This one took a long while to make. We hope you enjoy it. Likes and comments for the algorithm are always appreciated! ▶ www.patreon.com/WeltgeistYT

The line where the man with a torch is saying "I seek God", reminds me of Diogenes the cynic, when he walk through streets of Greece saying " I am looking for an honest man".

"Wissenschaft" includes all thinking that is careful, methodological, and motivated by sincere curiosity. You are absolutely right that it is not limited to STEM subjects.

Talk about synchronicity: was just watching (your)Schopenhauer vid, for Nietzsche reasons, and came to your home page to find a surprise. I love your takes on Nietzsche. Refreshing and personal, insightful and thought provoking. Like Nietzsche, you seem to prefer to invoke the audience to decide for themselves. Bravo.

My answer to the question of eternal recurrence since first reading it, has always been that whether or not I participate in recurrence, I likely wouldn't know as I live through each instance of life...and not only that, but also, if it's to be a perfect repetition, then am I not being challenged to live my life as fully as possible so that I can die without regret? I'm always so thankful for the timing of my introduction to Nietzsche, as it was when I felt like all the meaning in my life had fallen or faded away. His overall tone of positivity and optimism has been a very soothing thing for me. I always want to say more, but I can't figure out how to express it concisely and it always makes me realize just how much skill it takes to put your own thoughts into text with as much detail as I often have noticed Nietzsche does. Thank you so much for these wonderful Nietzche videos. The context you've given and summaries of the core concepts has been so helpful with parsing and comprehending his works. It's so easy to get overwhelmed between the layered meanings and the influence of modern-views shifting meanings enough that a familiar word becomes archaic.

The scope of this video was very well-conceived. Very good to re-contextualize "God is dead" as well. I think two of the biggest misconceptions regarding Nietzsche are (1) that the "God is dead" passage is gloating rather than deeply perturbed, and (2) that the ubermensch definitely refers to you, the cool misunderstood genius guy that is reading the work. Ironically, wondering "Is the ubermensch describing me?" is possibly the most banal, commonplace thing a person can do while reading Nietzsche.

[Nietzsche 's definition of science includes aspects of the humanities.] This explains some mild confusion I'd had reading Nietzsche myself. Very valuable to hear.

Much underrated channel. Great video as always, they always help me to better understand the complex works of Nietzsche and Schopenhauer! :)

Thanks weltgeist for another amazing video! Love your content!

Love all the videos you do on Nietzsche. I‘m thinking about starting to read one of his books soon for the first time!

Thank you for covering this book. It's my favorite Nietzsche book as I find it's the pivot point of his thinking. What came before led to this book, what came after was based on ideas in this book. The attitude, the wordplay, and the themes show this is where N learned how to dance with the truth.

I love the tapestry analogy you presented. I really appreciate how you went into the title and defined the different meanings for science back then and now. Thank you 🙏🏿

More synchronicity! I just ordered 5 books by Nietzsche (including this one) and will be reviewing your videos on each before reading. Thanks for the excellent work that went into making this video.

I hope that your channel keep growing,nice video

This is my favorite of your videos yet. Excellent work 💫

Very good video as usual on Nietzsche. You're doing amazing job but as you said, it is not a substitute for reading his works. And not just once. It takes time to click. Love you for doing this!

You and essentialsalts are phenomenal at digesting and explaining this material. Thank you

At about 23:15 you say a video titled "How Nietzsche took on the world" is linked in the description, but it seems you forgot to include the link. Also, I've got to say, I've been enjoying your videos for some time now. Thank you for doing what you do.

Your work in these videos continues to grow in terms of both clarity of expression and grasp of concept. Really excellent production here.

Finally a philosophy channel as a one stop shop for all western philosophy that intrigues me. Really appreciate your analyses of Nietzsche and Schopenhauer, wouldn't have been able to analyze Schopenhauer myself because he is too nihilistic for me to give him a try independently. Much appreciated.

I love all of your video, could you do The birth of tragedy next time pls?

Maybe for the ubermensch video you could talk about Raskolnikov from Crime and Punishment

To answer your question in the video, yes, there are examples of people who have said yes to life in the worst conditions and it happened shortly after Nietzsche died. Read Victor Frankel book on his experience and of being in a Nazi concentration camp and his psychological analysis of those who survived vs those died.

Love your channel!

