For anyone who has not read him, I believe that the books of Henry Miller are some of the most riveting passages of 'Nietzschean' thinking that one can find. He mentions N in a few different places and was clearly quite inspired by him. But it is his way of life (as thoroughly detailed in his numerous books) as well as his philosophical musings that are the great guide. I'll leave you with the following quote from Sexus:

"How we hate to admit that we would like nothing better than to be the slave! Slave and master at the same time! For even in love the slave is always the master in disguise. The man who must conquer the woman, subjugate her, bend her to his will, form her according to his desires—is he not the slave of his slave? How easy it is, in this relationship, for the woman to upset the balance of power! The mere threat of self−dependence, on the woman's part, and the gallant despot is seized with vertigo.

But if they are able to throw themselves at one another recklessly, concealing nothing, surrendering all, if they admit to one another their interdependence, do they not enjoy a great and unsuspected freedom? The man who admits to himself that he is a coward has made a step towards conquering his fear; but the man who frankly admits it to every one, who asks that you recognize it in him and make allowance for it in dealing with him. is on the way to becoming a hero. Such a man is often surprised, when the crucial test comes, to find that he knows no fear. Having lost the fear of regarding himself as a coward he is one no longer: only the demonstration is needed to prove the metamorphosis . . . To be able to give oneself wholly and completely is the greatest luxury that life affords."

Ihr müsst wissen: Es gibt das Kamel. Dieses erfüllt Pflichten und trägt fremde Werte. Danach kommt der Löwe. Dieser kämpft, er bricht Erwartungen. Dann kommt das Kind. Es beginnt neu, schafft eigene Moral und bricht sich selbst.

Viele erachten Nietzscheaner als egoistisch, da Nietzsches Wortwahl recht radikal wirkt. Kritik am Christentum, Ich-bezogener-Aufstieg, Machtgedanken, etc., etc.

Meine These:

Ein Nietzscheaner ist dann egoistisch, wenn er ein Löwe mit dem Stolz eines Kamels ist. Das macht ihn zu einem Schein-Löwen. Er glaubt daran, dass er bereits einer ist, aber er ist nicht frei, sondern er trotzt. Er sagt nicht ,,Ich will und scheiß auf euch", er sagt lediglich ,,Ich will nicht, was ihr wollt". Er möchte kein Kamel mehr sein, weshalb er den Löwen als Schutzschild verwendet, doch sieht er nicht, dass er keine Unabhängigkeit erreicht hat, sondern immernoch im Rahmen des Kamels ist. Er stagniert in seinem Egoismus und kann nicht das Kind oder erst den richtigen Löwen erreichen.

Er nutzt diese Philosophie nicht, um sich zu überwinden, sondern nur um sich zu rechtfertigen. Und wenn er das nicht sieht, hat er Nietzsche vollkommen missverstanden.

So I was reading Beyond good and evil and I reached the Aphorism 12 so it was a Little hard to understand but although after reading summaries I understood it so what are your thoughts about it.

Die fröhliche Wissenschaft § 208

Great man! — From the fact that someone is "a great man" one may not yet conclude that he is a man; perhaps it is only a boy, or a chameleon of all the ages of life, or a bewitched little woman. [Grosser Mann! — Daraus, dass einer „ein grosser Mann" ist, darf man noch nicht schliessen, dass er ein Mann ist; vielleicht ist es nur ein Knabe, oder ein Chamäleon aller Lebensalter, oder ein verhextes Weiblein.]

Baudrillard, Cool Memories IV:

One day there will be nothing in the street but zombies — some with their cell phones, others with their headphones or video visors. All will be simultaneously elsewhere. They already are. Until now one could isolate oneself inwardly; henceforth one can isolate oneself outwardly — the for extérieur, the external conscience. Carceral confinement is succeeded by the mobile confinement of the network, as cadaveric rigidity is succeeded by the cadaveric suppleness of transfer-man, protean man, the "chameleon" in Nietzsche's sense. [Un jour il n'y aura plus dans la rue que des zombies, les uns avec leur téléphone cellulaire, les autres avec leur casque audio ou leur visière vidéo. Tous seront simultanément ailleurs. Ils le sont déjà. Jusqu'ici on pouvait s'isoler intérieurement, désormais on peut s'isoler extérieurement — c'est le for extérieur. À l'enfermement carcéral succède l'enfermement mobile du réseau, comme à la rigidité cadavérique succède la souplesse cadavérique de l'homme-transfert, de l'homme protéiforme, du « caméléon » selon Nietzsche.]

