To bewail one's lot is always despicable: it is always the outcome of weakness. Whether one ascribes one's afflictions to others or to one's self, it is all the same.

to bewail one's lot is always despicable it is always the outcome of weakness n

considered himself a psychologist and every now and then we come across a passage or aphorism where he talks about

common human behaviors and how he analyzes them and perhaps there is

nothing more human than to complain but complain about what nich's philosophy

like most philosophy really is about suffering and more importantly how to deal with suffering the fact of the

matter is that suffering is a part of life it's part of the world and explanations for suffering and how to

escape it constitute most of the religious and philosophical doctrines that exist nothing is more obvious and

confrontational than the fact that life something that happens to us without our choice or consent is full of pain and

misery this fundamental problem of evil at once gives birth to two questions

first what can we do about it and second whose fault is it why is the world so

full of evil misery and pain one of the most human Tendencies is to seek someone

or something to blame for our troubles and our rational minds are very good at

finding people or things to blame you have to slave away and plow the fields and break your back and giving birth is

a painful ordeal because Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit

or the material world is actually an imperfect Fallen creation of the demiurge and your body of flesh and

blood is a prison and true Bliss awaits in the afterlife or this world is the

product of a metaphysical divorce in the fabric of reality where the fundamental Unity of the will through the workings

of the rational perceiving intellect gets broken up into two parts will and

representation and so now there is Duality instead of unity and all of creation is groaning and weeping and

gashing its teeth as a result and so when faced with this mountain of suffering that is baked into the cake of

reality we are at once posed with a challenge to undergo it or to overcome

it for n to whom everything can be viewed in terms of strong and weak the

question of suffering is answered differently depending on who provides the answer the question of suffering is

the following when faced with all the pain and misery in the world is there a counterbalance of joy and happiness

something that makes it all worth it or is the weight of the world too much to bear all the great religions of the

world answer in the negative the pain and suffering in this world at least outweighs all the good that may come of

life to the extent that they do answer in the positive this positive is always

framed as an escape from the world let's say heaven Nirvana or the fields of ium

the philosophers too seem to agree with this pessimistic assessment in all ages

the wisest have always agreed in their judgment of life it is no good at all

times and places the same words have been on their lips words full of Doubt full of melancholy full of weariness of

Life full of hostility to life at first nich sarcastically agrees saying that if

all these wise philosophers come to the same concl inclusion in their assessment of life then they must of course be

right but immediately n shoots back these great sages of all periods should

first be examined more closely is it possible that they were every one of them a little shaky on their legs a feet

Rocky decadent does wisdom perhaps appear on Earth after the manner of a crow attracted by a slight smell of

kryon all of this to say for n there is something worth living in life even with

all its suffering to be sure nche is the last philosopher to deny the existence

of suffering or to minimize the amount of it but rather he is different from the rest because he tips the scales in

favor of Joy instead of resignation schopenhauer looks at the world makes

the balance and says it's not worth it Retreat and resign n looks at the same

world sees the same things but he says overcome and power true

the difference as n sees it lies in the fundamental psychological constitution of those who came before him and himself

they were weak products of decadence and viewed life through their own poisoned lens n imagines another possibility a

view of life through the lens of the strong the energetic those overflowing with Vitality in short those with power

a strong Spirit sees in suffering a challenge not a defeat the powerless the

weak have no choice but to succumb but now an interesting psychological

phenomenon rears its head because in their heart of hearts the powerless desire power just as much as anyone else

and they will try and find an Avenue for their desire and seek little quantities of power wherever they can get them and

if revenge is not possible in this world they will invent another this is what n

calls resentment an imaginary Revenge not a real revenge not a Revenge from

strength but a Revenge born from weakness what does this look like the

first symptom making complaints what is the psychology of a

complaint I think we can all agree that complaining feels good it gives us relief but does it really solve any

