I wonder if your “truth” is different from the “truth” of a whale or a butterfly?...and if so..why?

Why not compare and contrast Nietzsche’s epistemology, philosophy of science and theories of truth of knowledge with your own? Let us know where you agree and disagree specifically? Let us know your personal struggle to deeply and thoughtfully consider the complex universe you find yourself in, and how you determine its innermost “truths”…tell us your processes for truth seeking…

Your quote above is just a mere snack of what Nietzsche has to say in the Gay Science about your specific desire to know the “truth”…

The intellectual conscience

I keep having the same experience and keep resisting it every time. I do not want to believe it although it is palpable: the great majority of people lack an intellectual conscience. Indeed, it has often seemed to me as if anyone calling for an intellectual conscience were as lonely in the most densely populated cities as if he were in a desert. Everybody looks at you with strange eyes and goes right on handling his scales, calling this good and that evil. Nobody even blushes when you intimate that their weights are underweight; nor do people feel outraged; they merely laugh at your doubts. I mean: the great majority of people does not consider it contemptible to believe this or that and to live accordingly, without first having given themselves an account of the final and most certain reasons pro and con, and without even troubling themselves about such reasons afterward: the most gifted men and the noblest women still belong to this "great majority." But what is goodheartedness, refinement, or genius to me, when the person who has these virtues tolerates slack feelings in his faith and judgments and when he does not account the desire for certainty as his inmost craving and deepest distress—as that which separates the higher human beings from the lower.

Among some pious people I have found a hatred of reason and was well disposed to them for that; for this at least betrayed their bad intellectual conscience. But to stand in the midst of this rerum concordia discors and of this whole marvelous uncertainty and rich ambiguity of existence without questioning, without trembling with the craving and the rapture of such questioning, without at least hating the person who questions, perhaps even finding him faintly amusing—that is what I feel to be contemptible, and this is the feeling for which I look first in everybody. Some folly keeps persuading me that every human being has this feeling, simply because he is human. This is my sense of injustice.

- The Gay Science

If there is no truth there is no morality there is no reason for living and
nothing we do matters.

…ahhh, you’ll be surprised how well you’ll do on this planet with your own version of the truth, some ego, and your own self indulgent reasons for living…

I get that there are no truths, there is no morality without God, and nothing we
do matters.

Explain to me again why you think this post, and whatever else you did today will matter in 5 billion years from now? Or whether it “matters” right this moment?

LGM
…once you answer that question…we’ll have your version of the “truth”…won’t we?...

[LGM]

LGM -

That's a wonderful Nietzsche quote - thanks for taking the trouble to type it out for us.

Don't thank me...thank him...Thank-you for your continued refreshing insights on a wide breadth of religious and philosophical ideas...

If Nietzche is right, if consciousness is like a little spark that flashes and dies once in a while here and there in the universe, then the greatness Nietzche would try and foster in humanity is ultimately futile - it is like the mouse who stands defiantly and "flips off" the eagle that is swooping to devour him (you may remember that image from the the classic T-shirt).

Clearly, he is right...human consciousness is a very recent phenomenon in the 5 billion year history of this solar system. Although I am not so proud to claim there is a magical demarcation point between our cortex abilities, and that of other biological species, both current and past...

Nietzche could be right. Maybe the feeling that we all have of the eyes of the universe telescopically focused upon our lives is but a psychological abberation. I used to think so, back when I first left the Christian faith, and I took some pride in holding this prickly, tough-guy philosophy. But now I am not so sure. Along with Carl Jung and Joe Campbell, I suspect that the "watched" feeling is like a memory of something real. In that feeling, consciousness gleans something of its origin and of its destination.

Again, our anthropocentric and ego laden philospohers will never know the true "qualia" of the humpback whale will they? Perhaps in that individual whale's "feeling", whale consciousness gleans something of its origin and of its destination, regardless of the existence or thoughts of a thinly haired primate with a different anatomy and cortex?

LGM
...I wish I could have you and Nietzsche over for dinner some evening...

[shunyadragon]

Question for atheists

Friedrich Nietzsche is a well known atheist who has been known to make
some pretty strong statements about his views on the world.

