It gets a bit tedious having to rebut this psychopathic philosophy but its necessary because the dissemination of these ideas generally is laying the ground for a return to a new Putin like feudal political model.
Jonathan's buddhist journey says a lot. The first phase of meditation path shows people that so much of their belief system is based in neurosis. But what then? Jonathan quit early.
Jonathan seems blissfully unaware of how his talk is another expression of victim culture. But this time we are all victims of a "slave morality" that prevents us from achieving our true greatness.
Sorry Jonathan but talented men and women are not misled by the christian demand to be nice to everyone. They are all out there doing it as should be obvious to anyone with eyes to see.
The discussion of Beethoven is stupid. What was Beethoven without an audience - that can afford tickets? What is music without the collective emotional resonance that characterises humanity. For that matter, what is Beethoven without an orchestra of dedicated and talented musicians?
The globalised world may be making billionaires out of people with particular talents. But what is Paypal, apart from a moderately useful payment system, without a thriving popular market?
The better model of the higher person is Tim Berners Lee, who gave his internet code for the common good.
What is being set out here and with the Ayn Rand crowd, is the groundwork for the billionaire class to make themselves unaccountable to society as a whole. It is a philosophy of anti-democracy. Only those who want to be slaves subscribe to it.
It is absolutely clear that you have no clue about Nietzsche's philosophy, the man Nietzsche admires is the truly creative and free spirit, not the billionaires, not the Putins, not the camel or the lion but the child.
You, like many others, have simply been spooked by Nietzsche's careless and provocative approach.
This is why you feel the need to resort to alarm the world of the dangers of this philosophy, capable of bringing a "Putin like feudal political model" (This is truly a schizo opinion).
That's why you disregard it's message not on the basis of it's inherent possible validity or invalidity, but on the possibility of danger that it might cause:
"Is it okay to believe this? Is it okay to hold this opinion? Is it socially acceptable?"
Your sole purpose is to stop dancing stars wherever you see them by deeming them dangerous, crazy, psychotic etc.
You are the perfect example of the Nietzschean Last Man.
Gio, let's not throw stones in a glass house shall we?
Nietzsche's approach was certainly careless and provocative, as well as classist and wrong. All Nietzsche really does with his genealogy of morality is say that the poor and religious are pitiful and that those who strive for power achieve it because they ought to.
He also claims that right and wrong were initially determined by the powerful: meaning that what's strong was once what was good and what's weak was once what was bad. (Ahistorical opinion by the way.) He means that goodness had nothing to do with altruism originally. He then claims that the weak and poor have "revalued" our values such that the affluent and powerful now seem bad.
Does that narrative of human history seem true to you? That our evolution was successful because higher humans led us?
Are higher humans brought about by dominating one another or by collaborative work? Economically speaking, the narrative is clear: we're all better off working together. Our morality has long been one that encourages the generation of healthy collaborative communities, and it's doubtful that we've gotten this far by encouraging the great to be even greater.
Nietzsche seems to misunderstand that the weakest people are those that need to dominate others in order to feel fulfilled. The hardest things we do in life are not achieved from a position of advantage, nor is it true that positions of advantage are mostly won from difficult work. (It's largely luck.)
The dancing stars in our world may be five-star generals to you, but I'll back the soldier who jumps on a grenade to save others as the "higher human" any day.
Jonathan Bi tells tall tales about having learned of asceticism in Tibet, but his performative speeches and the aristocratic intonations he attempts to include in his voice tell another story.
There's also a good reason that Nietzsche was the philosopher the German National Socialist Party co-opted the most. (in the early 1900s)
This lecture is a great and accessible exposition of Nietzsche's thought. Agreeing or disagreeing isn't the point--Bi and Nietzsche add depth to any discussion of morality. Nicely done.
I appreciate the amount of work that went into researching, writing, and presenting this lecture (as well as the design of your Substack site). This lecture has been transformative for my sense of self. I am delighted that our paths crossed on Substack and look forward to your next post.
Nothing personal, but i am at a juncture of life where i see that your presentation of ideas is designed to appeal to certain mass of population purely by presenting counter factuals as truths … or the counter narrative … to arouse attention in those sleeping minds who are so used to altruism, morality and other things you mentioned… in a way its good …to show the other side of a coin .. but pursuading them merely by hiding behind the halo of giants .. doesnt seem right to me … idolising the assholeness of beethoven and other characterstics of other people i dont think it will lead to any better society in logn term .. may cause some stirring in short term for sure in some peoples mind. Or i am completely wrong and your whole objective is to wake those people up then you are on right path but with wrong vehicle. I 100% agree on many things you said liking herd mentality, class envy and deepst desire … but praising the arrogance in someone is never right… Arrogance is using nitrous fuel where just petrol would have sufficed and causing uneccesaary ruckus. sometimes arrogance is good if you truely want to test your idea… but be aware if 50% of population began testign there ideas and showing arrogance .. it will be hell .. chaos would be inevitable… I think you should definetly read and understand chaos and complexity dynamics. IMO most solutions for society will come from intersection of Economics/Complexity physics/Psychology and will need stories and other arts to create the life.
It gets a bit tedious having to rebut this psychopathic philosophy but its necessary because the dissemination of these ideas generally is laying the ground for a return to a new Putin like feudal political model.
