What do you think?
Rate this book
The Anti-Christ
The reference to the Antichrist is not intended to refer to the biblical Antichrist but is rather an attack on the "slave morality" and apathy of Western Christianity. Nietzsche's basic claim is that Christianity is a poisoner of western culture and perversion of the words of and practice of Jesus. Throughout the text, Nietzsche is very critical of institutionalized religion and its priest class, from which he himself was descended. The majority of the book is a systematic attack upon the interpretations of Christ's words by St. Paul and those who followed him. Nietzsche claimed in the Foreword to have written the book for a very limited readership. In order to understand the book, he asserted that the reader "... must be honest in intellectual matters to the point of hardness to so much as endure my seriousness, my passion." The reader should be above politics and nationalism. Also, the usefulness or harmfulness of truth should not be a concern. Characteristics such as "Strength which prefers questions for which no one today is sufficiently daring; courage for the forbidden" are also needed. He disdained all other readers.
126 pages, Paperback
First published June 2, 1895
About the author
Friedrich Nietzsche
3,273 books22k followersFriedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (Ph.D., Philology, Leipzig University, 1869) was a German philosopher of the late 19th century who challenged the foundations of Christianity and traditional morality. He was interested in the enhancement of individual and cultural health, and believed in life, creativity, power, and the realities of the world we live in, rather than those situated in a world beyond. Central to his philosophy is the idea of “life-affirmation,” which involves a questioning of all doctrines that drain life's expansive energies, however socially prevalent those views might be. Often referred to as one of the first existentialist philosophers along with Søren Kierkegaard (1813–1855).
From the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
From the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,649 reviews
September 12, 2021
Der Antichrist = The Antichrist, Friedrich Nietzsche
The Antichrist is a book by the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, originally published in 1895.
In The Antichrist, Nietzsche presents a highly controversial view of Christianity as a damaging influence upon western civilization that must come to an end.
Regardless of ones religious or philosophical point of view, The Antichrist makes for an engaging philosophical discourse.
تاریخ نخستین خوانش: روز دوم ماه می در سال 2000میلادی
عنوان: دجال؛ نویسنده: فریدریش ویلهلم نیچه؛ مترجم: عبدالعلی دستغیب؛ تهران، آگاه، 1352، در 154ص؛ کتابنامه دارد، موضوع ردیه ها، و دفاعیه ها در باره ی مسیحیت، از نویسندگان آلمان سده 19م
عنوان: دجال - تلاش برای نقد مسیحیت؛ نویسنده: فریدریش ویلهلم نیچه؛ مترجم: سعید فیروزآبادی؛ تهران، جامی، 1386، در 154ص؛ کتابنامه بصورت زیرنویس؛ شابک 9789647468954؛ چاپ چهارم 1398؛
عبارت «دجال» در عهد جدید، چندین بار، تنها در رساله ی «یوحنا» آمده است؛ و مقصود آن کسی است، که با مسیح ضدیت میکند؛ و مدعی میشود که خود به جای «مسیح» است؛ «نیچه» میکوشند در «دجال»، مقدمات بیگانگی انسان، با خواسته ها و حقایق زندگی را، به روشنی نشان دهند؛ راهنمایی میکند، تا به انسانی آفرینشگر و «ابر انسان» بدل شویم، تا خویشتن را از تباهی رها سازیم؛ ایشان میگویند: «آدمی نیاز به ژرفنگری و چشمانی بیناتر برای رسیدن به ارزشهای والای انسانی دارد.»؛
تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 19/07/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ 20/06/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی
The Antichrist is a book by the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, originally published in 1895.
In The Antichrist, Nietzsche presents a highly controversial view of Christianity as a damaging influence upon western civilization that must come to an end.
Regardless of ones religious or philosophical point of view, The Antichrist makes for an engaging philosophical discourse.
تاریخ نخستین خوانش: روز دوم ماه می در سال 2000میلادی
عنوان: دجال؛ نویسنده: فریدریش ویلهلم نیچه؛ مترجم: عبدالعلی دستغیب؛ تهران، آگاه، 1352، در 154ص؛ کتابنامه دارد، موضوع ردیه ها، و دفاعیه ها در باره ی مسیحیت، از نویسندگان آلمان سده 19م
عنوان: دجال - تلاش برای نقد مسیحیت؛ نویسنده: فریدریش ویلهلم نیچه؛ مترجم: سعید فیروزآبادی؛ تهران، جامی، 1386، در 154ص؛ کتابنامه بصورت زیرنویس؛ شابک 9789647468954؛ چاپ چهارم 1398؛
عبارت «دجال» در عهد جدید، چندین بار، تنها در رساله ی «یوحنا» آمده است؛ و مقصود آن کسی است، که با مسیح ضدیت میکند؛ و مدعی میشود که خود به جای «مسیح» است؛ «نیچه» میکوشند در «دجال»، مقدمات بیگانگی انسان، با خواسته ها و حقایق زندگی را، به روشنی نشان دهند؛ راهنمایی میکند، تا به انسانی آفرینشگر و «ابر انسان» بدل شویم، تا خویشتن را از تباهی رها سازیم؛ ایشان میگویند: «آدمی نیاز به ژرفنگری و چشمانی بیناتر برای رسیدن به ارزشهای والای انسانی دارد.»؛
تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 19/07/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ 20/06/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی
August 3, 2011
I first read this book when i was in high school back the the late 80's. I was not certain about my philosophical or theological viewpoints at the time, and I expected to be met with a well thought out argument against Christianity. This is not what I found. Instead, I found the rantings of an angry man who was clearly reacting against Christians and the Church (proper) and wrongly leveling his disgust against Christianity itself. His arguments were weak and ill-formed at best. Needless to say, I was disappointed that Nietzsche could not mount a better attack than he did. I had previously found similar weak arguments (based mostly on emotion) in the text "The Tyranny of God" by Joseph Lewis. Although I am a Christian today, I am reasonably certain that I could develop a stronger argument against Christianity than Nietzsche or Lewis (which I obviously will not do here). So, if you are a Christian looking for a worthy opponent, don't bother looking here. And if you are an atheist looking to strengthen your arguments, I hope you have a better source than Nietzsche.
December 6, 2020
"The Antichrist" begins with the writer's egotistical pledge to become immortal, & then he pretty much backs his shit up. Masterfully. He identifies his readership & reading Nietzsche is like joining a secret club that's more than a century old. Indeed, one feels like a pariah when trying to discern the 2000+ year old lie.
So, after this, perhaps THE quintessential Anti-Christian argument, the question is--why do people STILL believe? I believe that they have all, as its the most obvious conclusion, not read this. Nietzsche argues the Church goes against all intelligence, human instincts, creativity (indeed philosophy and medicine too)... which is to say all of life. The portrait is vividly placed at the forefront of my mind: the Christian as a cadaversome simpleton... ready to be disposed of by the machinery of daily life, ready to be sucked dry by the vampiric imposters known as the clergy. How could God, in all his Perfection, become bored to create the known world? The self-elevating institution has lost all reality (we see this today... & it's no joke that the canonization of the ex pope comes at such crucial times...)...& common decency. It's "the worst crime against humanity." The killer of the Roman Empire, the Renaissance.
This opened my eyes: this inciting piece of literature that's brilliant in its narrow prejudice, but not wholly incorrect.
(2011)
So, after this, perhaps THE quintessential Anti-Christian argument, the question is--why do people STILL believe? I believe that they have all, as its the most obvious conclusion, not read this. Nietzsche argues the Church goes against all intelligence, human instincts, creativity (indeed philosophy and medicine too)... which is to say all of life. The portrait is vividly placed at the forefront of my mind: the Christian as a cadaversome simpleton... ready to be disposed of by the machinery of daily life, ready to be sucked dry by the vampiric imposters known as the clergy. How could God, in all his Perfection, become bored to create the known world? The self-elevating institution has lost all reality (we see this today... & it's no joke that the canonization of the ex pope comes at such crucial times...)...& common decency. It's "the worst crime against humanity." The killer of the Roman Empire, the Renaissance.
This opened my eyes: this inciting piece of literature that's brilliant in its narrow prejudice, but not wholly incorrect.
(2011)
May 1, 2024
"The Antichrist" is a bold charge against Christianity, or more precisely, against what became of Christian morality at the time of Nietzsche. He accuses the priests, in particular, of having perverted the original message of Christ, of constituting the negation of life as an ideal, and of leaving the real world to take refuge in an imaginary and false world.
I started reading this book a little too early: I had only read "Thus Spoke Zarathustra," one of Nietzsche's first books, and "The Antichrist" is one of these. Nevertheless, the references to his previous works are numerous, and I had the impression of being a bad student who did not learn his lessons to be able to follow the demonstration of the master. The translator's comments, however, filled my gaps somewhat.
In any case, Nietzsche's style is peculiar and pleasant to read: often impertinent and daring, sometimes fiery and unfair, and reliant on puns and irony. All this facilitates access to his works for "the uninitiated."
I started reading this book a little too early: I had only read "Thus Spoke Zarathustra," one of Nietzsche's first books, and "The Antichrist" is one of these. Nevertheless, the references to his previous works are numerous, and I had the impression of being a bad student who did not learn his lessons to be able to follow the demonstration of the master. The translator's comments, however, filled my gaps somewhat.
In any case, Nietzsche's style is peculiar and pleasant to read: often impertinent and daring, sometimes fiery and unfair, and reliant on puns and irony. All this facilitates access to his works for "the uninitiated."
July 8, 2020
The Mob and Its Conceits
This is the H. L. Mencken translation. I don’t know how well it captures Nietzsche’s native style; but it certainly captures Mencken’s. I think Mencken’s introduction alone is worth the price of admission. While it distorts Nietzsche as much as any “outraged Mississippi Methodist,” it summarises rather well Mencken’s genius and his utter derangement. Profound insights are mixed with trivial absurdities in about equal measure. The former include his observations about democracy; the latter his hatred of Judaism as a culture.
Mencken’s understanding of democracy is inseparable from his understanding of revolution, from the American and French to the Russian. They are brought about by mobs. Mobs don’t not learn. Mobs reinforce their own delusions and pursue them more ruthlessly and guiltlessly than any tyrant. The mob has leaders who emerge spontaneously from within itself because they are seen to be ‘one of us.’ The mob has no rules of behaviour other than to maintain loyalty to the mob. The mob has no conscience because it is sovereign, responsible only to itself and only as long as it remains in existence. When the mob disperses, it’s history effectively disappears and survivors are left with a mess to be cleaned up by those who would never join a mob.