One of them being that there is no such thing as truth. All our experiences
and beliefs are arbitrary.

Another being that what humans do is useless since humanity will eventually
die out and our actions will have little to do in the grand scheme of things.
So anything we do is useless.

A third is that there is no universal morality. That some moralities may be
good for one person but not good for another person depending on the
situation.

I'm just curious how atheists view these thoughts on our world. This is what
I get from his writings if I'm wrong then feel free to correct me.

1. There are no truths. (Which kind of sounds like a contradiction)
2. Anything we do is useless.
3. Nothing is truly right or wrong. (Sounds like this even would have to
include rape, murder, etc.)

Mainly I'm just curious if this is the general world view of atheists. What is
your take on Nietzsche?

Nietzsche is one of the most poorly understood philosphers of the modern world. To try and define Nietzsche's beliefs gets a little slippery if you reas all his stuff. He dilliberately contradicts himself frequently.

Common misconceptions abound about Nietzsche like those that claimed his writings supported Hitler and the Nazis of Germany. Few people read his works with the unbiased effort to understand and not judge him or put him on a couch with a shrink.

You could possibly say he believed the three statements you made, but with the provision that there are not absolutes from the human point of view. Making statements like 'Sounds like this would have to include . . .' is inserting the old atheist bashing morality statements.

I believe in God and I like Nietzsche's and share his view on these issues. People who believe in absolutes are the ones that cause most of the troubles of the world.

Nietzsche's main goal was to inspire prople to think for themselves and get out of that rut they call a grove. This is such a rare virtue in today's world of abundent knowledge and ignorance standing side by side.

[shunyadragon]

I disagree with him on all accounts. There is truth, we are just trying to find it!

seriously, there is truth. 2+2=4, that is true.

And what we do does positively and negatively affect our environment and the future of our world. We are very useful in the furthering of our planet.

But then again.. I'm not really atheist.

If our only concern was 2+2=4 than the world would a field of daisies and everybody could only count to four. Unfortunately, it is not that simple.

There is truth, but claim it is to lose it.

[salvationfound]

Of course I did, I chastised you for trying to summarize the myriad philosophical writings of a complex, misunderstood, and abused genius, into a 3 line, PowerPoint slide, where you didn’t even bother to quote him, or a specific work, directly.

Is that more clear?

Wouldn't it have been alot more easier to have simply asked me for quotes
rather than claiming I'm purposelly misrepresenting him?

What “writings” have you actually read of his and how recently? Have you actually read the entire “The Gay Science”?

Yes I read Gay Science for Introduction to Philosophy class a couple years
ago.

This was never even meant to be a debate thread.

[LGM]

Wouldn't it have been alot more easier to have simply asked me for quotes
rather than claiming I'm purposelly misrepresenting him?

didn't claim you were doing it on purpose. I'm quite sure this is your own version of the "truth"...

Yes I read Gay Science for Introduction to Philosophy class a couple years
ago.

Well, I would re-read it then...you seem to have forgotten much...

This was never even meant to be a debate thread.

Strange this request of yours from the OP then...

"I'm just curious how atheists view these thoughts on our world. This is what
I get from his writings if I'm wrong then feel free to correct me."

LGM
...hrmmm...not meant to be a "debate thread", in a apologist debate forum, where a Christian oversimplifies, misrepresents and denigrates Nietzsche, and then asks for comments only from atheists???

[Solly]

I am not a nonTheist either, but I read most of Nietzsche's stuff before I was a Christian, including Will to Power, and several large and serious studies, and I loved him. He wrecked my world view, and yet still had me coming back for more. After I was a Christian I discovered, firstly, how much Ayn Rand was dependant upon him, esp in her fictional renditions (John Galt as übermensch, Eddie Williers as serf).
Also, i found what a great critic he is of armchair Christianity. he was the son of a Lutheran pastor, and imbided mid 19th century German liberal Christianity, and rebelled against it, not against Christianity. He said, there was only one Christian, and he died on the Cross. N never really had done with Christ or Christianity. He is worth reading today. He was a prophet of the coming 20th century also - he went mad in 1889, died 1901.