I almost registered on this forum to reply to this thread, only to find I already have an account here! Very well strangers I must have known once, let us begin!
I do not pose as an expert on Nietzsche; I am an outrageous novice who has barely begun to study him. Yet I find him fascinating, and thusly dare to discuss him too early.
Somatica: Is Nietzsche difficult to read?
Having heard my whole life that he is difficult to read, I put off reading him. Now that I have begun, I find that he is not. But then, I am not truly reading Nietzsche, for I speak no German. Translation is an art, and how much of what I read is Nietzsche, how much Kaufmann, I cannot say.
iamtheother: Is Nietzsche sexist?
Nietszche does not speak of woman as the sex without penis. Rather, Neizsche speak of woman as short-hand for feminity. This has nothing to do with sex, and everything to do with gender. This is evidenced by his reference to Christians as women, a view supported by the Bible's references to the Church as the Bride of Christ. No one supposes that the Bible meant Christians to literally be sans penis, so why must we assume this of Neitszche. And once we accept effeminate men, it is a short step to masculine men. So we can speak of stereotyping, but surely not sexism.
newtonsapple : Can you explain what is a master-morality?
No -- this is what I seek in Nietzsche, and when I have finished all his works, I hope to be able to explain it to you, and to myself. I suspect however that it is mastery over oneself that is central.
Such: I am human (all too human) but I can overcome that and become something greater. That is the master, any other goals is slavery.
Van Keister: My question is why do we need to separate Nietzsche from Hitler. Why is this necessary?
Because Truth is superior to Fiction.
Now I am colored, as you accuse, by Kaufmann. But I cannot see the similarity between the writings I have read and Hitler's deeds.
Hitler was a slave to himself, no matter what else he may have mastered. Hitler's weaknesses were precisely those Nietzsche seems
to dispise most, no matter how Hitler may have viewed himself. To be Nietzschean is not to follow Nietszche.
van keister: differentiating the words of Socrates from Plato.
This is like seperating the words of Zarathustra from those of Nietzsche, and just as worthwhile.
youngphilosophe: In some areas he is quite brilliant but I still can't shake my prejudice when it comes to his idea of the "overhuman". I understand that he simply wanted man to advance and progress as quickly as possible but he did not consider both sides of his vision
Not Man: man. Not us: you.
Nietzsche asked you to think for yourself and dispised those who would not. Each person, by himself, must improve. Unless you believe in Lamarckian evolution, this has
nothing to do with the advancement of species.
Banno: Doesn't the very existence of this thread indicate that his writing is opaque?
THe existance of this thread demonstrates that his writing was German, and that by-and-large this is a barrier for the English. Depending on translation is a major weakness in understanding anything, but is a flaw in you and me, not in Niezsche.