Ancient men could really immerse themselves into these things, while modern man needs something to keep the attention going

anyone who can actually pay attention over time, we call "high functioning autistic"

Actually, the Bible follows this path too

and try to psychiatrically intervene

yeah I mean if there isnt a chick twerking on the bed I sort of zone out

Repetitiveness is also quite present in all South Asian scriptures

Hindu, Buddhist etc

Even repetition of certain phrases

I believe I read that it had certain spiritual purposes

I appreciate the fact that you can read nietszche while taking a shit since everything he did was loosely connected paragraphs

just little points here and there

to chew on

while youre wiping your ass

Because that's how these texts were designed, to be a proper source, inspiration to the reader, not a collection of quantitative data that can be apprexnded solely from the perspective of usefulness

important off topic question: when writing music, is it best to start with melodies, then add harmonies, then make it chord progressions, or the reverse?

@vigil#3835 Nietzsche was quite peculiar in a way that he sometimes wrote well prepared and elaborated thoughts, and sometimes it seems like he simply wrote down passing thoughts, even half-baked ones, but wich are nevetheless a testimony to the lucidity of his thoughts and are hence valuable

He sometimes wrote as if he was drifting away with thoughts, not caring to "formalize" these thoughts

But then, he switches in another moment to completely straightforward, surgical way of writing

@Deleted User 57835c2c Industry follows the pattern of first choosing key, tempo, then adding rhythm, bass, and then the rest

I think he mostly put stuff together to get the reader to think

without suggesting a ton

but

his actual philosophy was bad

thats neither here nor there

I personally always start by playing keys, using software emulations, such as piano, clavinet, or synthesizer, which gives me idea for a complete song

I see

@vigil#3835 I actually think he wrote 70% of the time the way you justsaid, but quite often completely drifted away and just wrote down what he had immediatelly in his mind, thoughts that he neither cared to formalize and elaborate on, neither did he seem to care whether the reader will comprehend them in their true meaning

I think that at least "Genealogy of Morals" must be understood as a fundamental book

Hard to call "Bad Philosophy"

I just mean his ultimate proposals on "how we should live" seemed to fall flat and just reiterate Christianity in a naturalistic sense

but yeah

I appreciate the scattershot style of his

I must love Nietzsche along with Schopenhauer for the fact that they deconstructed Teutonic sentiments alone

Along with Romanticism

I like Schopenhauers "metaphysics" if you can call it that a ton but his ethics are garbage

like all ascetics he just lived out his life smashing hookers and eating well

Which again, doesn't prove he wasn't right

No there are other reasons he wasnt right beyond his failure to live by his principles

SODOMIZE

THE WEAK

BUT DON'T HATE THE JEWS