Keith Devens .com

cites he who strongly supports the death penalty

Your lack of self examination is staggering. So, you think that a child rapist and murderer should, what, go to jail for life? That's punishment as well. But your idea of what's just punishment is arbitrary, whereas mine isn't.

how about when you expand your quote to its full context and realize that he was referring specifically to people that advocate capital punishment?

But thus do I counsel you, my friends: distrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful! They are people of bad race and lineage; out of their countenances peer the hangman and the sleuth-hound. Distrust all those who talk much of their justice! Verily, in their souls not only honey is lacking. And when they call themselves 'the good and just,' forget not, that for them to be Pharisees, nothing is lacking but- power! (Thomas Common translation)

Excellent! Thanks for the context, which of course I hadn't looked up. Of course, I strongly disagree with him

My point still stands. What is your basis for judging something to be just or unjust?

i'm not here to debate you on this, i was just pointing out how strange it was for you to be using a quote like that of nietzsche's knowing your own beliefs. i didn't even have to know the context of it to be able to guess that he was most likely using it in contradiction to your personal politics, and a simple search revealed it to be so.

next week in my class is kant, and the week after are nietzsche's ecce homo, genealogy of morals, and beyond good and evil. pretty heavy reading, but i'm looking forward to it.

i didn't even have to know the context of it to be able to guess that he was most likely using it in contradiction to your personal politics, and a simple search revealed it to be so.

Actually, I took a little time to read the passage in question (The Tarantulas, Thus Spake Zarathustra, section 29) and the passage doesn't have anything to do with the death penalty.

...out of their countenances peer the hangman and the sleuth-hound.

He was using that metaphorically. On your interpretation, he'd be against beagles too!

So, you were way off by bringing the death penalty into the discussion...

...using it in contradiction to your personal politics...

To that I'll give a big "duh". That's obvious. Nietzsche, particularly the passage in question, is against almost everybody's personal politics. This Sparknotes commentary on the tarantulas seems to be a pretty good and succinct explanation of what Nietzsche was getting at. Those who want democracy and equality are punishing those who would become the Übermensch. He maligns those who want "justice", meaning those who want men to be equal, stating baldly that "men are not equal".

Best I can tell, the part I quoted really does stand alone. That is, it seems to be a general admonition. Quoting it in the paragraph format like you did implies a context that isn't really there. In every format I've seen the part I quoted is its own paragraph. Grouping those four separate paragraphs together as you did is artificial.

In every format I've seen the part I quoted is its own paragraph.

Well, correction, it's got a preface, which I think further emphasizes its generality:

But thus do I counsel you, my friends: distrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful!

So, quoting it separately is perfectly legitimate. Though of course one should understand the context from which it comes:

Thus do I speak unto you in parable, ye who make the soul giddy, ye preachers of EQUALITY! Tarantulas are ye unto me, and secretly revengeful ones!

Those who want equality are tarantulas who take revenge on (i.e. punish) those who are not their equals. Harrison Bergeron comes to mind.

All in all, punishment hardens and renders people more insensible; it concentrates; it increases the feeling of estrangement; it strengthens the power of resistance.

Friedrich Nietzsche

Although the most acute judges of the witches and even the witches themselves, were convinced of the guilt of witchery, the guilt nevertheless was non-existent. It is thus with all guilt.

Friedrich Nietzsche

Source? Interpretation? Lazy.

Whatever the philosophers and judges and lefties say, if a murdering rapist crosses me, I will wipe out his family. For personal vengeance. And if that is a bad thing, go and live in Baghdad and preach to those nutcases.

Keith, you are way off.

Nietszche is speaking literally of the hangman. He is saying that the hangman comes from the group in whom the will to punish is strong. Capital punishment is, go figure, punishment, and strong punishment at that.

If your desire is to protect society from someone who is dangerous you can do that by locking them up for life. That is the will to protect the innocent, not the will to punish. Whether the criminal feels punished or not that is secondary to them being segregated from potential victims.

It costs society less to lock a person up for life than it does to execute them, by far. If you want to kill them instead that will be because your will to punish is strong. You have to do more and pay more to kill them and all you gain is the satisfaction of your blood lust, your will to punish.

Not to mention that nobody has yet figured out a way to stop executing 1 in 10 completely innocent people. So your blood lust comes at a very, very high price. When you see that Texas killed 200 last year that is 20 completely innocent people at least.

So, yeah, you hoisted yourself on your own petard by clipping 10 words of Nietzsche out of context. If you don't have the intellectual capacity to outgrow your will to punish at least have the grace to admit you fucked up here. You don't have to take it from us, there are many books analyzing Nietzsche which you can get someone smart to read to you.

Keith, you are way off.

Nietszche is speaking literally of the hangman. He is saying that the hangman comes from the group in whom the will to punish is strong. Capital punishment is, go figure, punishment, and strong punishment at that.

If your desire is to protect society from someone who is dangerous you can do that by locking them up for life. That is the will to protect the innocent, not the will to punish. Whether the criminal feels punished or not that is secondary to them being segregated from potential victims.

It costs society less to lock a person up for life than it does to execute them, by far. If you want to kill them instead that will be because your will to punish is strong. You have to do more and pay more to kill them and all you gain is the satisfaction of your blood lust, your will to punish.

Not to mention that nobody has yet figured out a way to stop executing 1 in 10 completely innocent people. So your blood lust comes at a very, very high price. When you see that Texas killed 200 last year that is 20 completely innocent people at least.

So, yeah, you hoisted yourself on your own petard by clipping 10 words of Nietzsche out of context. If you don't have the intellectual capacity to outgrow your will to punish at least have the grace to admit you fucked up here. You don't have to take it from us, there are many books analyzing Nietzsche which you can get someone smart to read to you.

Keith, you are way off.

Nietszche is speaking literally of the hangman. He is saying that the hangman comes from the group in whom the will to punish is strong.

Wow, I gave an interpretation based on the text and your argument consists of "you are way off". Good one.

To read The Tarantulas as some kind of admonition against the death penalty... to be honest I'm speechless.