Mencken was essentially right about democracy. It does promote the worst political environment for human survival. The difference between a mob and a democratic electorate is paper thin. Recent political events - in the United States, in Russia, in the Philippines, in India, and in Brazil to name only a few places - suggest that the mob has become the electorate. Just like any mob, each of the relevant electorates is motivated by some common but diffuse fear. As is traditional in mob activity, each is promoted and defended by religious practice and authority as a sort of cleansing of society. And, of course, the mob does not compromise; it gets what it wants or it destroys its opposition, and has no hesitation in fomenting revolution in the process.
The singular advantage of democracy, according to Mencken, is that popular anti-semitism will ensure that Jews can never attain to the ruling plutocracy. I don’t know where in his background this anti-semitism originates. To attribute it, in 1918, to a prevailing cultural norm would imply that Mencken was as much influenced by popular nonsense as the mob. To suggest that he had some particularly disappointing experience with individual Jews, would imply that he had a rather pronounced logical difficulty in his generalisations. In any case, his anti-semitism goes a long way in undermining his intellectual snobbery and his conclusions about the mob.
The most disturbing thing about Mencken’s anti-semitism is that it was neither casual nor superficial. Despite his reported remarks in the late 1930’s about the shame of the de-humanisation of Jews in Germany, the rationale for his hatred was identical to that of Hitler: Jews had invented the unnatural and irrational idea of caring for the less able and less well-off in the community. They had infected the Western world with this social malaise. And this is something Nietzsche had failed to take into account fully. The problem that both Mencken and Nietzsche (and Hitler) had with Christianity was at root a problem of Judaism. Judaism perverted the course of human evolution and therefore needed to be eliminated.
Both Nietzsche and Mencken wrote in a way that was intended to shock. Each overstated and exaggerated for effect. But Nietzsche was a philosopher and Mencken was a forerunner of America’s AM radio hosts. Nietzsche never wanted or expected wide-spread acceptance; Mencken lived for it in his books and editorials. Nietzsche analysed; Mencken sensationalised. Ultimately Nietzsche provokes reflection; Mencken merely revulsion at his own self-promotion. Nietzsche refused to join a mob; Mencken was a closet mobster of the first order.
This is the H. L. Mencken translation. I don’t know how well it captures Nietzsche’s native style; but it certainly captures Mencken’s. I think Mencken’s introduction alone is worth the price of admission. While it distorts Nietzsche as much as any “outraged Mississippi Methodist,” it summarises rather well Mencken’s genius and his utter derangement. Profound insights are mixed with trivial absurdities in about equal measure. The former include his observations about democracy; the latter his hatred of Judaism as a culture.
Mencken’s understanding of democracy is inseparable from his understanding of revolution, from the American and French to the Russian. They are brought about by mobs. Mobs don’t not learn. Mobs reinforce their own delusions and pursue them more ruthlessly and guiltlessly than any tyrant. The mob has leaders who emerge spontaneously from within itself because they are seen to be ‘one of us.’ The mob has no rules of behaviour other than to maintain loyalty to the mob. The mob has no conscience because it is sovereign, responsible only to itself and only as long as it remains in existence. When the mob disperses, it’s history effectively disappears and survivors are left with a mess to be cleaned up by those who would never join a mob.
Mencken was essentially right about democracy. It does promote the worst political environment for human survival. The difference between a mob and a democratic electorate is paper thin. Recent political events - in the United States, in Russia, in the Philippines, in India, and in Brazil to name only a few places - suggest that the mob has become the electorate. Just like any mob, each of the relevant electorates is motivated by some common but diffuse fear. As is traditional in mob activity, each is promoted and defended by religious practice and authority as a sort of cleansing of society. And, of course, the mob does not compromise; it gets what it wants or it destroys its opposition, and has no hesitation in fomenting revolution in the process.
The singular advantage of democracy, according to Mencken, is that popular anti-semitism will ensure that Jews can never attain to the ruling plutocracy. I don’t know where in his background this anti-semitism originates. To attribute it, in 1918, to a prevailing cultural norm would imply that Mencken was as much influenced by popular nonsense as the mob. To suggest that he had some particularly disappointing experience with individual Jews, would imply that he had a rather pronounced logical difficulty in his generalisations. In any case, his anti-semitism goes a long way in undermining his intellectual snobbery and his conclusions about the mob.
The most disturbing thing about Mencken’s anti-semitism is that it was neither casual nor superficial. Despite his reported remarks in the late 1930’s about the shame of the de-humanisation of Jews in Germany, the rationale for his hatred was identical to that of Hitler: Jews had invented the unnatural and irrational idea of caring for the less able and less well-off in the community. They had infected the Western world with this social malaise. And this is something Nietzsche had failed to take into account fully. The problem that both Mencken and Nietzsche (and Hitler) had with Christianity was at root a problem of Judaism. Judaism perverted the course of human evolution and therefore needed to be eliminated.
Both Nietzsche and Mencken wrote in a way that was intended to shock. Each overstated and exaggerated for effect. But Nietzsche was a philosopher and Mencken was a forerunner of America’s AM radio hosts. Nietzsche never wanted or expected wide-spread acceptance; Mencken lived for it in his books and editorials. Nietzsche analysed; Mencken sensationalised. Ultimately Nietzsche provokes reflection; Mencken merely revulsion at his own self-promotion. Nietzsche refused to join a mob; Mencken was a closet mobster of the first order.
May 8, 2021
Dios está muerto!El hombre es Dios!...o tal vez,no?
Este libro se ha convertido en una de mis obras favoritas!
“La vida es un instinto de desarrollo, de supervivencia, de acumulación de fuerzas, de poder”.
“Comprender los límites de la razón, esto es precisamente la filosofía...”
“La compasión es la práctica del nihilismo.”
“Yo solo creería en un Dios que supiera bailar”.
“Fe: no querer saber la verdad”.
“Bendito sea el que olvida, porque a él pertenece el paraíso.”
“Bienaventurados sean los olvidadizos ya que vuelven a tropezar con la misma piedra.“
“Cuando se tienen muchas cosas que meter en él, el día tiene cien bolsillos.”
“Cuántos hombres se precipitan hacia la luz, no para ver mejor sino para brillar.”
“Hablando francamente, es preciso que nos encolericemos alguna vez para que las cosas marchen bien.”
“De nadie estamos más lejos que de nosotros mismos.”
Este libro se ha convertido en una de mis obras favoritas!
“La vida es un instinto de desarrollo, de supervivencia, de acumulación de fuerzas, de poder”.
“Comprender los límites de la razón, esto es precisamente la filosofía...”
“La compasión es la práctica del nihilismo.”
“Yo solo creería en un Dios que supiera bailar”.
“Fe: no querer saber la verdad”.
“Bendito sea el que olvida, porque a él pertenece el paraíso.”
“Bienaventurados sean los olvidadizos ya que vuelven a tropezar con la misma piedra.“
“Cuando se tienen muchas cosas que meter en él, el día tiene cien bolsillos.”
“Cuántos hombres se precipitan hacia la luz, no para ver mejor sino para brillar.”
“Hablando francamente, es preciso que nos encolericemos alguna vez para que las cosas marchen bien.”
“De nadie estamos más lejos que de nosotros mismos.”
June 1, 2021
Nietzsche comes down so hard on christianity that he makes Christopher Hitchens look positively Presbyterian.
"This book belongs to the very few." ~FN
In his preface, Nietzsche anticipates a probable backlash to what he is about to publish. He states that only a person of sound intellect, one who is above "the wretched gabble of politics and national egotism" will comprehend all that he has to say. Or, plainly stated: This publication will not be well received by everyone. (Thank you Captain Obvious.)
"Christianity has sided with everything weak, low, and botched; it has made an ideal out of antagonism towards all the self-preservative instincts of strong life: it has corrupted even the reason of the strongest intellects, by teaching that the highest values of intellectuality are sinful, misleading and full of temptations." (pg 5)
For as my long as priests are held in high regard, Nietzsche asserts, truth and lies will always be transposed. He defines the term 'faith' as the blind ignorance of truthful thought and reason.
"...that is to say, to shut one's eyes once and for all, in order not to suffer at the sight of incurable falsity. People convert this faulty view of all things into a moral, a virtue, a thing of holiness. They endow their distorted vision with good conscience, they claim that no other point of view is any longer of value, once theirs has been made sacrosanct with the names "God," "Salvation," "Eternity." "(pg 8)
Christianity, in Nietzsche's eyes, is completely detached from reality. Its validity is bouyed up by the imaginary effects of imaginary causes, supported by imaginary beings, using imaginary psychology, based on an imaginary natural history. Sin, salvation, grace, punishment, forgiveness, and immortality are all tools of the nefarious trade.
"[Christianity] knows that it is a matter of indifference whether a thing be true or not; but that it is of the highest importance that it should be believed to be true. Truth and the belief that something is true: two totally separate worlds of interest, almost opposite worlds, the road to the one and the road to the other lie absolutely apart." (pg 21)
The keys to the control of the Christian congregations, Nietzsche believes, are the concepts of 'guilt' and 'sin.' Without one, the other is useless. Without both, Christianity is rendered impotent. It matters not that a person is indeed sinful, only that they should FEEL sinful. It is the very real guilt of the very imaginary sin that keeps the priest employed and the flock in line.
"..."sins" are indispensable: they are the actual weapons of power, the priest lives upon sins, it is necessary for him that people should "sin." ...Supreme axiom: "God forgiveth him that repenteth" - in plain English: him that submitteth himself to the priest." (pg 27)
Surprisingly or unsurprisingly, depending on your point if view, Nietzsche has a soft spot for Christ himself, repeatingly referring to him as the 'only true Christian' who ever lived and comparing him favorably to Buddha.
