Power / Will

Sounds like Nietzsche

Widely known to the public "Will to power" by Nietzsche is a misnomer, which has been misinterpreted and misused for the political slogans. It should be "Will to life and pleasure".

Reply to Corvus

No, actually the will to power is a sensation above all, and certainly suggesting it is "Will to Life and pleasure," is the misnomer...

Reply to Jamesk

More than just one man wrote basically more or less that same notion, the question is why are you looking for it?

Quoting DifferentiatingEgg

No, actually the will to power is a sensation above all, and certainly suggesting it is "Will to Life and pleasure," is the misnomer...

I seem to be able to understand "Will to life and pleasure" ok. But I have no idea what "Will to Power" means.

Could you please explain what you mean by the will to power is a sensation above all? Did Nietzsche give out clear reference or explanation on Will to Power?

Could you also explain why "Will to life and pleasure" is a misnomer?

Reply to Corvus
The electrical sensation of that often comes in pleasure and life affirming activities. That sensation that runs down your spine when you feel empowered. That doesn't mean idolize a will to live a "long life of pleasure...", the last man seeks a long life of meaningless pleasures. This is why Nietzsche doesn't object to tyranny and especially self tyranny, to build a discipline, is but an art form to Nietzsche.

Quoting DifferentiatingEgg

The electrical sensation of that often comes in pleasure and life affirming activities. That sensation that runs down your spine when you feel empowered. That doesn't mean idolize a will to live a "long life of pleasure...", the last man seeks a long life of meaningless pleasures. This is why Nietzsche doesn't object to tyranny and especially self tyranny, to build a discipline, is but an art form to Nietzsche.

Where does he say that? We need the relevant quotes and the source of the original texts for the quotes at this point.

Reply to Corvus Ah, very well, please permit me the time to produce a detailed (but straight forward) account for you, if you would. This way I give a more complete picture rather than leave you with questions since you're eager to challenge me for them.

Reply to Corvus
We can start with Thus Spoke Zarathustra Prologue Section 3 that expresses the sensation caused by the "Lightning" through reification we can empathize with the notion of a "lick of electricity" if you've ever been electrocuted even from the slightest bit such as licking a D Battery:

Wo ist doch der Blitz, der euch mit seiner Zunge lecke?

From there we can move to something like The Antichrist Aphorism 2 what is good? Everything that is the FEELING of power.

2.

Was ist gut? – Alles, was das Gefühl der Macht, den Willen zur Macht, die Macht selbst im Menschen erhöht.

Then we can simply ask ourselves what is will? A desire, a potential, a stimulus within us, a sensation of something prejudged within us something we can predicate ourselves in.

Reply to Vera Mont

Quoting Jamesk

I am trying to remember who wrote something along the lines that, man always seek to control other men, and avoids being controlled by others.

Quoting Vera Mont

Sounds like Nietzsche

Or a bad reading of Nietzsche.

The relation of force to force is called "will:' That is why we must avoid at aIl costs the misinterpretations of the Nietzschean principle of the will to power. This principle doesn't mean that the will wants power or wishes to dominate. As long as the will to power is interpreted in terms of a "desire to dominate," we inevitably make it depend on established values, the only ones able to determine, in any given case or conflict, who must be "recognized" as the most powerful. We then cannot recognize the nature of the will to power as an elastic principle of aIl of our evaluations, as a hidden principle for the creation of new values not yet recognized. The will to power, says Nietzsche, consists not in coveting or even in taking but in creating and giving. Power, as a will to power, is not that which the will wants, but that which wants in the will (Dionysus himself). The will to power is the differential element from which derive the forces at work, as weIl as their respective quality in a complex whole. (Deleuze on Nietzsche)

Quoting Corvus

Did Nietzsche give out clear reference or explanation on Will to Power?

Many believe they know what will and what power are, and accordingly interpret the title 'Will to Power.' One needs to stop linking the concepts of 'will' and 'goal.' The will to power is not a will that has power as its goal, which strives for power. This will does not aim at anything. If there are goals present, they are set by the will; they are at its service and cannot be external to it. It does not strive for any goal; it itself is eternal becoming. This becoming is struggle. Nietzsche: 'Willing in general is equivalent to the desire to become stronger, the desire for growth – and the desire to have the means for it.'

Quoting DifferentiatingEgg

We can start with Thus Spoke Zarathustra Prologue Section 3 that expresses the sensation caused by the "Lightning" through reification we can empathize with the notion of a "lick of electricity" if you've ever been electrocuted even from the slightest bit such as licking a D Battery:

Wo ist doch der Blitz, der euch mit seiner Zunge lecke?