problem we have it alleviates but it does not heal that is the definition of

nichan resentment the psyche trying to find an Avenue any Avenue to release

some tension exercise some power to feel alive even for a little while just to

fight back even for a little bit against the overwhelming weight and trouble of the world and our circumstances in a

remarkable passage in Twilight of the idols n discusses the two archetypes of the complainer the Christian and the

anarchist let's dive a little deeper and see what's up if you want to stop complaining as much in your own life and

take matters into your own hands especially when it comes to your education then look no further than

brilliant the sponsor of today's video brilliant is where you learn by doing with thousands of interactive lessons in

math data science programming and AI what sets brilliant apart is how interactive everything is you get

immediate visual feedback and you learn by doing which helps to retain everything more than if you were just

reading on top of that the courses on brilliant are bite-sized so you can do them consistently make it part of your

daily routine and stick with it for longer and see how much better you remember it all anyone interested in

philosophy should check out their logic courses logic is an important part of philosophy and it's where a lot of

people also get stuck plus it's always a good idea to train your mind on critical thinking skills they also have courses

on data science and Ai and I don't need to tell you how important these things will be in the future so you better come

prepared to try everything brilliant has to offer for free for a full 30 days

visit brilliant.org / vist or scan the QR code on screen or you can click the

link in the description you'll also get 20% off an annual premium subscription

thanks again to brilliant for sponsoring this video and now back to n so Twilight of the idols nche

addresses his paragraph to two prototypical types of complainers Christians and anarchists when he speaks

of anarchists he's not really aiming at the ideology of anarchism itself but rather it's more about the poor in

general the lower rungs of society the hav knots and those who are dissatisfied with their material lot in life and how

they choose to vent their frustration at first glance Christians and anarchists might not have a lot in common but that

is exactly the point that n will make they are superficially different but fundamentally the same they are both on

some level dissatisfied with life the anarchist's problem is material the

Christians problem is spiritual nche is going to argue that both suffer from the

same malaise decadance and both seek to remedy their Mala through the same means

first by complaining about it second by seeking to recreate the world in their

image but they do so in a dishonest manner they hide their resentment behind

high ideals that serve as nothing more than convenient masks for their true more Insidious intentions

on the surface they both seem to preach a noble ideal a better life for everyone

but how will that Utopia be achieved by doing away with social hierarchy in the

case of the anarchists and by doing away with spiritual hierarchy in the case of the Christian they are both n says and

this is the important part arguing for equality this is the part that is

fundamentally resentful and dishonest about their positions they are not saying I am weak and therefore I desire

to be stronger no they are saying I am weak and therefore everyone else should

be weak as well especially the strong there is not a desire to lift oneself up

but a desire to tear others down it is the Revenge of the weak against the strong of the miserable against the

happy revenge is their brand of equality a whole quivering Kingdom of burrowing

Revenge indefatigable and insatiable in its outbursts against the happy and equally so in disguises for revenge in

pretexts for Revenge when will they really reach their final fondest most Sublime Triumph of Revenge at that time

doubtless when they succeed in pushing their own misery in fact all misery into the consciousness of the happy so that

the latter begin one day to be ashamed of their happiness the doctrine of equality but there is no more deadly

poison than this for it seems to proceed from the very lips of Justice whereas in reality it draws the curtain down on all

Justice it's worth pointing out that for n life itself is unequal as life is

simply nature and nature is simply life is not living valuing preferring being

unjust being limited endeavoring to be different so what n is doing here is

taking all the lofty ideals and so-called Noble aspirations of the Christian and the anarchists and unmasks

them for having psychological roots for being born from a position of weakness and a desire to be stronger but because

they're not in a position to actually affect the change they want to see because they are too weak to increase

their own power all they can hope to do is complain relentlessly seek to tear others down and at last throw

metaphorical dirt at the strong trying to shame them for being strong and trying to make a virtue out of weakness

the Christian uses the doctrine of equality before God and the anarchist uses the doctrine of equal rights for

all which as n points out are identical phrases what is bad but I have already

answered all that proceeds from weakness from Envy from Revenge the anarchists

and the Christian have the same ancestry they are glad in their inmost heart that there is a standard According to which

those who are over endowed with intellectual goods and privileges are equal to them they contend for the

quality of all before God and almost need the belie believe in God for this purpose the key word in this final quote

is the word need a large part of nich's philosophy deals with the psychology of religion or what he in Beyond Good and

