Weltgeist

Support us on Patreon, get access to exclusive videos:
▶ https://www.patreon.com/WeltgeistYT

WATCH:
▶ Why Nietzsche Hated Socrates: https://youtu.be/DM78nStythg

OUR ANALYSES:
▶ Beyond Good and Evil: https://youtu.be/WIHXZUltfqk
▶ The Antichrist: https://youtu.be/qej1Z8Qzq_c
▶ Genealogy of Morals: https://youtu.be/6PUx4cOfFcI
▶ Twilight of the Idols: https://youtu.be/YpVr_NEvWYA
▶ The Will to Power: https://youtu.be/He6ZC7ZFBt8
▶ Daybreak: https://youtu.be/cOL2z7nuXdA
▶ The Joyful Science: https://youtu.be/U0fTBOJ-C_I

TIMESTAMPS:
00:00 Introduction
01:20 You can't handle the truth
03:24 Hiding from others
08:05 Hiding from yourself

In Beyond Good and Evil, the theme of the mask pops up now and again. Nietzsche considers it necessary for a philosopher (or free spirit) to conceal himself. Both from others, and himself. From others, because a true psychology would be shocking to society, laying bare the 'black and deep desires' of man. We must dilate the truths of our inner world, make it more palatable. Hence; a mask.

We also hide from ourselves. Moral biases and prejudices, ingrained since birth, cause internal resistance when we dig too deep down into our soul. We may not like what we find. The mind creates defense mechanisms. Nietzsche here touches upon a psychological phenomenon that would in modern times be called cognitive dissonance or self-deception.

He considered his philosophical work to be start of a psychology of the future in which "free spirits" (his dreamed-of new guard of philosophers) would boldly dare go beyond good and evil in their examination of the human psyche, setting sail over morality into new territory, heretofore unexplored.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

SUPPORT US ON PATREON:
▶ https://www.patreon.com/WeltgeistYT

WATCH:
▶ Nietzsche's Warning to Scientists: https://youtu.be/Qy8Xof92OYQ
▶ Why Nietzsche Hated Socrates: https://youtu.be/DM78nStythg
▶ Why Nietzsche Hated Plato: https://youtu.be/nEhNRuPh4As
▶ Why Nietzsche Hated Kant: https://youtu.be/9E_RLvcZ8jI

OUR ANALYSES:
▶ Beyond Good and Evil: https://youtu.be/WIHXZUltfqk
▶ The Antichrist: https://youtu.be/qej1Z8Qzq_c
▶ Genealogy of Morals: https://youtu.be/6PUx4cOfFcI
▶ Twilight of the Idols: https://youtu.be/YpVr_NEvWYA
▶ The Will to Power: https://youtu.be/He6ZC7ZFBt8
▶ Daybreak: https://youtu.be/cOL2z7nuXdA
▶ The Joyful Science: https://youtu.be/U0fTBOJ-C_I

For 2000 years, European culture had been dominated by the idea of God. God as the source of truth, beauty and justice. What is good? Good is whatever is sanctioned by God. What is evil? Evil is whatever is prohibited by God.

The moral order had God as its foundation. Critically, the concept of God is transcendent. He exists not as a part of the world, but rather God exists outside of the world if you will, above it, beyond it.

That is what allows God’s morality to be objective: it’s sacred, it doesn’t find its origin our world with all its imperfections and contingencies.

So what is really at stake with the death of God, is not the disappearance of God himself, but rather the death of objective morality as such.

Scientific atheism had been preparing itself in the decades leading up to Nietzsche’s proclamation. Little by little, God had become superfluous: the world could be explained through the scientific method.

Even worse, the place of man in the universe had been under constant attack. No longer were we created in God’s image, chosen by God to fulfil his divine plan. Copernicus robbed us of our central place in the universe, and Darwin gave us a worldly explanation for the origin of man: descent from an ape-like ancestor.

But what these scientific discoveries reinforced, is the idea that only this world is the real world. Confidence in the scientific method and its great explanatory power eroded the necessity for a beyond world. After all: we seem to be doing pretty well without it.

Yet, our existence in the material world is characterised by change and contingency. Everything is in constant flux, cultures change, wars are fought, empires are lost and won. Continental drift. Entropy. The expanding universe.

