Auditory meditative inducement into THE UNKNOWN http://www.archive.org/details/HoofprintsOnTheCeilingOfYourMind
Multiple things I wanted to bring up in regards to the Genealogy
GUT: The ending remark of afro 24---It was like Nietzsche knew what I was thinking all the time and really just said it---From the moment faith in the God of the ascetic idea is denied, A NEW PROBLEM ARISES: THAT OF THE VALUE OF TRUTH
THE WILL TO TRUTH REQUIRES A CRITIQUE--LET US DEFINE OUR OWN TASK--THE VALUE OF TRUTH MUST FOR ONCE BE EXPERIMENTALLY CALLED INTO QUESTION
--Walter Kaufmann....I don't think that footnote 14 was really required but thanks for the pointer.
As if I couldn't have been in more agreement with F.N,
Art to say in advance, for I shall some day return to this subject at a greater length--art, in which precisely the lie is the sanctified and the will to deception has a good conscience, is much more fundamentally opposed to the ascetic ideal that is science
Other than this initial rapturous response though--I am interested in gaining some additional perspectives on a particular perspective of the GOM (which hopefully ya'll will respond to...)
A friend of mine who has interests similar in mine, decided to re-read the GOM so that we could have a discussion about it. His first question he posed to me was, "So what do you think a Nietzschean society would look like--what kind of political/societal structure do you think he would support?" Now reading Nietzsche one theme which I have been unsure of how to really deal with is this weak/strong power dynamic... It seems to be (and this person was thinking in terms of) was that this could somehow be interpreted as an Ayn Randian/free-market capitalist situation. So namely Nietzsche would agree with this rhetoric of self-responsibility and the strong survive and prosper/ while the weak might die off. I could see where he was coming from (my interlocutor, a Foucaultdian mind you ) -- and I am interested in seeing what other people's perspective was in this respect.
Anyway, so as this conversation continued, we identified the fact that we had very different interests in as far as how we were reading the text. Namely, I considered how this text affected myself--how I aligned/misaligned with the slave morality. And this is how I usually approach texts--how does this describe/not describe my orientation with the world--is this a way in which I think I should orient myself in the world. While my interlocutor admitted that he immediately thought of how this text would look if everyone viewed the world/knowledge/them"self"ves/others/etc. in this manner. He even quoted the proverb--"do unto others,,,,,,,,,"-and I said well that;s kind of the slave morality and he agreed, that he was not sure if necessarily sure if the slave morality was the wrong way to go.
So long story short, I guess what I am wondering is:
How can this text manifest itself in politics/society?
CAN it be?--This is something which I found myself bringing up in this argument, should we even be trying to think in terms of a "Nietzschean state"