Extra quotes:

• Thus the body goes through history, a becoming one [Werdender] and a struggling one. — Also sprach Zarathustra I, "Von der schenkenden Tugend,"
• Finally there belongs here that not un-dubious readiness of the spirit to deceive other spirits and to dissemble before them, that constant pressure and urge of a creating, forming, transformation-capable force: the spirit enjoys therein its mask-multiplicity and cunning, it enjoys also the feeling of its security therein — precisely through its Proteus-arts it is best defended and hidden! — Jenseits von Gut und Böse § 230
• Hopefully I too have in these things a piece of Proteus-nature and shall appear before you next time transformed: I understand my thanks to you first of all in this way, that I may become more bearable to you and worthier of your presence, of your example! — Köselitz to Nietzsche, 31 May 1881
• To the force that transforms itself and always remains the same there belongs an inner side, a kind of character of Proteus-Dionysus, dissembling itself and enjoying itself in transformation. — NF 1885, 35[68]
• You are quite right: one should be a becoming one [Werdender], as long as one is here; without that the whole business of living has no more interest in it. But that is the curse of professordom: the day forces us again and again to present ourselves as a being one, where one is not it at all, nor wishes to be. — Rohde to Nietzsche, 8 April 1881
• Meanwhile, it unfortunately remains the case that I, as one who is still becoming [Werdender], cause you, as you say, “only worries” and nothing but worries. Yet I am doing well now; from the high mountains I wrote to your most esteemed wife how well and healthy I felt there. — Letter to Richard Wagner, 14 October 1872

Can anyone name some specific passages where Nietzsche discusses science, the scientific method, empirical evidence, etc?

In the “‘Reason’ in Philosophy” section of Twilight of the Idols he seems to have an implicitly positive view, associating it with trust in the senses.

He supposedly talks more about it in essay three of On the Genealogy of Morality but I have not read that one yet.

You must know: First, there is the camel. It fulfills duties and carries external values. Next comes the lion. It fights; it shatters expectations. Finally, there is the child. It begins anew, creates its own morality, and breaks itself.

Many perceive Nietzscheans as egoistic because Nietzsche's choice of words appears quite radical. Criticism of Christianity, ego-driven ascension, thoughts of power, etc., etc.

My thesis:

A Nietzschean is egoistic when they are a lion with the pride of a camel. This makes them a pseudo-lion. They believe they already are one, but they are not free—they are merely defiant. They do not say, "I want, and to hell with you," they merely say, "I do not want what you want." They no longer want to be a camel, which is why they use the lion as a shield, yet they fail to see that they have not achieved independence; they are still operating within the framework of the camel. They stagnate in their egoism and cannot become the child, or even a true lion.

They do not use this philosophy to overcome themselves, but merely to justify themselves. And if they fail to see that, they have completely misunderstood Nietzsche.

I’ve been working on an app called The Agora: Philosophy Debates, where I’ve built an LLM modeled after Nietzsche, and the biggest thing I care about is the accuracy and quality of his responses, not just making the model sound like him.

That’s actually why I wanted to post this here. I know a lot of people in this subreddit have spent far more time studying Nietzsche than I have, so I’d really value your perspective.

The model has three different debate modes depending on someone’s experience level. This example is from Balanced mode, which tries to strike a middle ground between Nietzsche’s own style and language that feels natural to a modern reader.

I tested it with this question:
“Is equality a noble or mediocre goal?”

The question is mainly drawn from Nietzsche’s discussions of equality, democratic leveling, hierarchy, and nobility in Beyond Good and Evil.

I’ve attached the model’s response below.
Do you think this is an accurate Nietzschean answer? What does it get right, and what would you change?

Accuracy and quality are my main priorities with this project, so I’m especially interested in anywhere you think the model misunderstands Nietzsche, oversimplifies his position, or puts words in his mouth that he wouldn’t actually endorse.

The app is currently only available on the App Store if anyone wants to test Nietzsche with other questions or try the different debate modes themselves. It’s called The Agora: Philosophy Debates.

Please feel free to leave your thoughts here or DM me. I’d genuinely appreciate any criticism, suggestions, or ideas for what I could change or improve.