I recommend this book, but with a caveat. The truth is that the vast majority of people will not glean much from it. As I sift through these reviews, I notice a significant number of individuals who are clearly not suited for Nietzsche's writing. They generally fall into several categories.

1) Easily Offended: When Nietzsche utters something they deem offensive, they lose interest in reading the book. Nietzsche is bound to offend you. However, this is part of his style and the nature of his ideas.

2) Those who make a superficial reading and then criticize accordingly. This stems from the first point. Those who are initially offended often seek more reasons to feel affronted and read Nietzsche as if he were an idiot. But as the saying goes, seek and ye shall find. If you approach Nietzsche in this way, he will indeed provide you with ample material to support your negative view.

3) People who desire a clear list of premises and a linear argument. Nietzsche's thought is organized, but much of this book develops thematically rather than through a traditional premise-based structure. Some may not appreciate this style, but there is a reason Nietzsche is renowned for his writing. This leads to the next point.

4) Those who don't think like Nietzsche. Since Nietzsche doesn't write straightforward treatises, you need to understand the lines of thought he presents. Those who fail to grasp these lines commonly pen negative reviews, complaining about how Nietzsche doesn't "prove his assertions." This, in turn, leads to the final category.

5) People who don't understand Nietzsche's project. This is also closely related to his style. This book is not intended to offer formally structured arguments. If you read Nietzsche according to some rubric you believe is appropriate, you will completely miss his point.

He’s way less annoying than Freud, I’ll give him that.

Freud is often considered a controversial figure in the field of psychology. His theories and ideas have been widely debated and criticized over the years. Some people find his concepts overly complex and difficult to understand.

In contrast, this other person seems to have a more approachable and likable personality. Maybe his ideas are presented in a more straightforward manner, or perhaps he has a better sense of humor.

Regardless of the reason, it’s refreshing to encounter someone who doesn’t come across as overly pretentious or irritating. It makes one more inclined to listen to what he has to say and consider his perspective.

Overall, while Freud may have made significant contributions to the field of psychology, this other individual offers a welcome alternative.

I truly enjoyed delving into the writings of this remarkable philosopher. The author, a powerful thinker of the eighteen hundreds, presented a philosophy that stands in stark contrast to the dominant western thought of Christianity.

While Christianity often emphasizes a slave morality, this philosopher's work celebrates the beauty and significance of living in the moment. His ideas challenge the traditional norms and offer a fresh perspective on life and human existence.

I wholeheartedly recommend this book to all those who are seeking a deeper understanding of different philosophical perspectives. It has the potential to open your mind and broaden your horizons.

So, go ahead and enjoy the journey of exploring this thought-provoking work. May you be blessed with new insights and a greater appreciation for the complexity of human thought.

Diamond

“Dur Wille zur Macht” (the Will to Power), which Nietzsche regarded as the fundamental driving force in human lives, encompassing ambition, achievement, and the striving to reach the highest possible in one's life. It is often contrasted with Viktor Frankl's view of Meaning and Freud's view of Pleasure.

This was one of the main things I took away from “Beyond Good and Evil” (BGE), my initial exploration into Nietzsche's writings. BGE consists of 9 essays and a concluding poem called “Aftersong”. Each essay is further divided into smaller, consecutively numbered sections, varying in length from one sentence to 3 or 4 pages. Nietzsche was indeed fond of short aphorisms, and essay #4 (“Epigrams and Interludes”) is composed entirely of these one or two-sentence sayings. Although few of them are likely to ever grace a motivational poster, they are thought-provoking nonetheless.

Like many others, I had heard or read about Nietzsche over the years but had never actually read him until now. I knew going in that his worldview was significantly different from my own, yet I wanted to experience his thinking directly. My impressions are as follows: He was a man of powerful intellect, bold and outspoken, holding back little in his sometimes scathing critique of other philosophers. He was no friend of religion, yet surprisingly in BGE he had kind words for the Jews and ironically criticized his own Germany for its growing antisemitism.

Nietzsche's writing can be pointed and at times dense, but it is seldom dull and often quite stylish. He is actually known for being a particularly “readable” philosopher. Sometimes he can sound rebellious, petulant, or even arrogant, all of which stem from the deep passion of his beliefs. He is known for several key concepts, including the eternal recurrence, master-slave morality, the will to power (mentioned above), and others, some of which are expressed in BGE.

This was a mind-expanding and interesting read. Much of it, I'm sure, I didn't fully understand, but it was worthwhile nonetheless. Translator Walter Kaufmann describes this book well: “It is possible to say briefly what makes the book great: the prophetic independence of its spirit; the hundreds of doors it opens for the mind, revealing new vistas, problems, and relationships; and what it contributes to our understanding of much of recent thought and literature and history”.

Nietzsche's best book is a profound exploration of what it means to be human.

He delves into the question with a depth that few others can match. Understanding the problem of human existence, Nietzsche bridges the gap between different philosophical perspectives.

He despises the atomization and objectivization that has plagued much of philosophy. Instead, he emphasizes the importance of the "ready-at-hand" and the need for a holistic understanding.

