On a second reading of this work, I found myself enjoying it more. Some advocate it as a great introduction to Nietzsche, but I still hold the view that "Twilight of the Idols" is superior. Nevertheless, there are no complaints here, as the reread was definitely more satisfying. I also read it alongside a companion book that provided analysis for each aphorism, which was a great experience. I didn't rely on it for every aphorism, but it was handy whenever needed.

The quotes within this work offer profound insights. For instance, the statement about the noble self-control involved in praising only where one doesn't agree is thought-provoking. It makes one consider the implications of our praise and how it reflects on our own tastes. Another interesting quote is about the idea that every philosophy is a foreground philosophy, hinting at the hidden depths and possible arbitrariness within each philosophical stance.

However, on my first read, I didn't have the same level of appreciation as I did for some other Nietzsche works. I felt that I didn't grasp as much as I usually do. Still, there were undoubtedly some high points. The quotes, such as "This is not a philosophical race – these Englishmen," and the description of the rank order of philosophers based on their laughter, added to the overall intrigue of the text.

12/17/24 reread
Enjoyed this more on a second read. I know some people recommend this as a good introduction to Nietzsche; I still disagree, "Twilight of the Idols" is better. No complaints though, definitely enjoyed it more on a reread. Also read this alongside a companion book that had analysis for each aphorism—great experience. Didn't use it for each aphorism but great to have whenever needed.

Quotes
It involves subtle and at the same time noble self-control, assuming that one wants to praise at all, if one always praises only where one does not agree: for in the other case one would after all praise oneself, which offends good taste.

Indeed, he will doubt whether a philosopher could possibly have "ultimate and real opinions, whether behind every one of his caves there is not, must not be, another deeper cave-a more comprehensive, stranger, richer world beyond the surface, an abysmally deep ground be- hind every ground, under every attempt to furnish "grounds." Every philosophy is a foreground philosophy-that is a hermits judgment: "There is something arbitrary in his stopping here to look back and look around, in his not digging deeper here but laying his spade aside; there is also something suspicious about it." Every philosophy also conceals a philosophy; every opinion is also a hide out, every word also a mask.

After all, you know well enough that it cannot be of any con- sequence if you of all people are proved right; you know that no philosopher so far has been proved right, and that there might be a more laudable truthfulness in every little question mark that you place after your special words and favorite doctrines (and occasionally after yourselves) than in all the solemn gestures and trumps before accusers and law courts.

The great epochs of our life come when we gain the courage to rechristen our evil as what is best in us.

Thus he once said: "Under certain circumstances I love what is human"-and with this he alluded to Ariadne who was presents -"man is to my mind an agreeable, courageous, inventive animal that has no equal on earth; it finds its way in any labyrinth. I am well disposed towards him: I often reflect how I might yet ad- vance him and make him stronger, more evil, and more profound than he is." "Stronger, more evil, and more profound?" I asked startled. "Yes," he said once more; "stronger, more evil, and more profound; also more beautiful"-and at that the tempter god smiled with his halcyon smile as though he had just paid an enchanting compliment.

1st read
I didn't end up liking this as much as some other Nietzsche I read. I just felt like I didn't grasp a ton of it more than usual at least. Still had some high points, without a doubt.

Quotes
"This is not a philosophical race – these Englishmen."

"I would go so far as to allow myself a rank order of philosophers based on the rank of their laughter – right up to those who are capable of golden laughter. And given that even gods philosophize... I do not doubt that they know a new and super-human way of laughing – at the expense of everything serious!"

"People who were cowardly, apprehensive, and petty, people who thought narrowly in terms of utility – these were the ones despised. But the same can be said about distrustful people with their uneasy glances, about grovelers, about dog-like types of people who let themselves be mistreated, about begging flatterers and, above all, about liars: – it is a basic belief of aristocrats that base peoples are liars. 'We who are truthful' – that is what the nobility of ancient Greece called themselves."

Although it wasn't precisely what I had anticipated, Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil proved to be a highly satisfying exploration of morality.

It deviated from my expectations as Nietzsche dedicated a significant portion of his text to prophesying and dissecting the "herd" mentality within democracy's slave culture. This served as a prelude to his final, magnificent essay, "What is Noble." However, the shattering of my expectations was never an issue.

