mimizu
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2006
- Messages
- 622
- Reaction score
- 0
... Nietzsche's concept that the ultimate power in the universe is the desire for power itself. What do you think about it? Especially when applied to inanimate objects.
They mentally slice up the physical space around them, depending on the look and touch characterestics of it in different places. So somewhere where it's hard and grey, it's a "rock", and somewhere where it's brown and tall, with green foilage on top, that's a "tree". Using this logic, humans separate the "tree", from the air and the earth around it, but it's not really a separate "object". Separate objects are just easier to think about than a chaotic whole.
Now, when I think of the "Will to Power" about living things, it reminds of boiling water to me. There are a bunch of little particles, composing bosons and fermions, which compose atoms, which compose molecules, which compose "living creatures", who constantly struggle against each other, steal chunks of matter from each other's bodies and adapt them into their own, and later decompose and the chunks of matter that used to compose them are adapted into other "living creatures'" bodies, while they also spawn some new bodies out of themselves, who continue to do the same thing. The whole process looks utterly pointless. It's a colossal ancient struggle about nothing.
Life is a struggle about nothing. We are born, we struggle trying to stay alive (and avoid being in pain) for a while, and then we die anyway.
My idea is that every specific body strives to become master over all space and to extend its force (its will to power) and to thrust back all that resists its extension. But it continually encounters similar efforts on the part of other bodies and ends by coming to an arrangement ("union") with those of them that are sufficiently related to it: thus they then conspire together for power. And the process goes on.
I don't think a rock acts a site of resistance. It's not resisting anything, since it's composed of the same particles as everything else that surrounds it. There isn't actually any difference between the rock and what surrounds it, rocks are just abstractions that humans (and animals) make.some interpreters might claim that rather than an attempt to 'dominate over others,' the "will to power" is better understood as the tenuous equilibrium in a system of forces' relations to each other. While a rock, for instance, does not have a conscious (or unconscious) "will," it nevertheless acts as a site of resistance within the "will to power" dynamic.
They mentally slice up the physical space around them, depending on the look and touch characterestics of it in different places. So somewhere where it's hard and grey, it's a "rock", and somewhere where it's brown and tall, with green foilage on top, that's a "tree". Using this logic, humans separate the "tree", from the air and the earth around it, but it's not really a separate "object". Separate objects are just easier to think about than a chaotic whole.
Now, when I think of the "Will to Power" about living things, it reminds of boiling water to me. There are a bunch of little particles, composing bosons and fermions, which compose atoms, which compose molecules, which compose "living creatures", who constantly struggle against each other, steal chunks of matter from each other's bodies and adapt them into their own, and later decompose and the chunks of matter that used to compose them are adapted into other "living creatures'" bodies, while they also spawn some new bodies out of themselves, who continue to do the same thing. The whole process looks utterly pointless. It's a colossal ancient struggle about nothing.
Life is a struggle about nothing. We are born, we struggle trying to stay alive (and avoid being in pain) for a while, and then we die anyway.