Where can we find something everlasting, something eternally true, a solid foundation on which to build our table of values? Where can meaning be found?

Nietzsche dedicates a few words to Schopenhauer’s reception in German philosophy, and he’s not positive about it. He mentions by name three philosophers:

Julius Bahnsen
Eduard von Hartmann
Philipp Mainländer

These three were followers of Schopenhauer’s philosophy who critically engaged with it and let him influence their own philosophy. In this sense they are post-Schopenhauerian philosophers. But neither of these three, says Nietzsche, truly engaged with the most important question that Schopenhauer asked. They are not real pessimists.

Let’s fast-forward to today. It’s been over 200 years since Schopenhauer first unleashed his philosophy upon the world, and it’s been over a 100 years since Nietzsche died.

Where are we now in regards to the fundamental question: what is the significance of existence?

Well, we haven’t conclusively answered the question yet. And we probably never will. But the question has become more urgent than ever.

In a way, this question spawned the entirety of existentialist philosophy, which dominated the latter half of the 20th century.

Kierkegaard, the philosopher who is commonly credited with being the first truly existentialist philosopher, tried to escape Hegel’s all-encompassing system of the development of history. Looking at Hegel’s huge construction, his

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This video is part 2 in our series on Schopenhauer’s philosophy of religion. Part one was about his broader philosophy of religion, which you can watch here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9EVlUJyrQg. In this part, we will zoom in on Schopenhauer’s criticism and evaluation of Christianity and the theological problem of reconciling the Old with the New Testament.

The main religious text in Christianity, the Bible, is composed of the Old and the New Testament. The problem is that Schopenhauer sees an optimistic worldview in the Old and a pessimistic worldview in the New Testament.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

WATCH:
The Antichrist pt. 1: https://youtu.be/_V1NFlaO3TE
Twilight of the Idols, the Weak vs. the Strong: https://youtu.be/ufd2QLenoAM

In this part, we will go over the notion of pity and why Nietzsche thought that pity was one of the most harmful elements of Christianity.

In earlier works, Nietzsche already spoke out against pity, or compassion. For example, in a paragraph of The Joyful Science, Nietzsche laments how pity leads us away from our own path and our individuality: pity as a distraction.

Nietzsche’s demonization of pity or compassion is an obvious attack on Schopenhauer’s philosophy, which held that compassion is the root of all morality. In fact, he is probably directly alluding to Schopenhauer in the above passage. And it is true, that for Schopenhauer, supreme goodness consists in complete compassion for other people and animals, so much so, that the perfectly good person should forget his own individuality altogether!

This is absolutely appalling to Nietzsche. In this formulation of pity, Nietzsche sees a denial of life, a resignation, a saying of No. A degeneration of man’s primal instinct: the will to power.

Pity, driven to its ethical conclusion, will make you a part of the herd by stamping out your individuality. Pity is the primary virtue of slave morality.

And it is therefore no coincidence that we find compassion, or “love thy neighbor” as the greatest commandment in Christianity.

But this is not the whole story. There is another problem with pity.

The reaction to pity, Nietzsche argues, is always disproportional to the cause. This makes pity extra insidious. Pity is the ultimate emotion of corruption, of degeneracy, because when we are being compassionate, we take the side of the weak and grant them a kind of power which they do not deserve. This, in turn, reflects badly on life itself.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Head to https://squarespace.com/weltgeist to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain using code WELTGEIST

Support us on Patreon, get access to exclusive videos:
▶ https://www.patreon.com/WeltgeistYT

OUR ANALYSES:
▶ Beyond Good and Evil: https://youtu.be/WIHXZUltfqk
▶ The Antichrist: https://youtu.be/qej1Z8Qzq_c
▶ Genealogy of Morals: https://youtu.be/6PUx4cOfFcI
▶ Twilight of the Idols: https://youtu.be/YpVr_NEvWYA
▶ The Will to Power: https://youtu.be/He6ZC7ZFBt8
▶ Daybreak: https://youtu.be/cOL2z7nuXdA
▶ The Joyful Science: https://youtu.be/U0fTBOJ-C_I

Music used:
"Evening Fall - Harp", "Frozen Star", "Gnarling Situation" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Keep exploring at https://brilliant.org/Weltgeist/. Get started for free, and hurry—the first 200 people get 20% off an annual premium subscription.

