Nobility and Vulgarity

[DHodges]

An issue kept cropping up as I read Neitzsche’s Beyond Good and Evil. He kept contrasting what he called noble with what was common and ordinary, or vulgar.

I really wasn’t following why this was so important to him, and I had to give it a few days thought. It seemed like a strange distinction to me. The way I would normally think of it, the opposite of vulgar would be polite rather than noble. I just don’t usually think in terms of nobility.

Part of why I wasn’t following him was that he was right about where the world was heading: the democratic view of the world has taken over so thoroughly, the assumption of equality is so pervasive, that it now takes some thought to see behind it and remember that it is, in fact, a fiction. Political equality is something we have settled on, as a matter of consensus, out of a sense of fairness – not because of any actual underlying equality.

But at times I felt he was going too far; he seemed to me like those people who like music that is underground, but immediately drop it if it becomes popular - they like it because it is underground, not on its own merits. He rejects anything that is common simply on the basis that it is common. So he has a sense of this kind of a kind of snobbery, of wanting to create a sort of elitism for himself, just to be contrasting himself to anything ordinary. If most people like it, it must be bad.

A lot of the time, of course, he’s right - things that are popular - pop music, bestsellers, popular TV shows – generally do suck, because they are geared toward a lowest common denominator - the common interests of love, sex and gossip. But maybe there’s more to it than that.

I have a suspicion that it has to do with delusion. The popular mind is highly deluded. And these delusions are directly tied to reproduction. Deluded ideas, like love, lead to reproduction, and so it will always be up to the individual to dig himself out from under the weight of the culture he is born into. A stable culture must value reproduction. One’s parents likely valued reproduction – enough to do it.

The essence of nobility, as I see it, is seeking after truth.

Most people are actually in love with their delusions, and do not want them challenged, because they are comfortable there – for instance, people jump from one bad love affair to the next because they are in love with love, never thinking that the idea of love they have may be flawed.

And there is the issue of ego - which always seems to come up. Neitzsche describes the common ego very well: the person does not trust himself about his own self-worth, and looks for others to tell him. He trusts the group – the herd – more than he trusts himself. He is nothing by himself; he is more real as a reflection in the eyes of others. In the popular mind, there is little distinction between “truth” and “consensus”. What everyone believes is true, almost by definition, so he is obsessed with what others think of him.

So nobility is also trusting in one’s self. Not in the sense of having an inflated ego, but in the sense of believing in your own power to form values and judgments, rather than accepting popular belief as a proof. That implies a certain independence of spirit.

[unwise]

Will you feel better if the QVC cult agrees with you? You guys mock the 'common' 'vulgar' person for his 'herd' mentality, yet you are all trying to form a group consensus on 'truth' 'masculinity' 'consciousness' 'femininity' 'enlightenment' and other issues. This is the same herd mentality. Why don't you step out on your own as N. suggested?

[Nick]

Will you feel better if the QVC cult agrees with you? You guys mock the 'common' 'vulgar' person for his 'herd' mentality, yet you are all trying to form a group consensus on 'truth' 'masculinity' 'consciousness' 'femininity' 'enlightenment' and other issues. This is the same herd mentality. Why don't you step out on your own as N. suggested?

It's called teaching or helping to raise someones consciousness of reality, or their own motives and the effects of their actions. You simply aren't humble enough to see or understand this. Your ego has run-a-muck and has transformed you into a beacon of darkness (ignorance). Of course there's always hope for you if the nature of cause and effect sees to it that you are humbled in some manner. Only time will tell.

[Kelly Jones]

The way I would normally think of it, the opposite of vulgar would be polite rather than noble. I just don’t usually think in terms of nobility.

Nietzsche had a background in philology and classical studies. He is using words with particular connotations: Vulgar means popular (of the people); Noble is one of the ruling class, a politician, involved in ruling the city of people (polite, from polis, the city), which implies wisdom. These days, vulgar, politician, and civilian are all taken to be similar.

Probably Nietzsche was not talking about current trends so much as the eternal and abysmal difference between the individual and the societal-minded person. The "director" individual contributes to a pool of resources to support other individuals (he is not a slave of society), but the "slave" feels he must contribute to be worth supporting.

Directive nobility is not elitism, just a normal healthy human mindstate: one that has learnt how to value. It's contrasted with the attitude that "to sacrifice one's life in the service of humankind is the man's greatest glory". As you say, Dave, the popular view is about sacrificing one's life for the sake of being reproduced..... but there's no real glory in being a clone, or a leader of clones.

So nobility is also trusting in one’s self. Not in the sense of having an inflated ego, but in the sense of believing in your own power to form values and judgments, rather than accepting popular belief as a proof. That implies a certain independence of spirit.