Jonathan's buddhist journey says a lot. The first phase of meditation path shows people that so much of their belief system is based in neurosis. But what then? Jonathan quit early.
Jonathan seems blissfully unaware of how his talk is another expression of victim culture. But this time we are all victims of a "slave morality" that prevents us from achieving our true greatness.
Sorry Jonathan but talented men and women are not misled by the christian demand to be nice to everyone. They are all out there doing it as should be obvious to anyone with eyes to see.
The discussion of Beethoven is stupid. What was Beethoven without an audience - that can afford tickets? What is music without the collective emotional resonance that characterises humanity. For that matter, what is Beethoven without an orchestra of dedicated and talented musicians?
The globalised world may be making billionaires out of people with particular talents. But what is Paypal, apart from a moderately useful payment system, without a thriving popular market?
The better model of the higher person is Tim Berners Lee, who gave his internet code for the common good.
What is being set out here and with the Ayn Rand crowd, is the groundwork for the billionaire class to make themselves unaccountable to society as a whole. It is a philosophy of anti-democracy. Only those who want to be slaves subscribe to it.
It is absolutely clear that you have no clue about Nietzsche's philosophy, the man Nietzsche admires is the truly creative and free spirit, not the billionaires, not the Putins, not the camel or the lion but the child.
You, like many others, have simply been spooked by Nietzsche's careless and provocative approach.
This is why you feel the need to resort to alarm the world of the dangers of this philosophy, capable of bringing a "Putin like feudal political model" (This is truly a schizo opinion).
That's why you disregard it's message not on the basis of it's inherent possible validity or invalidity, but on the possibility of danger that it might cause:
"Is it okay to believe this? Is it okay to hold this opinion? Is it socially acceptable?"
Your sole purpose is to stop dancing stars wherever you see them by deeming them dangerous, crazy, psychotic etc.
You are the perfect example of the Nietzschean Last Man.
Gio, let's not throw stones in a glass house shall we?
Nietzsche's approach was certainly careless and provocative, as well as classist and wrong. All Nietzsche really does with his genealogy of morality is say that the poor and religious are pitiful and that those who strive for power achieve it because they ought to.
He also claims that right and wrong were initially determined by the powerful: meaning that what's strong was once what was good and what's weak was once what was bad. (Ahistorical opinion by the way.) He means that goodness had nothing to do with altruism originally. He then claims that the weak and poor have "revalued" our values such that the affluent and powerful now seem bad.
Does that narrative of human history seem true to you? That our evolution was successful because higher humans led us?
Are higher humans brought about by dominating one another or by collaborative work? Economically speaking, the narrative is clear: we're all better off working together. Our morality has long been one that encourages the generation of healthy collaborative communities, and it's doubtful that we've gotten this far by encouraging the great to be even greater.
Nietzsche seems to misunderstand that the weakest people are those that need to dominate others in order to feel fulfilled. The hardest things we do in life are not achieved from a position of advantage, nor is it true that positions of advantage are mostly won from difficult work. (It's largely luck.)
The dancing stars in our world may be five-star generals to you, but I'll back the soldier who jumps on a grenade to save others as the "higher human" any day.
Jonathan Bi tells tall tales about having learned of asceticism in Tibet, but his performative speeches and the aristocratic intonations he attempts to include in his voice tell another story.
There's also a good reason that Nietzsche was the philosopher the German National Socialist Party co-opted the most. (in the early 1900s)
This lecture is a great and accessible exposition of Nietzsche's thought. Agreeing or disagreeing isn't the point--Bi and Nietzsche add depth to any discussion of morality. Nicely done.
I appreciate the amount of work that went into researching, writing, and presenting this lecture (as well as the design of your Substack site). This lecture has been transformative for my sense of self. I am delighted that our paths crossed on Substack and look forward to your next post.
I don't agree with some points but all in all, this was very informative and enjoyable. But now what am I supposed to do with this information? Haha
great video.
Wow… what a piece.
Kudos
THX for opening a new door
Excellent read!
Nothing personal, but i am at a juncture of life where i see that your presentation of ideas is designed to appeal to certain mass of population purely by presenting counter factuals as truths … or the counter narrative … to arouse attention in those sleeping minds who are so used to altruism, morality and other things you mentioned… in a way its good …to show the other side of a coin .. but pursuading them merely by hiding behind the halo of giants .. doesnt seem right to me … idolising the assholeness of beethoven and other characterstics of other people i dont think it will lead to any better society in logn term .. may cause some stirring in short term for sure in some peoples mind. Or i am completely wrong and your whole objective is to wake those people up then you are on right path but with wrong vehicle. I 100% agree on many things you said liking herd mentality, class envy and deepst desire … but praising the arrogance in someone is never right… Arrogance is using nitrous fuel where just petrol would have sufficed and causing uneccesaary ruckus. sometimes arrogance is good if you truely want to test your idea… but be aware if 50% of population began testign there ideas and showing arrogance .. it will be hell .. chaos would be inevitable… I think you should definetly read and understand chaos and complexity dynamics. IMO most solutions for society will come from intersection of Economics/Complexity physics/Psychology and will need stories and other arts to create the life.
"I am too convinced by Nietzsche to be convinced by the rhetoric of the sick." Masterful and wonderfully put together.
Excellent article