Not quite sure if POWER means "the sensation caused by the "Lightning" through reification we can empathize with the notion of a "lick of electricity" if you've ever been electrocuted even from the slightest bit such as licking a D Battery:"

Power could be used to mean electric energy or force, but it seems to make little sense here.

Wouldn't it be closer to the mental drive for achieving good and positive things in life or needed in life in all living organisms? This still makes more sense to me.


Quoting DifferentiatingEgg

From there we can move to something like The Antichrist Aphorism 2 what is good? Everything that is the FEELING of power.

But isn't "life and pleasure" far better than FELLING of power? Without life, there is no power, no sensation. Just nothing and blankness forever. That can't have anything to do with feeling of power or Good. What about pleasure? Isn't it what life is all about?

Quoting DifferentiatingEgg

Then we can simply ask ourselves what is will? A desire, a potential, a stimulus within us, a sensation of something prejudged within us something we can predicate ourselves in.

For me "will" is desire or intentionality in the form of latent perception. It operates both consciously (in a mental way) and unconsciously (on a biological level). It is the underlying foundational perception of general perceptions and actions in the living organisms.

The reason that you wake up in the morning, opening your eyes from deep sleep, even though no one is waking you up is due to the act of your will wanting to face the day, and keep living sustaining your life. Your body feels hunger, thirst, tiredness etc, your mind feels bored so you want to do something to entertain you, and you want to meet your friends for chats to get rid of your boredom etc, all come from your will operating in your mind and body underneath your general perception and bodily functions.

That is my idea on the will to power of Nietzsche, but you may disagree. I kind of agree with your saying that will is a sensation, but sensation is via the bodily organs. Will as sensation has no bodily organ dealing with the sensation, hence it seems to be unclear on that point.

And power for electricity like feeling? It sounds too contingent. Some folks may experience feelings and sensation like that, but I cannot recall having such feelings or sensations at all. Hence the explanation is not quite making sense I am afraid.

Quoting Number2018

Nietzsche: 'Willing in general is equivalent to the desire to become stronger, the desire for growth – and the desire to have the means for it.'

Sure, I could go with that. Not quite same as my own idea and interpretation of Will to power, however it makes more sense to me. :up: :cool:

Power, as a will to power, is not that which the will wants, but that which wants in the will (Dionysus himself). The will to power is the differential element from which derive the forces at work, as weIl as their respective quality in a complex whole. (Deleuze on Nietzsche)

Nietzsche is a philosopher of power who managed to conceive of power without relying on political theory. Foucault, rather than Deleuze, has become his most consistent follower. However, Foucault extends far beyond Nietzsche’s philosophy of power. While Nietzsche grounds morals and institutions in the practices of distinguished groups or individuals, Foucault ultimately removes the psychological aspect from his approach. As a result, conscious intentions and schemes become derivatives of impersonal strategies. The issues of origin, implicit meaning, or explicit intentionality are replaced with relations of forces that manifest on the surface of events. Foucault deconstructs the notions of the subject and its social status. Thus, neither individual subjects nor the masses influence the course of history: subjects emerge simultaneously with the relationships between forces that arise between them and are defined by these relationships.

Quoting Corvus

But isn't "life and pleasure" far better than FELLING of power? Without life, there is no power, no sensation. Just nothing and blankness forever. That can't have anything to do with feeling of power or Good. What about pleasure? Isn't it what life is all about?

Hey, just cause Nietzsche details his values doesn't mean you can't hold life and pleasure at a higher value. Nietzsche equates life to the will to power. So for him, it's like saying "Life" but "Life" in those moments when you get that sensation of lightning.

Nietzsche's a tricky little bietzche like that.

Will to power as the driving force to overcoming the fundamental chaos of existence.

Quoting DifferentiatingEgg

Hey, just cause Nietzsche details his values doesn't mean you can't hold life and pleasure at a higher value. Nietzsche equates life to the will to power. So for him, it's like saying "Life" but "Life" in those moments when you get that sensation of lightning.

All life on earth is burning away into the ashes day by day. All the biological living bodies burns itself as they consume oxygen, food and liquid for daily living into the old age and eventual death. Life is a temporal state. The conscious intelligent beings are aware of the fact and the destiny of the life. Hence they desire to prolong their lives, which is the basic instinct manifests as Will to Life.

Even the lesser animals with no idea of what death means, have and displays fear when chased by their predators, or faced with the sign of danger, and then try to hide way from the immanent and imminent danger. Why? Because they have Will to Life from the animalistic instinct.

