When he excused himself for not re-doing the first lecture for the recordings since it was "too tiring" I thought that was kinda lame. I get it now. I really do.
Bro... where are the claps and roars at the end of the lecture!? This class is so passive. Raymond is up there slaying this shit and these kids don’t even know.
- a society has different moralities within itself that are in tension with each other. Society is plural, but some views are more hegemonic/ dominant - the concept of good has two opposites: bad and evil, so it’s not a unitarian concept - to understand western morality you have to understand the history of morality - 18th century: trying to obtain concepts as clear and defined as possible. Focused on Plato’s dialogues (dialectics)/ analysis. - 19th century: Plato’s dialogues lead nowhere and are self-destructive. Plato’s myths (mythos = what people say, nor true nor false) are more important than dialectics. - Myths are not connected with abstract ideas, but with individual stories (how do you define justice -> individual story about justice). Myths aren’t just historical facts, but stories that could happen to anyone with the same characteristics as the characters - The birth of tragedy: rehabilitate mythical forms of thinking as opposed to conceptual forms of thinking
- conceptual: if you are x you will do this - history: one fact after the other, not organized by logical necessity - myths: an individual did x, organized by logical necessity.
- myths are templates that can be applied again and again - myths talk about 2 groups of people: hegemonic ones (masters), oppressed ones (slaves). Masters (gods and powerful people) have they’re own concept of what is good, and observe that not everybody lives a good life (looser nature). Bad life is for people who lost the race of life, and there is nothing morally wrong with that, it’s just life. - there are degrees of good and bad, it’s not a dichotomy
If I were his student I would know that regardless of how complex the topic is , he will make sure I understand it, which is what all teachers should be trying to do . 👍
He was rolling at end... Last ten minutes is gold and wish he didn't run out of time and abrupy stop. I believe he was discussing nietszches slave morality theory
Hi Hugo! Here's the syllabus for the 3rd year 'European Philosophy' module, which is where Nietzsche fits into the Cambridge undergrad degree www.phil.cam.ac.uk/curr-students/II/II-outlines-reading-lists/paper4-europeanphil
The word "schlecht" in German used to be ambigious. It firstly meant "common,odinary,simple" in contrast to "noble". Secondly it meant "bad or evil". I think that Nietzsche was well aware of this ambiguity. Nowadays "schlecht" only means "bad". "Ordinary" means "schlicht". The vowal has shifted from e to i, so that these words are pronouced differently.
I have heard Nietzsche defended as NOT the philosopher honored by the Nazis. For instance, he wasn't anti-semitic. However, it is easy to see why Hitler would prefer a philosopher who believes in a master slave society.
Hitler's "honoring" of Nietzsche began and ended with inviting his horrible sister to official ceremonies. He had no patience for Nietzsche's philosophy.
my profs. were so lazy compared to this guy. They just sorta stood up there speaking as casually as they could to save energy for they private student meetings, I guess.
A lot of this seems like common sense, or that it’s a predictable logical trajectory given knowledge of the initial premise. Or should I say it’s “appropriate” or a “necessity” for someone like Nietzsche to develop thoughts like this.
Nobody in the room knows basic math terminology. Moving from "5" to "-5" is not "changing the coefficient". It is "changing the SIGN". "Vorzeichen wechseln" = "changing the sign."
A good series of lectures and some interesting insights, but also some very mistaken and reductionist takes on many of Nietzsche's concepts. This professor is no doubt a Thoroughly Modern individual, with all the mind poison that entails.
Jesus and Christianity it's precisely because the Hebrews were slaves to the Egyptians, Babylonians, and Romans that they came up with the moral ethical system that they did. Jesus was a jew and so his teachings are of the same genealogical tradition.
