Beauty no accident.

[Byzantine Prince]

What Nietzsche thought of beauty as it related to the ancients and germans. I found this very interesting today.

47

Beauty no accident. -- The beauty of a race or a family, their grace and graciousness in all gestures, is won by work: like genius, it is the end result of the accumulated work of generations. One must have made great sacrifices to good taste, one must have done much and omitted much, for its sake--seventeenth-century France is admirable in both respects--and good taste must have furnished a principle for selecting company, place, dress, sexual satisfaction; one must have preferred beauty to advantage, habit, opinion, and inertia. Supreme rule of conduct: before oneself too, one must not "let oneself go." The good things are immeasurably costly; and the law always holds that those who have them are different from those who acquire them. All that is good is inherited: whatever is not inherited is imperfect, is a mere beginning.
In Athens, in the time of Cicero (who expresses his surprise about this), the men and youths were far superior in beauty to the women. But what work and exertion in the service of beauty had the male sex there imposed on itself for centuries! For one should make no mistake about the method in this case: a breeding of feelings and thoughts alone is almost nothing (this is the great misunderstanding underlying German education, which is wholly illusory), one must first persuade the body. Strict perseverance in significant and exquisite gestures together with the obligation to live only with people who do not "let themselves go"--that is quite enough for one to become significant and exquisite, and in two or three generations all this becomes inward. It is decisive for the lot of a people and of humanity that culture should begin in the right place--not in the "soul" (as was the fateful superstition of the priests and half-priests): the right place is the body, the gesture, the diet, physiology; the rest follows from that. Therefore the Greeks remain the first cultural event in history: they knew, they did, what was needed; and Christianity, which despised the body, has been the greatest misfortune of humanity so far.

I like it because it's good for my vanity.

[Devastatin Dave]

and Christianity, which despised the body, has been the greatest misfortune of humanity so far.[/CENTER]

Is it really necessary to criticize Christianity for the millionth time. Plus this shows your ognorants, God made us in his image. Unfortunately I cannot outright call you an intolorant, ignorant bigot, but you sure are acting like one.

[Byzantine Prince]

I did not write that. I'm not that crazy to be that offensive.

That's from Nietzsche's Twilight of the Idols.

I see you are offended though, I suggest you don't read that book.

As for man being made in god's image is not really right. God is a believed in as a spirit, not in any physical shape. This is not paganism.

[Sjakihata]

As for man being made in god's image is not really right.

well, in the first book of moses, it literally says "God created man in his image", and after all, the bible is the words of God, no?

[Strike For The South]

BP your love affair with Nietzsche is growing tiresome I can barley understand him therefore how good can the man honestly be

[Steppe Merc]

I disagree. People can be beatiful if their parents are unactractive, or even ugly if their parents are beatiful.
Case in point: men are not beatiful. Yet there are many beatiful women out there.

[Sjakihata]

BP your love affair with Nietzsche is growing tiresome I can barley understand him therefore how good can the man honestly be

In my experience, to read Nietzsche is not like reading other poets or philosophers. Nietzsche uses metaphors and allegories and spins the languages beautifully (I really recommend reading him in german, since it'll make his works much more like poesi, than philosophy). What Im trying to say is, that you dont just sit down and read 200 pages. Read one or two pages and reflect upon - and supplement your reading with secondary litterature as well, that'll greatly increase your experience. However, if you are able to, I suggest wait with the secondary litterature untill you have form an opinion about his works. Dont go biased to it, read it for what it is - then read someone elses opionions.

[Papewaio]

BP your love affair with Nietzsche is growing tiresome I can barley understand him therefore how good can the man honestly be

There is a grain of truth in that statement.

[Papewaio]

Beautiful traits are those that show health, fertility and disease resistance.

What we find beautiful is viable partners for our offspring.

[Byzantine Prince]

I can't agree with that. We find anything that reflects our Selves beautiful.

[Papewaio]

Nope I'm hetro.

[Byzantine Prince]

*sigh* I never took you for a shallow person. I'm a heterosexual too, but that doesn't mean that I don't see beauty in other things then females. Beauty comes from within the person himself because without him it doesn't exist. That's why it's a reflection of the Self.

It's a representation of something within you. So if you find your wife beautiful it's not necessarily because she is beautiful to everyone, like me. She's not. It's because it's an ideal in your mind that makes that person someone beautiful.

[Papewaio]

There is a direct link between what we find beautiful and what is fertile and healthy.

Scientists have found things like high checkbones (and other indicators of beautry) are related to disease resistance.

A whole raft of reserach out there shows that we are attracted to healthy mates.

On the other hand emotionally we look for someone who we can get along with, this often means similar life experiences and or outlooks on life.

[_Martyr_]

I would go along with the more evolutionist pov. What we see/perceive as beauty has to do with evolutionary advantages. Nearly everything we find beautiful relates to the golden ratio, phi (1:1.618).

Its not so much philosophical as it is biological imo.