Your interpretation Will to Power as the electrical sensation which runs down your spine due to some exciting objects or events, sounds not quite true. Because the sensation would be too short and evanescent, therefore meaningless. If you were talking about the physical sensation from bodily pleasure, then it sounds still ambiguous because one doesn't have to Will the sensations. It happens naturally with the bodily functions and operations, why does one need to Will for it?

Will to Life and Pleasure makes more sense because life wants to keep living as long as possible, and life gets richer and more meaningful when it accompanies the strong rich pleasures which are both physical and mental in their origin.

Quoting DifferentiatingEgg

Nietzsche's a tricky little bietzche like that.

The original philosophical writings and ideas by the historical philosophers need to be translated into the present reality to suit, be intelligible and understandable, hence we could make more sense of the world and life in it.

Sensible interpretation and clarification on the ideas will prevent the ideas being misused by the political power hungry folks or business folks who are driven by the wrong motives for their egotistic gains and trying to get the support of the public for their ill willed projects or campaigns under the slogan of misinterpreted and modified meaning of the great philosophical ideas.

Reply to Corvus

I really didn't want to do this, but the reply feels relatively indignant especially with that dogshit you wrote at the end there attempting to insult my intelligence with the whole dogshit on sensible interpretation. So, we're going to axe that notion right here. And we will discuss why you're full of nonsense.

Your biggest mistake is trying to assume that your perspective is Nietzsche's own. You're taking your concepts and putting them into Nietzsche's as if what you think is what Nietzsche own thoughts were, as if Nietzsche said it... No, thats your wrong understanding of him. Instead of attempting to understand Nietzsche's perspective you let your own process of reification ruin it by distortion of his thoughts into something you can understand. Massive No No.

For Nietzsche the wiil is something that drives, it is a multiplicity of several drives. A drive isn't something we control, it's not exactly a desire, though a desire can form from not fulfilling a drive. So first and foremost, we can see the will to something is already a sensation.

Nietzsche, from BGE § 19:So let us for once be more cautious, let us be "unphilosophical": let us say that in all willing there is firstly a plurality of sensations, namely, the sensation of the condition "AWAY FROM WHICH we go," the sensation of the condition "TOWARDS WHICH we go,"

Secondly we can see that in his first few aphorisms of BGE Nietzsche talks about the will to truth, or the will to delusion, thus there are a multiplicity of drives/wills and thus we can represent this Will to X. In your little dream world you equate Life and Pleasure to Power. And for Nietzsche this is an absolutely grotesque equation that he himself would despise as a hedonistic lastman nihilist. For the Last man has the WILL TO LIFE as his greatest drive. And the Hedonist has the Will to Pleasure as his greatest drive.

Make no mistake, Nietzsche's greatest examples of highest men are the beasts of prey who live life dangerously...

Thus Spoke Zarathustra :Man is a rope stretched between the animal and the Superman—a rope over an abyss.

A dangerous crossing, a dangerous wayfaring, a dangerous looking-back, a dangerous trembling and halting...

...The man looked up distrustfully. “If thou speakest the truth,” said he, “I lose nothing when I lose my life. I am not much more than an animal which hath been taught to dance by blows and scanty fare.”

“Not at all,” said Zarathustra, “thou hast made danger thy calling; therein there is nothing contemptible. Now thou perishest by thy calling: therefore will I bury thee with mine own hands.” ...

...For to-day have the petty people become master: they all preach submission and humility and policy and diligence and consideration and the long et cetera of petty virtues.

[b]Whatever is of the effeminate type, whatever originateth from the servile type, and especially the populace-mishmash:—THAT wisheth now to be master of all human destiny—O disgust! Disgust! Disgust!

THAT asketh and asketh and never tireth: “How is man to maintain himself best, longest, most pleasantly?” Thereby—are they the masters of to-day.[/b]

These masters of to-day—surpass them, O my brethren—these petty people: THEY are the Superman’s greatest danger!

Surpass, ye higher men, the petty virtues, the petty policy, the sand-grain considerateness, the ant-hill trumpery, the pitiable comfortableness, the “happiness of the greatest number”—!

Do not bother attempting to ever correct me on Nietzsche again, especially since you think he was calling for Nihilistic Hedonism... No, that is your own will. Your misnomer of Nietzsche's will to power is his greatest disgust...

Another failure in consideration is that the beast of prey to be incited to the heights must overcome themselves in their opposite... So they temper their destructive capacity with the opposite extremes.