I love your video, well I should say that in plural such great works

Thank you for these videos. Nietzsche showed me to craft my own way. To even become better than him. The more I understand myself the more I understand this man and many philosophers before and after Nietzsche . Thanks to nietzsche attacking me and my ideas, my morals, my pessimism. I would eternally thank this man even after I create a thorough enough way to life and surpass even him.

Can't wait for the Übermensch video

Amazing video. Love your work

Nice !

Thank you! Excellent! For the lazy reader type would you recommend something like Kaufmann The Portable Nietzsche? Ive taken up your recommendation of Solomon, Introducing Philosophy and find it quite useful.

Really appreciate the work you guys do. I was wondering if you have a recommendation for a particular translation to English? The greatest difficulty I've encountered with this book is horribly botched translations.

Surprisingly I can remember even before reading Nietzsche and even reading philosophy, with a divorce, abandonment by mistress, attempt of suicide, having two children, one not caring enough, I quoted in some place, that if I have the chance to live again, I will choose the same path to live! Isn't that what Nietzsche's itaernal recurrence?

very nice

Amazing video as always

Thanks once again WG. 👍👍😊

Was that life ? I want to say to death. Well then! Once more, my friend!

The idea of eternity scares me. I think i would reject the offer even if i were to experience merely the good parts of life infinitely. Life and experience is great but i want a deep rest at the end of it. Does that disqualify me from becoming a life affirming ubermensch? Great video as always.

Loved the video!

Thank you for another great video. I will pass it to my kids with the hope that they will click on entering Nietsche's thinking.

Funny how a channel which is essentially about Schopenhauer and Nietzsche borrows its name from Hegel: Weltgeist.

i see a problem with the idea of recurrence: if everything is exactly the same the next time and the next time forever wouldn't my mind and memory be the same as well i.e. won't i experience everything for the first time everytime ? in that case why would i be happy or sad with this prospect ? how is it different than me experiencing life only once ? if i do have all my memories from the previous lives each time won't i be able to improve or degrade my life by making different decisions each time ? in that case won't it be a different life each time ? if each time i only have the idea that i have lived this life before but no memory to prove it won't i just dismiss that idea as meaningless everytime and have a repeat of the first scenario ? in short i think that there can be no reason to be happy or sad with this prospect if the conditions are maintained exactly and the scenario doesn't actually happen if there are reasons to be happy or sad.

20:21 It all depends if your going to remember or not, if you remember, any life will probably be like your favorite song as an alarm tune. If don't, you will be like Bernard Lowe and say "we had this conversation before...?" If the answer is yes it would be really mind blowing cause every choice you've made were never conscious, even this meeting happened cause it's part of the play. Now i see the resemblance with Berserk, Nier Automata and Westworld. I heard that Nietzsche hated this type of idea cause it makes progress meaningless. It also brings interesting questions, would you be lazy cause everything already happened and events would meet you anyway, no matter what you do? Or will you do your best to live at max while also knowing this is also predetermined? Your own decisions were in big part set by your previous self, you became your god, will you hate yourself? Live anxious about the future and it's lack of possibility? Every past error would be "meh, it was inevitable, i don't need to learn from it'. And most importantly, what if he was lying? What if the belief in this type of destiny creates the destiny itself? It's Cersei and Eren arc, paradoxically they create the very future they fear just by "knowing" about it. This "knowledge" about the future could easily be used to manipulate someone, show patterns and Confirmation Bias and boom, they're on your hands. Like Abagnale said "they only know what you tell them."

