Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Friedrich Nietzsche

2011-12-15T19:33:32Z

Jcwkid:

[[Image:nietzsche2.jpg|right|250px|thumb]]
'''Friedrich Nietzsche''' (1844-1900) was a [[Germany|German]] [[atheism|atheist]] [[philosopher]] whose work set a foundation for the [[existentialism|existentialist]] movement of the 1900s.<ref>[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nietzsche/ Stanford's Biography on Nietzsche].</ref> Nietzsche went mad and suffered a mental breakdown, from which he never recovered.

Nietzsche was critical of [[religion]] in general, though especially [[Christianity]], which he described as the "religion of pity."<ref>[http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Friedrich_Nietzsche/ Nietzsche Quotations]</ref> Nietzsche is perhaps most famous for his declaration that “God is dead,” which suggests that since Christian morality views worldly pleasures as immoral, to accept Christianity is to deny life - therefore, God (a personification of Christian principles) is figuratively dead. Furthermore, he postulated that the Christian Heaven, a metaphysical "true world" beyond the reach of the human senses, devalued the physical world that we live in. In this sense, he accused Christianity of nihilism. He also suggested that Western culture seemed no longer rooted in Christian dogmatism and a faith-based worldview. Without [[God]], the idea of absolutes are difficult to come by, and Nietzsche thus suggested ways for people to cope with this loss of "[[Good]]" and "[[Evil]]".

{{cquote|When [[Adolf Hitler]] first met [[Benito Mussolini]], he presented him with a gift of the collected works of Nietzsche. It was an appropriate memento. Hitler's ideas about life and politics were largely derived from Nietzsche. Hitler subscribed to the Nietzschean idea that superior people have an inborn right to rule. - [[William Kilpatrick]]}}

Nietzsche suffered a mental collapse in 1889, and spent the last ten years of his life unable to care for himself. During this time, his sister Elizabeth Förster-Nietzsche took over his affairs, and worked to falsify and re-edit his writings in order to support her virulent Antisemitism (a view which Nietzsche arguably abhorred, and often mocked, during his lifetime). It was her distorted version of culled and misquoted statements which later provided an intellectual fig leaf for the [[Nazi]]s and [[Italian]] [[Fascist]]s.

The ''Übermensch'' (overhuman, superhuman) was a literary device used in his magnum opus, "[[Thus Spoke Zarathustra]]". The Overman was to be a new kind of being which would overcome resentment and affirm the Eternal Recurrence of the same.

The statement "God is dead" first appeared in Nietzsche's "[[The Gay Science]]", in Aphorism 108, titled "New Struggles". This aphorism introduces Nietzsche's famous Madman, who runs out into the street shouting, "God is dead!" Yet, to his dismay, the Madman sees "he has come too soon," for people have not realized this cultural revelation for themselves and are blind to it. They consider the Madman's seemingly theological claim as absurd for they misunderstand him; it is no argument about the existence of God, but a claim of how [[secular]] society has become. Nietzsche was no friend to Christian beliefs, and no doubt considered the Christian God to be a mere myth. This passage shows his hope for a [[philosophy]] of the future, one he imagined would be emptied of coarse objective rationalizing, which he characterized as God and associated with Christianity. Nietzsche, in other words, felt his message of subjective truth came too soon and hoped, as the Madman, that he would be understood someday.

Nietzsche's father Carl Ludwig Nietzsche, was a [[Lutheran]] pastor.

In his first [[Papal Encyclical]], "Deus Caritas Est" (God is Charity/Love) [[Pope Benedict XVI]] quotes from Nietzsche's ''Beyond Good and Evil'', taking very seriously Nietzsche's claim that the Church has poisoned ''eros'' (love) with dogma, and responding to it.