Nietzsche, Ecce Homo, Fatality, 3:People have never asked me as they should have done, what the name of Zarathustra precisely meant in my mouth, in the mouth of the first immoralist;...
...Have I made myself clear? ... The overcoming of morality by itself, through truthfulness, the moralist's overcoming of himself in his opposite—in me—that is what the name Zarathustra means in my mouth.

From there we move to BGE 200:

Nietzsche BGE § 200:The man of an age of dissolution...
...the finest examples of which are Alcibiades and Caesar (with whom I should like to associate the FIRST of Europeans according to my taste, the Hohenstaufen, Frederick the Second), and among artists, perhaps Leonardo da Vinci. They appear precisely in the same periods when that weaker type, with its longing for repose, comes to the front; the two types are complementary to each other, and spring from the same causes.

... so let's back up a bit...
The will is a sensation...
So what is the SENSATION OF POWER?
THAT ELECTRIC FEELING OF EXCITEMENT...
The lightning that runs down your spine.

All of this aligns with Nietzsche's thought...
yours is indeed the massive lack of sensible interpretation.

Reply to DifferentiatingEgg
DEgg, your interpretation on Nietzsche is not a philosophical interpretation. You have just repeated what Nietzsche had said. What is the point?

Philosophical interpretation on these classic writings mean that you need to read between the lines and synthesize with the present time reality. Some folks might be able to synchronize with the interpretation and some might not. But the interpretation has to make sense to the readers in accordance with the life they are leading in the real world.

If you just pick up the ideas, do some search on Google, and quote them parroting with the words in the similar or exact same fashion as the original writing, then what is the point of reasoning and philosophizing?

I am quite disappointed with your level of reasoning on these points and philosophical intelligence which seems to be nonexistence in your writings, especially when the alternative idea of the interpretation of Will to Power has been given out with the real life examples in the world. Philosophical reasoning and interpretations must take into the form of dialectical process in order to reach the meaningful resultant conclusions and points. Rise above just parroting what had been written down 100+ years ago when the world was different from now.

Quoting DifferentiatingEgg

All of this aligns with Nietzsche's thought...
yours is indeed the massive lack of sensible interpretation.

You need to crack the Egg, come out from the shell, and fertilize your ideas with the real world and life in it, before the Egg gets rotten, and become a total unintelligible entity.

Reply to Corvus You're silly, an interpretation doesn't mean taking something to not even a legitimate bastardization, and then declaring what people think of Nietzsche's will to power is a misnomer because it doesn't fit your flavor.

There are good interpretations and bad. Your interpretation is terrible.

That would be like me saying the word German word Kaufhaus in English is a building of free charity. Get real.

Reply to DifferentiatingEgg "To silly folks, the whole world looks silly." - anonymous

Reply to Corvus The point is, you blustery gust, is that your philosophy doesn't mean shit when we are discussing Nietzsche's philosophy. :wink:

Reply to DifferentiatingEgg I tried to interpret the idea. You just repeated what Nietzsche had said 100+ year ago. Now who is a philosopher, and who is a parrot here? :rofl:

Reply to Corvus I gave you my interpretation straight away. That feeling of excitement, of feeling alive from living dangerously.

And I gave you the aphorisms to show how shit your interpretation was after you tried to insult me. Fact is, your interpretation is that through the lens of the type Nietzsche loathed. Mine is definitely what Nietzsche is referring to.

Your vain attempt to keep combating is reminisce of a dumptruck stuck in mud.

The fuck do you think philosophy is? Wildy misrepresenting the ideas of others? Daft. Hilarious you even consider yourself a philosopher, truthfully.

"Luuk maah, I made me a thut!"

And you came at me with "sensible interpretation" so check yourself.

Reply to DifferentiatingEgg

It appears to be the case that your unstoppable use of bad language in every postings of yours just reveals that you are threatened by your own ignorance and nonsense. There is no philosophical content in your postings.

Reply to Corvus :lol:

You're not very good with logic are you?

You got butthurt the moment I corrected your notion of Nietzsche's philosophy aiming at long life and hedonism.

I was quite polite, and you demanded an interrogation ASKING FOR QUOTES FROM APHORISMS

Let's go back to show how much of a worm you truly are...

Quoting Corvus

Where does he say that? We need the relevant quotes and the source of the original texts for the quotes at this point.

Now fuck off. Oh... whoops...
Kindly have a long boring life of pleasure.

Reply to DifferentiatingEgg I am OK with logic to get by most philosophical books. You seem to have no idea even what philosophical discussions are about. Your way of discussion sounds like the uneducated gangs in the street fights, or drunkards in the pubs utterly devoid of any level and degree of reasoning and logic.

