# Nietzsche Quote



## Edher

Saludos,

        Though I am aware that philosophy allows individual interpretations, I would like to know if any one knows the general interpretation of the following quote or at least could guide on how to find it on the internet,

"Even the wisest among us is nothing but a confused, hybrid of plant and phantom."

       I don't understand that combination.

Thank You,
Edher


----------



## la grive solitaire

Hi Edher,

The quote is from the Prologue to "Thus spake Zarathustra": "Even the wisest among you is only a disharmony and hybrid of plant and phantom. But do I bid you become phantoms or plants?"

http://nietzsche.thefreelibrary.com/Thus-Spake-Zarathustra


----------



## te gato

Edher said:
			
		

> Saludos,
> 
> Though I am aware that philosophy allows individual interpretations, I would like to know if any one knows the general interpretation of the following quote or at least could guide on how to find it on the internet,
> 
> "Even the wisest among us is nothing but a confused, hybrid of plant and phantom."
> 
> I don't understand that combination.
> 
> Thank You,
> Edher


Hey Edher;
You are speaking of a writing done by Friedrich Nietzsche..who was very famous for saying one thing but meaning the opposite..
In his writing of 'Thus Spake Zarathus'..Nietzche was throwing away the Christian idea of there being a God...
'Even the wisest among you is only a disharmony and hybrid of plant and phantom.'
What he is saying is ..That even the smartest human is not 'that' smart or pure and has conflicts..and that we are all just biological beings..and no one knows what makes us 'tick'...

Link to 'Thus Spake Zarathus.'

http://www.gla.ac.uk/~dc4w/laibach/nietzar.html

te gato


----------



## Edher

Saludos a ambos,

       Thank you for your cooperation la grive solitaire however, the link that you provided isn't functioning.
        Yes, I am quoting from "Thus Spoke Zarathustra" and yes I am aware of the overall theme of Nietzsche's work. Yet, I am a bit baffled as to why he chose that metaphor. I'm dissecting his philosphy, in other words, I am not just taking his phrases as idioms. I would like to know why he specifically chose plants and phantoms.
       Taking into account that a few paragraphs previous to that statement he was talking about how the soul weakens the body and how dirty and impure we perceive our soul, I believe the phantom that he is talking about is the soul of men. 
       Furthermore, I was reading somewhere that there is a believe that souls nourish plants but I'm having trouble finding information about that.
     Thanks for you contribution as well, Te Gato.

Edher


----------



## Benjy

i think he chose plant because vegitation is regarded as inanimate. you know like a tree doesnt move or act in the same way as an animal. i suppose that you could show that plants are just lower order intelligences or something (carnivorous plants for example). just my thought.

phantom + plant = animal?

spirit + matter = man?


----------



## mjscott

Edher
"Furthermore, I was reading somewhere that there is a belief that souls nourish plants but I'm having trouble finding information about that.
Thanks for you contribution as well, Te Gato."

I think you are on the right track, Edher. Somehow, even the vegan does not see the soul in a bunch of radishes, but can and will have mercy on the soul and life of a lab mouse or a cockroach. I think he uses a plant as an unemotional body, and a phantom as a nondescript spirit.

Just a thought....


----------



## gaer

la grive solitaire said:
			
		

> Hi Edher,
> 
> The quote is from the Prologue to "Thus spake Zarathustra": "Even the wisest among you is only a disharmony and hybrid of plant and phantom. But do I bid you become phantoms or plants?"
> 
> 
> http://www.geocities.com/thenietzschechannel/zarapro.htmHi


Here are the actual lines:

Wer aber der Weiseste von euch ist, der ist auch nur ein Zwiespalt und Zwitter von Pflanze und von Gespenst. Aber heisse ich euch zu Gespenstern oder Pflanzen werden?

The translation is good, I think, but Zwiespalt is dichotomy more than disharmony, and Gespenst is spirit, ghost, apparition, phantom. So there are some added nuances there. 