Regrettably, too many individuals dismiss Nietzsche prematurely, being pre-offended and thus missing out on the powerful and vital aspects of his writings without even giving them a chance. Some of the offense can be attributed to the era in which he lived, some to his cultural context, some to misinterpretations regarding his influence on Nazi thought, and some to the indoctrinated discomfort ingrained in those who attempt to read him today.

All in all, being offended by Nietzsche is truly a pity. There is a wealth of importance in his work, especially for those who feel, like Zarathustra, that they are shouting into a vast void.

For anyone with the willingness to delve deep, Nietzsche has much to say and will surely speak to you.

Friedrich Nietzsche is often regarded as a complex and controversial figure in the history of philosophy. He was a thinker who dared to challenge the established norms and values of his time. Nietzsche's ideas were revolutionary and had a profound impact on various fields, including philosophy, literature, and psychology.

Some people might even go as far as to say that Nietzsche was the original Meninist. This is a bold statement, but it does hold some truth. Nietzsche was critical of the traditional roles and expectations placed on men in society. He believed that men should break free from the constraints of convention and embrace their true selves.

Nietzsche's philosophy emphasized the importance of individualism and the pursuit of power. He encouraged men to be strong, independent, and to assert their will. In this sense, he can be seen as a precursor to the modern Meninist movement, which also advocates for male empowerment and the rejection of traditional gender roles.

However, it is important to note that Nietzsche's ideas were not without their flaws. His emphasis on power and individualism could sometimes lead to a sense of nihilism and a disregard for the well-being of others. Nevertheless, his work continues to be studied and debated today, and his influence can still be felt in many aspects of our society.

"Todo pensador profundo tiene más miedo de ser comprendido que de ser mal entendido." This profound statement by Nietzsche reflects the complex nature of his philosophical ideas.

"Más allá del bien y el mal" is an incredible book that is based on the same philosophical ideas as "Así hablo Zaratustra", but in a completely different way. Although it has the same particular style of Nietzsche, as it is stated in the edition I have read, "it is a glossary of the Zaratustra". And indeed, this book is like the second part of "Zaratustra", but with less literary quality and more philosophical content. I rather felt it as a complement and would recommend reading "Así hablo Zaratustra" before this text. That way, you will surely be able to get more benefit from it and the reading will be more enjoyable.

I always recommend to those who wish to read Nietzsche to do an analysis of Nietzschean thought prior to reading. Otherwise, it will never be possible to fully enjoy or understand the text. Although in this text, unlike "Zaratustra", it is of lesser difficulty.

Within this book, we can appreciate his main ideas about morality and values. Besides, in an almost prophetic way, about the superman and the will to power, which goes beyond good and evil or decadent morality! The one who creates and establishes his own law.

Actually, I would like to make an enormous review about Nietzsche's works, but surely it would bore all of you, so I make them very simple, hahaha.

This remarkable book had a profound impact on my life, helping to bring about a significant transformation. When I was just 17 years old, I had never come across anything as intellectually challenging, profoundly thought-provoking, and disturbingly engaging as this particular piece of literature.

Admittedly, I was still relatively young at that time, but it was precisely this book that set me on the path to exploring the fascinating world of Philosophy, and I have remained on that path ever since.

Franz Kafka once said that a book should serve as an axe for the frozen sea within us, and this book truly was one of those for me. It had the power to shatter the ice of my complacency and ignorance, opening up new perspectives and ideas that have continued to shape my thinking and understanding of the world around me.

To this day, I am deeply grateful for having discovered this book and for the journey it has led me on. It will always hold a special place in my heart and in my intellectual development.

I truly long for the day when I can pen a comprehensive review for this remarkable book. However, at present, I have doubts that the outcome will do justice to the work.

Therefore, I will share with you the initial few lines of the preface. These lines, on their own, serve as a summation of Nietzsche's entire critique of philosophy. It was the very nature of dogmatist philosophers, rather than their observations or understandings, that led them to a pseudo-rational, systematized perception of the human mind.

"Supposing truth is a woman - what then? Are there not grounds for suspicion that all philosophers, insofar as they were dogmatists, have been extremely inept when it comes to women? That the gruesome seriousness, the clumsy obtrusiveness with which they have typically approached truth thus far have been awkward and highly inappropriate methods for captivating a woman's heart?" Nietzsche's words here are both thought-provoking and challenging, making us question the traditional ways in which philosophers have pursued truth.

