I made the following statement:

I understand my “opinion” is unpopular for not being a superswarm. The superiority of numbers is what Nietzsche intuitively sensed when he coined the term “Übermensch.”

Paul Stevenson then proudly commented that he knows that Nietzsche’s word Über(mensch) translates as Over and not Super.

  1. Several points come to mind.
  2. My use of “super” in reference to “Über” is naturally indirect, because of the lack of one-to-one reference, but more importantly, since I am talking about a superpotent overarching / surreptitious underlying determination I categorize as superswarming.
  3. The word Über has no direct translation in English, due to linguistic, temporal and personal context, and the word Mensch really has no translation at all, a combination of human and humanity and the singular of people* being the closest, and man being traditional.
  4. Nietzsche saying that “man” is something that should be overcome, is due to stereotyping. Nietzsche’s scorn of humanity is a case of mistaken identity, because mythic archetype is not human. It is shaman myth.
  5. Nevertheless, Nietzsche’s intention is secondary to my observation. I am referring here to the determination of Nietzsche’s meaning by the human innate underlying cosmic pattern or what Carl Jung coined “collective unconscious,” as being subject to a kind of dispersed dynamic-fractal superswarming. Not as mythological archetype, which is an erroneous interpretation of Jung’s book, The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious .
  6. My point is that Nietzsche is already subconsciously gravitating to a post-heroic mythology of humans simultaneously assimilated as the emerging technological-cosmic singularity and as the infinitude of its smallest granularity nothingness.
  7. Here also important that Wittgenstein said that language meaning is seated in the function of words: and the function of meaning in our time is pervasively cultural-collective.
  8. Representativeness heuristics being common to all communicating organisms does not mean that civilization’s archetype mythology is human innate. It is an indication that human shortsightedness is so wide open to systemic manipulation, the process is consuming us.
  9. Nietzche, Jung and social contract civil interpretation dismally overplay actual human operational agency in the civil process and underplay self-organizational cosmic forces like memetic superswarming.
  10. NOTE: even deeper than the analogy of superswarming is the analogy of the universe as dynamic three-dimensional standing wave structure.
  11. If social contract shamanism has indeed taken over and dominates all world language, then archetypal characteristics in all peoples worldwide, irrespective of language spoken is not an indication that mythological archetype is congenital and should be included in Jung’s human collective unconscious
  12. Today the social contract shamanism-generated body of mythology has shifted from a very recently well-defined hierarchical construct to a construct of accelerating differentiation, in unconscious reflection and anticipation of the utter disintegration of the human holon.
  13. There is fatal confusion in the perception of what is human, and the confusion of overcoming humanness now actually widely expressed as transhumanism, and the dismal attitude that “human,” whatever meaning it takes moment-to-moment, can become ever bigger and better, and that we can be super in a superswarm, and blissfully posthuman.

* people as singular, as in he is good people.