Gaer


----------



## Artrella

Edher said:
			
		

> Saludos a ambos,
> 
> Thank you for your cooperation la grive solitaire however, the link that you provided isn't functioning.
> Yes, I am quoting from "Thus Spoke Zarathustra" and yes I am aware of the overall theme of Nietzsche's work. Yet, I am a bit baffled as to why he chose that metaphor. I'm dissecting his philosphy, in other words, I am not just taking his phrases as idioms. I would like to know why he specifically chose plants and phantoms.
> Taking into account that a few paragraphs previous to that statement he was talking about how the soul weakens the body and how dirty and impure we perceive our soul, I believe the phantom that he is talking about is the soul of men.
> Furthermore, I was reading somewhere that there is a believe that souls nourish plants but I'm having trouble finding information about that.
> Thanks for you contribution as well, Te Gato.
> 
> Edher




Does Nietszche think we have a soul?  What does he say about men?
This philosopher says that we are nothing.  We are a mistake and on top of that we are "a conceited nothing".  We feel proud about our knowledge.  We are "a nothing" who assumes that reason puts ourselves above all. He says we are conceited and that this comes from our intellect, ie from the possibiliy men have to know.  However, to have intellect could be seen as a sign or weakness, we are less than other animals because we have intellect.
He says that we don't have to take for granted that by means of our "reasoning" there is a continuum between subject-object.  He disagrees with Descartes who said that by means of our "reasoning" we can construct the world that surrounds us.  Nietszche says "no".  We cannot create the world and understand it because there are things in the middle that block our ability to know it.
He is in blatant oposition to the "Racionalism" of Descartes.  You know, Descartes says that by reasoning you can say that God exists (Discurso del Método). Descartes says there exists _objectivity_ and Nietszche says no, there is _subjectivity_ instead.
So if we are weak because we have intellect and reason, that could explain your phrase... I think???


----------



## Edher

Saludos,

       I finally found what I was referring to earlier,

http://www.wordreference.com/es/en/frames.asp?es=alma

4. f. Principio sensitivo que da vida e instinto a los animales, y *vegetativo que nutre y acrecienta las plantas.*

Sensitive principle which gives life and instinct to animals, and vegetative that nourishes and helps plants grow

Could anyone please explain me this connotation of "soul."?

Edher


----------



## te gato

Edher said:
			
		

> Saludos,
> 
> I finally found what I was referring to earlier,
> 
> http://www.wordreference.com/es/en/frames.asp?es=alma
> 
> 4. f. Principio sensitivo que da vida e instinto a los animales, y *vegetativo que nutre y acrecienta las plantas.*
> 
> Sensitive principle which gives life and instinct to animals, and vegetative that nourishes and helps plants grow
> 
> Could anyone please explain me this connotation of "soul."?
> 
> Edher


Edher;
First of all..with Nietzsche..you could take fifty Philosophy Majors..put them all in one room...give them one Nietzsche quote and not one will agree on what he was trying to say..

If you look at the some of the Native Indians of the past...their concept was that everything was apart of the ' greater whole'. You had the two big ones..Mother Earth..Father Sky...
Father Sky and Mother Earth gave everything to the people...unconditionally..and everything was a part of them..So take Mother Earth for example..Their thought was that everything we see..touch..hear..were a part of Mother Earth..Therefore when harvesting was done..they thanked the plant spirit..as well as Mother Earth..same for the Animals they hunted and ate..thanks was given to the animal spirit...
They...the Indians..felt that everything on earth had a spirit..sure not in the aspect of being able to give cognate thought but that everything had feelings..a spirit..a soul...What you took from Mother Earth...that things soul..spirit.. would then therefore go back to Mother Earth and the cycle would then start all over again. 
As for the 'greater whole'...they pictured it as a great spider web..and Mother Earth and Father Sky were like little fly's stuck in that spider web..that there was more than *us*.
Philosophy is just a concept of what people think..what they feel..their perception of things...and everyone's concept is different...
Was it the Mother Earth concept that Nietzsche was referring to when he spoke of the plants and phantoms...who knows... Was he referring to everything being apart of the ' greater whole'..to me it sounds like he was..but that is *MY* perception..
As for a 'soul'...
As a human we hopefully know the differences between right and wrong....
Some of us know that it is wrong to go out and murder another person..*Conscience*...
We know that it hurts others when we treat them like crap...*Feelings*...
We know that it makes others happy when we help them...*Nurture*..
Some believe that there is a higher power..a God....*Religion*...
We all.. cry...bleed...feel anger...feel shame...question...*Humanity*..
In my opinion..take all of that..insert it into one body...and you have a '*soul*'..

te gato


----------



## gaer

te gato said:
			
		

> Edher;
> First of all..with Nietzsche..you could take fifty Philosophy Majors..put them all in one room...give them one Nietzsche quote and not one will agree on what he was trying to say..


That is SO true!  

