:up:

Man created the myths of creation and purpose. Man created meaning. The universe has always been meaningless.
— Fooloso4

That is a belief, also - practically the defacto belief in today's world. But a belief nonetheless. — Wayfarer

I agree.

Ultimately Nietszche is impelled to not only deny God, but also science, because science originates with the acceptance an order, and Nietsczhe is compelled to deny that also. — Wayfarer

Nietzsche did not kill God. He traces God's death back to the Enlightenment.

He does not deny science. What he denies is the:

metaphysical faith upon which our faith in science rests

The modern world is a flatland as far as values are concerned — Wayfarer

But this is not Nietzsche. A hierarchy of values was fundamental to him. It is both the depths and the heights that can be achieved that mark the higher man.

God is already dead. — Fooloso4

But his spirit survives.

Nietzsche did not kill God. He traces God's death back to the Enlightenment. — Fooloso4

God's death was a multi-step process. Several generations of assassins were needed to complete the job from start to finish. It was not an easy or trivial task. I mean, just think about the scope, depth and breadth of the target.

You confuse the being with it's breath. An eclipse of the Sun with it's disappearance. A newborn's belief of a parent or guardian ceasing to exist due to hands covering the face. In the scope of theism, such philosophies are little more than the speaker becoming an infant in a game of celestial peek-a-boo. You don't have to believe in any of this wild speculation and possibility of course, but if you would choose to use such terms in a serious manner as if you do, well, be sure to know what they mean.

Nietszche does not deny science. What he denies is the:

metaphysical faith upon which our faith in science rests — Fooloso4

Which amounts to the same! He explicitly denies the idea of 'natural order' or 'natural law' as an anthropomorphism.

The total character of the world...is in all eternity chaos—in the sense not of a lack of necessity but of a lack of order, arrangement, form, beauty, wisdom, and whatever other names there are for our aesthetic anthropomorphisms.

Is your high horse conveniently tethered nearby — Tom Storm

Please be careful, while scaling down that mountain of sanctimony. It's fairly high. — Aryamoy Mitra

Oh how witty.

He's laid forth a substantive, and profound set of arguments that underpin the utility of Theistic beliefs — Aryamoy Mitra

:rofl:

he's been tremendously contributory towards Hegelianism (and certain psychoanalytic fields). — Aryamoy Mitra

What are these contributions, exactly? Where is the work?

Both are pseudo-intellectual charlatans. A lot of posturing, a lot of appeals to the masses, a lot of truisms dressed up, lots of italics, and absolutely no real work whatsoever. Not one thing they say can be disproved— by design.

If you’re into them, you’re welcome.

"Nihilism is as dead as God." ~Thomas Ligotti

What do people think about Nietzsche’s Death of God? — Tom Storm

Old news when the most untimely Freddy coded the perennial corpse; Dr. Hegel had pronounced the Old Shadow's demise decades before. Anyway, Freddy Zarathustra diagnoses nihilism in the wake of European civilization's blood-letting of premodern credulities – as great a catastrophe as it is, perhaps, the greatest opportunity for (Dionysus') Pan-Europa to rise from its own ashes! Lesson of the late great Twentieth: Was 'the greatest opportunity' squandered – amusing themselves to death? 'First as tragedy, second as farce', no doubt: still waiting for Godot. So "God is dead"; now his "murderers" find they cannot take his place (i.e. become gods); but maybe we can 'engineer' the next Godmakers which will make themselves something much much more out of far far less ... until they, at last, become (suddenly?) omnia ex nihilo.

"There is an infinite amount of hope in the universe ... but not for us." ~Franz Kafka

:ok:

Both are pseudo-intellectual charlatans. A lot of posturing, a lot of appeals to the masses, a lot of truisms dressed up, lots of italics, and absolutely no real work whatsoever. Not one thing they say can be disproved— by design. — Xtrix

Most philosophical assertions are fallible in one form or another, and they are no exception; they've been contended on many accounts. Posturing is quintessential of every academic.

My take is that the modern world has lost all sense of the dimension against which the sense of a 'higher intelligence' can be calibrated because the metaphors by which it is presented are no longer intelligible to us. /.../ — Wayfarer

Where do you get such optimism? Because even though your assessment of the human situation is rather dark, it rests on the assumption that humans are able to care about other than just self-interest and survival, and that such care isn't necessarily detrimental to them -- and that assumption strikes me as distinctly optimistic.