Maybe a better translation might have been "the art of the poet?" There is something to it. Like Aristotle I believe defined poetry as doing something without reason, without meaning, or a goal. In a way, it is doing for it's own sake. The art itself is its own product, it's own goal. Now I suspect what he wanted to convey is making poetry into an art, the art of affirming life. Just like he does not take troubadours randomly. The troubadour basically were taking Christian love and make it into a passion, instead of something of the will. Well, it's not totally true historically, but there is something to it. They kind of meshed both concepts together. So in that view, the troubadour was subverting Christianity, or reverting it to something prior. Funnily today, that transformation is pretty complete, and love is pretty much entirely a passion, in part because the will has disappeared. It's conception itself is gone. People use the word, but it is meaningless, something like the power to choose, which has no meaning. Now about the eternal recurrence, it's something I thought about over the years. It's a fascinating tool which I like. It's certainly something that kind of auto corrects thought. Like In Christianity and most value systems, you basically love things that are devoid of life, devoid of movement and realism. So he puts life first in all it's flaws and imperfections, which is interesting. I think there is some wisdom in this, probably the most fundamental one. Now I would say, I think it's actually what Christianity was teaching at first, but was lost. I mean the life aspect, it was there, but got lost and became secondary to ideas, like faith, obedience and some other things. Hegel had the same problem with history I believe. He thought it had become dead. Another interesting thought, in a way, the best superman would be Jesus himself, not as a God, but as a Man. I suspect it is what he was hinting at, because in the Gospels, Jesus himself tells people that the old laws were dead, because they were not life affirming. One parable that is a bit in that vein is one where the Pharisees ask Jesus if you should save a cow that has fallen in a well on the Sabbath. Now, for it to be godly, you should not do anything on the Sabbath, but Jesus goes against that way of thinking and say to save the cow. He would also often say the laws are a bit irrelevant, they are inscribed in your heart, etc. So he was more about individualism, more about practical wisdom, so art proper, than idealized laws. More of a poet than a philosopher, but philosophers made him into a preacher, someone that would tell people what to do, instead of someone just doing things. He accepted everything too. The sick and the imperfect, the poor and so on. He accepted all the worlds suffering and then died from it. He was doing the Father's will, so God's will, like he was following the plan, even though it was not exactly what he would have wanted. So in that way, he becomes a tragedy, and also an example of the eternal recurrence, because at least on our part, we don't want the story to be any different. People keep reading the same thing over and over, reliving the same thing over and over. But he died and stayed dead, according to N. We killed him, but now it means it is up to us to do the same or kill ourselves out of grief. So I think there is some of that. By bringing up the idea of eternal recurrence, the questions is: do we honor his life, grieve and move on for what we did? or do we die out of culpability? I think what he calls nihilism is the latter. I think he was trying to force people to choose definitively, instead of being pale criminals so to speak. Ghosts. But then I think about Aristotle, and the first principle of ethics, which is to seek the good and avoid the bad. It seems a lot more natural and healthy to me in the end, at least functionally, as a rule of thumb to go around at least voluntarily, but he other one is probably wise for things that are involuntary. It's like Camus' absurd. Sisyphus is punished with eternal return by the gods, and his potential is null. It is an absurd life, but he still has the last possibility, the last laugh if you will, to accept it, to accept his chains. It's the only power left to him, either be the suffering criminal, of the one that affirms his own life, good and bad. And the question is whether one devise his own life in order that it might be possible to do so in the same circumstance. Like are we ready to be like Sisyphus, or Jesus, or any tragic hero? So my answer is that you should, but certainly not look for it. Tragedy is not tragedy if it is not imposed, otherwise it is simply suicide or something, reckless behavior and anti social behavior. And I think it is where people go wrong with N., they take it as some sort of rule of life as if they wanted to get N.'s approval of something, some sort of narcissist supply to N. It's weird and slave mentality, but with the delusion of the opposite. I see the same in people seeking the Imitation of Christ. I tend to tell them it's the last thing you want to do, he died for your sins, not so people would follow him, or do the same. Trying to do the same is not possible, because it is not your role, and trying to do it would rob him of his own excellence so to speak. Sometimes there can only be One. I think it is the same with N. There is only one UberMensch, and he died under terrible circumstances as well. At least we did not do it this time. 😀

[Nietzsche idealized "light-footedness."] A stark contrast to the boneheaded rhetoric of hollow masculinity Nietzsche is often wheeled out in order to trumped.

Thank you. I will most definitely buy this book to read.

Great video!

the fact that bertrand russel, an english philosopher, found nietzschean philosophy "dispicable" just makes nietzsche's critique of english moral philosophy much more true and hilarious.

What is the painting at 35:46?

Would you ever do a video on Stirner, someone who is said to have had an unsung influence on the Neetch.

Please read Walter Kaufmann's translators introduction.

Okay, I don't understand something. If everything is entwined, if every moment is deeply connected to every other, how do you arrive at a 'new morality' that is in every way distinct and separated from the one that came before? Or, do these new moralists still rely on God for their 'new' system?

Great video. An ubermensch video does sound interesting.

Bro I am bit late lol 😂 but nice to see ur another vid on neitzche

Art and science? Maybe science fiction plays that part today. Star Trek back in the 1960s was my Joyful Science. 😊

really, anyone who wants to read any 19th century philosophy should spend serious time understanding the notion of science and see how it is used in various contexts. when introducing people to the idea, i find either 'systematic knowledge' or a 'systematic practice' to deliver the idea well with some supplementary explanation.

what about "frolicking"?