Some books you read. You pick them up, turn the pages, and absorb the words and ideas within. They are a source of knowledge, entertainment, or inspiration.

But then there are some books you live. These are the ones that have a profound impact on you, that change the way you think, feel, or see the world. They become a part of your life, and you carry them with you long after you've finished reading.

These books might speak to your soul, resonate with your experiences, or offer a new perspective that you never considered before. They have the power to move you, to make you laugh or cry, and to inspire you to take action or make a change.

Whether you read for pleasure or for personal growth, there are certain books that will always hold a special place in your heart and mind. They are the ones that you live, and they shape who you are and who you will become.

Every deep thinker is more afraid of being understood than of being misunderstood. If Nietzsche had begun with this thought rather than almost concluding with it, perhaps he would have been more comprehensible. His readers might have said, 'Oh, right, so that's how it's going to be, is it? We're dealing with some smart-arse who is going to play games with us - well, play away... '

But, he doesn't start here. He starts with, 'SUPPOSING that Truth is a woman--what then?' My university lecturer was very excited about this idea. In fact, he was writing his doctorate on precisely this concept, calling it something like 'Nietzsche's Women'. So, I read this book as if it was an exploration of truth being defined as whatever a German version of Victorian sexual relationships would have had the stereotype of 'woman' be. And really, Nietzsche, to me, simply doesn't maintain this metaphor at all. Later in the work, when he talks of women (a highly sexist version of women, admittedly), he is talking of women, not of truth.

The book is structured with a Preface, nine parts, and a final sort of ramble that I guess is supposed to be quite 'artistic'. The whole is divided into 296 numbered paragraphs. Some paragraphs are a couple of pages long (which can be a pain to read as they are thick text and quite dense). Others are aphorisms and can be quite direct or obscure to the point of incomprehensibility. Some of these end up on desk calendars, most don't.

The paragraphs that I think my lecturer must have struggled with the most were those from 233 to 239, where Nietzsche discusses the 'weaker sex'. This seems to me to be standard sexist nonsense and says nothing interesting about either women or truth.

Now, let's look at my division of the spoils. The Good: I like Nietzsche's statement that texts not written to be voiced often sound hollow. I also liked some of the aphorisms, like 'One is punished most for one's virtues' and 'I do not like it' - Why? - 'I am not up to it.' - has anyone ever answered like that?'

The Bad: I find his rants against democracy and socialism, against what he calls the 'herd mentality', quite obnoxious. His criticism of the English in 252 is also trite and pointless nonsense that undermines his arguments generally.

The Evil: I have a visceral reaction to Nietzsche's support of eugenics. His pronouncements on society, such as 'Every elevation of the type “man” has hitherto been the work of an aristocratic society', are clear and unambiguous and are poisonous to society.

Beyond: I've gone back to reading Nietzsche again because twenty years ago I read him and hated him. Since then, I've read many commentaries and listened to lectures where he is greatly praised. But I still find him hard to understand and his views on society objectionable. I find Modern Philosophy's obsession with the individual and the'meaninglessness' of the world to be a dead end. I quickly become bored with obscurantism, and Nietzsche's children, like Heidegger, Sartre, and Derrida, are experts in it. Life is too short to waste on such rants.

Finally, an aside. Throughout this book, there are odd punctuation marks, like : -, which made me think of smileys or emotes. After a while, I couldn't help but feel this was quite appropriate.

“I like it” would be a bit of a stretch. To be honest, it was just okay. The whole thing reads like a sermon, which is rather off-putting. What really gets under my skin is his views on women. They are so outdated and narrow-minded that they are worthy of nothing more than an eye-roll. It's disappointing to see such archaic thinking in this day and age. One would hope that people would have evolved beyond such simplistic and demeaning views. But alas, here we are. It makes me wonder how much progress we've really made in terms of gender equality.

Perhaps it's time to have a more in-depth conversation about these issues and challenge the status quo. We can't continue to let such backward ideas persist. It's up to all of us to speak out and demand change. Only then can we hope to create a more equal and just society for everyone.

Reading Nietzsche's books has its own special way.

One should spend more time than usual reading the paragraphs of the book and constantly go back and study the text from the beginning of the paragraph again until one clearly understands what Nietzsche is trying to express.

Moreover, studying Nietzsche is equivalent to studying almost all the ideas and thoughts of the philosophers before Nietzsche.