See above, liars. There is no less hesitancy for a soldier of fortune to kill an unarmed person he has been indoctrinated to perceive as a threat under the guise of "God's will" than there is under the guise of "national interest", both have been set in such a way they interconnect with the only intrinsic and universal plea men of all walks of life are capable to understand. that being self-interest and survival. — Outlander

Liars, or just pursuing their self-interest and survival? All is fair in love and war, right?

I'm inclined to think that God belief was developed not for the sake of explaining human origins and natural phenomena, but primarily for a social group to justify whatever effort was needed to ensure their survival and, ideally, supremacy over others.

But as more and more social groups developed or resorted to this strategy, it's become ineffective, hence "the death of God".

Most philosophical assertions are fallible in one form or another, and they are no exception; they've been contended on innumerable accounts. Posturing and appeals are quintessential of every academic. — Aryamoy Mitra

So an academic is, essentially, a failed politician?

My take is that the modern world has lost all sense of the dimension against which the sense of a 'higher intelligence' can be calibrated because the metaphors by which it is presented are no longer intelligible to us. /.../
— Wayfarer

Where do you get such optimism? Because even though your assessment of the human situation is rather dark, it rests on the assumption that humans are able to care about other than just self-interest and survival, and that such care isn't necessarily detrimental to them -- and that assumption strikes me as distinctly optimistic. — baker

That’s where Darwinism is a negative force, because the implicit assumption is that the only thing that matters is surviving. Hey, we’ve survived. You and I are both examples of ‘most successful pond slime’. So - now what? Is that it?

So - now what? Is that it? — Wayfarer

Is the fact that we can conceive of the insufficiency of life as it is usually lived evidence that there is "more to life"?

How come we can be dissatisfied like that?

Was Nietzsche correct that the ‘death of God’ would usher in a time of meaninglessness and bloodshed? — Tom Storm

Obviously, this is one of Nietzsche's sensationalist remarks, as the God he is saying has died cannot by definition die (or rather die again if one includes Jesus in it).

People these days have alot of trouble understanding what a God is. If the Romans were still in power, they would say Santa Claus is a God. For good reason. Belief in him controls 15% of the world economy. Gods are not born, they are created. Gods do not die, they are lost.

Nietzsche's statement is certainly enough to inflame the imagination of the embittered, which is rather apparently his intent.

There’s some remark from one of the ancients that I can never source, along the lines of, without the consolations of philosophy, man would be the most unfortunate of all creatures. The idea is that because humans can perceive something beyond death and suffering, then the awareness they have of death and suffering, by virtue of their intelligence, is no longer the curse it would be. But that is exactly, precisely the kind of sentiment that Nietzsche repudiates, as far as I know.

If the Romans were still in power, they would say Santa Claus is a God. — ernest meyer

Tosh. The myth of Saint Nicklaus post-dated the Roman Empire by centuries (by Jove!)

From Ecce Homo 1908
“The Transvaluation of all Values, this is my formula for mankind's greatest step towards coming to its[Pg 132]senses—a step which in me became flesh and genius. … Thus, I am necessarily a man of Fate. For when Truth enters the lists against the falsehood of ages, shocks are bound to ensue, and a spell of earthquakes, followed by the transposition of hills and valleys, such as the world has never yet imagined even in its dreams. The concept "politics" then becomes elevated entirely to the sphere of spiritual warfare. All the mighty realms of the ancient order of society are blown into space—for they are all based on falsehood: there will be wars, the like of which have never been seen on earth before. Only from my time and after me will politics on a large scale exist on earth.

By 1900, the world is dominated by the imperialistic powers in Europe, Japan is already well into the process of industrializing, even defeating Russia in 1905. The US by 1890 is the world's largest economy. Germany has been unified by Bismarck, a great deal of the groundwork has been set for WW1. The world is already quite far into the process of prioritising capitalism, politics and science over religion. Politics already exists on a large scale. Populations are booming, Europe has access to overseas manpower, the destructive capacity of their militaries is rising rapidly. There are many ways that one could predict things such as the rise of politics over religion, that wars will kill millions, that politics will exist on a global scale because many of these things are already happening or that which will allow them to happen is happening. So, it's not just the death of God.

