I tend to evaluate blog posts I read with the question: Did I learn something new? The answer very often is: No, I already knew that many people find a, b or c problematic. But here, the answer clearly is: Yes, I know more about the world after reading this post than I did before.
It's been a while, great to see another post from you Brett! This is an incredibly interesting (and I think important) series. I'm looking forward to your future instalments.
A fundamental problem, it seems to me, is that Nietzsche is relying on the very thing he purports to despise, a universal concern for mankind and a desire for its well-being, as really the only well-founded guard against the kind of nihilism he wishes to oppose. If death is oblivion, then there really isn't any rational reason to place any fundamental value on the welfare of anyone that isn't yourself, and that's the death knell for any kind of complex society.
Genetics don't solve this problem, as humans can and do opt to defy genetic imperatives on a fairly regular basis and the cratering of industrial tfrs worldwide indicates that the urge to reproduce isn't actually as strong as some people believe.
No one has any will if he doesn't sustain his own life, or would you posit Nietzsche's will to power as applying to all life, not just human? That would be crackpot metaphysics.
The sustainment of life is a coin, on one side is the imperative to live and the flip side is fear of death (since we are conscious of our mortality). Slavery has 'worked' because living as a slave is in general (over the span of human existence) preferable to death. Give me liberty (a lovely expression of will to power) or give me death, is a very recent sentiment, and only given in advancement of an ideal greater than one person's life.
I tend to evaluate blog posts I read with the question: Did I learn something new? The answer very often is: No, I already knew that many people find a, b or c problematic. But here, the answer clearly is: Yes, I know more about the world after reading this post than I did before.
It's been a while, great to see another post from you Brett! This is an incredibly interesting (and I think important) series. I'm looking forward to your future instalments.
Brett -- I love this series so far starting with the way you condense and express these important ideas.
Also, I strongly believe your work is massively underrated / for the most part unknown and that might have to do with the medium of exposition.
Have you ever considered taking this to YouTube (or similar) for a wider reach?
I’m looking forward to reading the next parts of this insightful series.
A fundamental problem, it seems to me, is that Nietzsche is relying on the very thing he purports to despise, a universal concern for mankind and a desire for its well-being, as really the only well-founded guard against the kind of nihilism he wishes to oppose. If death is oblivion, then there really isn't any rational reason to place any fundamental value on the welfare of anyone that isn't yourself, and that's the death knell for any kind of complex society.
Genetics don't solve this problem, as humans can and do opt to defy genetic imperatives on a fairly regular basis and the cratering of industrial tfrs worldwide indicates that the urge to reproduce isn't actually as strong as some people believe.
No one has any will if he doesn't sustain his own life, or would you posit Nietzsche's will to power as applying to all life, not just human? That would be crackpot metaphysics.
The sustainment of life is a coin, on one side is the imperative to live and the flip side is fear of death (since we are conscious of our mortality). Slavery has 'worked' because living as a slave is in general (over the span of human existence) preferable to death. Give me liberty (a lovely expression of will to power) or give me death, is a very recent sentiment, and only given in advancement of an ideal greater than one person's life.