Overall, I think the effects of Nietzsche on the male mind are dissipation and degeneration. Wyndam Lewis referred to Nietzsche as a "vulgariser" and this never seemed more true than today. Women may still stand to benefit from his writings, though.
Wednesday at 14:13 · · Unlike ·
·
· · 50 of 58
·
o
Jennifer Armstrong It's paradoxical -- but focusing on oneself in a shamanistic fashion can be the opposite of narcissistic. One exploits ones own often negative experiences in order to help others have insights that can change them.
Gia Harris
I like the idea. Also concur that most people will wallow in their own crud and only truely look at themselves, or whatever story they hold so tightly it feels like a reality until it becomes unbearable or costs them too much. Unfortunately...See more
Wednesday at 21:50 · Like
o
Halina White Narcissism is counter productive, but focusing on self is entirely different. The difference between a self serving attitude and a self persevering one?
Wednesday at 21:50 · Like
o
JWJennifer ArmstrongWhat I'm getting at is the idea of shamanistic doubling. If I have a deep problem, it probably has its roots in society. For instance,when society undergoes some significant historical shifts, this will have an effect ...See more
Wednesday at 22:00 · Like
o
Halina White I don't think looking inwards is narcissistic at all. Quite the opposite, Narcissists look to the outside TO solve their inner turmoil. On the other hand, looking within to understand yourself, you realise you really cant save anyone else and can only lead by example.
Wednesday at 22:07 · Like
o
Jennifer Armstrong Yeah, but I don't think that's how it works. I tend to use the word "narcissism" in the Freudian sense -- such that we have healthy narcissism which only becomes unhealthy if taken too far. So, any kind of self-care or concern for one's own well-being is "narcissistic". Only, in this limited sense, that is a GOOD thing.
Wednesday at 22:25 · Like
o
Halina White Different horses for different courses..there are labels for everything these days..
Wednesday at 22:31 · Like
o
Jennifer Armstrong It does lead to some misunderstandings. I find the term useful in relation to understanding aspects of Nietzsche's "egotism". It's core seems to be healthy self-love that is related to an infant's struggle for survival against greater forces. So, in other words, its a very primary sensation that Nietzsche is tapping into and trying to appeal to, in his writings.
Wednesday at 22:35 · Like
o
Halina White Its buried as much as possible by 'society'.
Halina White Thats what I love about Nietzsche, you might not like him, but you just have to listen.
Wednesday at 22:40 · Like
o
Jennifer Armstrong
I think we listen because he is capable of talking about these things that we partially remember from when we were infants, which have become long buried. This is what draws us to his writings. However, most people do not see him as a sh...See more
Wednesday at 22:53 · Like · 2 people
o
Halina White Absolutely, Jennifer. Humans will see whatever suits them, and will distort facts to serve them. I always say "the mind can convince us of anything", but our instincts never lie.
Wednesday at 22:57 · Like · 1 person
o
Adam Francis Cornford Personally, I could never stand the guy. His whole idea of the basis of human existence seems wrong to me. But maybe that's just me trying to convince myself that cooperation and compassion and equality of condition in a commonwealth are what makes life good...
Yesterday at 03:11 · Like
o
Jennifer Armstrong He is best viewed as someone who stands right at the end of the transition from Feudal consciousness to fully blown Bourgeois consciousness (I see academia as a remnant of Feudal consciousness; of monastic study and the like.) Sure, if you are entering bourgeois consciousness, you have to rearrange your soul. But Nietzsche thought feudal spiritual hierarchies were more elevating.
Yesterday at 07:10 · Like · 2 people
o
Jennifer Armstrong That's why I think that those who are already bourgeois do not understand him. He was more about internal spiritual PROCESSES, rather than interested in a person proclaiming any final outcome as to what he had become. I notice that contemporary Nietzscheans do NOT understand the meaning of process; the joyful experience of transition for one state of being to another. They find this, in particular, most disturbing and will tend to misunderstand and attack whenever they see this happening.
23 hours ago · Like · 1 person
o
Jason Carter I had a response initially but Facebook must have consumed it.
12 hours ago · Like
o
Jason Carter In American high schools, at least in the '80s, most young males go through a "Led Zeppelin" phase. To me, this is what Nietzsche is to philosophy.
12 hours ago · Unlike · 1 person
o
Jennifer Armstrong Jason, you responded on my author site. Your response is still there.
12 hours ago · Like
o
Jennifer Armstrong Oh, and your response is also on my blog.Hope you don't mind. If so, will remove it.
12 hours ago · Like
o
Halina White Your Led Zeppelin analogy is very apt. Peoples idea of 'growing up' is always associated with physical achievements rather than personal evolution and hardships overcome. I am very fond of the saying you should "never judge the beggar in the street, he could be the buddha".
12 hours ago · Like · 1 person
o
Jason Carter "And if he says he's the Buddha, kill him."
12 hours ago · Like · 1 person
o
Jason Carter Nope. You can keep my comments up. I'm male, so like to leave my scent wherever possible, even in print on a computer screen.
12 hours ago · Like
o
Jennifer Armstrong Ok. Hopefully you are leaving your sense, too, although that is never for certain.