Yes, I think you're right there. It's like sitting alone on your motorbike at the top of a steep muddy slope, and thinking, "I will not fall off and break my neck, I'll ride this down like a dream. Just lean back, hold the course, and GO!"


Kelly

[suergaz]

The essence of nobility, as I see it, is seeking after truth.

Its essence, as I see it, is seeking after itself.

Most people are actually in love with their delusions, and do not want them challenged, because they are comfortable there – for instance, people jump from one bad love affair to the next because they are in love with love, never thinking that the idea of love they have may be flawed.

To be in love is to be in love with love, with its idea, and also its object. That people can't help but love themselves when they love beyond themselves is not delusional.

And there is the issue of ego - which always seems to come up. Neitzsche describes the common ego very well: the person does not trust himself about his own self-worth, and looks for others to tell him. He trusts the group – the herd – more than he trusts himself. He is nothing by himself; he is more real as a reflection in the eyes of others. In the popular mind, there is little distinction between “truth” and “consensus”. What everyone believes is true, almost by definition, so he is obsessed with what others think of him.

What is true, and what is believed to be true, is distinguished by the vain as by anyone who finds they trust anything.
Only in the vain, about them, one treads carefully, as trust is more deeply wedded to that which holds them to life--their understanding. The ego poses no threat to the noble.

So nobility is also trusting in one’s self. Not in the sense of having an inflated ego, but in the sense of believing in your own power to form values and judgments, rather than accepting popular belief as a proof. That implies a certain independence of spirit.

Nobility as independence of spirit. Now that's where our nobilities are alike! :D I've always liked you Dave, you're a calm one, a steady spirit, noble! But as deluded as any who 'speak out' against love!

[frank]

There is a guard -Ego- to look after you.

The guard adheres to this formula: to protect you it can not be you.

Although your Ego and you are one in the creature you are, oneness is not a useful distinction for a guard to make.

A guard needs to keep an eye on its charge. To do that it has to separate itself from its charge.

It's hilarious.

frank

[Jamesh]

All adjectives are emotionally based, thus subjective. Even the meaning in our head in relation to nouns is emotionally based.

Nobility, respect whatever - all meaningless in relation to reality.
One of the reasons I often mock the QRS is their attachment to the word nobility.

[DHodges]

Nietzsche had a background in philology and classical studies. He is using words with particular connotations: Vulgar means popular (of the people); Noble is one of the ruling class, a politician, involved in ruling the city of people (polite, from polis, the city), which implies wisdom. These days, vulgar, politician, and civilian are all taken to be similar.

There's also the issue of the translation from German into English, as well as the change in the meaning of words over time. That's why I wasn't sure if I was getting what he was getting at.

It seemed an odd thing to be so concerned with, which is why I put more thought into it.

Where does authenticity fit into this? I started thinking about that last night. A noble person has a self to be authentic to - he has a nature. The vulgar, it seems, have no nature of their own, but are just a reflection of what is around them, so fashion might be the vulgar equivalent of authenticity.

[DHodges]

Will you feel better if the QVC cult agrees with you?

You know, I didn't even know there was a QVC cult.

You guys mock the 'common' 'vulgar' person for his 'herd' mentality, yet you are all trying to form a group consensus on 'truth' 'masculinity' 'consciousness' 'femininity' 'enlightenment' and other issues. This is the same herd mentality. Why don't you step out on your own as N. suggested?

Everyone comes from a herd; we are herd animals by nature.

The point is not to mock and put down others, or form a consensus. The point is to consider these qualities in one's self, to determine what is worthwhile and what is not.

Is nobility something worthwhile, something one should aim for and strive for? Is the distinction with vulgarity a meaningful one? To even consider this question is perhaps a move in the direction of nobility, because it is a question one must take on and decide for one's self - it's a question of what values you accept, or create, for yourself.

If one were to simply read and mindlessly agree, then that would be the herd mentality as you say. But I don't think these are questions that allow you to do that. You must think about them, or reject thinking about them - thus accepting mediocrity, vulgarity, etc., by default.

[frank]

dave:

Is nobility something worthwhile, something one should aim for and strive for? Is the distinction with vulgarity a meaningful one? To even consider this question is perhaps a move in the direction of nobility, because it is a question one must take on and decide for one's self - it's a question of what values you accept, or create, for yourself.

...organising these non-existant 'things'...these abstract speculations into Categories and assigning them Properties...
...Language Bewitchment that 'fogs' the perception of Reality...

The Ego trying to 'structure' a personality to be 'impressive'....
Will I be Noble?
Will I be Vulgar?
Wanting to be an Ideal Form...claiming to be an Ideal Form...