Evil calls the religious Neurosis the idea is that humans create value systems

that serve their own psychological Constitution over here in the 21st century that statement seems almost so

self-evident that it shouldn't even need to be said out loud but in the 19th century before Freud before

before psychology became such a dominant force in the humanities this was a revelation the essence of n's position

is that religious belief doesn't stem from an honest search for the truth but stems from a psychological need the weak

had to invent religion so they could level the playing field with the strong being weak in the physical plane they

invented a spiritual plane in which they could be the superior ones and exact their type of imaginary Revenge that n

cuse resentment keep in mind that this has nothing to do with the equality they profess it's about tearing down the

strong that is their first motivation and if an equality should result from that like equality before the eyes of

God then that equality is just a side effect not the main event as a quick

aside n was probably the first who really brought this idea to the Forefront that religion arises out of a

psychological rather than a sociological or more naively theological need but a

precedent in this matter was set by schopenhauer who mainstreamed the idea and philosophy that it's not the

intellect who is the main driver of human motivations but the will in other words that something fundamentally

irrational lay at the basis of what compels humans to do the things they do including inventing

religion n however is much more cynical than schopenhauer who is on the whole

more friendly towards religion schopenhauer believed that the will was a real thing a real metaphysical

substrate of reality and so he believed that humans could more or less access

this will this fundamental Truth at the heart of the universe through all kinds of different means so the great world

religions he argued all pointed towards this fundamental truth with a capital T

of the will and some religions do so better than others Christianity and Buddhism in particular got really close

according to schopenhauer but there are still other ways of accessing the will through ART especially music through an

aesthetic lifestyle and also although this is more difficult through a thorough deep understanding of

philosophy for n no such truth with capital T exists let alone that we

humans can really access it this amounts to a total rejection of schopenhauer's philosophy but nevertheless n takes over

certain ideas or ways of thinking and uses them for his his own ends and one example of that is the idea that it's

not the intellect but something else entirely that drives Human Action and so

n arrives at his concept of the will to power it's a bit like schopenhauer's

will to life only the main motivation has changed we go from Mere life to expanding life to growth to overcoming

to power but also the metaphysics behind it are different schopenhauer still

believed in the Romantic SL platonic idea of a cap capital T truth that is out there somewhere and that we can

uncover or at least approximate for n the will to power is simply one drive

among many it's the principle actually of struggle itself it's more of a relation between things than an actual

thing in itself like schopenhauer's will is but anyway how does this fit into the

psychology of the complaints for n complaining is a sign of weakness because it's precisely the type of thing

you do when you have no other tools to hand to affect your circumstances a superficial example is

the weather people love to complain about the weather why well the weather

is one of those things that no human weak or strong has the power to change sure you could use an umbrella you can

choose to stay inside you can travel to other countries but you can't change the weather itself and by complaining about

it we take our little revenge on it it feels good to complain but why does it

feel so good according to nche because it gives us a tiny Taste of power it's

not real power of course but a sort of imaginary power and that's precisely what resentment is an imaginary revenge

in the genealogy of morals n puts out the thesis that religion arose because of a revolution in morals a slave revolt

where the weak succeeded in trans valuing all values the strong simply lived their life as they pleased they

took what they want wanted did what they wanted and said what they wanted as to CS put it the strong do what they can

and the weak suffer what they must the problem with this Arrangement is that power is a zero sum game in society we

can't all be powerful and the weak as Tod says undergo whatever the strong

command of them but this is a humiliating and unacceptable situation

so what is to be done we're not going to repeat n's entire line of argument because we've done so already in an

