2. misc-audio
  3. 173256-139155

Nietzsche and Runaway Audio Consumption

Came across this today. A lot of posts bring up the issue of "how much is enough?" or "when is audio consumption justified" etc.

Does this Nietzsche aphorism apply to audio buying? You be the judge! 

Friedrich Nietzsche: “Danger in riches. — Only he who has spirit ought to have possessions: otherwise possessions are a public danger. For the possessor who does not know how to make use of the free time which his possessions could purchase him will always continue to strive after possessions: this striving will constitute his entertainment, his strategy in his war against boredom. 

Thus in the end the moderate possessions that would suffice the man of spirit are transformed into actual riches – riches which are in fact the glittering product of spiritual dependence and poverty. They only appear quite different from what their wretched origin would lead one to expect because they are able to mask themselves with art and culture: for they are, of course, able to purchase masks. By this means they arouse envy in the poorer and the uncultivated – who at bottom are envying culture and fail to recognize the masks as masks – and gradually prepare a social revolution: for gilded vulgarity and histrionic self-inflation in a supposed ‘enjoyment of culture’ instil into the latter the idea ‘it is only a matter of money’ – whereas, while it is to some extent a matter of money, it is much more a matter of spirit.” 

Nietzsche, Friedrich. 1996. Human, All Too Human: A Book for Free Spirits. Cambridge University Press. (p. 283-4, an aphorism no. 310)

I'm pretty sure @mahgister will want to read this one! (Because they speak so artfully about avoiding the diversion that consumption poses to the quest for true aesthetic and acoustic excellence.)

128x128hilde45

Showing 3 responses by nolojunko

nolojunko
34 posts
 

N's confused notions of anthropology certainly corrupt much of his moral conceptions (it's a pretty poor foundation).  That said (quite apart from the bogus Spirit idea), his general point as regards proper use of goods, entertainment, etc. can be helpful when finely filtered.  In the end, N's the last guy I'd read on ethics.

 

nolojunko
34 posts
 

@mahgister 

I've studied the subject for 30 years, my friend.  And I don't think I want to invest in another hundred hours of grad studies, so don't expect me to "...go back to school..." any time soon.   Merry Christmas, peace, brother.

 

nolojunko
34 posts
 

@ mahgister - Thanks much for your latest response to me.  I'm all good, so no problem.  I also often regret my passions :) 

Second, in a forum such as this, it's a real challenge to adequately express complex philosophical, ethical, religious (spirit-ual) concepts, considering the nature of the medium and its audience.  In retrospect, maybe doing so is a fool's errand.

RE: N's use of the term/concept of "spirit" seems to me to be quite different from the Hebrew as used by the ancients (I have studied Hebrew), from which you make reference.  It would have been more helpful and clear had I effectively engaged this particular quibble. But again, the nature of the forum is challenging when attempting to engage even such limited scope.

All that said, Hilde does make an interesting and potentially profitable observation by posing the question he does - just in terms of an ethical consideration some may wish to ponder.  I'm merely observing that, perhaps, utilizing N does more to confuse or obscure the matter for interested readers than provide clarity necessary for arriving at a more mature understanding of the matter.  

More to discover