Nietzsche -- The Man Behind the Philosophy

[Reconstructo]

Good post, Fido. A little unfair perhaps, but you do put your finger on the issues.

Spengler called Nietzsche a socialist, by which he meant moralist. Indeed, Nietzsche was a part time moralist. He thought man was too naive, too tame, too broken. But he should have realized that buying and selling and eating and shetting were going on like usual, that people were stuffing their faces, that criminals were being executed, wars fought. Where was all this pity? In the pulpit? But that was just whitewash. Nietzsche forgot that intellectual conscience or if you prefer consistency is the virtue of a subculture, not humanity at large.

The strange thing is that you criticize Nietzsche in a depth-psychology biographical way, and this to me is what Nietzsche did well to other philosophers. As you say, youth is madness, and I was drawn to Nietzsche by the phrase "beyond good and evil." What young man of spirit does not want to go beyond? And I digested all of this and even his errors were useful. As determinate negations, as capes tried on and found wanting. But Nietzsche was still a first-rank philosopher at times, in spite of all his absurdities. And even his absurdities are instructive, just as porn is instructive. Ecce Homo is an x-ray of philosophic ambition. Un-edited megalomania and power-drive, blah blah, etc.

[Fido]

Originally Posted by Reconstructo

Good post, Fido. A little unfair perhaps, but you do put your finger on the issues.

Spengler called Nietzsche a socialist, by which he meant moralist. Indeed, Nietzsche was a part time moralist. He thought man was too naive, too tame, too broken. But he should have realized that buying and selling and eating and shetting were going on like usual, that people were stuffing their faces, that criminals were being executed, wars fought. Where was all this pity? In the pulpit? But that was just whitewash. Nietzsche forgot that intellectual conscience or if you prefer consistency is the virtue of a subculture, not humanity at large.

The strange thing is that you criticize Nietzsche in a depth-psychology biographical way, and this to me is what Nietzsche did well to other philosophers. As you say, youth is madness, and I was drawn to Nietzsche by the phrase "beyond good and evil." What young man of spirit does not want to go beyond? And I digested all of this and even his errors were useful. As determinate negations, as capes tried on and found wanting. But Nietzsche was still a first-rank philosopher at times, in spite of all his absurdities. And even his absurdities are instructive, just as porn is instructive. Ecce Homo is an x-ray of philosophic ambition. Un-edited megalomania and power-drive, blah blah, etc.

There is no essential difference between philosophy and morality, or properly, ethics...It is moral forms we deal with and not physical ones...

I would put Spengler in the same class as NIetzsche...Each in their narratives of European civilization saw it in decline, much as people before the end of the first millenium saw everything winding down to the end, and the coming of Jesus...And the fact the Jesus did not return left the Church in position to take over society, and they did, and pretty much gave us Western law as we have it, excepting England and the U.S., of course...

In any event, I don't see it...I don't see that we are winding down, or that we need some super man types to lift humanity out of the dirt...If Nietzsche had read Engals, or perhaps Morgan on anthropology, he might have gathered that the state was founded on the power of raiding chiefs who eventually set themselves above their own people... There were never two classess of people in Tribal Europe until the Franks discovered the stirrup, which made one man on a horse the equal of many...The difference between the supermen and the peasants was four more feet...And all that was a step down for humanity for sure, because all the talents of all the people were wasted by class division...

Humanity marches forward...It is because of democracy, because equality of humanity has been given some of its due that we know the great advance of technology in the span of time between Nietzsche and ourselves... The lords couldn't balance their checkbooks...The people can do anything...

[Reconstructo]

I think Spengler was quite different than Nietzsche. He strikes me as much colder. His influence is Goethe. He has much of Hegel's organicism.

