@-Thiudareiks- It's not a genuine question, it's a convoluted mass of many questions that build a towering mess off of a Schmigma strawman.

I was born in a European country, so everything was provided readily to me, I grew up in a tradition. You are better off asking other North Americans. I would recommend you go for other North Americans who use the term "shitely" and are therefore in your region of North America.

If you do not have any kind of feel of what tradition might be, you are better off studying all the great philosophers of the western tradition, especially the ones from the country where you come from, so you can acquaint yourself with the questions your own people posed 1, 2, 10 centuries ago. Then the history of your country and the heroes of your country and what they represented.

As for your lumberjack grandfather? Stick him up your arse schmigma.

@Stigma

Im not presenting my opinion as fact, because if you actually read Nietszche you would know that what I said was what he literally wrote in his works.

Your premise is wrong because it misuses the terms. If you misuse the terms they cease to have meaning. The terms were explicitly defined by their inventors (Nietszche and Evola) meaning that your argument doesnt make any sense.

One cannot conflate the idea of the Overman with Christian values because the Overman is defined IN OPPOSITION to Christianity. Furthermore, as Nietzsche shows Christianity and Christians cannot be viewed independently as the Christian Ressentiment created Christianity in an attempt to reverse the original definitions of "good" and "bad".

The Overman cannot be reached through different aspects of the soul (whatever that means), because it can only be reached through the Will to Power.

Finally, you cannot "agree" or "disagree" with Evola or Nietszche, because you do not have the authority to do so. Why? Because you have not read the material and have not understood it. How do I know? Because you demonstrate a gross misuse and misunderstanding of what the terms you are using mean (LOL @ thinking that the Will to Power can be achieved through the Slave morality of Christianity).

@Chaddeus_Rex

You are presenting your opinion and ideology as fact, as if you impose the argument you are making as an inherent truth. I presented you with the counter-argument to what aspects of Christianity are corrupt, rather than the ideology itself, which you have rejected from a place of denial within your own ideology. How can we form a basic discourse around these matters when you can’t see out of your own trench?

You can’t keep relying on telling me what I have or haven’t read (as again, you present this as fact and you are quite incorrect) as a way to say ‘I won’ as it once again makes this discourse redundant as you stare at your feet in your own trench.

I presented you with the idea that the overman can be met from different aspects of the soul - which is the formulation of my argument - and you disagree (which is your right) but then you tell me the only reason I don’t agree is because I haven’t read the material. I have read the material, and I disagree. If we can move on from your infantile and incorrect point we might move this discussion along - if you cannot, please refrain from bothering any further.