DOWNLOAD "Self-Reliance": https://weltgeist.tv/emerson

TIMESTAMPS:
00:00 Introduction
02:22 Brother-soul
06:17 Philosopher-poet
10:17 Self-Reliance

SUPPORT US ON PATREON:
▶ https://www.patreon.com/WeltgeistYT

WATCH:
▶ Nietzsche's Warning to Scientists: https://youtu.be/Qy8Xof92OYQ
▶ Why Nietzsche Hated Socrates: https://youtu.be/DM78nStythg
▶ Why Nietzsche Hated Plato: https://youtu.be/nEhNRuPh4As
▶ Why Nietzsche Hated Kant: https://youtu.be/9E_RLvcZ8jI

OUR ANALYSES:
▶ Beyond Good and Evil: https://youtu.be/WIHXZUltfqk
▶ The Antichrist: https://youtu.be/qej1Z8Qzq_c
▶ Genealogy of Morals: https://youtu.be/6PUx4cOfFcI
▶ Twilight of the Idols: https://youtu.be/YpVr_NEvWYA
▶ The Will to Power: https://youtu.be/He6ZC7ZFBt8
▶ Daybreak: https://youtu.be/cOL2z7nuXdA
▶ The Joyful Science: https://youtu.be/U0fTBOJ-C_I

This video was sponsored by Brilliant.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This video is a deep-dive explanation of one of the most notorious concepts in Western philosophy: Nietzsche's Will to Power. What is the philosophical background, how did it evolve throughout Nietzsche's intellectual career, and how can we look at the concept today?

The first part serves as an introduction of sorts. We’ll go over Nietzsche’s intellectual background, most importantly the influence of Schopenhauer and Darwinism. We will also look at the question of interpretation: is the Will to Power a metaphysical principle or simply a human drive or emotion?

In the second part we go over Nietzsche's entire body of published work and trace how the concept of the Will to Power evolved throughout Nietzsche's intellectual career and philosophy.
We see how Nietzsche first thinks about power in The Joyful Science but how the term was first coined in Thus Spoke Zarathustra, and how it gradually becomes an all-encompassing force by the time we get to works such as Beyond Good and Evil, Twilight of the Idols and The Anti-Christ. We will see how the main question in this series, "is the Will to Power a metaphysical force or a materialist or psychological drive?" is not so simple to answer.

WATCH our in-depth video on the Will to Power in Beyond Good and Evil here:
https://youtu.be/2Ap9lkhHizU

In the third and final part of our series on Friedrich Nietzsche's concept of the Will to Power, we look at a modern interpretation (Bernard Reginster's The Affirmation of Life: Nietzsche on Overcoming Nihilism from 2006) to finally settle the question of whether or not the Will to power is a metaphysical concept or not -- turns out we have to take a middle road and figure out what exactly Nietzsche means by "power"...

Timestamps:
00:00 Part 1
07:10 Part 2
20:14 Part 3

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

RECOMMENDED READING:
1) The Essential Goethe (https://amzn.to/3waasZB)
2) The Complete Works of Shakespeare (https://amzn.to/3g5bzEf)
3) Lord Byron: The Major Works (https://amzn.to/353peFJ)
4) Calderon, Life is a Dream (https://amzn.to/3x39tui)

WATCH: The Art of Not Reading: Schopenhauer's 6 Rules: https://youtu.be/LCTHrBC2zSw
WATCH: Four Must-Read Books According to Schopenhauer: https://youtu.be/0PWBfDhmhgE

German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer was an avid reader, and he had a lot to say about the art of reading. Or rather, the art of not reading. We have covered that essay in a previous video.

In the essay, Schopenhauer stressed the importance of picking good books, because life is short and time is limited. In the comments, a lot of people were asking for specific recommendations. Which books did Schopenhauer enjoy? In this video we will go over some of the authors Schopenhauer particularly enjoyed.

This video will be more about authors than individual works. There are some authors Schopenhauer held in such high esteem, he enjoyed every single one of their works.