"This saintly anarchist who called the lowest of the low, the outcasts and "sinners," the Chandala of Judaism, to revolt against the established order of things - this man was a political criminal in so far as political criminals were possible in a community so absurdly non-political. This brought him to the cross: the proof of this is the inscription found thereon. He died for 'his' sins - and no matter how often the contrary has been asserted there is absolutely nothing to show that he died for the sins of others." (pg 28)
So, if Christ's ideals were praise worthy and of good intent, who bastardized the Christian identity? Nietzsche lays the blame squarely on St Paul:
"Paul is the incarnation of a type which is the reverse of that of the Savior; he is the genius in hatred, in the standpoint of hatred, and in the relentless logic of hatred." (pg 43)
But wait, there's more...
"Even what he himself did not believe, was believed in by the idiots among whom he spread HIS doctrine. What he wanted was power; with St Paul the priest again aspired to power" (pg 44)
Overall, Nietzsche's take on Christianity is a collection of many valid points interspersed with a few questionable conjectures. It is cynical, eristic and inflammatory. Five stars!
"This book belongs to the very few." ~FN
In his preface, Nietzsche anticipates a probable backlash to what he is about to publish. He states that only a person of sound intellect, one who is above "the wretched gabble of politics and national egotism" will comprehend all that he has to say. Or, plainly stated: This publication will not be well received by everyone. (Thank you Captain Obvious.)
"Christianity has sided with everything weak, low, and botched; it has made an ideal out of antagonism towards all the self-preservative instincts of strong life: it has corrupted even the reason of the strongest intellects, by teaching that the highest values of intellectuality are sinful, misleading and full of temptations." (pg 5)
For as my long as priests are held in high regard, Nietzsche asserts, truth and lies will always be transposed. He defines the term 'faith' as the blind ignorance of truthful thought and reason.
"...that is to say, to shut one's eyes once and for all, in order not to suffer at the sight of incurable falsity. People convert this faulty view of all things into a moral, a virtue, a thing of holiness. They endow their distorted vision with good conscience, they claim that no other point of view is any longer of value, once theirs has been made sacrosanct with the names "God," "Salvation," "Eternity." "(pg 8)
Christianity, in Nietzsche's eyes, is completely detached from reality. Its validity is bouyed up by the imaginary effects of imaginary causes, supported by imaginary beings, using imaginary psychology, based on an imaginary natural history. Sin, salvation, grace, punishment, forgiveness, and immortality are all tools of the nefarious trade.
"[Christianity] knows that it is a matter of indifference whether a thing be true or not; but that it is of the highest importance that it should be believed to be true. Truth and the belief that something is true: two totally separate worlds of interest, almost opposite worlds, the road to the one and the road to the other lie absolutely apart." (pg 21)
The keys to the control of the Christian congregations, Nietzsche believes, are the concepts of 'guilt' and 'sin.' Without one, the other is useless. Without both, Christianity is rendered impotent. It matters not that a person is indeed sinful, only that they should FEEL sinful. It is the very real guilt of the very imaginary sin that keeps the priest employed and the flock in line.
"..."sins" are indispensable: they are the actual weapons of power, the priest lives upon sins, it is necessary for him that people should "sin." ...Supreme axiom: "God forgiveth him that repenteth" - in plain English: him that submitteth himself to the priest." (pg 27)
Surprisingly or unsurprisingly, depending on your point if view, Nietzsche has a soft spot for Christ himself, repeatingly referring to him as the 'only true Christian' who ever lived and comparing him favorably to Buddha.
"This saintly anarchist who called the lowest of the low, the outcasts and "sinners," the Chandala of Judaism, to revolt against the established order of things - this man was a political criminal in so far as political criminals were possible in a community so absurdly non-political. This brought him to the cross: the proof of this is the inscription found thereon. He died for 'his' sins - and no matter how often the contrary has been asserted there is absolutely nothing to show that he died for the sins of others." (pg 28)
So, if Christ's ideals were praise worthy and of good intent, who bastardized the Christian identity? Nietzsche lays the blame squarely on St Paul:
"Paul is the incarnation of a type which is the reverse of that of the Savior; he is the genius in hatred, in the standpoint of hatred, and in the relentless logic of hatred." (pg 43)
But wait, there's more...
"Even what he himself did not believe, was believed in by the idiots among whom he spread HIS doctrine. What he wanted was power; with St Paul the priest again aspired to power" (pg 44)
Overall, Nietzsche's take on Christianity is a collection of many valid points interspersed with a few questionable conjectures. It is cynical, eristic and inflammatory. Five stars!
May 26, 2019
This is the sort of book you just know is going to get criticised before even opening the cover.
Nietzsche had an unwarranted hatred for Christianity. His worldview certainly does not make for a peaceful world and he was clearly in a grumpy mood when he wrote this. His world is one which the strong dominate and the weak are trampled upon and even destroyed. I guess he has a point there. This philosopher who spoke of the death of God is certainly going to rattle a few cages. He kind of fails because doesn't use logical reasoning and historical text taken in the right context to back what is essentially a hatred of the darker institutional side of Christianity. Without Christian or Jewish texts to back a personal opinion shared by a range of enlightened thinkers offers no philosophical guidance really. The reader is mostly left going through page after page of Nietzsche's rage against a monopoly of an undefined truths. I don't have any beliefs, and I'm not religious in any way, so to me this book meant nothing. It was interesting in parts, boring in others.
Nietzsche had an unwarranted hatred for Christianity. His worldview certainly does not make for a peaceful world and he was clearly in a grumpy mood when he wrote this. His world is one which the strong dominate and the weak are trampled upon and even destroyed. I guess he has a point there. This philosopher who spoke of the death of God is certainly going to rattle a few cages. He kind of fails because doesn't use logical reasoning and historical text taken in the right context to back what is essentially a hatred of the darker institutional side of Christianity. Without Christian or Jewish texts to back a personal opinion shared by a range of enlightened thinkers offers no philosophical guidance really. The reader is mostly left going through page after page of Nietzsche's rage against a monopoly of an undefined truths. I don't have any beliefs, and I'm not religious in any way, so to me this book meant nothing. It was interesting in parts, boring in others.
March 15, 2015
I was expecting a structured, rigorous, and objective argument against Christianity. Instead I found an anti-Semitic, sexist, elitist, emotionally garbled, and unstructured list of insults and rants degrading any religious or spiritual individual to an inherently weak, even sub-human entity. Considered by Mencken to be his magnum opus, the very death of God... personally, the only thing his work devours is its own very weak arguments.
September 7, 2008
Um, WOW!
The anti-christ is really anti-Christianity. Nietzsche talks about how Christianity is the religion of the weak, the low, the botched and the "outcast among men".
He asks the reader, "why labour together, trust one another, or concern one's self about the common welfare, when every man, because he has an "immortal soul" is as good as every other man...that insignificant bigots and the three-fouths insane may assume that the laws of nature are constantly suspended in their behalf."
He further notes that Christianity finds sickness necessary. The actual ulterior purpose of the whole system of salvation of the church is to make people ill.
I found this book very fascinating. I kept waiting for lightening to strike me down while I read this book. ;oP
When I take my Literary class - THIS is the book I will be doing my report on!
...Which of course means I have to read the Bible. So...
The anti-christ is really anti-Christianity. Nietzsche talks about how Christianity is the religion of the weak, the low, the botched and the "outcast among men".
He asks the reader, "why labour together, trust one another, or concern one's self about the common welfare, when every man, because he has an "immortal soul" is as good as every other man...that insignificant bigots and the three-fouths insane may assume that the laws of nature are constantly suspended in their behalf."
He further notes that Christianity finds sickness necessary. The actual ulterior purpose of the whole system of salvation of the church is to make people ill.
I found this book very fascinating. I kept waiting for lightening to strike me down while I read this book. ;oP
When I take my Literary class - THIS is the book I will be doing my report on!
...Which of course means I have to read the Bible. So...
December 8, 2017
لنتفق أن نيتشه أشد حبًا للمسيح من تابعيه وإن لم يُدرك هو ذلك!
هذا الكتاب لا يقل أهمية عن هكذا تكلم زرادشت نقرأ الاثنين ونفهمهم لنستطيع فهم نيتشه جيدًا، هو بمثابة تكملة وتوضيح له.
من عنوان الكتاب الفرعي نستطيع أن نستدل عما وراءه: مقال اللعنة على المسيحية..
وفي العنوان الفرعي أهمية أكثر من العنوان الأصلي؛ ذلك لأنه بقوله اللعنة على المسيحية يُعلن سخطه على المنظومة الكنيسية واحتكارها للدين، على القساوسة الذين خصهم بالكثير من لعناته في كتبه، على بولس والمسيحية البولسية، على الأب والابن والروح القدس، لكن ليس على المسيح بذاته!
كما أن هذا الكتاب يُظهر جانب آخر وهو أن نيتشه في إماتته للإله كان بشكل أكبر ساخط على الإله الذي صورته المسيحية، فقد رأى بعض الشرائع الدينية الأخرى أفضل من المسيحية كما فعل مع البوذية، وامتداحه لفعل فريدريش الثاني بحرب بلا هوادة ضد روما، وصداقة مع الإسلام.
هذا لا يعني بالضرورة أنه إذا أتيحت له نشأة أخرى لكان آمن بالإله
نيتشه في هذا الكتاب أكثر سخطًا من المعتاد على كل شيء، فيقول عن المسيحية بأنها الشيء الأكثر كارثية في تاريخ الإنسانية، وعن المرأة بأنها الخطأ الثاني للرب، وتابع احتقاره الكبير للألمان المعاصرين والسابقين له.
قرأت من فترة جزء كبير من ترجمة أخرى بعنوان: عدو المسيح.. توقفت قبل أن أصل لمنتصفها لسوء الترجمة، كالعادة ترجمة علي مصباح أفضل بمراحل. وهكذا يجعلني أقول بشكل نهائي أن على مصباح أفضل من فهم نيتشه فترجمه.
هذا الكتاب لا يقل أهمية عن هكذا تكلم زرادشت نقرأ الاثنين ونفهمهم لنستطيع فهم نيتشه جيدًا، هو بمثابة تكملة وتوضيح له.
من عنوان الكتاب الفرعي نستطيع أن نستدل عما وراءه: مقال اللعنة على المسيحية..
وفي العنوان الفرعي أهمية أكثر من العنوان الأصلي؛ ذلك لأنه بقوله اللعنة على المسيحية يُعلن سخطه على المنظومة الكنيسية واحتكارها للدين، على القساوسة الذين خصهم بالكثير من لعناته في كتبه، على بولس والمسيحية البولسية، على الأب والابن والروح القدس، لكن ليس على المسيح بذاته!