[Strike For The South]

I find everything beautiful as long as they

1. Have black hair
2. Are about 5'7
3. Have big Lips
4. Have 34DD
5. are loaded
6. And there name is Anglina Jolie

[bmolsson]

I find my notebook rather beautiful.....

[GoreBag]

It's both. One cannot escape his culture, and neither his own body.

[AntiochusIII]

Perhaps we should seperate the concepts of biological beauty, which is most likely unconsciously inspired by instincts, and other, more abstract beauties?

As I can find a book beautiful as different than a lady's beauty.

And hey, for those who deny a man his right to be beautiful, remember that there are a lot of beautiful boys in anime.

[Soulforged]

well, in the first book of moses, it literally says "God created man in his image", and after all, the bible is the words of God, no?

Yes but if you read the little interpretation behind the main text, you'll notice that this means the soul and not the physical image, wich was it's first meaning. But think what will happen to christianity if they interpreted this literally. Let's say the hipotetical case in wich an Alien comes, is he the image of God too? That'll be nuts. Even looking at our own history, taking any given time, let's say the Crusades, chirstians hated muslims, so they couldn't say that the image was physical, because that'll make muslims sons of God too. Back on topic, though this post is not to attack christianity, i tottaly agree with Nietzche, the moral of Chrisitianity has always been based formally on the soul (wich leaded to many absurd ends) and that made many people unhappy. The flesh and the matter is what makes us what we're not an idea of being beatiful based on some superstision. Now: What is being physically beatiful? Well maybe chemistry has some word or two about that, mainly because the decision is on the couple the next human, the fellow man, and not in the mirror.

[GoreBag]

Perhaps we should seperate the concepts of biological beauty, which is most likely unconsciously inspired by instincts, and other, more abstract beauties?

Well, why?

As I can find a book beautiful as different than a lady's beauty.

That's just a question of personal taste with, maybe, a dash of fetishism.

And hey, for those who deny a man his right to be beautiful, remember that there are a lot of beautiful boys in anime.

Baaaaad reference, but still a cultural (or subcultural) expression.

[Bartix]

There is a direct link between what we find beautiful and what is fertile and healthy.

Unless you are pervert fashion designer, which is reason why fashion models are not beautiful but looking like skinny young boys.

Fertility line of reason should mean beauty ideal includes wider hips for woman to give birth.

[Ser Clegane]

Nietzsche uses metaphors and allegories and spins the languages beautifully (I really recommend reading him in german, since it'll make his works much more like poesi, than philosophy).

Indeed.

I found an interesting comment by Johannes Hirschberger on him:

Bei keinem Philosophen ist die Gefahr so groß, daß der Leser sich von der Sprachmusik berauschen läßt und sich mit großen Worten zufrieden gibt. Was man da für Tiefe hält, ist oft genug nur Stimmung und Affekt, die zu suggerieren Nietzsche ein Meister ist.

I will try to translate:

"With no other philosopher there is such a danger that the reader gets intoxicated by the music of the language and is content with great words alone. What is perceived as depth, is often just sentiment and emotion -and Nietzsche is a master in evoking these."

When reading the text that was quoted to start this thread (and even more so when reading the German original of the text) I tend to agree with this assessment.

Style over actual content - and I have to admit that I am a bit undecided whether the text is just a lengthy introduction to deliver an attack on Christianity in the end, or whether the last sentence is a kind of afterthought along the lines of "BTW, did I already tell you today that I hate Christianity?".

BTW, considering how some patrons seem to idolize certain philosophers, the title of this specific work of Nietzsche ("Götzendämmerung" in German) has a nice ironic touch.

Oh, well...

[Adrian II]

Style over actual content - and I have to admit that I am a bit undecided whether the text is just a lengthy introduction to deliver an attack on Christianity in the end, or whether the last sentence is a kind of afterthought along the lines of "BTW, did I already tell you today that I hate Christianity?".

Nietzsche had to deal with a different kind of Christianity than we are dealing with today. It was practically all-pervasive in ruling circles, academia and public life. Christian notions underpinned just about any debate, even in philosophy. For someone to go and sweat Christianity out of his system, to rid his mind of all those deeply-ingrained religious notions on which children in his day and age were raised from day one, was a heroic effort. I have do doubt that it contributed to his eventual descent into psychosis. He was a true hero -- which should not deter us from criticising Nietzsche in turn, of course. More than any other nineteenth century philosopher Nietzsche paved the way both for a comprehensive criticism of Christianity and for a modern philosophy that acknowledges God's death or absence and tries to absorb the consequences for ontology, ethics, and society at large. We are still struggling with this, witness the many discussions of ethical issues and their religious connotations in this forum alone. So let us take our hats off for this great thinker and poet, then rip him to pieces if need be; Nietzsche himself would not expect to be spared.

[Byzantine Prince]

Yeah Nietzsche was a hero. No other philosopher has had as much influence on other postmodern thought. He is the incarnation of Schopenhauer without the worthless pessimism, therefore the best.
Nihilism without the circular logic and skepticism.

Also people didn't listen to him until waaaay after he died. Everything he wrote was for him first and foremost. Very few other people read his work back then. The world was not ready for his poeticly written, vitriolic attacks on herd morality and christianity.