== Nietzsche's Insanity ==
Currently, there is an ongoing debate on whether Friedrich Nietzsche's insanity was caused purely through disease or whether his atheistic/[[nihilism|nihilistic]] philosophical outlook on life was the cause.<ref>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17881977</ref><ref>http://www.ukapologetics.net/truthaboutnietzsche.html</ref><ref>http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/hutchison/070307</ref><ref>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17087793?dopt=Abstract</ref><ref>http://www.leonardsax.com/Nietzsche.pdf</ref><ref name="hkbu">http://www.hkbu.edu.hk/~ppp/top/top19</ref><ref>http://books.google.com/books?id=x4qDrNKVC5gC&pg=PA61&lpg=PA61&dq=Ren%C3%A9+Girard+nietzsche+and+madness&source=bl&ots=DQFLJpqjJd&sig=mXNq_6J6_qTciP2vW-FHojwBn20&hl=en&ei=hv99Sp0Y2YG2B8Ogsf4B&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false</ref>
An article published on the Hong Kong Baptist University declares:
{{cquote|Trying to explain what caused his insanity can only be a matter of speculation. Some people believe it was the result of a physical illness. Others interpret his suffering as that of a true prophet, almost as if he were accepting the punishment on behalf of those who could not see mankind's tendency towards self-destruction so clearly. Still others regard his final fate as a natural outcome of his philosophical outlook.<ref name="hkbu">http://www.hkbu.edu.hk/~ppp/top/top19</ref>}}

The Russian-born psychoanalyst and writer Lou Andreas-Salomé, who had a brief and tempestuous affair with Nietzsche, believed that Nietzsche's philosophy can be viewed as a reflection of his psychology and that his madness was the result of his philosophizing.<ref>http://www.amazon.com/Nietzsche-Lou-Salome/dp/0252070356</ref> In addition, the French historian René Girard asserted that Nietzsche's philosophy led to his insanity.<ref>http://books.google.com/books?id=x4qDrNKVC5gC&pg=PA61&lpg=PA61&dq=Ren%C3%A9+Girard+nietzsche+and+madness&source=bl&ots=DQFLJpqjJd&sig=mXNq_6J6_qTciP2vW-FHojwBn20&hl=en&ei=hv99Sp0Y2YG2B8Ogsf4B&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false</ref>

==On Morality==
Friedrich Nietzsche argued that [[rational egalitarianism]] denies [[creativity]], and reason cannot create values and [[morality]], attempt to do so would only lead to [[nihilism]]. Therefore morality has been imposed.

Friedrich Nietzsche wrote "Morality is the herd-instinct in the individual.", "With morality, the individual can only ascribe value to himself as a function of the herd", "I submit that egoism belongs to the essence of a noble soul ... and has its basis in the primary law of things", "all morality is partisan; just as any legal system will favor certain behavior against others", "who else should we wish to serve, if not ourselves?" and "Whoever battles monsters should take care not to become a monster too, for if you stare long enough into the Abyss, the Abyss stares back into you."

==On Science and Knowledge==
Friedrich Nietzsche wrote "I mistrust all systemizers and avoid them; the will to systematize is a lack of integrity", "there is no pre-established harmony between the furtherance of truth and the well-being of mankind", "the free-spirit is brought into disrepute chiefly by scholars who miss their thoroughness and ant-like industry in his art of regarding things", "there are many things I do not wish to know, wisdom sets a limit on knowledge too", "the fact that science as we practice it today is possible proves that the elementary instinct which protect life have ceased to function", "we have arranged for ourselves a world in which we are able to live with postulation of bodies, lines, surfaces, causes, and effects, motion and rest, form and content: without these articles of faith, nobody could manage to live", "the irrationality of a thing is no argument against its existence, rather a condition for it", "[too much knowledge causes us to] choke on our own reason", "creed of nihilism which I see everywhere is the result of too much learning" and "Any truth which threatens life is no truth at all, it is an error".

==On Politics==
Friedrich Nietzsche wrote "As a political subject, it is an illusion to ask myself what I require from the state. In reality, it is a question of what the state requires from me", "culture and the state are antagonistic", "clearly, the individual will is forfeit to the demands of government - a kind of political Darwinism. The herd triumphs again, this time under the banner of the state", "socialism is the fantastic younger brother of an almost decrepit despotism, which it wants to succeeded", "the doctrine of free will is an invention of the ruling classes" and "madness is something rare in individuals; but in groups, parties, ages, it is the rule".