كما أن هذا الكتاب يُظهر جانب آخر وهو أن نيتشه في إماتته للإله كان بشكل أكبر ساخط على الإله الذي صورته المسيحية، فقد رأى بعض الشرائع الدينية الأخرى أفضل من المسيحية كما فعل مع البوذية، وامتداحه لفعل فريدريش الثاني بحرب بلا هوادة ضد روما، وصداقة مع الإسلام.
هذا لا يعني بالضرورة أنه إذا أتيحت له نشأة أخرى لكان آمن بالإله
نيتشه في هذا الكتاب أكثر سخطًا من المعتاد على كل شيء، فيقول عن المسيحية بأنها الشيء الأكثر كارثية في تاريخ الإنسانية، وعن المرأة بأنها الخطأ الثاني للرب، وتابع احتقاره الكبير للألمان المعاصرين والسابقين له.
قرأت من فترة جزء كبير من ترجمة أخرى بعنوان: عدو المسيح.. توقفت قبل أن أصل لمنتصفها لسوء الترجمة، كالعادة ترجمة علي مصباح أفضل بمراحل. وهكذا يجعلني أقول بشكل نهائي أن على مصباح أفضل من فهم نيتشه فترجمه.
January 1, 2010
As an atheist, I wish I had liked this better but it's too full of crazy name-calling and smug self congratulating and angry bellowing, leaving about only 1/3 of the book to explain his ideas. Which I can't say are super crazy, I mean, when it boils down to it, he says Catholicism is the anti-christ because it never understood Jesus's real message, which was to live naturally and in a sort of live-and-let-live(or die) way, and instead perverted the message and turned it into shenanigans about hell and sin and immortal life, thus negating every natural instinct and the value of actual life by stressing the importance of life after death. And that's a worthy idea, I think, it's just pretty much burrowed into a lot of hate and craziness and KANT I HATE YOUUUU and hating Jews and women and other men and Germans and people in general. You can't even say he was specifically a jackass to anybody (well, to Jews, I suppose) because he thoroughly hates everyone.
Deeply reminded me of fanboys trolling the comic boards. Screemo.
Deeply reminded me of fanboys trolling the comic boards. Screemo.
February 27, 2016
I love Nietzsche jedes mal, what can I say. I love his witty, sarcastic and controvertional thoughts.
I love how he starts the book by clamming the reader has to have achieved a certain state of consciousness to be able to read him and that they need seven solitudes experience to understand him.
what is happiness? The sensation that power is growing and one resistance has been tamed (lovely)
Being Nietzsche the anti Christ himself, he puts Christianity into such a down level that it’s impossible to even make a straight comment on that. He says Christianity wants to annul intellectuality that it feeds on the weak. They want to make people sick, weaken them in order to tame them. It annuls sensations, the joy of sensation, and chastity makes the cult more intense.
Chapter 45 is just pure irony, he takes chapters from the bible and makes sarcastic comments on what has been said, with such geniality, that cannot be described, only read.
He talks about Adam and Eve and how the tree of knowledge is an allegory to the hate of science, of the achievement of the real truth.
One comment that I found extremely interesting, was the fact the he says that germans came up with Protestantism and that if Christianity never ends, germans would be the ones to blame. Ahhahah priceless, seriously genious! Since I’m living here in Germany and surrounded by mainly protestant people and I’ve been thinking a lot about this before, because we have Catholicism in southern European countries where I come from, and young people have already came to the conclusion that it is fanaticism so nearly no one actually goes for their bullshit, but since protestants are a step ahead (being more liberal and all) there is still young people going to church and buying all this god crap. So, definitely I agree with Nietzsche and Protestantism is a trap!
There is some stuff that I don’t agree with, for example, that Islamism sees the man has its first condition or that anarchism and Christianity are alike due to the pretense of all men being equal, he even makes this machist comment that I’m not gonna put here because I don’t want to remember it, even though he is some sort of right.
And genially, he finishes his book appealing that in some point we have to stop counting our years based on the birth of Christ and start counting it from the last day of this Christian era. Maybe someday Nietzsche, someday… I’ll be waiting here for that as well…
I love how he starts the book by clamming the reader has to have achieved a certain state of consciousness to be able to read him and that they need seven solitudes experience to understand him.
what is happiness? The sensation that power is growing and one resistance has been tamed (lovely)
Being Nietzsche the anti Christ himself, he puts Christianity into such a down level that it’s impossible to even make a straight comment on that. He says Christianity wants to annul intellectuality that it feeds on the weak. They want to make people sick, weaken them in order to tame them. It annuls sensations, the joy of sensation, and chastity makes the cult more intense.
Chapter 45 is just pure irony, he takes chapters from the bible and makes sarcastic comments on what has been said, with such geniality, that cannot be described, only read.
He talks about Adam and Eve and how the tree of knowledge is an allegory to the hate of science, of the achievement of the real truth.
One comment that I found extremely interesting, was the fact the he says that germans came up with Protestantism and that if Christianity never ends, germans would be the ones to blame. Ahhahah priceless, seriously genious! Since I’m living here in Germany and surrounded by mainly protestant people and I’ve been thinking a lot about this before, because we have Catholicism in southern European countries where I come from, and young people have already came to the conclusion that it is fanaticism so nearly no one actually goes for their bullshit, but since protestants are a step ahead (being more liberal and all) there is still young people going to church and buying all this god crap. So, definitely I agree with Nietzsche and Protestantism is a trap!
There is some stuff that I don’t agree with, for example, that Islamism sees the man has its first condition or that anarchism and Christianity are alike due to the pretense of all men being equal, he even makes this machist comment that I’m not gonna put here because I don’t want to remember it, even though he is some sort of right.
And genially, he finishes his book appealing that in some point we have to stop counting our years based on the birth of Christ and start counting it from the last day of this Christian era. Maybe someday Nietzsche, someday… I’ll be waiting here for that as well…
July 15, 2018
Ίσως άβολο για μερικούς αλλά σίγουρα Μ Ε Γ Α Λ Ε Ι Ω Δ Ε Σ!
January 20, 2016
كان نبتشه يحمل في داخله مسيحًا أعظم، مسيحًا أفضل، مسيحًا أعرق من يسوع.
لو كان المسيح قد صلب، فنيتشه، هو الآخر قد صلب، ولكن على العكس من يسوع، الذي أحيط بالتقديس والتعظيم، لم يحظ نيتشه بشيء، على الرغم من كونه تحمّل - حيًّا -، ولكل يوم، آلام الصلب، ولكل يوم من حياته دفن حقده وغيظه، حتى مرضه ووفاته.
كان نيتشه، على الرغم من كل ما قال، يحمل شيئًا ما - غير الحقد والكره والضغينة - للمسيح يسوع المصلوب. شيئًا آخر غير الاحتقار، شيئًا لم يستطع هو حتى أن يفهمه، بله، قراؤه.
في نهاية حياته، أرسل نيتشه رسائل عدة للبابا، ولأصدقائه، وللرهبان يدعوهم فيها للابتهال له، ممهورة باسم LA crucifié
أي المصلوب. حمل نيتشه بداخله ما يكفي من آلام ليتم تذكره، آلام ربما فاقت آلام المسيح على صليبه، لكنه على الرغم من ذلك قد بخس حقه.
يقول نيتشه في كتابه العزيز: هكذا تكلم زرادشت :- لست الفم المناسب لهذه الأذان.
ويقول أخيرًا
إنهم يحتاجون من يخلصهم، لكن من مخلصهم.
نيتشه رائع، نيتشه مجنون، نيتشه رقيق القلب، نيتشه، يمتلك أجمل قاموس شتائم وسباب اطلعت عليها في حياتي. لكن مع ذلك، نقضه للمسيحية، وللمسيح، ولبولس ذلك الكريه الذي شوّه الوجود بانحطاطه (في رأيه) لم يحظ على أكثر من ذهولي فقط، أتفق ولا شك مع نقضه للكهنة، وللمسيح التاريخي، لكن نقده للمسيحية، وكالعادة، خطاب عاطفي، على الرغم من كونه محبب إلى قلبي.
لو كان نيتشه رسولًا، لكانت البشرية أفضل ولا شك، حيث لا مجال للضعفاء والمساكين بيننا، نحن أصحاب الفكر والسمو العقلي
لو كان المسيح قد صلب، فنيتشه، هو الآخر قد صلب، ولكن على العكس من يسوع، الذي أحيط بالتقديس والتعظيم، لم يحظ نيتشه بشيء، على الرغم من كونه تحمّل - حيًّا -، ولكل يوم، آلام الصلب، ولكل يوم من حياته دفن حقده وغيظه، حتى مرضه ووفاته.
كان نيتشه، على الرغم من كل ما قال، يحمل شيئًا ما - غير الحقد والكره والضغينة - للمسيح يسوع المصلوب. شيئًا آخر غير الاحتقار، شيئًا لم يستطع هو حتى أن يفهمه، بله، قراؤه.
في نهاية حياته، أرسل نيتشه رسائل عدة للبابا، ولأصدقائه، وللرهبان يدعوهم فيها للابتهال له، ممهورة باسم LA crucifié
أي المصلوب. حمل نيتشه بداخله ما يكفي من آلام ليتم تذكره، آلام ربما فاقت آلام المسيح على صليبه، لكنه على الرغم من ذلك قد بخس حقه.
يقول نيتشه في كتابه العزيز: هكذا تكلم زرادشت :- لست الفم المناسب لهذه الأذان.
ويقول أخيرًا
إنهم يحتاجون من يخلصهم، لكن من مخلصهم.
نيتشه رائع، نيتشه مجنون، نيتشه رقيق القلب، نيتشه، يمتلك أجمل قاموس شتائم وسباب اطلعت عليها في حياتي. لكن مع ذلك، نقضه للمسيحية، وللمسيح، ولبولس ذلك الكريه الذي شوّه الوجود بانحطاطه (في رأيه) لم يحظ على أكثر من ذهولي فقط، أتفق ولا شك مع نقضه للكهنة، وللمسيح التاريخي، لكن نقده للمسيحية، وكالعادة، خطاب عاطفي، على الرغم من كونه محبب إلى قلبي.