Disclaimer: When you buy one of these works from the above links, I earn a small commission, at absolutely no cost to you. Consider it a way to support the channel while also adding some worthwhile classics to your home library.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

WATCH part 1: https://youtu.be/l_eMcosHDAc

Nietzsche assumed Richard Wagner's music and Arthur Schopenhauer's philosophy were the products of an overflowing vitality, or a surplus of life. However, in the Joyful Science, he changes his mind. It was a mistake to think Wagner and Schopenhauer are a product of exuberance, rather, Wagner and Schopenhauer are a product of a lack of vitality.

Most notably in his work The Case of Wagner we find a long polemic that seeks to critique Wagner’s music, and with it, Schopenhauer’s philosophy. If there’s enough interest, we’ll do a separate video on Nietzsche versus Wagner. Comment below if you’re interested.

This video is not about criticism. In this follow-up video, we want to look at what kind of art this late Nietzsche considers good. If bad art procedes from a lack of vitality, what kind of art procedes from a surplus of vitality?

In the paragraph of the Joyful Science in question, Nietzsche drops four names:

“[Art may] proceed from gratitude and love:—art of this origin will always be an art of apotheosis, perhaps dithyrambic, as with Rubens, mocking divinely, as with Hafiz, or clear and kind-hearted as with Goethe, and spreading a Homeric brightness and glory over everything.”




--- Music in the video (CC)
Canon in D Major by Kevin MacLeod is is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0-licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Source: http://incompetech.com/music/royalty-free/index.html?isrc=USUAN1100301

Artist: http://incompetech.com/

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

SUPPORT US ON PATREON:
▶ https://www.patreon.com/WeltgeistYT

WATCH:
▶ Nietzsche's Warning to Scientists: https://youtu.be/Qy8Xof92OYQ
▶ Why Nietzsche Hated Socrates: https://youtu.be/DM78nStythg
▶ Why Nietzsche Hated Plato: https://youtu.be/nEhNRuPh4As
▶ Why Nietzsche Hated Kant: https://youtu.be/9E_RLvcZ8jI

OUR ANALYSES:
▶ Beyond Good and Evil: https://youtu.be/WIHXZUltfqk
▶ The Antichrist: https://youtu.be/qej1Z8Qzq_c
▶ Genealogy of Morals: https://youtu.be/6PUx4cOfFcI
▶ Twilight of the Idols: https://youtu.be/YpVr_NEvWYA
▶ The Will to Power: https://youtu.be/He6ZC7ZFBt8
▶ Daybreak: https://youtu.be/cOL2z7nuXdA
▶ The Joyful Science: https://youtu.be/U0fTBOJ-C_I

TIMESTAMPS:
00:00 Introduction
02:50 Apollo and Dionysus
06:05 The Dionysian Man
09:09 To be or not to be
12:41 Conclusion

In The Birth of Tragedy, Nietzsche’s first work, he dedicates a few lines to an interpretation of Shakespeare’s Hamlet. At this stage in his life, he was a firm believer in the philosophy of Schopenhauer.

He argues that Hamlet is the prototypical Dionysian man: he has seen the truth; the world is a place of endless suffering. This realization, explained by Schopenhauer and Nietzsche with their metaphysics of the Will, paralyses him.

It explains why throughout the play, Hamlet is so hesitant to kill Claudius. This hesitation has been the subject of major debate. Freud blamed it on the Oedipus complex. René Girard thought Hamlet was paralysed because of his realization that violence begets violence, and avenging his father’s death would be harmful, not just. Existentialists argued that Hamlet is too spoilt for choice, being radically free in the world, and therefore opts to not choose at all, being overhwelmed.

Nietzsche argues that Hamlet’s paralysis is the default state of the Dionysian man, the man who looks beyond the veil of illusion that Apollo (the World as Representation) enchants us with. The Dionysian man sees the world for the place of suffering that is; irredeemable, endless suffering. No action can make things right. So why kill Claudius? Why do anything at all? Why even live?

While Nietzsche only mentions Hamlet in passing, in this video we looks at the famous “to be or not to be” speech in the context of this interpretation.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices