\nDaniel S. Forrest, Suprahumanism: European Man and the Regeneration of History (via hierarchical-aestheticism)"}The tragic urge to self-overcoming has been identified as the only way man and his presence in the world may be ennobled, and this has become the primary element of our suprahumanist ethic. It is what the ancient Greeks called aret\u00e9, the quest for excellence: the act of living up to one\u2019s full potential.
\n\nSince suprahumanism recovers and transfigures the founding myths of Indo-European culture, when it comes to specifying its particular tenets such features as the following might be listed: an eminently aristocratic conception of the human individual; the importance of honour (\u2018shame\u2019 rather than \u2018sin\u2019); a heroic attitude towards life\u2019s challenges; the exaltation and sacralisation of the world, beauty, the body, strength, and health; the rejection of any \u2018worlds beyond\u2019; and the inseparability of morality and aesthetics.
\n\nModern materialistic society is based on two principles: that nothing is worse than death, and nothing is better than wealth. In contrast, aristocratic society is based on the principles that there are things worse than death and better than wealth. Dishonour and slavery are worse than death. Honour and freedom are better than wealth. Trading wealth for spiritual goods demonstrates one\u2019s freedom from material necessity. Hence, transforming wealth into the spiritual \u2014 into honour, prestige, or beautiful and \u2018useless\u2019 things \u2014 is an aristocratic virtue.
\n\nThe term \u2018aristocracy\u2019 (aret\u00e9) is used, throughout this book, in its etymological sense, and should not be confused either with \u2018nobility\u2019 \u2014 as a social class \u2014 or with \u2018elite\u2019. An elite is merely a minority holding power within a certain society; an aristocracy distinguishes itself by ability to interpret and express a certain collective will, identity \u2014 or sovereignty. An aristocracy incarnates the spirit of an entire community, not particular class interest. Georges Sorel, without lapsing into paradox or oxymoron, speaks of \u2018proletarian aristocracy.\u2019
\n\nThe highest value for a suprahumanist ethics undoubtedly lies not in a form of \u2018justice\u2019 whose purpose is essentially interpreted as flattening the social order in the name of equality, but in all that may allow man to surpass himself. Since to consider the implications of life\u2019s basic framework as unjust would be palpably absurd, such classic antitheses as noble vs. base, courageous vs. cowardly, honourable vs. dishonourable, beautiful vs. deformed, sick vs. healthy \u2026 come to replace the antitheses operative in a morality based on the concept of sin: good vs. evil, humble vs. vainglorious, submissive vs. proud, weak vs. arrogant, modest vs. boastful\u2026