Nietzsche's ideas about values, the will to power, and the aesthetic are all presented in this book. He challenges the reader to think for themselves and not outsource truth.

Although he assumes a certain level of familiarity with philosophy, his writing style makes this book accessible even to neophytes.

It is a pity that some may misinterpret his ideas and use them to support anti-democratic and anti-egalitarian stances. However, this does not take away from the genius of Nietzsche's work.

Overall, this book is a masterpiece that offers valuable insights into the human condition.

This book is a revolutionary philosophical work.

If you deeply understand his words, from then on, you will only look at the nature of things and will no longer be an ordinary person.

It is a book that tells you about what has happened to it over the centuries and shows how the sword of thought has overcome differences in thought and tarnished our innate nature with ancient customs.

This book can make you extremely rebellious and wild. The revolution and rebellion that call you ask yourself in the face of all self-evident and rational certainties: from where do we know?

And question all self-evident and rational certainties and demand that they prove their validity in the court of your inner reconsideration with the mention of historical facts and evidence.

This is a task that is usually doomed to failure... However, this book is only a negative book and has a negative logic.

It empties the foundation beneath you and leaves you hanging, unless you yourself find a way to stand firm in this darkness or learn to fly without wings.

This may be the main goal, and of course, it is the most difficult and at the same time the most salvation-bringing and hardest to achieve.

It takes a long time in your life and is completely worth the pain. The pain of confronting the habits of thinking and beliefs that are deeply ingrained in the subconscious and the involuntary and mechanical connection of it with our nervous system.

It is the pain of resisting the reactions and emotions that are caused by the accumulated value judgments and the involuntary mechanism in us....

After reading Chbosky's book, I find myself unable to sleep.

The ramblings of Nietzsche, on the other hand, have a strange soothing effect on me.

His writing seems to be in perfect harmony with his personality, which is bleak and barren.

It's as if his words are a reflection of the desolate landscapes that exist within his mind.

As I immerse myself in his works, I am drawn into a world of darkness and uncertainty.

Yet, there is also a certain beauty and power in his writing that keeps me coming back for more.

Perhaps it is the way he challenges our preconceived notions and forces us to confront the harsh realities of life.

Whatever the reason, Nietzsche's words have become a source of comfort and inspiration for me in the midst of my sleepless nights.

Awful writing! It is needlessly vague and infuriatingly sanctimonious. I eagerly anticipated section four (a chapter of ONLY short "epigrams and interludes"), hoping that the valuable gems hidden beneath the rest of the dross would be distilled and separated. Unfortunately, the brevity of each statement leaves many completely unproven, resulting in broad (often idiotic) generalizations. Also, Nietzsche, what's with all the em-dashes? Do you think you're Emily Dickinson?

While I am about to recommend reading only the introduction, I must criticize this assessment: "[The book's:] significance lies not only in the stylistic excellence--Nietzsche was a consummate artisan of the German language" (xxiii). HA! The second half of this sentence IS more accurate: "[it:] is marred only occasionally by a failure to elaborate a thought or idea fully."

Other than the absurdity of claiming this to be "stylistic excellence," the introduction provides a clear, relatively succinct overview of every section of the text. Another plus is that it leaves out the intense derision pervasive in Nietzsche's voice.

I wonder if I had read this 125 years ago, would I have enjoyed it more? Perhaps I would have thought, "Wow, someone is finally attacking the blinding and diminishing dogma of religion! Nietzsche's confidence is inspiring and his strong attitudes are just what are needed!" However, living in a much more secular age (thank god!) and having the benefits of 135 years to expound on Darwin's initial discoveries, reading Nietzsche's obnoxious mini-rants today strikes me as either, "Duh" or "Well, he's actually quite mistaken there." Our "entire instinctual life" is not based on the single, most primal drive of "the will to power." [The second reaction was often a result of having recently read Boyd's evolution of cognition and fiction and Wright's evolution of God.]

*Christianity is "an ongoing suicide of reason...nonsense and superstition" (44-5). The Bible is "perhaps the greatest audacity and'sin against the spirit' that literary Europe has on its conscience" (49).

In some respects, it is very similar to Chesterton as it is more driven by style than by the actual arguments. However, unlike Chesterton, it lacks the grace and cheerfulness that would at least make it enjoyable to read. Instead, it is replaced by the obnoxious personality of a man who has delusions about how amazing his theory is about everything.

While this in itself may not have been a problem, it is the constant and ever-present lack of systematic thought. None of the arguments have a clear line of reasoning. They are jumpy and rest on axioms that he proposed just a few sentences ago, and he draws conclusions without clarifying or justifying them. At times, I had no idea what the hell he was trying to say due to the already mentioned absence of systematic argumentation.

The book is more or less obnoxious depending on your a priori agreement with his thinking. It really boils down to shitting on everything he dislikes and praising everything he likes with little to no satisfactory exposition of the proposed idea. It is a book that has no head or tail in its construction, and again, this in itself may not be a problem, but here it is just random.