No decent educated philosophers would use rough language like you have been using in a public forum.

Reply to Corvus Im on a forum about philosophy, that doesn't make me a philosopher. But I'm sure as hell more of one than you are language or not. I don't mind meeting passive aggression and disrespect with upfront language. It doesn't mean much of anything other than let people know up front about my displeasure.

If that bothers you then learn respect before being a backtracking disrespectful resentful worm.

Quoting Corvus

Your way of discussion sounds like the uneducated gangs in the street fights, or drunkards in the pubs devoid of reasoning and logic.

Precisely why I use it. Gives you a sense of false bravado thinking I'm just some "thug."

That you tried to slip an insult under the radar just shows a kind of low integrity. But overtness is a no no?

Reply to DifferentiatingEgg

If you habitually use bad language in your supposed-to-be philosophical postings, then it drastically reduces the credibility and integrity on your points you are trying to make. Some might even feel that you are not a worthy debater lacking intelligence and decency.

I can do the same or even worse to you than yourself in using bad language for your irrationality and nonsense, but I do control myself. I am glad I can. :nerd:

Reply to Corvus Can you though? You forgot that you even asked for direct quotes cause you got inflamed. Then you tried to insult me for not having a sensible interpretation, when from the get go, I knew your interpretation was complete dogshit and even said hey, if that's how you wanna look at it go for it. If I wanted to make you look like a complete dumbass then I'd have done so.

But like I said, you got butthurt then wanted to insult me because you couldn't handle being wrong... your desire to be right keeps you coming back. Moving the goal post, as to why you are "right" when really you're just little more than cripple expressing resentment. It's your whole reason for trying to even study philosophy. A severe insecurity over your low effort and low ability.

All you have shown us is you're terrible with Nietzsche, and a weak will that continually comes back to commit to fallacy after fallacy just to feel some sense of "right."

What it was, was that post of yours where you call for a sensible interpretation was your "triumphant moment" and I took that away from you, you've been desperately grasping for it since... fallacy after fallacy, because you give into compulsion and poor logic.

This is not my idea of enjoyable, this is how I handle your type though.

I'm burying the axe so you remember it's painful to insult me through fallacy, disrespect, and dishonesty. Isn't pain the history of morality? Isn't that why a good bit of the world has turned away from cruel and unusual punishment? Because people would inflict unspeakable acts upon the human?

Reply to DifferentiatingEgg

I don't see anything worthwhile in your postings which has even half in philosophy or logic at all mate. Your postings are filled with just emotional attacks on the other party. As I said before, but will say again. What's the point? You just repeat what Nietzsche had said 100+ year ago.

You are unable to synthesize the classic philosophical texts into the present coherent idea which gives more meaning to the living beings in earth.

If your idea of enjoyable in philosophy is just repeating the quotes, and keep making fierce attacks devoid of any degree of logic and reasoning on others with different ideas, then no one would be able to see any point in that act at all.

Quoting Corvus

Where does he say that? We need the relevant quotes and the source of the original texts for the quotes at this point.

You are as stupid as you are dishonest. You asked for the quotes idiot.

Pretty simple it logically follows that if you dont want sourced quotes dont say they are NEEDED and ask for them.

You've been practicing Fallacyophy, not Philosophy... or as a hedonist, maybe phallusophy... but certainly not Philosophy.

Reply to DifferentiatingEgg

Quotes are sometimes needed for the relevant points in discussions, which must be followed by interpretation. You just repeat what is in the quote, and says there is no room for interpretation.
That is not philosophy. That is religious ceremony. Where is logic in your argument? Resorting to verbal diarrhea with abusive profanity is not logic, is it?

Reply to Corvus Again you're dishonest, I allowed for your own room for interpretation to your own perspective. But when you declare that as Nietzsche's own then you're wrong. Especially when Nietzsche's perspective clearly states otherwise. That's when you say "Nietzsche was wrong, I prefer Will to Life and Will to Pleasure" not "Nietzsche meant the complete opposite of what he said!"

Quoting DifferentiatingEgg

Hey, just cause Nietzsche details his values doesn't mean you can't hold life and pleasure at a higher value. Nietzsche equates life to the will to power. So for him, it's like saying "Life" but "Life" in those moments when you get that sensation of lightning.

It wasn't until after you insulted me, by saying because I detail Nietzsche's perspective for Nietzsche's perspective that I'm not making sensible interpretations, did I decide to bury the axe in you; because it's clear the one who lacked any sensibility was you.