hourong video on the genealogy of morals but here's the gist the weak took every

value of the strong and inverted it and they designated this new opposite value

as good and the old value as bad if the strong simply take what they want then

that's greed and greed is not good what is the opposite of greed poverty

suddenly willful poverty becomes a virtue hence why among swear a vow of

poverty and a vow of Chastity as well of course because the strong love to

indulge in their carnal desires the weak had to invent a way to make those desires evil in this way the weak have

their little Revenge their own tiny Taste of power they got to feel good when they admonished the strong for

being strong because they invented value systems that designate the strong and their way of life as evil we can put

this in a more cynical formulation the weak who sing the Praises of poverty and Chastity are actually lying about

what they want in life to others for sure but most of all lying to themselves

nich's sneaking suspicion is that the weak would want nothing more than to be the strong and powerful themselves but

they can't get it so they invent another world an imaginary one in which they can pretend to be powerful ones instead the

Christian he who for 2,000 years has passed as a Christian is simply a psychological self- delusion closely

examined it appears that despite all his faith he has been ruled only by his

instincts and what instincts the weak after all are still only human and

humans desire power as a quick aside this is why n for all his opposition to

Christianity actually admired Jesus himself Jesus didn't lie to himself he

preached a way of life that was without resentment Jesus lacked this fundamental Instinct for Revenge it was totally

absent in his soul to put it more simply if the Christian lies to himself about his true desires then in Jesus there is

no lie just authenticity Jesus was a pure Soul who didn't have these power

hungry ulterior motives that's what N means with the famous enigmatic phrase

there was only one Christian and he died on the cross you'll notice when reading the

gospels that Jesus never complains never speaks in terms of opposition he never uses the word Revenge

constantly the Pharisees try to lure him into this trap they ask him to condemn an adulterous woman and he says let he

who is without sin cast the first stone they ask him to take a stand against worldly Authority and he says Render

unto Caesar what is Caesar's with a little freedom in the use of words one might actually call

Jesus a free spirit he cares nothing for what is established the idea of life

life as an experience as he alone conceives it stands opposed to his mind

to every sort of word formula law belief and Dogma he speaks only of inner things

life or truth or light is his word for the innermost in his site everything else the whole of reality all nature

even language has significance only as sign as allegory here it is of Paramount

importance to be led into no error by the Temptations lying in Christian or rather ecclesiastical prejudices such a

symbolism par Excellence stands outside all religion all Notions of worship all history all natural science all worldly

experience all knowledge all politics all psychology all books all art his

wisdom is precisely a pure ignorance of all such things he has never heard of

culture he doesn't have to make war on it he doesn't even deny it the same thing might be said of the state of the

whole Bourgeois social order of Labor of War he has no ground for denying the

world for he knows nothing of the ecclesiastical concept of the world denial is precisely the thing that is

impossible to him compare this passage to nich's view of a noble morality a

life affirming morality I do not want to wage war with the ugly I do not want to accuse I do

not even want to accuse the accusers looking aside let that be my soul negation and all in all to sum up I wish

to be at any time Hereafter only a yes Sayer Jesus had no Instinct for denial

and N wants to have no Instinct for denial is it any wonder that in his Madness letters he signed them as the

crucified you might wonder why we're so focused on Christians when n also takes aim at the so-called anarchists as the

prototypical type of the complainer that's because for n they are one and

and the same the anarchist and the Christian have the same ancestry a large

point in n's philosophy is that Society in the long 19th century during which he lived despite increasing skepticism

towards the truth and metaphysics of Christianity people weren't actually removing themselves from Christianity

they just dressed up Christian morality and doctrines in different clothing the philosophy of utilitarianism popular in