11 hours ago · Like
o
Jennifer Armstrong
Without "god" there is ONLY process, or processes. There is no eternal soul, hence no essences. Why depend on others to attribute qualities of power or value to you, when they, themselves, lack essences? There is nothing to guarantee t...See more
11 hours ago · Like
o
Halina White I see the the whole god thing as totally redundant, even if there was a god, its irrelevant. People always prefer to look to the outside for the "answers? (its easier than taking personal responsibility) rather than looking within and trusting yourself. That way they can always blame someone else.
11 hours ago · Like
Jennifer Armstrong
The god thing is kind of not so redundant as we tend to structure our psychology on the basis of essences. To the degree we do that, the god thing still has some play in our minds. We do lean on it unaware that we are doing so. Only via...See more
11 hours ago · Like
o
Jennifer Armstrong I'm also putting your stuff on my blog, Halina. Just for something to do. I'm about to start work in four minutes.
11 hours ago · Like · 1 person
o
Halina White Yes. our psychology manifests itself physically, and even ends up being law. However, I do think there is an essential self, when I see influential (yet long dead) people's vibration still pulsing, it makes me wonder about energy fields and what that means. Heck, I have no answers, only a lot of questions. People have more in common than they do differences that is why organised religion makes me see red. Life is fluid and nothing is guaranteed...
11 hours ago · Like
o
Jennifer Armstrong Well there is something that coalesces in the sense of identity, which makes life worth living. It's just not essentialistic in the way that language would seem to denote.
10 hours ago · Like
o
Halina White I think I know what you mean? When you sit with nature you start to get an idea how "small" you are....
10 hours ago · Like
o
Halina White Life might be bi-polar. Or maybe I am? Not clinical anyway....
10 hours ago · Like
o
Jennifer Armstrong It's not about being small at all. Having no essence could just as easily mean that you encompassed the universe. The point is that you know you exist whether or not anybody affirms it. (So you are no longer a victim of language or of other people's ideas.)
10 hours ago · Like · 1 person
o
Halina White I meant small in the sense of our own mortality and the cycle of life.
10 hours ago · Like
o
Jennifer Armstrong Oh, I suppose so. But I think there is a countervailing expansiveness. You feel part of infinity.
10 hours ago · Like
o
Halina White "You feel part of infinity" I like to think so....
10 hours ago · Like
o
Jennifer Armstrong No. No thinking.
10 hours ago · Like · 1 person
o
Halina White Working with the facts is all you can do legally. As it should be.
10 hours ago · Like
o
Jennifer Armstrong Facts have their place. I think that any kind of mystical experience that can teach you the difference between a fact and one's own perceptions (which are generally tainted in one way or another) is useful.
10 hours ago · Like
o
Halina White Facts are the only thing you can place laws on, but they are still formed by a (biased?) collective human code. This is where instincts and intuition come in, they DONT make any sense at all..hence philosophy, and it doesn't exactly fit in with the "acceptable"..
9 hours ago · Like
o
Jennifer Armstrong Our reception of facts is definitely mediated by our existing values. I think the basis for good judgement is not instinct or intuition but good epistemology.
9 hours ago · Like
o
Halina White I wouldn't disagree, understanding always helps make better decisions, but being practical appeals to me more, because it avoids getting caught up in (a possibly faulty) analysis exercise that could keep you 'paralyzed' from moving on..
9 hours ago · Like
o
Jennifer Armstrong
I think a lot of one's ability to distinguish facts from values is based on knowing that most people are incapable of doing this very much at all. You have to kind of expect them not to do this, rather than anticipating the opposite -- an...See more
9 hours ago · Like
o
Halina White
Thats the interesting thing about consciousness. All 7 billion people have them. Id prefer not to agree with you in that people people cant differentiate between facts and values but I cant help but agree. That is till they suffer long enough and have to make a decision to change...
Objectivity on the other hand is perhaps a discussion for another day....
9 hours ago · Like
o
Jennifer Armstrong It's not such a heavy deal as it seems. Objectivity is useful only to a particular kind of empirical thinking mind. Most people don't really need it that much.
8 hours ago · Like
o
Halina White There is a certain quality to objectivity that implies fairness, and nature seems to be anything but.
8 hours ago · Like
o
Jennifer Armstrong I think that is partly a mistake. Objectivity in the scientific sense does not necessarily lead to fairness. I think the principle of reciprocation leads to fairness, not objectivity. (In other words, matching subjectivities leads to fairness.)
8 hours ago · Like
o
Halina White Reciprocation and co-operation might be just the key to breaking the code!
8 hours ago · Like
o
Jennifer Armstrong Objectivity is energy devoid of its subjective forces. You have to work with subjectivity. Actually, it is the only way to be just and to protect yourself at the same time. If someone is harmful, you need to reciprocate just enough (and no more) to keep them at a distance. If someone is helpful, then showing the same attitude does in fact create the conditions for an alliance.
8 hours ago · Like
o
Halina White Which brings us to ying and yang, black and white etc.. Subjectivity is individuality which leaves little room for stereotypes.
8 hours ago · Like
o
Jennifer Armstrong Yes, language tends to essentialise us, lending us the social appearance of "objectively knowable" qualities, but it leads us down dead end roads in terms of self-understanding. Spontaneity is true subjectivity.
8 hours ago · Like · 1 person
No comments:
Post a Comment