[Sjakihata]

BP how old are you?

[Devastatin Dave]

Also people didn't listen to him until waaaay after he died.

Not to go off topic, but isn't kind of sad that people, whether it be a great mind, poet, painter, or world leader rarely get any credit till they are dead. I wonder how these posthumously famous people would feel about their fame, whether it would be that of pride or disgust?

[Adrian II]

(..) his poeticly written, vitriolic attacks on herd morality and christianity.

Speaking of which, a bit more perspective on Nietzsche could not hurt. Nietzsche himself struggled with more than just the absence of God. What made his work (and sanity) much more problematic is the notion that man had actually killed God with his bare hands, or at least that is how it felt to him. Apart from the sentation of a horrible loss, he felt a profound guilt as well which he expressed in the famous words from Thus Spoke Zarathustra:

God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. Where shall we, murderers of all murderers, find consolation? That which was the holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet possessed has bled to death under our knives. Who will wipe this blood off us? With what water could we purify ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we need to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we not ourselves become gods simply to be worthy of it?

And while we are on the subject of herd mentality: as a socialist I have learned a lot from Nietzsche's detailed dissection and scathing criticism of socialism, which he held to be just another spring-board for the physically, socially and intellectually weak in their fight against the strong, energetic, individualistic mindset he advocated. Reading Nietzsche on that subject when I was, oh, 20 years old or thereabout definitely put me off all revolutionairy dreams and rhetoric. Many notions of a 'better' society are secretly or openly based on revenge, jealousy and irrational hatred. Nietzsche alerted me to that. A truly great mind.

[Redleg]

Reading anything by Nietzsche in its English Translations is like reading the writtings of an individual who had severe mental problems and was trying to capture them down on paper.

It leads one to question the rationality of his work.

Nietzsche endured periods of illness during much of his adult life. In 1889, after the completion of Ecce Homo, his health rapidly declined until he collapsed in Turin. Shortly before his collapse, according to one account, he embraced a horse in the streets of Turin because it had been flogged by its owner. Thereafter, he was brought to his room and spent several days in a state of ecstasy writing letters to various friends, signing them "Dionysus" or "The Crucified." He gradually became less and less coherent and almost entirely uncommunicative. His close friend Peter Gast, who was also an apt composer, observed that he retained the ability to improvise beautifully on the piano for some months after his breakdown, but this too eventually left him.

The initial emotional symptoms of Nietzsche's breakdown, as evidenced in the letters he sent to his friends in the few days of lucidity remaining to him, bear many similarities to the ecstatic writings of religious mystics; however, this comparison is merely provisional and does not propose to demonstrate any supposed views held by Nietzsche. These letters remain the best evidence available for Nietzsche's own opinion on the nature of his breakdown. Nietzsche's letters describe his experience as a radical breakthrough in which he rejoices, rather than laments. Most Nietzsche commentators find the issue of Nietzsche's breakdown and "insanity" irrelevant to his work as a philosopher, for the tenability of arguments and ideas are more important than the author. There are some, however, including Georges Bataille, who insist that Nietzsche's mental breakdown be considered.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nietzsche

One should note this when reading and attempting to follow Nietzsche philisophy. Or you can try reading the writtings of any severely depressed individual and get an understanding of this unique problem of irrational thought. Try it sometime its more troubling then reading Nietzsche.

[Byzantine Prince]

Nietzsche went insane because he had intense migranes, and poor vision from crappy neural connections, not because he simply thought he had killed god. That was a metaphor anyways.

I don't know why we are talking about nietzsche, this was about beauty. All the christians are so offended by that last part, I don't think they want to read the rest of that book. Especially avoid this one: the anti-christ

Anyways I only wanted this to be about beauty and how it is cultivated with the generations. If there weren't painters advance their craft before michelagelo, michelangelo wouldn't have learned how to paint. If we all let ourselves degenrate, we only do a dis-service to the future generations.

[Redleg]

Nietzsche went insane because he had intense migranes, and poor vision from crappy neural connections, not because he simply thought he had killed god. That was a metaphor anyways.

Don't get defense Byzantine Prince its not an attack on Nietzsche - just that one must question the rationality of Nietzsche philisophy. Going insane the way Nietzsche did comes from more then intense migranes and poor vision.

I don't know why we are talking about nietzsche, this was about beauty. All the christians are so offended by that last part, I don't think they want to read the rest of that book. Especially avoid this one: the anti-christ

The discussion must include Nietzsche philisophy since you primarily quoted him in your very first post, with very little of a way of direction by you on what way you wanted the discussion to procede.

Oh by the way I have read Nietzsche - and find him very confusing and sometimes enlightened. But its not a philisohy I buy wholesale into like you seem to.

Anyways I only wanted this to be about beauty and how it is cultivated with the generations. If there weren't painters advance their craft before michelagelo, michelangelo wouldn't have learned how to paint. If we all let ourselves degenrate, we only do a dis-service to the future generations.

Then you should of considered writing it like this verus just quoting Nietzsche.