Gaer


----------



## te gato

gaer said:
			
		

> That is SO true!
> 
> Gaer


Yes..and 5 thousand years from now..they still will not agree..trust me I have had many all-nighter discussions about Nietzche..
The man had distain for any form of spirituality..that was his right as a human..but...he also had distain for 'man' as a whole..

some of his other quotes..

'the Earth hath skin, and the skin hath diseases. One of these... is called man'
'Morality is the herd-instinct in the individual.'
'The last Christian died on the cross.'
'Faith: not wanting to know what is true.'
'Plato was a bore.'

I am surprised that he did not jump off a bridge..
for how could a person that had such distain for the 'man' wish to live amongst the insanie masses that he called human kind..makes you wonder..

te gato


----------



## gaer

te gato said:
			
		

> Yes..and 5 thousand years from now..they still will not agree..trust me I have had many all-nighter discussions about Nietzche..
> The man had distain for any form of spirituality..that was his right as a human..but...he also had distain for 'man' as a whole..


<gulp>
Without knowing a great deal about the man, I have to say that I share SOME of his contempt for mankind. Just look at the world!

Don't mistunderstand me. There are wonderful human beings, and there always have been—and always will be, if we don't extreminate ourselves.

But I ask myself many times each day if mankind, as a whole, is a good thing.

About his quotes:

_'the Earth hath skin, and the skin hath diseases. One of these... is called man'_

Well, I'm not always sure he was wrong about that.

_'Morality is the herd-instinct in the individual.'_

I agree and disagree. When people believe that everything they have been told that is good and bad IS good and bad, just because they have been conditioned to believe it, I think the man was right. But that's a very narrow definition of morality. There are many of us who decide with great pain what we believe to be good and bad, and that too can be called morality. So there is a lot of arrogance in his statement.

_'The last Christian died on the cross.'_

I don't agree with that at all. 

_'Faith: not wanting to know what is true.'_

If you have faith in something merely because NOT having faith in something is frightening and too hard to face, then I think there is truth in that. But again, it's amazingly arrogant to believe that the faith of all people is based on nothing but ignorance. I don't agree with that at all.

_'Plato was a bore.'_

In this case, I'd consider the source. Plato might have made the same comment about Nietzsche, if he had had the chance.  



> I am surprised that he did not jump off a bridge..
> for how could a person that had such distain for the 'man' wish to live amongst the insanie masses that he called human kind..makes you wonder..


I often have a strong desire to jump off high places, head first, but in South Florida it's hard to find such places.  

Gaer


----------



## mjscott

Nietzsche was a nihilist. Instead of feeling the pulse, the heartbeat of the cycle of the universe, he felt that the pulse was a throbbing headache--I do believe. I think through great pain he expressed himself, knowing that each expression of his own was just more of something inside (inspired or not) that he would further use to beat himself over the head. His message? The same as Solomon in Ecclesiastes: Vanity, vanity--all is vanity! Nothing is significant!

At least by the end of Ecclesiastes Solomon resigned himself to saying that if someone is satisfied with what they do for work they are blessed. Nietzsche didn't have that satisfaction, or so we think. Either that, or maybe he fooled us all and really got his kicks from ticking off Christians, the Establishment and philosophers of his time.

I would rather be inspired (think that all things are connected and that I am blessed to be a part of the whole) than think that the whole chimichanga was nothing, zero, zip, zilly-zally zilch.


----------



## te gato

mjscott said:
			
		

> Nietzsche was a nihilist. Instead of feeling the pulse, the heartbeat of the cycle of the universe, he felt that the pulse was a throbbing headache--I do believe. I think through great pain he expressed himself, knowing that each expression of his own was just more of something inside (inspired or not) that he would further use to beat himself over the head. His message? The same as Solomon in Ecclesiastes: Vanity, vanity--all is vanity! Nothing is significant!
> 
> At least by the end of Ecclesiastes Solomon resigned himself to saying that if someone is satisfied with what they do for work they are blessed. Nietzsche didn't have that satisfaction, or so we think. Either that, or maybe he fooled us all and really got his kicks from ticking off Christians, the Establishment and philosophers of his time.
> 
> I would rather be inspired (think that all things are connected and that I am blessed to be a part of the whole) than think that the whole chimichanga was nothing, zero, zip, zilly-zally zilch.