Like trying to make a cake...spoon o' sugar, cup o' rice, dash o' milk...

Best Cake in Show!

Inauthentic and Hilarious.

realise the true Nature by realising what the Ego is grasping after and why...
...striving, grasping, forcing, trying, pushing...what for? doesn't work...

frank

[Blair]

A human being on its own is niether vulgar nor noble, it just is.

Context gives it a label, a derived meaning. Both attributes are learnt behaviours, a way of conducting the person-self in a culture to fit in. Both are ridiculous aberrations.

[bert]

dave:

The essence of nobility, as I see it, is seeking after truth.

I shall say it like Dali :"the truth is between our teeth.all philosophy is proved out in the art of eating.a man reveals himself when he is fork in hand."

[bert]

nobility becomes a combination of death and shit, the acceptance of man as a whole and what it implies.

[DHodges]

A human being on its own is niether vulgar nor noble, it just is.

Is there ever such a thing? Perhaps a feral child?

Context gives it a label, a derived meaning. Both attributes are learnt behaviours, a way of conducting the person-self in a culture to fit in. Both are ridiculous aberrations.

I disagree. Outside of a culture - and a feral child is the only example I can think of - homo sapiens is just a particular type of ape.

It is not an aberration, it is the nature of humanity, to exist within a culture.

[DHodges]

Inauthentic and Hilarious.

If that is inauthentic, then what do you think would actually be authentic?

It's hilarious.

What's funny is that every time I read "it's hilarious," I think, "Shut the fuck up, Donny." (John Goodman to Steve Buscemi in The Big Lebowski.)

I guess that's just me.

[R. Steven Coyle]

Dave:

There's a great anime out called Vampire Hunter D.

Check it out -

http://www.vampirehunterdbloodlust.com/

[Gretchen]

[/quote]
Where does authenticity fit into this? I started thinking about that last night. A noble person has a self to be authentic to - he has a nature. The vulgar, it seems, have no nature of their own, but are just a reflection of what is around them, so fashion might be the vulgar equivalent of authenticity.[/quote]

So would the creator of fashion be noble, even somewhat? The why of the creative process may have some influence on the determination. There is art for money and then there is art for art's sake, perhaps ego's sake? Just rambling thought.

[frank]

dave:

If that is inauthentic, then what do you think would actually be authentic?

realise the true Nature by realising what the Ego is grasping after and why...
...striving, grasping, forcing, trying, pushing...what for? doesn't work...

What's funny is that every time I read "it's hilarious," I think, "Shut the fuck up, Donny." (John Goodman to Steve Buscemi in The Big Lebowski.)

If you're melancholic/depressed...shovin' meds down your throat...tryin' to be serious...or grandiose yourself as a Sage...

...then how could Human Nature appear to you as humorous...

You're given a Life or Life Sentence.
You don't get out of here Alive.
So, you are effectively on Death Row.
You are just Doin' Time.

What the fuck is the point of being depressed.
Do you get a Trophy?

It's over before it's over...geddit?

The Joke is always on you.

ha ha ha

It's hilarious.

frank

[MrRemarkable]

Probably it's the class war. But not always like that though
The high upper class try to be noble because they think they are proven for better life with their social status and income.
And the lower class look after vulgarity cause they feel resentment to being "noble" or "high class" or "Ivy league". They think it's phony and also pretty gay way of life. The AFrican Americans are great examples. Although they ussed to be slaves, after general sense of "Blacks are beautiful", black people have risen up in social stauts and common standard views. Black adults are respected by the majority and they try to live quite noble life such as living in Surburb house and playing chess and going to church. But there is another ironical side of African Americans especially among youths to success.
Nowadays there is general sense of "I need use vulgarity to be successful." If you look at young blacks dressed up in loose hip-hop clothes and quite unnoble way of life. They listen to chronic rap songs written by artists like Dr.Dre or 2pac who give messages like, "Fuck the world. The world is materialistic anyway and don't fuck with me even if I live an amoralistic life.
The curious thing is that although blacks are accoustomed to vulgarity than most other races, such as feeling from inside calling one thyself, "Nigger~", they don't believe in equlaity.
So althogh general African Americans are common and vulgarsome and even were freed by the concept of freedom, equlaliy and liberty, they were first race to take off the mask of "general good neighbors" and chase after money, $$$
(yes how many times do you hear about $$ and hoes and bling bling and shooting other people and smoking weed in chronic albums.
maybe too long sorry~
my point is that the African Americans are actually very opposite of "classic fairy noblity". They are like the anarchists!!!
They do not belive in equality and standard morality while they are opposite to the main stream or the "classic fairy nobility"
I am not dissing African Americans but I think that's how it pretty much is among this new generation.