Still, I thought you post was good. Yes, Nietzsche was a boy in love with comic books. He was Romantic poet in the wrong genre. But consider the opening of Beyond Good and Evil. "Supposing Truth to be a woman.." He proceeds to expose the prejudices of philosophers, judges them from the better parts of himself. He assimilated Schopenhauer, but added a twist. He saw that Life was the maker and breaker of truth. In many ways, Nietzsche is just the return of the Sophist, the same sophist that Plato declared himself morally superior to. But Nietzsche inherited Plato's moral superiority. It still clung to him, the smell of the priest. Whereas a Protogoras was paid well, lived to a ripe old age. So Nietzsche is a Chatterton in the attic type of Romantic Sophist. Or that's one of many possible descriptions.

What do you think of Rorty? He's an example of a modern smiling sophist who has assimilated the Romantics and the linguistic philosophers quite well I think. A well-adjusted Nietzsche who writes in a calm clear English.

[de_budding]

I both admire and detest Nietzsche’s enigmatic style of writing.
His writing seems to ask that you work him out, rather than him explaining himself. I find this both original and interesting but also a little lazy.

I think Nietzsche strives to be super-succinct and catchy - even referring to his aphorisms as 'barbs'... or catchy points. And his 'barbs' are catchy and I thinnk this sort of use of pun and wit is great.

I always dip in and out of BGaE and TotI and find both full of advice and reflections which I find relevant and interesting. However, I struggle to follow his larger ideas which are meant to be woven into the books, although I have tried to pick these up from books like ‘A very short introduction to Nietzsche’ (oxford press) and fine these equally inspired and original, especially regarding religion and slave morality.

In a nut shell I think his writing style (particularly in BGaE and TotI) is original and adventurous... both reflections of his thought and ideas in my opinion.

Regards,
Dan

[Fido]

Originally Posted by de_budding

I both admire and detest Nietzsche’s enigmatic style of writing.
His writing seems to ask that you work him out, rather than him explaining himself. I find this both original and interesting but also a little lazy.

I think Nietzsche strives to be super-succinct and catchy - even referring to his aphorisms as 'barbs'... or catchy points. And his 'barbs' are catchy and I thinnk this sort of use of pun and wit is great.

I always dip in and out of BGaE and TotI and find both full of advice and reflections which I find relevant and interesting. However, I struggle to follow his larger ideas which are meant to be woven into the books, although I have tried to pick these up from books like ‘A very short introduction to Nietzsche’ (oxford press) and fine these equally inspired and original, especially regarding religion and slave morality.

In a nut shell I think his writing style (particularly in BGaE and TotI) is original and adventurous... both reflections of his thought and ideas in my opinion.

Regards,
Dan

It could be that he was a shiney pin ball bouncing off the bumpers and paddles of contradition...If he was telling the truth, then why the enthusiasim??? Every one with the truth is the bearer of bad tidings, as welcome as discord at any party... The truth discovered at great pains also means change at great cost...Is the truth so difficult to gather, or does humanity not want to bother???As far as I can tell people just need enough truth to keep tomorrow like yesterday.... Offer them any more and you will suffer rejection...The reason Nietzsche was successful is for telling what people wanted to hear...Everyone tends to see the superman in their own reflections...Everyone can bathe in their pleasure at cruelty...Did Nietzsche ask for sacrifice as Jesus did???

[Reconstructo]

"Wisdom maketh a man's face to shine." Ecclesiastes.

At moments, Nietzsche gets there. But he doesn't have the personality type to be a lawgiver.

He is a pinball, but his journey is instructive. A young reader will first assimilate his lesser thoughts and then negate them. But a kernel remains that is valuable.

[Fido]

Originally Posted by Reconstructo

"Wisdom maketh a man's face to shine." Ecclesiastes.

At moments, Nietzsche gets there. But he doesn't have the personality type to be a lawgiver.

He is a pinball, but his journey is instructive. A young reader will first assimilate his lesser thoughts and then negate them. But a kernel remains that is valuable.

So does alcohol...

[Reconstructo]

Sometimes alcohol is Liquid Wisdom.

But seriously, a thinker's happiness is a recommendation of his thoughts as well as his liquor.