11:21 Painting name anybody?

I love this channel

Excellent. Thank you.

Will you consider doing any analysis on Jung?

I have been telling this( about Buddha) to my friends, how dangerous he is, even before hearing anything about Nietzsche.

Given that some believe in the immortality of the soul does one who believes so not internally believe that it would live out all possible human lives in its infinite including oneself over and over and over? Is not asking one the consider the immortality of the soul and the idea of hell or heaven in every possible theology ask just that? I understand it’s simply to understand the man and his work but given what’s given to us by previous philosophers he’s asking the same question posed by all of the giants whose shoulders he stands on I would simply ask the demon what it’s views on its own immortality would be as it would simply be the same as I’ve already accepted this possibly from a young age given my own thinking It’s truly not such an enormous ask in my opinion Aside from that another amazing video!!

I’m bracing myself… What have you got for me today sir🎩?

Hi Weltgeist, thanks for this first class analysis of "The Gay Science". Have you narrated for Libravox in the past? It was your pronunciation of "Hitherto" that made me ask.

3:12 WOW

I'd like to watch a dedicated video on the ubermensch ideal

How about "A breath of fresh air" as a translation of the title.

why should i watch this video? I don't know what this video is about. can anyone help?

finally

Having recently read The Gay Science, I found the clarfications provided by this video extremely complementary. Thank you Weltgeist!

God bless us all

I'm reading "beyond good and evil" trust me , bit difficult to understand him.

13:50

Nietzsche was an existentialist which means doing your own thing as a free and responsible person. Further explained- we, not God, are responsible for purpose and meaning in our lives. Life is meaningless; you must create your own meaning.

i have been doing my first pass on the gay science for the past couple of months, so nice timing for that video! btw I didn't start book 5, as soon as i finished 4 i just got so pumped about Zarathustra that i started TSZ instead and i love it :D

I loved it

🙏

The god is dead thing reminds me of Something I thought about philosophers etc maybe having no use but for the habit (hopefully) of Being open to rational debate at least Like a babbling brook of life continuance

hello can anyone please help me to understand the concept!

I don't remember "The Joyful Science" book from my Nietzsche college course. The GAY Science was a great book though. Is there any relation?

Im announcing the Arrival of the Predicted Ubermensch; yes it Is I!

Uberfans demand a video on the ubermensch

“The Gay Humanities” has suuuuch a ring to it

16:54 What's important to note it's that this seems based entirely on reasoning and the logic that social behaviour is always something teached and that being a "herd" or acting as group is not natural or beneficial to humans, especially the individual. It's comprehensible that Nietzsche though that given his circunstances but in the same way early Economists - no matter how bright they were - were wrong in the predictions, he's wrong in this too. He's unaware of the biological, economical, political and technological aspect of humanity. He focus too much on christian values like their some kind of illuminati and everything has always to be related to them or what they represent. Humans are social animals, globalization improves life for everyone and complete disregard for each other suffering brings people back to State of Nature. But since you're are a small drop against the tie - Niet wrote for few anyway - you'll be okay with being more selfish as long as the system keeps there.

Didn't austrian economists probed that value is always subjective? So the value of life is, isn't?

Yes I can

Are you Dutch? You sound Dutch....

Peterson is the last Englishman to be reckoned with.

comment for algorithm

I feel like there's this gaping hole in serious philosophy where a "joyful science" should be. Okay, god is dead. We're free. Let's have a beautiful time with each other in this life. We know what this beautiful time looks like. We have movies about it and if we're lucky we get glimpses of it ourselves. But it seems like there's so little good work on how to get to this state. There's plenty of tips and tricks and shallow self help but nothing all that compelling. Idk does this resonate with anyone?

Too many adds. Doubt the great man would approve.

I call Christianity the one great curse, the one great intrinsic depravity, and the one great instinct of revenge, for which no means are venomous enough, or secret, subterranean and small enough - I call it the one immortal blemish on the human race.

Is ubermensch abelist?

Boons

God lives.

:)

Bro seriously . Im sorry but every video i see about nietzsche can't do him honor . They are either too " intellectual " or too heavy . 2 things he was heavily against

Gay!

Gay Science. It's GAY! GET OVER IT!

gay science