==On Women==
Friedrich Nietzsche wrote "Women are essentially unpeaceful" and "Man is for woman a means; the purpose is always a child. But what is woman for man?"

Nietszche also wrote "Stupidity in a woman is unfeminine." [http://www.goodreads.com/search?page=3&q=Nietzsche&search%5Bcountry%5D=&search%5Bpage%5D=2&search%5Bper_page%5D=20&search%5Bquery%5D=Nietzsche&search%5Bsearch_type%5D=quotes&search%5Bsort%5D=&search%5Bsource%5D=goodreads&search_type=quotes&tab=quotes]

==On Philosophy==
Friedrich Nietzsche wrote "Philosophy is the dressing-up in rational argument of moral beliefs, intuitions and desires".

==On Religion==
Friedrich Nietzsche was born to a long line of Protestant Lutheran ministers. His grandfather, Friedrich August Ludwig Nietzsche, was in fact an established Protestant scholar whose writings argued the “everlasting survival of Christianity.” From an early age Friedrich Nietzsche maintained a dedication to Lutheranism and continued his passion for theology in university. In the year 1864, Nietzsche entered the University of Bonn as a theology and philology student with a particular interest in the translation and interpretation of Biblical texts. Nietzsche's views on religion are scattered amongst his earliest works in the 1860s well up until the time of his death in 1889. As such, his views concerning religion, morality, and human nature are not outlined definitively and are thus the subject of scholarly debate.

However, Nietzsche spoke out against Islam citing that it was a force subsisting wholly on the denial of the individual. He posed in his work "The Birth of Tragedy" that Islam (among other religions) utilizes the restriction of necessary human desires such as love as a means of securing their permanence as a force of control.

Thus Friedrich Nietzsche viewed [[Mohammed]], [[Buddha]], [[Homer]] etc, not as religious figures, but as creators of rigid moral frameworks, who lost their authority as [[Europe]] severed ties with its diverse religious tradition.

==See Also==
*[[Nihilism]]

==References==
<references/>
*[https://www.dartmouth.edu/~fnchron/index.html Nietzsche Chronicle]
*[http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/452786.html Nietzsche: The Problem of Autumn]
*[http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=816224 "The Case for Nietzschean Moral Psychology"]
*[http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20051225_deus-caritas-est_en.html#_ftnref1 ''Deus Caritas Est'', from the Vatican website]
*[http://www.amazon.com/Introducing-Nietzsche-Third-Introducing-Laurence/dp/1840466278/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-5268663-4749443?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1179639544&sr=1-1 Introducing Nietzsche, Third Edition by Laurence Gane]
*[http://www.goodreads.com/search?page=3&q=Nietzsche&search%5Bcountry%5D=&search%5Bpage%5D=2&search%5Bper_page%5D=20&search%5Bquery%5D=Nietzsche&search%5Bsearch_type%5D=quotes&search%5Bsort%5D=&search%5Bsource%5D=goodreads&search_type=quotes&tab=quotes
{{DEFAULTSORT:Nietzsche, Friedrich}}]

[[Category:Existentialist Philosophers]]
[[category:German Philosophers]]
[[Category:Children of Clergy]]

Talk:Divorce

2011-11-19T15:31:01Z

Jcwkid: /* I find this article offensive */

==I find this article offensive==
I find the line "Divorce affects more than the spouses; it also causes pain for any children from the marriage where the non-custodial parent is often seen less often or in some cases not at all. It is common for children to blame themselves for the divorce. Relationship difficulties for the children are especially common into later life if either of the parents is poisoning the relationship with the children for the other by making negative comments to the kids." I am the child of a divorced couple and I do not appreciate the view that my parents' divorce will somehow make me grow up emotionally challenged. I do not blame myself for the divorce. Trust me, if my parents did not get a divorce, life would be a lot worse for all three of us - the preceding year to the divorce was complete agony. They were arguing all the time, and I, personally, am glad that they don't have to do that anymore. The divorce has given them great relief, as they no longer have to live with people they hate, and it has also given ''me'' great relief, as I no longer have to watch the two most important people in my life screaming at each other. I suggest the line be removed from the article. -[[User:BLeeser|BLeeser]]

