Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Master–Slave Morality

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 67 posts

Re: Master–Slave Morality

#51

Post by 0db532a0 »

KirinDave wrote: post #48
0db532a0 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Contextualise, under Nietzsche's master-slave moralities, the following topics over which there is an abundance of articles and discussions on HN, posted by people who frequent HN: Gender/racial equality, language games over gender, rights to be called one name or another, the elusive one percent, supposed rights to privacy and free speech, the right not to incriminate oneself, the pornification/glorification of work…

So do many philosophical systems. They've been shot down many times before as irrelevant. Because Nietzsche is popular with certain vocal minorities on HN who are eager to make him look more credible than he has ever actually been on this topic is the only reason it's gotten this far, whereas other philosophical frameworks that have been floated here have been moderated away as immaterial. And behold, the mods seem t…

Easiest trick in the book: Associate any idea you disagree with, with "certain vocal minorities". Works wonders on here and Twitbook. I put this in the same bag as I put book reviews which go along the lines of "characters have no depth", and "no plot".

Is the fact that Nietzsche is still studied and cited in a positive light, that books are written on his works by academics at leading universities including Oxford still not sufficient for you, or is it only Frankfurt types you'll openly associate with?

I suppose really though that this isn't important enough for you to look into; rather you'd prefer to run the party line and maintain your job at Googsoft.

You're right in one respect. I wouldn't expect any different from the mods.

Re: Master–Slave Morality

#53

Post by 0db532a0 »

KirinDave wrote: post #48
0db532a0 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Contextualise, under Nietzsche's master-slave moralities, the following topics over which there is an abundance of articles and discussions on HN, posted by people who frequent HN: Gender/racial equality, language games over gender, rights to be called one name or another, the elusive one percent, supposed rights to privacy and free speech, the right not to incriminate oneself, the pornification/glorification of work…

So do many philosophical systems. They've been shot down many times before as irrelevant. Because Nietzsche is popular with certain vocal minorities on HN who are eager to make him look more credible than he has ever actually been on this topic is the only reason it's gotten this far, whereas other philosophical frameworks that have been floated here have been moderated away as immaterial. And behold, the mods seem t…

What the fuck is NRx, mate? Do you even Wittgenstein [1]? Check you nextly!

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_game_(philosophy)

Re: Master–Slave Morality

#54

Post by 0db532a0 »

dr_dshiv wrote: post #50
0db532a0 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Validation of Nietzsche's ideas in more of a modern, scientific context. Thinking about a person's morality as originating from a person's psychology.

What does it mean to scientifically validate Nietzsche's ideas? What invalidated the ideas in the first place? I'm assuming the association with Nazis and Mussolini.

Validating them in the sense of using the ideas as a model to understand our own psychology, and the origins of our moralities. Showing that certain ideas that Nietzsche held around free will and the nature/nurture debate hold up to scientific scrutiny.

Re: Master–Slave Morality

#55

Post by yorwba »

slowenough wrote: post #39
slowenough wrote: post #17

Hypothesis: In a liberal democracy, when leaders adopts a persona of master morality, the slaves are threatened. If leaders instead project a slave morality, the slaves are peaceable and content. But behind the scenes, it seems like a state needs to rule with master morality, but for peaceableness, promote the adoption of slave morality among the slaves. Controversial view: Christianity is a perfect ruling tool becau…

Hypothesis: In a liberal democracy, when leaders adopts a persona of master morality, the slaves are threatened. If leaders instead project a slave morality, the slaves are peaceable and content. But behind the scenes, it seems like a state needs to rule with master morality, but for peaceableness, promote the adoption of slave morality among the slaves. Controversial view: Christianity is a perfect ruling tool becau…

What's the point of replying to your comment with a copy of your comment? Did you want to edit something and didn't know how to do that?

Re: Master–Slave Morality

#56

Post by svara »

woodruffw wrote: post #13

The SEP[1] is probably a better reference than Wikipedia for most philosophical topics, especially for individuals like Nietzsche (who, for various reasons, tends to find himself in the intersection of vaguely reactionary thinkers and people who want to read philosophy without seriously engaging with the rest of the canon). In particular, this Wikipedia article gives the incorrect impression that Nietzsche is especia…

I finally found the time to read the SEP article and all in all I feel the Wikipedia article is a good summary.

Quoting SEP:

"""

Thus, what unifies Nietzsche's seemingly disparate critical remarks — about altruism, happiness, pity, equality, Kantian respect for persons, utilitarianism, etc. — is that he thinks a culture in which such norms prevail as morality will be a culture which eliminates the conditions for the realization of human excellence — the latter requiring, on Nietzsche's view, concern with the self, suffering, a certain stoic indifference, a sense of hierarchy and difference, and the like.

"""

That goes a lot further than just being descriptive, there's a clear value judgement in there.

Re: Master–Slave Morality

#59

Post by KirinDave »

0db532a0 wrote: post #53
KirinDave wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So do many philosophical systems. They've been shot down many times before as irrelevant. Because Nietzsche is popular with certain vocal minorities on HN who are eager to make him look more credible than he has ever actually been on this topic is the only reason it's gotten this far, whereas other philosophical frameworks that have been floated here have been moderated away as immaterial. And behold, the mods seem t…

What the fuck is NRx, mate? Do you even Wittgenstein [1]? Check you nextly! [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_game_(philosophy)

I don't understand why you think I believe in coincidences of that magnitude.

Re: Master–Slave Morality

#60

Post by KirinDave »

0db532a0 wrote: post #51
KirinDave wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So do many philosophical systems. They've been shot down many times before as irrelevant. Because Nietzsche is popular with certain vocal minorities on HN who are eager to make him look more credible than he has ever actually been on this topic is the only reason it's gotten this far, whereas other philosophical frameworks that have been floated here have been moderated away as immaterial. And behold, the mods seem t…

Easiest trick in the book: Associate any idea you disagree with, with "certain vocal minorities". Works wonders on here and Twitbook. I put this in the same bag as I put book reviews which go along the lines of "characters have no depth", and "no plot". Is the fact that Nietzsche is still studied and cited in a positive light, that books are written on his works by academics at leading universities including Oxford s…

> Easiest trick in the book: Associate any idea you disagree with, with "certain vocal minorities". Works wonders on here and Twitbook. I put this in the same bag as I put book reviews which go along the lines of "characters have no depth", and "no plot".

I'm not sure who's literary critique in particular hurt you, but it's irrelevant.

> Is the fact that Nietzsche is still studied and cited in a positive light, that books are written on his works by academics at leading universities including Oxford still not sufficient for you, or is it only Frankfurt types you'll openly associate with?

Ah yes. Yes. The Frankfurt School. Allegiance to that group is always at the root of these problems, isnt it? You are not a "social marxism" conspiracy theorist at all.

> I suppose really though that this isn't important enough for you to look into; rather you'd prefer to run the party line and maintain your job at Googsoft

If you were trying to pretend you weren't in the NRx family of thought, you did a bad job here slipping a Damore reference in.

> You're right in one respect. I wouldn't expect any different from the mods.

Maybe post things that are meaningful about technology and science rather than the crackpot edge of Nietzche's widely rebutted social economics? Next you're going to tell me Burke was right. If you need someone to tell you it's all right, no fear! You've got a lot of other options. Maybe, go to a site like SSC.

Post reply on HN