Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

22890Re: [existlist] Re: Attention All Nihilists

Expand Messages
  • Mattlzpf@aol.com
    Nov 16 6:14 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      > Apart from the ascetic ideal, man, the animal man, had no meaning so far.
      > His existence on earth contained no goal; "why man at all?"—was a question
      > without an answer; the will for man and earth was lacking; behind every great
      > human destiny there sounded as a refrain a yet greater "in vain!" This is
      > precisely what the ascetic ideal means: that something was lacking, that man was
      > surrounded by a fearful void—he did not know how to justify, to account for,
      > to affirm himself, he suffered from the problem of his meaning. He also
      > suffered otherwise, he was in the main a sickly animal: but his problem was not
      > suffering itself, but that there was no answer to the crying question, "why do I
      > suffer?"
      > Man, the bravest of animals and the one most accustomed to suffering, does
      > not repudiate suffering as such; he desires it, he even seeks it out, provided
      > he is shown a meaning for it, a purpose of suffering. The meaninglessness of
      > suffering, not suffering itself, was the curse that lay over mankind so far—
      > and the ascetic ideal offered man meaning! It was the only meaning offered so
      > far; any meaning is better than none at all; the ascetic ideal was in every
      > sense the "Faute de mieux" par excellence so far [Faute de mieux means "for
      > want of something better." The italicized phrase means something like "the
      > pre-eminent next-best-thing."]. In it, suffering was interpreted; the tremendous
      > void seemed to have been filled; the door was closed to any kind of suicidal
      > nihilism. This interpretation—there is no doubt of it—brought fresh
      > suffering with it, deeper, more inward, more poisonous, more life-destructive
      > suffering: it placed all suffering under the perspective of guilt.
      > But all this notwithstanding —man was saved thereby, he possessed a meaning,
      > he was henceforth no longer like a leaf in the wind, a plaything of nonsense—
      > the "sense-less"— he could now will something; no matter at first to what
      > end, why, with what he willed: the will itself was saved.
      > We can no longer conceal from ourselves what is expressed by all that
      > willing which has taken its direction from the ascetic ideal: this hatred of the
      > human, and even more of the animal, and more still of the material, this horror
      > of the senses, of reason itself, this fear of happiness and beauty, this
      > longing to get away from all appearance, change, becoming, death, wishing, from
      > longing itself—all this means—let us dare to grasp it—a will to nothingness,
      > an aversion to life, a rebellion against the most fundamental
      > presuppositions of life, but it is and remains a will! ... And, to repeat in conclusion
      > what I said at the beginning: rather than want nothing, man even wants
      > nothingness. —
      > "
      -- from Toward a Genealogy of Morals

      maybe he does what nothingness huh?


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Show all 28 messages in this topic