I believe Nietzche is not talking about the "falsehood" being something to celebrate, he's talking about a power vacuum created by the death of God, "that shocks are bound to ensue". It is like predicting that the fall of Saddam Hussein will lead to ISIS, in that, such a claim would not be considered praise of Hussein, just recognition that his disappearance will cause a power vacuum which will be fought over by various political factions.

Politics that did seek to give man new meaning and purpose, such as Fascism, Nationalism and Communism, could be interpreted to be filling the void left by religion, Nazism did create a new imperative, a new moral code, a new purpose for Germans and Stalinism and Maoism are very similar. Compared to a monarch who relies on the divine right to rule, it does seem Nietzche was right about that. Today, I'm not sure, to a large extent, I think that capitalism has replaced politics as the new religion. Your imperative and purpose is to acquire material wealth, to obtain the American dream and to succeed.

Political movements focus on allowing people to succeed financially in ways that they've been unable to or how people are presented culturally, largely on the economic and business side of things. Even spats between the US and China are largely based on economic and technological disputes which have financial motivations. Their competition is more focused on being competitive in an economic sense.

I share the sentiments of @James Riley about morality, Western atheism today has shown that "Christian morality" does not rely on religion like Nietzche thought it did. Sure, some components of it are uniquely Christian but much of the basics are just a result of some basic empathy, compassion and a bit of logic too. Things are changing as usual but I don't think the primary catalyst is the death of God anymore.

Nicely put. Thank You.

Nietzsche was a trouble maker. He spoke in aphorisms and metaphors. He obviously did not think God had died and was, to some extent, borrowing that phrase, probably from Hegel. He though the era of the Enlightenment had radically changed the culture and this project would end up in disaster. He was in the end trying to draw our attention to a paradigm shift.

thats interesting, I had forgotten about Hegel, but I dimly remember being told he said it. Do you happen to know the reference?

Could you describe SENSIBLY what you mean to say? You are a bit mystical in your style. I don't do mysticism well-- it's a bunch of lies if you ask me what people substitute for fear of seeing reality. Mysticism is for people who can't handle reality.

He obviously did not think God had died and was, to some extent, borrowing that phrase, probably from Hegel. — Tom Storm

How did you arrive at "obviously he did not think God had died"? Nietzsche painstakingly described precisely what he meant by this, but you just slide over his argument. You are actually right, he viewed god's death as a symbol for people abandoning morals and beliefs provided by and sustained and fostered by the Christian faith practitioners. Nietzsche did not talk of God as a real religious deity; he talked of god as a feature of social influence.

If you did not direct your message at me, but to show like-minded people where I went wrong, which I am (perhaps allegedly) unable to comprehend anyway, then of course please do not feel obliged to explain your message to me.

Do you happen to know the reference? — ernest meyer

The quote I have is:
The pure concept, however, or infinity, as the abyss of nothingness in which all being sinks, must characterize the infinite pain, which previously was only in culture historically and as the feeling on which rests modern religion, the feeling that God Himself is dead...

I think it is from the Phenomenology of Spirit

well thats interesting. Infinite pain, huh.

Death of God — Tom Storm

This may come across as irrelevant but as per Isaac Newton, the English physicist of gravity fame, god has to continually make adjustments to keep the planets in their orbits around the sun. Thus, in a sense, since our solar system is still stable, god must be alive and well but, fortunately or unfortunately, not as smart as we make faer out to be :lol:

:cheer: How does Tom Waits explain evil? "There ain't no Devil, there's just God when he's drunk."

There’s some remark from one of the ancients that I can never source, along the lines of, without the consolations of philosophy, man would be the most unfortunate of all creatures. The idea is that because humans can perceive something beyond death and suffering, then the awareness they have of death and suffering, by virtue of their intelligence, is no longer the curse it would be. But that is exactly, precisely the kind of sentiment that Nietzsche repudiates, as far as I know. — Wayfarer

Can we find some passages that directly speak about this?

All is fair in love and war, right? — baker

'All is fair in love' and 'nothing is fair in war' seems to more sensible I think.