لو كان نيتشه رسولًا، لكانت البشرية أفضل ولا شك، حيث لا مجال للضعفاء والمساكين بيننا، نحن أصحاب الفكر والسمو العقلي
July 24, 2019
The Antichrist, is written by the philosopher, Frederich Nietzsche, and in this book, Nietzsche explains his view on Christianity, and he goes on to tell us how tremendously damaging it is to western civilisation. It is rather immediate to the reader, that he wishes Christianity to come to an end.
This short book presents itself as angry ramblings, and I found it to be rather intense. It certainly wasn't intense enough to put me off, though. I LOVED it. Nietzsche is masterful in his philosophical rants, and I mostly agree with what he says. There were some parts that didn't feel as solid with me, but some kind of hit me square on in the face. He certainly knew what he was talking about.
Reading this book definitely begs the question, why do people believe? I can unashamedly admit that raised as a Catholic that I did, until I escaped the grasp of school and the Catholic system. I was then allowed to breathe, read, and think for myself. It then became clear that I believed in absolutely none of it, so I deconverted to an atheist.
Nietzsche explains how the church goes completely against philosophy, science and our interlect, so basically, all of human life as we know it. I like the way that this reads as a diary, and how Nietzsche skillfully raises questions and answers for people who possibly need the fuel on the debate about Christianity.
On finishing this, it is clear that Nietzsche detested Christianity, and because of that, I have gained some interesting theories from a man who I personally think, was a genius.
This short book presents itself as angry ramblings, and I found it to be rather intense. It certainly wasn't intense enough to put me off, though. I LOVED it. Nietzsche is masterful in his philosophical rants, and I mostly agree with what he says. There were some parts that didn't feel as solid with me, but some kind of hit me square on in the face. He certainly knew what he was talking about.
Reading this book definitely begs the question, why do people believe? I can unashamedly admit that raised as a Catholic that I did, until I escaped the grasp of school and the Catholic system. I was then allowed to breathe, read, and think for myself. It then became clear that I believed in absolutely none of it, so I deconverted to an atheist.
Nietzsche explains how the church goes completely against philosophy, science and our interlect, so basically, all of human life as we know it. I like the way that this reads as a diary, and how Nietzsche skillfully raises questions and answers for people who possibly need the fuel on the debate about Christianity.
On finishing this, it is clear that Nietzsche detested Christianity, and because of that, I have gained some interesting theories from a man who I personally think, was a genius.
May 4, 2018
يا إلهي ، يالكمية التعصب والتطرف الموجودة في هذا الكتاب، جنون أقل ما يقال عنه وبذاءة وتطرف ونسخ للحقائق وأبادة لكل ما لا يتقبله عقله المريض القابع في غضب لا أقول أنه لا مبرر له فحسب، ولكنه أيضا أنقلاب على الأخلاق والقيم ومباديء العقل والإنسانية ، نيتشه محطم الأوثان وهادم المسيحية، يصب لعناته ��لى المسيحية وتاريخها المخزي كما يسميه أبتداءاً من الحواريين وأنتهاء للسطلة الكنسية في أوروبا، المسيحية في رأي نيتشه ماتت يوم مات المسيح على الصليب ، وعجز العقل الغربي عن أستيعاب ذلك حتى الآن، وما بقايا المسيحية سوى ذلك الفتات والأخلاق المنحطة (كما يصفها) الذي نشره أتباع المسيح بعد صلبه ، كل القيم المسيحية قد نالها التقريع والشجب من قبل نيتشه في هذا الكتاب، البداية مع فكرة الفادي المخلص ، وزرع أخلاق العبيد، والعطف على الضفعاء، والشفقة، والغفران، والخطيئة كما بينتها المسيحية، كل ذلك يسميه نيتشه أخلاق العبيد والإنحطاط، تعدى به الأمر الى المطالبة بمحو ليس فقط المظاهر المسيحية في أوروبا ، بل حتى القضاء على كل مظهر يشير أن المسيحية مازالت على قيد الحياة ودفنها كما دفنت الديانات السابقة .. هذا التطرف الأعمى الذي يصدر سوى عن شخص غاضب وحاقد، يصف مجتمعه الألماني بالأنحطاط والمسيحية بأكبر كارثة حلت على البشرية يحتاج لأن يعالج لا بفكرة مضادة، بل بالكشف عن حالة نيتشه النفسية والعقلية في تلك الآونة التي أقدم فيها كتابه هذا البحث ، ليس طبيعا أن يكتب المرء بهذا الشكل من التطرف ويدعو في نهاية كتابه الى تدمير كل المدن والبلدات الحاضنة للمسيحية وتسويتها بالأرض !! وتجويع رجال الدين والرمي بهم تائهين في الصحراء ! بل وشطب حتى التاريخ الميلادي بأعتباره مرتبطا بولادة المسيح وجعله تاريخا لبداية عصر الأنحطاط..
هذا الأحتفاء والانبهار بالحضارة اليونانية والرومانية مبالغ فيه ولا يبرز فيه المؤلف أي مظاهر سوء وفساد وكأنها جمهوريات مقدسة لا يأتيها الباطل أبداً ..
لا أختلف مع كل ماذكره نتيشه وهناك نقاط عديدة كانت منطقية ومشجعة على مناقشتها والتفكير فيها بعمق ولكن هذا التشنج في طرح المسألة يجعلك تتعاطف مع المسيحية لا ضدها ..
ومن العجيب أن يأتيك أحدهم ويقول أن النازية لم تتأثر بأفكار نيتشه، بل أقول أن النازية وليدة شرعية لمثل الأفكار المقيتة التي تجعل العالم أكثر تطرفاً وجنوناً ومزرعة للقيم اللأخلاقية ومنبتاً دائماً للعنف والضغينة ..
لو قال المسيحي أن ٢ + ٢ = ٤
لقال نيتشه أن ٢ + ٢ = ٧
هكذا بأختصار فقط كل مايريده أن يقلب القيم السائدة سواء كانت صائبة أو غير ذلك، المهم أن يخالف المسيحي في كل الحالات وأن يكون نقيضاً أبدياً للمسيح ..
هذا الأحتفاء والانبهار بالحضارة اليونانية والرومانية مبالغ فيه ولا يبرز فيه المؤلف أي مظاهر سوء وفساد وكأنها جمهوريات مقدسة لا يأتيها الباطل أبداً ..
لا أختلف مع كل ماذكره نتيشه وهناك نقاط عديدة كانت منطقية ومشجعة على مناقشتها والتفكير فيها بعمق ولكن هذا التشنج في طرح المسألة يجعلك تتعاطف مع المسيحية لا ضدها ..
ومن العجيب أن يأتيك أحدهم ويقول أن النازية لم تتأثر بأفكار نيتشه، بل أقول أن النازية وليدة شرعية لمثل الأفكار المقيتة التي تجعل العالم أكثر تطرفاً وجنوناً ومزرعة للقيم اللأخلاقية ومنبتاً دائماً للعنف والضغينة ..
لو قال المسيحي أن ٢ + ٢ = ٤
لقال نيتشه أن ٢ + ٢ = ٧
هكذا بأختصار فقط كل مايريده أن يقلب القيم السائدة سواء كانت صائبة أو غير ذلك، المهم أن يخالف المسيحي في كل الحالات وأن يكون نقيضاً أبدياً للمسيح ..
March 8, 2018
Σε μία κοινωνία που τω «Δόξα τω Θεώ» έχει αναχθεί σε πρότυπο επικοινωνίας μεταξύ των ανθρώπων, ένα βιβλίο με τίτλο «Ο Αντίχριστος, Ανάθεμα κατά του Χριστιανισμού» φαντάζει αντίθετο στα χρηστά ήθη από τις 6 αυτές λεξούλες και μόνο, λέξεις τοποθετημένες τόσο προβοκατόρικα ώστε άνθρωποι που θα τολμήσουν να περάσουν τα μάτια τους έστω και από τη ράχη του θα κοιτάνε αμέσως ενοχικά από την άλλη μεριά.
Και επειδή μέχρι και σήμερα δεν είχα διαβάσει ολόκληρο έργο του Νίτσε παρά αποσπάσματά του και μόνο, και γνωριζοντας την επιδραστικότητά του πάνω στο έργο του Καζαντζάκη τον οποίο διαχρονικά θαυμάζω, ομολογώ πως έμεινα με το στόμα ανοιχτό.
Ο Νίτσε ξεκίνησε να σπουδάζει θεολογία (!) στο πανεπιστήμιο της Βόννης αλλά τα παράτησε στη μέση (τι πρωτότυπο) γιατί κανείς από τους δασκάλους του δεν έδινε απαντήσεις σε βασικές του ερωτήσεις. Ο ίδιος ξεκίνησε να γράφει βλέποντας στην αρχή τη ζωή με ρομαντισμό, συνέχισε εκλογικεύοντας το συναίσθημα, στον Αντίχριστο όμως πραγματικά δείχνει να έχει απασφαλίσει. Γραμμένος στην ωριμότερη συγγραφική του περίοδο, ο τεράστιος ψυχολόγος-φιλόσοφος δείχνει να ξέρει ποιός είναι ο εχθρός της πνευματικής αναγέννησης του ανθρώπου, ο εχθρός της προόδου, ο εχθρός της επιστήμης, ο εχθρός της ομορφιάς, και σε ένα κείμενο αδιανόητα καταιγιστικό δε διστάζει να δώσει απαντήσεις σε όλα εκείνα που ούτε ένας από όλους εμάς δεν τολμάει καν να διανοηθεί πως μπορεί να σκεφτεί. Δεν είναι υποτακτικός κανενός. Νοιώθει, και άρα είναι ελεύθερος να πει όλα αυτά που έχει στο μυαλό του. Δεν κρύβεται πίσω από βαθυστόχαστους ψευτοσυλλογισμούς, δε φοβάται τη σημασία των λέξεων, μάλιστα κατανοώντας πλήρως την έννοιά τους τις χρησιμοποιεί ως σφαίρες τις οποίες εκτοξεύει εις βάρος όλων όσων πιστεύουν σε αυτά που δεν βλέπουν, σε αίολα, θολά, πνευματικά (;) κινήματα, τα οποία δε διστάζουν να κουνάνε το δαχτυλάκι κατα το δοκούν κ με βάση πάντα το συμφέρον εκείνων στους οποίους ανήκει το δαχτυλάκι αυτό.