Overall, the book is a disappointment, lacking the coherence and intellectual rigor that one would expect from a serious work of non-fiction.

Friedrich Nietzsche is indeed a renowned philosophical writer. To me, he has become an even greater legend than what his writing might initially suggest. After delving into his work, I was both astonished by the verbosity and the repetitive nature of his actual writing. In fact, to put it rather casually, a significant portion of his arguments in this book seem to boil down to the assertion that 'everything is meaningless and everything is subjective'. Of course, this is a rather blatant exaggeration, but that's how Nietzsche's writing comes across to me. I would love to have others explain to me in the comments below what it is that I might be missing about his writing. Such a discussion would truly pique my interest.

The central premise of this book, which meanders from one idea to another, is that morality itself should exist 'beyond good and evil'. At times, it is extremely challenging to precisely understand what Nietzsche means due to this meandering nature. However, it appears that he posits that since, 'existentially', everything is devoid of meaning - given Nietzsche's disbelief in heaven, hell, or any kind of God - morality and reality become subjective. In other words, Nietzsche seems to suggest that there are certain natural or scientific laws that govern an internal morality, leading us to act in the ways we do. He contends that 'good and evil' are concepts of a morality imposed by religion and thus merely a veneer over how humanity truly behaves.

It should come as no surprise to anyone that Friedrich Nietzsche was vehemently anti-Christian and anti-religious in general. This is rather odd because it seems that one of his key concepts (as per my classes) was 'perspectivism' - the idea that there are a plethora of various perspectives that should be considered in regard to any issue. Yet, Nietzsche completely abandons this idea when it comes to Christianity and seems to close his mind to the possibility that any intelligent thoughts could have such a religious backing. In other words, this 'perspectivism' seems to be little more than a title created by Nietzsche to appeal to those with a diverse range of perspectives and is not necessarily as wholeheartedly embraced by himself as it might seem. Please correct me if I am wrong in my assessment of this issue, as this is my first full encounter with Nietzsche's text.

The one aspect in which I do concur with Nietzsche regarding religion is the notion that we do not require God for morality or for happiness. Some might wonder how I can hold this belief, and I would clarify that I do not believe the purpose of my faith is simply to provide me with morality - to make me a 'good' person or to bring me happiness. For that, all I would need to do is follow the government's laws, read books, have a successful career, love my family, and engage in numerous other activities that I could do without any need to be involved with anything Christian. What Nietzsche fails to understand is that my faith revolves around a personal connection to a God, not simply about attempting to become a more morally upright individual. And that connection truly is something that exists 'beyond good and evil'.

However, some of his ideas are simply contradictory. (Others, such as his 'will to power' or 'God is dead', are often misunderstood but are discussed elsewhere.) I am referring to the idea that he seems to advocate considering a variety of ideas for any concept yet outright rejects some. He believes that the concept of anything being able to create itself is absurd - so then how did everything come into existence in the first place? There must be some sort of starting point that requires creation from nothing - or perhaps from a being who defies understanding and has always existed (such as an all-powerful God?).

Friedrich Nietzsche is a well-known philosopher.

For those who are not familiar with him, he was often seen as an angry individual. He seemed to shield himself from the harsh world by surrounding himself with an inflated ego and an overly prominent moustache.

Rather than asking you to read his actual works, I have created a "Nietzsche Book Generator" for you. With this, you can create your own philosophical tomes right at home.

Here are the simple steps to follow: First, make one or more completely absurd claims. Then, to protect yourself, assert that anyone who disagrees with you is too dumb to understand your words, which is like the "The Emperor's New Clothes" way of arguing. When you run out of things to say, just write the most misogynistic thought that pops into your mind. Also, be sure to impress the reader with your abundant use of Latin clichés. Repeat these steps about two hundred times, and voila, you have a "book".

After that, all you have to do is relax and wait to be taken seriously by many intelligent people!

Nietzsche is a complex and controversial philosopher whose ideas have had a profound impact on Western thought. His work challenges many of our most cherished beliefs and assumptions about morality, truth, knowledge, and the nature of existence.

At the heart of Nietzsche's philosophy is his critique of traditional metaphysics and its attempt to ground value and meaning in a transcendent, objective reality. He argues that such attempts are doomed to failure because they ignore the embodied, subjective nature of human experience. Instead, Nietzsche主张 that value and meaning are created by individuals through their own acts of will and interpretation.

Nietzsche's ideas have been both praised and criticized. Some see him as a radical thinker who has opened up new possibilities for understanding the human condition, while others view him as a dangerous nihilist who undermines the very foundations of morality and civilization.

Regardless of one's stance on Nietzsche, it is clear that his work cannot be ignored. His ideas continue to inspire debate and discussion among philosophers, scholars, and thinkers from a wide range of disciplines.

In conclusion, Nietzsche's philosophy is a powerful and thought-provoking challenge to our traditional ways of thinking. It forces us to question our most basic assumptions and to reexamine the nature of value, truth, and knowledge. Whether we ultimately agree or disagree with his ideas, we can all benefit from engaging with his work and grappling with the difficult questions he poses.