England at the time is a prime example of this it's long story but we cover it in our video on n and English philosophy

the anarchist by which nich simply means a socialist or even more broadly the poor in general are in the same

predicament as the Christians of your the same Instinct that prompted the Christian to seek imaginary revenge and

throw dirt on the strong also shows itself in the anarchist except that the anarchist does have his eyes set on the

material world the Christians deny it completely they're satisfied with being equal in the eyes of God AKA being equal

in the spiritual but not Material plane but the anarchist does seek his equality

in the material world and it's in this context the context of the long 19th century with utopian socialist ideals

and revolutions and Marxism just around the corner that n critiques the anarchist and accuses him of basically

being a Christian in Disguise when the anarchists as the mouthpiece of the decay in strata of

society raises his voice in Splendid indignation for right Justice equal rights he is only groaning under the

burden of his ignorance which cannot understand why he actually suffers what

his poverty consists of the poverty of life and again the main psychological

point is this complaining feels good his Splendid indignation alone relieves him

somewhat it is a pleasure for all poor Devils to grumble it gives them a little intoxicating sensation of power in fact

complaining feels really good the very Act of complaining the mere fact that

one bewails one's lot May lend such a charm to life that on that account alone one is ready to endure it there is a

small dose of Revenge in every lamentation the problem is as we've

mentioned at the start of the video that life is full of suffering how do we deal

with this suffering either we have the strength to do something about it or we

do not and if we don't we must cope somehow whether one ascribes one's

afflictions to others or to one's self it is all the same the Socialist does the former the Christian for instance

does the latter that which is common to both attitudes or rather that which is

equally ignoble in them both is the fact that somebody must be to blame if one

suffers in short that the sufferer intoxicates Ates himself with the honey of Revenge to allay his anguish you can

make the argument that since the anarchist is focused on the material world and since he ultimately does seek

to affect change in the real world this makes him a fundamentally different Creature from the Christian after all

what if the revolution succeeds but n's problem goes deeper than that it's about

the underlying psychology of someone who wants a revolution like that what in Beyond Good and Evil he calls a leveler

discussing this at length would take us away from the point of the video but I'll repeat here a quote from Beyond Good and Evil that gets to the meat of

the matter what they would Fain attain with all their strength is the universal Green Meadow happiness of the herd

together with security safety comfort and alleviation of life for everyone

nche is opposed to all these things in the sense that he makes the observation that human culture and human life

flourishes under opposite conditions everything Wicked terrible tyrannical

predatory and Serpentine in man serves as well for the elevation of the human species as its opposite we do not even

say enough when we say only this much and in any case we find ourselves here

both with our speech and our silence at The Other Extreme of all modern

ideology n has a totally different view of mankind a view based on embracing

suffering danger the Union Shadow the dark side of humanity and the Dark Side of of life he seeks a Humanity that

integrates and Embraces all these shadowy parts he wants us his readers the free spirits of the future to

bravely stare into the abyss that is nich's vision of a psychology of the

future and in this psychology there is no room for complainers the question naturally

arises if complaining is a sign of the weak then what is the opposite we've

already hinted at it life affirmation it really is a shame that n succumbed to

Madness so early in life if he had been around for longer he would have written more books expounding on his vision for

the future as it stands in n's written works we find that he mostly deals with

the past that is he spends more time destroying the philosophies of the past than talking about his ideal philosophy

of the future but what we do know is that he himself left the door open for

those who came after him to finish what he started the subtitle to Beyond Good and Evil is a Prelude to a philosophy of

the future a Prelude that is not the complete thing a starting point an

appetizer and Beyond Good and Evil he talks about the so-called free spirits of the future the generation of

philosophers who would come after him and further down in the future still we have of course the arrival of the

uberman a concept that is as famous as it is shrouded in mystery he only really

really talks about it in Thus Spoke zaratustra and even so in pretty vague terms there the Uber mench is presented

as the next stage in the evolution of mankind something Beyond Human unburdened by the old moralities of the

past which n sought to destroy the self-overcoming of mankind at large and

zaratustra himself is only a prophet that is he makes an announcement a

prophet doesn't lay out an entire system or a road map a prophet is someone who speaks in riddles speaks of the future