Βιβλίο σταθμός, σκληρό ανάγνωσμα, βάζει τα πράγματα σε μία άβολη σίγουρα για κάποιους τάξη, σίγουρα όμως τάξη.
Και επειδή μέχρι και σήμερα δεν είχα διαβάσει ολόκληρο έργο του Νίτσε παρά αποσπάσματά του και μόνο, και γνωριζοντας την επιδραστικότητά του πάνω στο έργο του Καζαντζάκη τον οποίο διαχρονικά θαυμάζω, ομολογώ πως έμεινα με το στόμα ανοιχτό.
Ο Νίτσε ξεκίνησε να σπουδάζει θεολογία (!) στο πανεπιστήμιο της Βόννης αλλά τα παράτησε στη μέση (τι πρωτότυπο) γιατί κανείς από τους δασκάλους του δεν έδινε απαντήσεις σε βασικές του ερωτήσεις. Ο ίδιος ξεκίνησε να γράφει βλέποντας στην αρχή τη ζωή με ρομαντισμό, συνέχισε εκλογικεύοντας το συναίσθημα, στον Αντίχριστο όμως πραγματικά δείχνει να έχει απασφαλίσει. Γραμμένος στην ωριμότερη συγγραφική του περίοδο, ο τεράστιος ψυχολόγος-φιλόσοφος δείχνει να ξέρει ποιός είναι ο εχθρός της πνευματικής αναγέννησης του ανθρώπου, ο εχθρός της προόδου, ο εχθρός της επιστήμης, ο εχθρός της ομορφιάς, και σε ένα κείμενο αδιανόητα καταιγιστικό δε διστάζει να δώσει απαντήσεις σε όλα εκείνα που ούτε ένας από όλους εμάς δεν τολμάει καν να διανοηθεί πως μπορεί να σκεφτεί. Δεν είναι υποτακτικός κανενός. Νοιώθει, και άρα είναι ελεύθερος να πει όλα αυτά που έχει στο μυαλό του. Δεν κρύβεται πίσω από βαθυστόχαστους ψευτοσυλλογισμούς, δε φοβάται τη σημασία των λέξεων, μάλιστα κατανοώντας πλήρως την έννοιά τους τις χρησιμοποιεί ως σφαίρες τις οποίες εκτοξεύει εις βάρος όλων όσων πιστεύουν σε αυτά που δεν βλέπουν, σε αίολα, θολά, πνευματικά (;) κινήματα, τα οποία δε διστάζουν να κουνάνε το δαχτυλάκι κατα το δοκούν κ με βάση πάντα το συμφέρον εκείνων στους οποίους ανήκει το δαχτυλάκι αυτό.
Βιβλίο σταθμός, σκληρό ανάγνωσμα, βάζει τα πράγματα σε μία άβολη σίγουρα για κάποιους τάξη, σίγουρα όμως τάξη.
December 26, 2023
I love a good diatribe against Christianity, but I feel Nietzsche could have done more. This is much better than Zarathustra, and the anger in which the author condemns Christians, and Paul especially, warms my heart. Still, he could have ridiculed the doctrines of the "faith" a little more clearly. It would've been nice to see this cult of human sacrifice barbed by a sharper point.
Long ago, I had a grand conception to write a novel, or a well-researched history, showing how religion, Monotheistic religions of the middle-east mostly, brought the world into the dark ages. How the Greeks and Romans were far ahead, in most ways, of the late 20th-early 21st century culture of western civilization. What brought the world of the Romans to an end more than anything else? Christianity. Then it brought us the Crusades, burnings at the stake, witch hunts, and all kinds of horrendous BS.
Nietzsche already had that idea, and he blames the Christians for the descent of humanity from the high-minded Mediterranean of antiquity to the nihilism of Medieval Europe. The discoveries in science, the evolution of art and culture, the improvement of humankind as a whole was severely slowed with the rise of Christianity, especially the writings of the liar, Paul.
And the Renaissance? This rebirth of art and culture was the rediscovery and translation of the Greeks and Romans. It was a beautiful ballast against the proliferation of the Christian sect.
The main idea here is that Christianity, and and any religion that promises a wonderful afterlife, discounts real life. If the main goal is not of this world, then why aspire to be great here? Everyone can be great in the afterlife. If all souls are equal and can get to heaven, then a great person is no better than a weak or foolish person. Faith is the enemy of reason. Salvation from without is the enemy of salvation from within.
Long ago, I had a grand conception to write a novel, or a well-researched history, showing how religion, Monotheistic religions of the middle-east mostly, brought the world into the dark ages. How the Greeks and Romans were far ahead, in most ways, of the late 20th-early 21st century culture of western civilization. What brought the world of the Romans to an end more than anything else? Christianity. Then it brought us the Crusades, burnings at the stake, witch hunts, and all kinds of horrendous BS.
Nietzsche already had that idea, and he blames the Christians for the descent of humanity from the high-minded Mediterranean of antiquity to the nihilism of Medieval Europe. The discoveries in science, the evolution of art and culture, the improvement of humankind as a whole was severely slowed with the rise of Christianity, especially the writings of the liar, Paul.
And the Renaissance? This rebirth of art and culture was the rediscovery and translation of the Greeks and Romans. It was a beautiful ballast against the proliferation of the Christian sect.
The main idea here is that Christianity, and and any religion that promises a wonderful afterlife, discounts real life. If the main goal is not of this world, then why aspire to be great here? Everyone can be great in the afterlife. If all souls are equal and can get to heaven, then a great person is no better than a weak or foolish person. Faith is the enemy of reason. Salvation from without is the enemy of salvation from within.
May 7, 2010
Unlike many other people who have reviewed this book, I do not believe that Nietzsche was an idiot. It is extremely obvious in The Antichrist, that Nietzsche was strongly right-wing, and therefore had a strongly right-wing outlook on life. This is NOT a book for someone who is NOT right-wing themself, and also CLOSED-MINDED TOWARD OTHER WAYS OF THINKING.
Its true, Nietzsche's beliefs are not democratic. He did not believe that all men were created equal. He believed that strength was good, that weakness was bad, and that the strong should rule over the weak. He saw Christianity as something that was embracing all the weaknesses in man, and therefore something that was universally wrong.
I am not saying that I am a supporter of Nietzsche's philosophy. In reality I am a very Left-Wing thinker. I am not racist in any way, and I am not against any religion in its entirety, but I do not think that it is harmful for me to once in a while take a glimpse into the world on the other side of the spectrum.
Its true, Nietzsche's beliefs are not democratic. He did not believe that all men were created equal. He believed that strength was good, that weakness was bad, and that the strong should rule over the weak. He saw Christianity as something that was embracing all the weaknesses in man, and therefore something that was universally wrong.
I am not saying that I am a supporter of Nietzsche's philosophy. In reality I am a very Left-Wing thinker. I am not racist in any way, and I am not against any religion in its entirety, but I do not think that it is harmful for me to once in a while take a glimpse into the world on the other side of the spectrum.
December 20, 2016
أقرأ ل "نيتشه" وأسمع صراخه في أذني.
September 30, 2020
Wikipedia says that the German Der Antichrist could conceivably be translated into English as either The Anti-Christ or The Anti-Christian; but translator Walter Kaufmann (a name that brings me back to college philosophy classes; it always seemed like that guy had translated just about everything) opted for The Antichrist, no hyphen, noting that "a translation of the title as The Antichristian overlooks that Nietzsche plainly means to be as provocative as possible." Good old Nietzsche obviously learned from the commercial success of Marilyn Manson's Antichrist Superstar.
Anyway, Nietzsche goes hard at Christianity here. I'm still very put off whenever he hints at politics or at his contempt for people he considers beneath him (and he does more than hint). I don't think I'd want to live in Nietzsche's vision of an ideal society. But when he talks about the psychology of belief, or about the way a belief in the Beyond alienates us from life, or analyzes what it really means to hold a conviction, or contrasts Buddhism's conception of suffering with Christianity's, well, call me crazy, but I think he makes a fair amount of sense.
February 22, 2015
أعتقد أن العنوان الثاني أكثر بلاغة : هذا الكتاب عبارة عن لعنة فلسفية للمسيحية. كل هذا الحقد يثير الدهشة بالفعل. و لا يمكن أن أتفهمه الا لو تعرّفت على النمط الاجتماعي السائد في المانيا القرن التاسع عشر. لكن عموما ففلسفة الاحتقار النيتشوية، لم تكن المسيحية ضحيتها الوحيدة و ان كانت أشدها.
يدهشني نيتشه في هذا الكتاب بأنه كملحد لا أخلاقيّ، لا يعادي الأديان تماما، و رغم سلسلة اللعنات التي يطلقها على المسيحية في هذا الكتاب، فهو يقرّ أيضا بأهميّة الإله الذي قدمته بعض الثقافات الأخرى. المهمّ بالنسبة لنيتشة هو احترام الانسان لغرائزه، و احترام الاله لغرائز الانسان التي جبله عليها.
أيضا، بدا لي نيتشة اكثر منطقية في هدمه.. لا توجد تناقضات كبيرة هذه المرة، خلافا لأفول الأوثان. لا أريد الخوض في المسائل التيولوجية، فهناك الكثير من المسائل التي يمكن للقس أن يؤاخذ عليها، كتأويل الاصحاحات المذكورة، يجب التنويه ان بعض الاصحاحات احدث عليها بعض التحويرات..
في النهاية، حاول نيتشة تقديم البديل، صفحة يتيمة، حاول أن يكسبها الهالة القدسية اللازمة لبناء بديل للمسيح، لكنّها كانت في نهاية الأمر هدما لا بناء. تواصل لعنات على المسيحية. نقيض المسيح الذي قدمه في النهاية مجرد كاره للمسيحية. و لا أدري لماذا، لقد بدا لي الأمر متسرعا جدا، و كان من الممكن أن يطبخ نقيض المسيح بطريقة أكثر عبقرية، خصوصا و قد وفّر لنفسه طيلة الكتاب ـ لعن المسيحية، العناصر الكافية للطبخة..
أجل، يجب مراجعة قيم الخير و الشر، قياسها الاول الحياة نفسها. الغرائز الأساسية، حفظ النوع، القيم الطبيعية الاولى.