:Can you imagine what would be left in the [[Bible]] if someone could demand the removal of anything he said offended him? Not much.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:46, 27 February 2011 (EST)
::I don't recall the Bible ever telling me I will grow up mentally instable. Unlike you, Mr. Schlafly, I am an actual child of divorcees, so I think I have the monopoly of knowledge on how divorcee children feel after divorces. -- [[User:BLeeser|BLeeser]]

This offends you Bleeser because no one took the time to do research on divorce. It's found that children that are either way to young, as in infancy, to understand divorce and children who are much older, as in adulthood, feel the effects much less. Search any psycinfo database and you'll find these results.

==Biblical view==
I don't understand the position in the "Biblical view" section. Is it really claiming that '''divorce''' is adultery and thus a sin, or that sex/marriage '''after''' divorce is adultery, that the divorce didn't change anything, and that therefore the divorced couple are still married in the eyes of God? --[[User:Scott|Scott]] 03:57, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
:I am not gonna touch this with 10 foot pole. However, what is the Church's view? often the Church's view and the Bible's view don't quite synch up. I'd be more inclined to take the Church's stance over the Bible's, as it's probably more up to date.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 03:58, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
:: Up to date? Its holy writ. Nothing short of the second coming is going to change the instructions in the bible. If the Church, an instutition of Man, says something that contradicts the divine authority of the earthly incarnation of God Himself... then the church must be wrong, and that is that. The bible forbids all divorce with one possible narrow exception, and claiming otherwise does not change that. - BornAgainBrit
:::No offense, but if the bible is that clear cut, then why do we still have the Church? Why bother going to church if I can just get the information out of my Bible? The Bible was written by men, and it portrays the cultural biases of those men. Don't get me wrong, it is probably the best moral guidelines ever created and has laid the foundations for Western Society. However, it is not infallible. This is why I have a problem with non-nondenominational churches and biblical fundamentalism. To believe the Bible is the book of the Teachings of Jesus is fine, to believe it is a wonderful guideline for how to live one's life is fine. To suggest that everything written in it is divine truth without any bias interjected by those who wrote it is gullibility. To believe that path will only lead you to become a evil hate monger like Fred Phelps.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 00:06, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

Wouldn't than be rather depandant on which church we're talking about? [[User:What|What]]
: The Church (with a capital "C") almost always refers to the Roman Catholic Church. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 04:10, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

Well, I thought conservatives where mainly Protestants... [[User:What|What]]

:::?????? !!!!!! I'm sure that will come as surprise to a ''lot'' of Roman Catholics. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 19:01, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

Well, mainly was a strong word, wasn't actually what I meant, but I reda somewhere that in 2000 63 % of the votes for Bush was protestant and 26 % of them catholic. If that is in anyway representative, wouldn't it be wrong to use the view of the catholic church as a norm in this case? [[User:What|What]]

:Fine, but nobody has answered the question: Is that section of this article claiming that the Bible says that '''divorce''' is a sin of adultery, or that sex after divorce is still adultery, the same as it was before the divorce? The section quotes an unspecified translation of the Bible, and does not cite any church teaching or Bible commentary for its opinions. --[[User:Scott|Scott]] 18:01, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

::Here is a better question, the Bible says you shouldn't have sex with someone before marriage. So if you have sex with someone you never intend to marry, is ok then? (this is obviously a joke)--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 21:48, 26 March 2007 (EDT)

I have trouble with the conclusions drawn in this article in regard to divorce is always wrong and Matthew's allowance for marital unfaithfulness doesn't really mean that. I would prefer we simply show that there are 2 different views and not necessarily point to one being right and the other being wrong. Christians, good Christians, can have different views on this matter. Would that be ok with everyone, or would I be stepping on someone's toes? Thanks [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 17:54, 10 May 2007 (EDT)

==More data added==
I came across this doing a Google search on major denomination position on divorce (i think) and found it rather lacking. It seems to have been that way for some time, so i researched and added more info and did some formatting, by the grace of God. What think ye? It needs more formatting, at least.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 20:10, 1 July 2009 (EDT)