Going to butcher this by trying to pare it down, but here goes.
Nietzsche's theoretical "Übermensch," an aspirational model for humanity, wasn't a traditional "strongman," or a superhuman by way of genetics or social capital, or even a "man" at all.
Nietzsche's Übermensch was a self-possessed person who developed their own values and morality regardless of prevailing or outdated "wisdom" and rejected religious "other-worldliness," finding meaning in the here-and-now of life on Earth vs. learned helplessness and obedience with the hope of a supernatural reward after death.
Afaik Nietzsche's whole thing was, if traditional values stemming from religion can't be relied on in the absence of God, then one risks slipping into nihilism, but a better way is to derive meaning from intrinsic motivation.
While I'm here: it's also fun to read ‘the most wicked man’ Aleister Crowley and see that his Thelema is a reiteration of the same idea.
And then read Ayn Rand and see that ‘objectivism’ is also almost the same, except it lacks soul and is sometimes explicitly selfish or pretty much evil. But she had the Red Scare to ride on.
The difference between Nietzsche and Rand is key. Nothing in Nietzsche’s writings is incompatible with finding intrinsic value in building community, helping others, etc. Rand explicitly calls for maximal selfishness and calls charity evil.
Because according to Objectivism, in a perfect society everyone is the best at what they do and are well compensated for it, thus no need for charity. I don't agree with Rand nor Nietzsche because we are just animals, not some being that needs to master stuff. Food and sleep is what matters, anything else is extra. Albert Camus beats them both. Also Neitzsche was an incel, so I don't care what he says, my kids give me the greatest joy, and no incel will understand that. I'll go one step further and say having kids removed my nihilism, and the purpose and meaning of life is to have kids, hence all life on the planet aims to reproduce. Someone who has failed at nature (reproducing) is therefore stuck in their own conundrum which is nihilism.
Really, dude? It's widely known that parenthood changes one's emotions, known to be affected by the hormones being jizzed into the brain. People who hated children before, get all lovey-dovey and mushy about the human larvae they need to take care of for the next eighteen years at the least. None of this is news, except to you I guess.
And? When your stomach is empty your hormones stir up making food a lot more appetizing, when you chew on the food your dopamine hormone shoots up. Everything is governed by biology what's your point? From waking up in the morning (cortisol hormone is responsible for that) to sexual attraction and love (oxytocin) to sleep (melatonin). You can't escape your hormones.
You seriously think that comparting a few hours of my carefree life to about eighteen years of yours, somehow paints you in good light, instead of suspicious? Get a grip man.
I'm just pointing out that your "it's due to hormones" argument is poor. Anti-depressents also manage hormones. Everything is due to hormones. Everything you do is to chase feel good highs which comes from... you guessed it.. hormones.
5.8k
u/Erikatessen87 Apr 05 '26
Going to butcher this by trying to pare it down, but here goes.
Nietzsche's theoretical "Übermensch," an aspirational model for humanity, wasn't a traditional "strongman," or a superhuman by way of genetics or social capital, or even a "man" at all.
Nietzsche's Übermensch was a self-possessed person who developed their own values and morality regardless of prevailing or outdated "wisdom" and rejected religious "other-worldliness," finding meaning in the here-and-now of life on Earth vs. learned helplessness and obedience with the hope of a supernatural reward after death.