أجل الطبيعة تفرض نظاما هرميا، و المساواة الجرداء مجرّد هذيان.
يدهشني نيتشه في هذا الكتاب بأنه كملحد لا أخلاقيّ، لا يعادي الأديان تماما، و رغم سلسلة اللعنات التي يطلقها على المسيحية في هذا الكتاب، فهو يقرّ أيضا بأهميّة الإله الذي قدمته بعض الثقافات الأخرى. المهمّ بالنسبة لنيتشة هو احترام الانسان لغرائزه، و احترام الاله لغرائز الانسان التي جبله عليها.
أيضا، بدا لي نيتشة اكثر منطقية في هدمه.. لا توجد تناقضات كبيرة هذه المرة، خلافا لأفول الأوثان. لا أريد الخوض في المسائل التيولوجية، فهناك الكثير من المسائل التي يمكن للقس أن يؤاخذ عليها، كتأويل الاصحاحات المذكورة، يجب التنويه ان بعض الاصحاحات احدث عليها بعض التحويرات..
في النهاية، حاول نيتشة تقديم البديل، صفحة يتيمة، حاول أن يكسبها الهالة القدسية اللازمة لبناء بديل للمسيح، لكنّها كانت في نهاية الأمر هدما لا بناء. تواصل لعنات على المسيحية. نقيض المسيح الذي قدمه في النهاية مجرد كاره للمسيحية. و لا أدري لماذا، لقد بدا لي الأمر متسرعا جدا، و كان من الممكن أن يطبخ نقيض المسيح بطريقة أكثر عبقرية، خصوصا و قد وفّر لنفسه طيلة الكتاب ـ لعن المسيحية، العناصر الكافية للطبخة..
أجل، يجب مراجعة قيم الخير و الشر، قياسها الاول الحياة نفسها. الغرائز الأساسية، حفظ النوع، القيم الطبيعية الاولى.
أجل الطبيعة تفرض نظاما هرميا، و المساواة الجرداء مجرّد هذيان.
Read
October 17, 2023We all agree that religion has been an important part of human history and culture, providing comfort and hope to many, when they no longer had anything to believe in.
However, Nietzsche's critique highlights some of the limitations and flaws of organized religion. While I see the value of his ideas, I also agree with Nietzsche's points about the herd mentality and how it can suppress individualism and creativity. Saying that Christianity and its central figure -Jesus - have been used as a tool
of oppression and domination, through its doctrine of " love thy neighbor ", one could say that, yes, Christianity has perpetuated a slave mentality and prevented individuals from attaining true freedom.
Moreover, Nietzsche asserts that Christianity has been responsible for inducing a guilt-ridden mentality in people. I can see how this can be a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it can lead to introspection and self reflection, but on the other hand, it can also be used as a tool for control and manipulation. It's crucial to recognize when feelings of guilt and shame are helpful, and when they are harmful. Christianity's focus on sin, justice and punishment weighs heavily on the psyche of believers, leading to feelings of inadequacy and self-loathing. Nietzsche posits that this guilt-ridden mentality serves as a means of control, with the priestly class using it to impose their beliefs and values on the masses. I think while Nietzsche's ideas may challenge traditional religious beliefs, this can also be seen as an invitation to reflect on what we believe and Why. Although his emphasis on individual autonomy and self - actualization could be also interpreted as promoting narcissism or hedonism over the common good.
The Anti-Christ may be a harsh critique, but, ultimately, I believe that individuals should be free to explore their spirituality and beliefs without being constrained by organized religion.. We should be able to embrace our individuality while also recognizing the importance of living a life that is fulfilling and meaningful, and Nietzsche's critique provides a quite valuable perspective on how we can achieve this. We can learn from his ideas to find our own path in life, whether or not it aligns with traditional religious beliefs. I definitely recommend this book, even if here and there is rife with unfounded claims, hasty generalizations and rhetorical devices that often distract from the core thesis, but in the same time offers an appealing alternative to the muddied waters of contemporary religious discourse.
However, Nietzsche's critique highlights some of the limitations and flaws of organized religion. While I see the value of his ideas, I also agree with Nietzsche's points about the herd mentality and how it can suppress individualism and creativity. Saying that Christianity and its central figure -Jesus - have been used as a tool
of oppression and domination, through its doctrine of " love thy neighbor ", one could say that, yes, Christianity has perpetuated a slave mentality and prevented individuals from attaining true freedom.
Moreover, Nietzsche asserts that Christianity has been responsible for inducing a guilt-ridden mentality in people. I can see how this can be a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it can lead to introspection and self reflection, but on the other hand, it can also be used as a tool for control and manipulation. It's crucial to recognize when feelings of guilt and shame are helpful, and when they are harmful. Christianity's focus on sin, justice and punishment weighs heavily on the psyche of believers, leading to feelings of inadequacy and self-loathing. Nietzsche posits that this guilt-ridden mentality serves as a means of control, with the priestly class using it to impose their beliefs and values on the masses. I think while Nietzsche's ideas may challenge traditional religious beliefs, this can also be seen as an invitation to reflect on what we believe and Why. Although his emphasis on individual autonomy and self - actualization could be also interpreted as promoting narcissism or hedonism over the common good.
The Anti-Christ may be a harsh critique, but, ultimately, I believe that individuals should be free to explore their spirituality and beliefs without being constrained by organized religion.. We should be able to embrace our individuality while also recognizing the importance of living a life that is fulfilling and meaningful, and Nietzsche's critique provides a quite valuable perspective on how we can achieve this. We can learn from his ideas to find our own path in life, whether or not it aligns with traditional religious beliefs. I definitely recommend this book, even if here and there is rife with unfounded claims, hasty generalizations and rhetorical devices that often distract from the core thesis, but in the same time offers an appealing alternative to the muddied waters of contemporary religious discourse.
January 23, 2022
Let me see now, in this book Nietzsche is against equality, wants a return to the older values, and believes in a special privileged class. That is the exact same components that make up American Fascist or American First Members or what I prefer to call Trumpites. The book ‘Behold, America’ by Churchwell pretty much framed her narrative around those three components.
In addition to those components necessary for Trumpism, Nietzsche added one more, let your feeling be your guide and trust in your own instincts. I can’t count the number of times Trump makes a statement to the affect ‘only trust me, don’t trust fake news’, or his frequent appeals to our fear, uncertainty and doubt, our most basic of all instinctual feelings. Nietzsche wants us to say ‘yes to the now’, he wants us to ‘stop thinking and follow me, your leader’ (that quote doesn’t come from Nietzsche it comes from John Huston in the ‘Why We Fight Series’ by Frank Capra) exactly what the fascist of WW II advocated and exactly as Trump wants us to be today.
Nietzsche is convinced that there are only a few gifted intellectuals and a few worthwhile artisans, and the rest of us are of the herd and need to be led and are not deserving of special class status. In this book, Nietzsche believes in special classes of people and they are the ones who deserve the privileges in his system. Trump loves his ‘super big brain’, and thinks he’s smarter than anyone, and moreover, he believes he never has to ask for forgiveness since he has nothing to forgive because he has never done anything wrong (a sentiment Nietzsche embraces within this book).
In this book, Nietzsche hates equality. Fairness is nothing but weakness for him. It’s the ultimate ‘moral acid’ that wears away at everything that makes his world view great to him. Trump seems to only believe in fairness for his self identified groups of privileged at the expense of the other.
Nietzsche rejects Christian values and wants a transvaluation of all values. He does want a return to values be it an older original set of mythical values. You could even say he wants to make Europeans great again because they need to return to the old values. Where have I seen that message before, oh yeah, ‘make America great again’ reminds me of Nietzsche’s search for older values. (Value is always a loaded word, for some people traditional values mean making gays be ashamed of themselves and forbidding them to express their love, for example, hardly a value worth having in my belief system).
Almost everything Nietzsche says is absurd. Nietzsche is definitely not a Nazi (after all, he is not a nationalist or a socialist and he doesn’t like workers and mostly he was not an anti-semite, Nazis actually weren't socialist either), but American Fascist who morphed into American First and now have trans-morphed to Trumpism can get their complete system from this little book.
I give this book five stars not because I like what is in it, I give it five stars because it relates very closely to modern day Trumpism with the exception of the Christian bashing that is within this book. I would even say that Nietzsche’s brand of relativism overlaps with Trumps version of absolutism since both lead to the myth of a superman among ordinary individuals and each of them believe they are that superman.
In addition to those components necessary for Trumpism, Nietzsche added one more, let your feeling be your guide and trust in your own instincts. I can’t count the number of times Trump makes a statement to the affect ‘only trust me, don’t trust fake news’, or his frequent appeals to our fear, uncertainty and doubt, our most basic of all instinctual feelings. Nietzsche wants us to say ‘yes to the now’, he wants us to ‘stop thinking and follow me, your leader’ (that quote doesn’t come from Nietzsche it comes from John Huston in the ‘Why We Fight Series’ by Frank Capra) exactly what the fascist of WW II advocated and exactly as Trump wants us to be today.
Nietzsche is convinced that there are only a few gifted intellectuals and a few worthwhile artisans, and the rest of us are of the herd and need to be led and are not deserving of special class status. In this book, Nietzsche believes in special classes of people and they are the ones who deserve the privileges in his system. Trump loves his ‘super big brain’, and thinks he’s smarter than anyone, and moreover, he believes he never has to ask for forgiveness since he has nothing to forgive because he has never done anything wrong (a sentiment Nietzsche embraces within this book).
In this book, Nietzsche hates equality. Fairness is nothing but weakness for him. It’s the ultimate ‘moral acid’ that wears away at everything that makes his world view great to him. Trump seems to only believe in fairness for his self identified groups of privileged at the expense of the other.
Nietzsche rejects Christian values and wants a transvaluation of all values. He does want a return to values be it an older original set of mythical values. You could even say he wants to make Europeans great again because they need to return to the old values. Where have I seen that message before, oh yeah, ‘make America great again’ reminds me of Nietzsche’s search for older values. (Value is always a loaded word, for some people traditional values mean making gays be ashamed of themselves and forbidding them to express their love, for example, hardly a value worth having in my belief system).
Almost everything Nietzsche says is absurd. Nietzsche is definitely not a Nazi (after all, he is not a nationalist or a socialist and he doesn’t like workers and mostly he was not an anti-semite, Nazis actually weren't socialist either), but American Fascist who morphed into American First and now have trans-morphed to Trumpism can get their complete system from this little book.
