/philosophy/ - Philosophy

There is nothing beyond good and evil. That's the point. It's an infinite, empty ocean of madness that can't be traveled.

You can't actually exist without any values. They are at the very core of you.

The point is that the ones you have right now are arbitrary. You can make them whatever you want, but can you ever escape the value that made you wish to change your values in the first place?

>>137
>You can't actually exist without any values. They are at the very core of you.

This. Nietzsche isn't arguing in favor of nihilism, as many people would think; he is all about transcending common sense morals and developing your own, according to your will to power.

There are no values, so how can integrity be a value?

>>188
Are you saying you don't have any values? I don't believe you.

>>193
"Living— isn't it precisely a wishing-to-be-different from this Nature? Doesn't living mean evaluating, preferring, being unjust, being limited, wanting to be different?" – Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil, Article 1,9

"A man who despises himself, still respects himself enough to value his own opinion" or something like that, favorite quote from that book.

>>135

Integrity is the accuracy of one's actions and "values". Whether you think this is "virtuous" or some other gay shit like that is another story.

Accuracy is objective, it is consistency.

If you have no "values" to be accurate, truthful, or consistent about in the first place then you better start hailing Eris/Discordia (or not).

>>137
>You can't actually exist without any values. They are at the very core of you.
But if a value is so profound that you cannot exist without it isn't faith?

And if you'd argue that faith is the belief in something you can't prove I'll ask can you prove anything? Is there a way to understand what is purely object through your subjectivity?

>>135

"What if truth is a woman?"

Beyond good and evil is my favorite of the Nietzschean books. Beyond good and evil means beyond the valuation of truth as the end-all value. A philosophical system that questions truth at this very basic notion, or "Why not untruth?". Nietzsche prefers courage and exploration, but does not quite advocate for what you say the edgy teenager thinks, that NOTHING IS GOOD, MORALITY IS STUPID, LETS BURN SOME SHIT

Nietzsche is misunderstood by mostly everyone, except scholars and people who pay very close attention. He wrote obscure on purpose, basically copying Heraclitus.

You can actually come up with refutations to Nietzsche if you are careful, which is why the postmodernists piss me off so much. They just take his word as gold, and have no courage to fight against him. It's exactly the opposite of what he would have wanted from man

>>193
Not being very proficient in Nietzsche's thinking, would you mind explicating what you [or he] would understand "value* to mean?
Is it conviction? Inclination? Preference?

I ask because there is no view I hold to which I feel the term "value" were reasonably applied, primarily because of the lack of possible objective grounding thereof, making even the formation of beliefs impossible to me. But I do have preferences, and while they might stem form my personality and/or experience, they can be justified and substantiated, though not necessarily to the satisfaction of those with contrary preferences. Is it that, which is meant? Or are you saying that it's impossible not to have convictions of an unjustifiable but implied objective nature?
Not No.188, by the way.