and Heralds the coming of something the biblical prophets preached the coming of the Messiah zaratustra preaches the

coming of the Uber MCH but where does that leave us in our little post death

of God World sandwiched between this great historical event and the still greater event of the coming Uber Manch

as mentioned nich's philosophy Falls relatively silent here but there are

hints let's look at one what if some day or night a demon

were to steal after you in your loneliest loneliness and say to you this life as you now live it and have lived

it you will have to live once more and innumerable times more and there will be nothing new in it but every pain and

every joy and every thought and sigh must return to you all in the same succession and sequence even this spider

and this Moonlight between the trees and even this moment and I myself the eternal hourglass of existence is turned

over and again and again and you with it Speck of dust would you not throw

yourself down and nash your teeth and curse the demon who spoke thus or have you once experienced a tremendous moment

when you would have answered him you are a God and never have I heard anything more

Divine this is the famous thought experiment in the joyful science an idea that would take hold of N and play an

increasingly important role in the further development of his philosophy under the banner of the so-called

Eternal recurrence later on in his career n seems to believe that the Eternal

recurrence is not just a thought experiment but that it might actually be a physical reality but that's a story

for another video in the joyful science it's framed as a thought experiment what

if you had to relive your life the exact same way as it happened now over and over again for all eternity would you

enjoy this arrangement or hate it the answer to this question is a measure of

how much you are able to affirm life hypothetically ideally this thought

experiment leaves you jubilant it's the best news you've ever heard you love and enjoy life so much that of course you

want to repeat it over and over again but if you read between the lines a bit

n seems to think that only the Uber mench this creature of the future something Beyond man can actually affirm

life to the fullest and the reason why is because in thinking about this thought experiment we don't just look at

life as a totality you don't zoom out so to speak look at your life as a whole

and think okay there was some bad in here some good but overall I had a pretty good life so let's do it again

that's the wrong way to think about this life affirmation of this kind affirms every single moment of your life every

second of it including and this is what most people tend to overlook the bad

parts and I don't need to tell you that life can get pretty bad it's easy to be

life affirming after you got a raise when your child is born on your wedding day but n asks from us the courage to be

equally life affirming when we get fired when we lose a loved one or when we go through a divorce the demon comes to you

in your loneliest loneliness he comes to you when you're at your lowest and he's here to tell you this moment of supreme

suffering of in pain do you have the courage to say to me yes I want this

again and again for all eternity n believes that saying yes to this demon in this moment is simply

impossible for humans it requires superhuman psychological strength

nevertheless the thought experiment poses as an ideal that we can strive towards this is as close to a positive

practical ideal that n ever gives us in his writings you can flip FP around the

thought experiment a bit and think to yourself when you're presented with a choice in life if I had to relive and

remake this Choice again and again for all eternity and by making a choice now

I'm locking in myself for all eternity how would this influence my decision how

would you look at life what would your next morning look like n challenges us

to embrace the entirety of our existence from the peak of ecstasy to the depths of despair this thought experiment isn't

just about accepting life it's about loving it every single second with a fierce unyielding passion imagine

standing in that moment of your loneliest loneliness where the Shadows seem endless and yet you find the

strength to say yes I want this again that isn't just courage it's a profound

Act of love for life and fate Amor fatti by envisioning Our Lives as an eternal

recurrence we are pushed to make decisions not just for the moment but for an eternity of moments we learn to

live with intention to choose with wisdom and to find Joy Even in our darkest

hours maybe this nichan ideal where we affirm life in its totality is

impossible for us but it's worth it to try to love life even when it hurts

let's not live life just for the highlights but for the whole spectrum of Human Experience because in this Embrace

of life's full cycle we discover not just just resilience but a profound life-altering inspiration we find that

even in the shadow there is Beauty in the pain there is growth and in every moment there is an opportunity to live

and to find joy and with this realization we are not just surviving we are thriving echoing through eternity