Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
i will learn about everything eventually, would you excuse me the delay that hath occured?life is known to occasionally get in the way of knowledge.at least i admitted i know little to nothing of their beliefs?painted wolf said:HelpMe, perhaps you should do some reserch on them before you condemn them to 'wrongness'
wa:do
Dr. Berkeley is that you? If so how is the Visa going?Berkeley said:Nietzsche argued for a pathos of authenticity - any philosophy that seeks to explain how the world is and the best way to live, would be counter to Nietzsche's cause.
Neitzsche was influenced by pagan imagery but he was not a follower of any religion (to be so would be anti-Neitzschian). Like other existentialist writers, Nietzsche used his writings to entice (from the French to set on fire) his readers into thinking about their existence and lives. His work is designed to encourage you to reflect on your current beliefs - not to replace them with his beliefs.
'God is dead' refers to the death of Christian influence on Western philosophy. Before Descartes, scholars believed that Aristotle (who was not a Christian) had provided all the answers. Descartes is considered the father of modern philosophy because he doubted. All philosophy after Descartes required us to think for ourselves rather than leaving the last word with God.
Neitzsche's writings appear similar to Satanic writings because they turn Christian ideals on their head. This is key to Nietzsche's philosophy - if you do not believe in a Christian God, what reason do you have to follow Christian morality? If God is dead (in that we do not use Him to resolve philosophical discussion) how do we justify our current moral beliefs. Furthermore, how do we justify our metaphysical and epistemological beliefs?
Neitzsche shows similarities with Satanists in some areas but equally he shows similarites with atheist political organisations (like free-spirit anarchists 300 years before his time).
Linking the names of respected philosophers to political/religious theories in order to give some authority to these theories - is decidedly anti-Neitzschian.