For this reason, it is often necessary to stop, clarify the footnotes of the book, and perhaps refer to relevant sources to complete the general information about the topic of discussion.

And of course, the charming world of Nietzsche completely changes your preconceived notions.

For example, at the beginning of a paragraph, Nietzsche wants to discuss the belief that ordinary people have no doubt about certainties. For this reason, he first states the topic you accept.

For example, in paragraph 207:

"The human being who no longer curses and does not call others bastards, like the evil-seeing and knowledgeable dreamer who, after thousands of complete or half failures, reaches a bloom and is one of the most valuable tools existing."

And then, to your surprise, you see how he refutes all your previous preconceptions with his arguments:

"But this human being must be in the hands of a more powerful individual than others because in our opinion, he is only a tool, a mirror, and not the goal itself."

This is what makes the study of Nietzsche's works, despite its complexity, be accompanied by a wonderful pleasure.

Moreover, one is amazed by Nietzsche's amazing prediction in paragraph 208 about the understanding of countries.

Of course, this prediction is also due to the study of Dostoyevsky's works, which has led to such a deep understanding of the Russian nation in Nietzsche:

"Today, I see the strongest force and the strongest will to desire among the European countries in Russia."

"There, the will waits with a powerful force, and I believe that Russia must ultimately become a threat so that Europe decides to show the same threat to this country, that is, to become the master of will."

And then he talks about the will to desire in Germany compared to France and England, and the end of the paragraph ends with this text:

"The 20th century is a war for world domination, and the need to achieve a strategic policy."

Also, one can understand very well why the author and English philosophers hate Nietzsche because in paragraph 228, Nietzsche clearly shows the hypocrisy of the English to the reader:

"That old English sin whose name is the language of thieves and moral hypocrisy is also a hidden defense against spiritual punishment. If there are any pure races, they will suffer from this moral pain."

"These cowardly animals, with their confused minds and trembling spiritual punishments, who want to bring their self-love in the form of public welfare, know nothing and smell nothing. Public welfare is an unachievable dream and concept, but only a drug that causes excitement and has a bad effect on higher human beings."

"This benefit is among the convinced and basically mediocre English people."

Now, regarding the issue of public welfare, Nietzsche believes that in the past, people were either rulers or subjects.

But in modern times, this meaning of rulership has changed color because of spiritual punishment. As he says in paragraph 199:

"Rulers know only one way to escape spiritual punishment, either to make themselves executors of old or superior commands, for example, the fundamental law or the law of God."

"Or, according to the cowardly way of thinking, borrow the principles of cowards and, for example, consider themselves the first servant of their nation or a tool to achieve public welfare."

A writing that elevates the paradox to the status of law. I liked it: constructive and evolutionary.

Reading synthetic philosophy is not an ordinary process. The one who, by chance or caprice, reads philosophy must be very careful: not to simply share the ideas as such, but to bring them before a - if I may call it so - "supreme tribunal of morality", a tribunal with a subject and an object that can eminently dissect each cell of the two parties in the process: the universal moral code and the personal moral code.

Well, Nietzsche precisely draws our attention to this fact: who can say in this world what is good and what is evil?

And, regarding him, if I am allowed a biographical critique, I can say that he seems rather arrogant and megalomaniac (sometimes it seems to me that he does not write from the position of a human being and, often, when talking about humanity, he addresses with "you"), but dangerous through a - and, if I am allowed - "dialectic in the form of soliloquy".

This kind of philosophical exploration challenges our preconceived notions and forces us to think deeply about the nature of morality and values. Nietzsche's ideas, although controversial, have had a profound impact on philosophy and continue to be relevant today.

By engaging with his work, we can expand our understanding of the human condition and gain new perspectives on the complex issues that confront us in modern society.

Friedrich Nietzsche, a philosopher known for his complex and often controversial ideas. I find myself eternally grateful that I don't have to inhabit the inner workings of his mind. After delving into chapter 6, I have decided to call it quits.

The level of biting sarcasm and elitist hubris present in his writing is simply overwhelming. It becomes increasingly difficult to wade through the sea of his caustic remarks and inflated sense of superiority.

Perhaps Nietzsche's intentions were noble, but the way he presents his thoughts is just too much for me to handle. I can only take so much before my own mental state begins to suffer.

So, with a sense of relief, I step away from his works, content in the knowledge that I don't have to subject myself to any more of his intense and often abrasive musings.