Hey mjscott;
Maybe..but it is sad that through his headache..he gave us all one..
A man that writes like that is hard to understand..and we will never know what his purpose was..we can only speculate..with all our own different ideas as to why...Egotistical...God Complex...Massive Miagrane..who knows..
He was quite revered by the 'Fuhrer' Adolf Hitler..though..now that is a scary thought...
I agree with you...I like being one re-fried bean in the collective chimichanga..
te gato


----------



## gaer

te gato said:
			
		

> He was quite revered by the 'Fuhrer' Adolf Hitler..though..now that is a scary thought...
> I agree with you...I like being one re-fried bean in the collective chimichanga..
> te gato


And go figure, because Hitler's favorite composer was Wagner, whose Ring was all about gods. 

Actually, that doesn't prove anything either, and Wagner was a real jerk! (Yet he wrote astounding music.)

At least Wagner created something. So far as I can see, Nietzsche  was only interested in tearing things down. 

G


----------



## zebedee

Interesting discussion. I'm moving it to Culture to open it up to more ideas.

zeb


----------



## Artrella

*The Gay * *Science* 

Do you want to read some excerpts by Nietzche and then discuss on some particular topic?

They are really interesting and show the thoughts of this man connected with morality, knowledge, religion.

Take a look at them.  He may be right/wrong (this is up to each of us) but at least he makes us think about the world, the man, religion...

Have a good time!


----------



## DDT

te gato said:
			
		

> He was quite revered by the 'Fuhrer' Adolf Hitler..though..now that is a scary thought...



The fact that he was quite appreciated by Hitler doesn't mean that there was a direct correspondance between the philosophy of Nietzsche and Hitler's delusions of omnipotence...that butcher exploited Nietzsche's superman theory in order to justify the superiority of the Arian race...

DDT


----------



## DDT

gaer said:
			
		

> So far as I can see, Nietzsche  was only interested in tearing things down.



Let me respectfully disagree...the opposition/syncretism between the Apollonian illusion and the Dionysian inspiration (_The Birth of Tragedy_, 1871) is an invitation to overcome pessimism through the harmonization of man and nature...I am convinced that Nietzsche detected some hidden details in the neverending process of human quest for truth...

DDT


----------



## gaer

DDT said:
			
		

> Let me respectfully disagree...the opposition/syncretism between the Apollonian illusion and the Dionysian inspiration (_The Birth of Tragedy_, 1871) is an invitation to overcome pessimism through the harmonization of man and nature...I am convinced that Nietzsche detected some hidden details in the neverending process of human quest for truth...
> 
> DDT


<gulp>

Okay…

That will teach me to generalize about things I don't know anything about. 

Gaer


----------



## te gato

DDT said:
			
		

> The fact that he was quite appreciated by Hitler doesn't mean that there was a direct correspondance between the philosophy of Nietzsche and Hitler's delusions of omnipotence...that butcher exploited Nietzsche's superman theory in order to justify the superiority of the Arian race...
> 
> DDT


Ahummm..DDT;
Back up the Nietzsche train for just a moment...
Did I say ANYWHERE in my posting that it was Nietzsche's doing that Hitler was the butcher he was...no I did not..I was just pointing out a known and documented fact...
te gato


----------



## DDT

te gato said:
			
		

> Ahummm..DDT;
> Back up the Nietzsche train for just a moment...
> Did I say ANYWHERE in my posting that it was Nietzsche's doing that Hitler was the butcher he was...no I did not..I was just pointing out a known and documented fact...
> te gato



I didn't misunderstand what you said, I just meant to point out another documented fact... 

DDT


----------



## cristóbal

Nietzsche: God is dead.
God: Nietzsche is dead.


SORRY! I just couldn't help myself.


----------



## Artrella

cristóbal said:
			
		

> Nietzsche: God is dead.
> God: Nietzsche is dead.
> 
> 
> SORRY! I just couldn't help myself.






«¿Adónde se ha ido Dios? Nosotros le hemos matado. Todos nosotros somos sus asesinos... ¿Cómo hemos sido capaces de beber el mar entero? ¿Quién nos ha dado la esponja con que hemos podido borrar el horizonte entero? ¿Qué hemos hecho cuando desprendimos la Tierra del Sol? ¿Hacia dónde se mueve ahora? ¿Hacia dónde nos movemos nosotros, ¿Nos estamos alejando de todos los soles? ¿Es que nos estamos cayendo, incesantemente? ¿Hacia detrás y hacia todos los lados? ¿Hay además un arriba y un abajo? ¿No vagamos perdidos en la infinitud de la nada? ¿No sentimos en nuestro rostro el vaho del espacio vacío? ¿No sentimos que va aumentando el frío? ¿No se va acercando la noche, continuamente, una noche cada vez más densa?...» (*Die Fröhliche Wissenschaft, número 125*)


----------

