>>14203180Of course man is a product of nature, but I like the notion of man as an in between of a beast and a God, that's why I mentioned "divinity".
The only argument against "the problem of suffering" in Heraclitus, and in Nietzsche is the individual judgement/value attributed of suffering.
This is not directly implied in any of the phrases of Heraclitus, but for the sake of this argument I would like to bring up the constant flow of opposites (P51) which also applies to experiences like suffering. How come life is not worth continuing in the form of future generations because there are painful experiences (even considering the asymmetry argument and saying there are only very few moments of happiness) when the negative is a necessary part of the positive or happiness?
But suffering and tension (P51: mentions the bow) are not limited to being necessary counterparts of happiness, they allow the fundamental possibility of growth and through that, power. The end of life-affirmation of Nietzsche can be seen in P102 of Heraclitus: Striving towards being closer to a God in affirming everything as good, beautiful and just. At that point every experience even the most painful furthers the life of man. Personally, I think that P53 (war as the father/king of all…) expresses that sentiment to some degree: Heraclitus doesn’t directly oppose the painful experiences of war because of its potential, maybe because it allows the expression of strength/power.
Nothing is owed to you, life just is and that includes every last bit of misfortune and pain. Obsessing over feelings and not using everything in life for your benefit would be a waste (of life) in my eyes.
(Here’s a link to the fragments:
https://antilogicalism.files.wordpress.com/2016/12/heraclitus_fragments_final.pdf)