I give this book five stars not because I like what is in it, I give it five stars because it relates very closely to modern day Trumpism with the exception of the Christian bashing that is within this book. I would even say that Nietzsche’s brand of relativism overlaps with Trumps version of absolutism since both lead to the myth of a superman among ordinary individuals and each of them believe they are that superman.
November 17, 2012
كتاب جريء و شديد في انتقاده للمسيحية.
أعتقد أن الكتاب اكتسب الأهمية في وقت صدوره في اوروبا في بداية القرن العشرين,و لا شك أنه كان جريئا في طرحه و إثارته للأسئلة
يبدو الكتاب كخواطر تخلو من التدقيق و التوثيق. فيه إنصاف للإسلام و إنتقاد لمحاكم التفتيش.
إليكم بعض الفقرات التي رأيتها صادمة و مثيرة
أعتقد أن الكتاب اكتسب الأهمية في وقت صدوره في اوروبا في بداية القرن العشرين,و لا شك أنه كان جريئا في طرحه و إثارته للأسئلة
يبدو الكتاب كخواطر تخلو من التدقيق و التوثيق. فيه إنصاف للإسلام و إنتقاد لمحاكم التفتيش.
إليكم بعض الفقرات التي رأيتها صادمة و مثيرة
January 26, 2009
Green vomit.
August 4, 2019
Solo es otra versión subjetiva de los hechos, tan válida como cualquier otra.
April 10, 2024
The Nietzsche who is most of interest to me is the Nietzsche of Beyond Good and Evil and especially The Gay Science. The Antichrist (arguably better rendered as The Anti-Christian) is pretty far down on my list of favorite Nietzsche books, but as always, it includes some unforgettable passages.
Anyone who thinks Nietzsche is unproblematically "anti-religious" should probably review it, and perhaps focus on sections 33-36, in which he provides a surprisingly sensitive and insightful reading of the career of Jesus in the Synoptic Gospels.
Speaking of which, it is one of the book's many substantial critical and historical problems that Nietzsche did not distinguish between the Synoptic Gospels and the Gospel of John; much of what he said about Paul applies equally well to John. But as Walter Kaufmann has noted, this book is so replete with historical errors, it would be pedantic to enumerate them. This does not mean the book is devoid of important insights.
Antichrist also represents a great deal of what I think of as the "bad Nietzsche," the polemicist who is more of a no-sayer than a yes-sayer, who sounds, at times, bitter and shrill, and whose contrariness poises him to positions I find intensely problematic, such as his wildly-ahistorical defense of the Indian caste system as explained in the Law Code of Manu, which he clearly only partly understood.
In his limited defense, this book was conceived as the first of four volumes in a Revaluation of all Values series, and I believe the negativity of the book was to a large degree intended as a way-clearing for what was to come, a process of breaking bonds and creating a clearing for new growth.
Anyone who thinks Nietzsche is unproblematically "anti-religious" should probably review it, and perhaps focus on sections 33-36, in which he provides a surprisingly sensitive and insightful reading of the career of Jesus in the Synoptic Gospels.
Speaking of which, it is one of the book's many substantial critical and historical problems that Nietzsche did not distinguish between the Synoptic Gospels and the Gospel of John; much of what he said about Paul applies equally well to John. But as Walter Kaufmann has noted, this book is so replete with historical errors, it would be pedantic to enumerate them. This does not mean the book is devoid of important insights.
Antichrist also represents a great deal of what I think of as the "bad Nietzsche," the polemicist who is more of a no-sayer than a yes-sayer, who sounds, at times, bitter and shrill, and whose contrariness poises him to positions I find intensely problematic, such as his wildly-ahistorical defense of the Indian caste system as explained in the Law Code of Manu, which he clearly only partly understood.
In his limited defense, this book was conceived as the first of four volumes in a Revaluation of all Values series, and I believe the negativity of the book was to a large degree intended as a way-clearing for what was to come, a process of breaking bonds and creating a clearing for new growth.
December 19, 2021
8.5/10.
Nietzsche hates a manifestation of Christianity. It is the manifestation which renounces life ("once saved, always saved") and leads to a certain life-sickness. Nietzsche hates the deification of the lowly as the best; the "tolerance" of every single attack you, your family, and your nation receives; the shunning of intellect, of Renaissance-type beauty, of rejoicing in a mastery of life; the inability to judge which is derived from the equal value of all creatures (I just had a Protestant tell me that a murderer was equal in value in the sight of God as Kant, Plato, or any true philosopher); the degeneration of the word "equality", making it now physical, intellectual, — nigh moral! — and twisting it into "liberation theology", the "liberating" of the worst and the hypertrophy of resentment against the best.
Societies work well under Christianity — but proper Christianity. The religion of acceptance, tolerance, of bringing in and "loving" every man as your neighbor will implode any nation. Christianity in a proper manifestation — life-affirming, evolution-supporting, morality-raising — is a K-selected strategy which breeds charity within the group, and a proper reaction against the out-group. It rises the individual to restrain themself sexually — for their own good and for the good of the nation (Weininger and Carle Zimmerman shows that this preserves civilization) — by imposing a metaphysical judgement upon deviant and reckless promiscuity.
But when all judgement is suspended, what good is that? Should you marry the ugly, the poor, and the dumb? No! One must have worldly selection too, for your own genetic interests and future progeny. A certain discrimination must be made in this world that is essential for survival and for life. The mass acceptance of all — the complete suicide of the mind — is what our culture has gone into. We have been infected by the muckiest muck of degenerated, mind-destroying postmodern Christianity. We have postmodern Puritans prancing around, rioting and looting stores, in a cancerous crusade to manifest that great virtue, Equality, on earth — to bring the true Millennium! They deify the new "oppressed" and hate the founders, the creators, the best of the West who actually brang forth Beauty, Truth, and Knowledge. All is stomped into the dust in favor of the new "slaves" with their postmodern slave morality.
The weakening of the instincts of Western Man: this is our fatal disease. Strong men have strong religions. Strong religions create confident, inspired, achieving peoples who bring forth their world-historical contribution to humanity. Religion is the life-spirit of a people, its shared framework from which to devise music, painting, poetry, literature, and philosophy. The creations of a strong group affirms itself: it rejoices in its achievements. It is not self-castigatory; it does not complain of its woes. It holds its head high. This is what Christianity once was — the divine spirit propelling Western Man to greatness. With the rise of genetic mutations, debased Christianity has taken hold of the intellectuals, further debasing any aspirant spirit left over from the Spring and Summer of our Culture. The demagogues of this debased dirt-religion — corrupted from its once high spirits [think Church spires, Madonnas, Bach, Louis IX, and the Protestant work ethic] — hammer into the masses' heads that they cannot justify their own existence. Best to accept anything that comes. Don't fight, be tolerant! That's virtue, you know!
Corruption, corruption, corruption! The only hope for Christianity today is for its weak, "liberal", "tolerant", ever-changing sects to fizzle out in their self-contradictions and self-hatred. Then the bearers of ancient strength — the Church Fathers and Orthodoxy — can come out of their ancient refuge and show us moderns how far we have fallen.
Nietzsche hates a manifestation of Christianity. It is the manifestation which renounces life ("once saved, always saved") and leads to a certain life-sickness. Nietzsche hates the deification of the lowly as the best; the "tolerance" of every single attack you, your family, and your nation receives; the shunning of intellect, of Renaissance-type beauty, of rejoicing in a mastery of life; the inability to judge which is derived from the equal value of all creatures (I just had a Protestant tell me that a murderer was equal in value in the sight of God as Kant, Plato, or any true philosopher); the degeneration of the word "equality", making it now physical, intellectual, — nigh moral! — and twisting it into "liberation theology", the "liberating" of the worst and the hypertrophy of resentment against the best.
Societies work well under Christianity — but proper Christianity. The religion of acceptance, tolerance, of bringing in and "loving" every man as your neighbor will implode any nation. Christianity in a proper manifestation — life-affirming, evolution-supporting, morality-raising — is a K-selected strategy which breeds charity within the group, and a proper reaction against the out-group. It rises the individual to restrain themself sexually — for their own good and for the good of the nation (Weininger and Carle Zimmerman shows that this preserves civilization) — by imposing a metaphysical judgement upon deviant and reckless promiscuity.
But when all judgement is suspended, what good is that? Should you marry the ugly, the poor, and the dumb? No! One must have worldly selection too, for your own genetic interests and future progeny. A certain discrimination must be made in this world that is essential for survival and for life. The mass acceptance of all — the complete suicide of the mind — is what our culture has gone into. We have been infected by the muckiest muck of degenerated, mind-destroying postmodern Christianity. We have postmodern Puritans prancing around, rioting and looting stores, in a cancerous crusade to manifest that great virtue, Equality, on earth — to bring the true Millennium! They deify the new "oppressed" and hate the founders, the creators, the best of the West who actually brang forth Beauty, Truth, and Knowledge. All is stomped into the dust in favor of the new "slaves" with their postmodern slave morality.
The weakening of the instincts of Western Man: this is our fatal disease. Strong men have strong religions. Strong religions create confident, inspired, achieving peoples who bring forth their world-historical contribution to humanity. Religion is the life-spirit of a people, its shared framework from which to devise music, painting, poetry, literature, and philosophy. The creations of a strong group affirms itself: it rejoices in its achievements. It is not self-castigatory; it does not complain of its woes. It holds its head high. This is what Christianity once was — the divine spirit propelling Western Man to greatness. With the rise of genetic mutations, debased Christianity has taken hold of the intellectuals, further debasing any aspirant spirit left over from the Spring and Summer of our Culture. The demagogues of this debased dirt-religion — corrupted from its once high spirits [think Church spires, Madonnas, Bach, Louis IX, and the Protestant work ethic] — hammer into the masses' heads that they cannot justify their own existence. Best to accept anything that comes. Don't fight, be tolerant! That's virtue, you know!
Corruption, corruption, corruption! The only hope for Christianity today is for its weak, "liberal", "tolerant", ever-changing sects to fizzle out in their self-contradictions and self-hatred. Then the bearers of ancient strength — the Church Fathers and Orthodoxy — can come out of their ancient refuge and show us moderns how far we have fallen.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,649 reviews