Download Nietzsche's Perspective on Truth, Illusions, and Morality and more Study Guides, Projects, Research Philosophy in PDF only on Docsity!
Beyond good and Evil
Preface supposing truth is a woman philosophers like love-sick suitors who don’t understand the woman-truth central problem of philosophy is Plato’s error: denying perspective , the basic condition of all life
On the Prejudices of Philosophers
questioning the will to truth who is it that really wants truth? What in us wants truth? Why not untruth?
origin of the will to truth out of the will to untruth, deception can anything arise out of its opposite? A dangerous questioning? Nietzsche sees new philosophers coming up who have the strength for the dangerous “maybe.” Note in general Nietzsche’s preference for the conditional tense, his penchant for beginning his questioning with “perhaps” or “suppose” or “maybe.” In many of the passages throughout this book Nietzsche takes up a perspective which perhaps none had dared take up before, a perspective to question what had seemed previously to be unquestionable. He seems to constantly be tempting the reader with a dangerous thought experiment. This begins with the questioning of the will to truth and the supposition that, perhaps, the will to truth may have arisen out of its opposite, the will to untruth, ignorance, deception.
the supposition that the greater part of conscious thinking must be included among instinctive activities Nietzsche emphasizes that consciousness is a surface phenomenon conscious thinking is directed by what goes on beneath the surface contrary to Plato’s notion of pure reason , the conscious intellect, Nietzsche supposes, is not necessarily in control
supposition that untruth is a condition of life thus the falseness of a judgment is not necessarily an objection What counts is whether it is “life promoting, life preserving, species-preserving, perhaps even species cultivating.” This thought experiment of untruth as a condition of life can be traced back to the early essay “On Truth and Lie in an Extramoral Sense”: truths are illusions that we have forgotten are illusions and to the Apollonian art drive in The Birth of Tragedy the creation of beautiful illusions which are necessary to life the capacity to create necessary fictions without which we could not live
criticizing philosophers who think they have purely discovered their truths, those who think they have obtained some ‘objective’ or ‘neutral’ standpoint challenging this assumption Nietzsche suggest they are all “wily spokesman for their prejudices which they baptize ‘truths’” calls out Kant in particular, for thinking he has obtained such a standpoint with his ‘categorical imperative”
important passage focusing on Nietzsche’s psychology of the unconscious drives
every philosophy a kind of personal confession and unconscious memoir this echoes the Preface to The Gay Science in which Nietzsche suggests philosophers philosophize out of their sicknesses (himself included!)
questioning the Stoics and their vow to live “according to nature” Nietzsche challenges this view by suggesting there is nothing “stoic” about nature: “nature” Nietzsche suggests is wasteful beyond measure, indifferent, without purpose, without mercy and justice, perhaps living is wanting to be other than this nature thus untruth as a condition of life Nietzsche criticizes what he sees in the Stoics: their attempt to read into “nature” their own image but all philosophers have done this all philosophy “creates the world in its own image” “Philosophy is this tyrannical drive itself, the most spiritual will to power, to ‘the creation of the world’”
first reference to “nihilism” in his published writings criticizing the metaphysical opposition between “the real and apparent world” also criticizing the quest for certainty which has been the dominant theme in modern philosophy the reference to nihilism is to the “puritanical fanatics of conscience who prefer even a certain nothing to an uncertain something”
criticizing Kant for thinking that he had ‘discovered’ a new faculty in man, the faculty for synthetic judgments a priori Nietzsche proposes replacing Kant’s question: How are synthetic judgment a priori possible? with the question: “Why is belief in such judgments necessary?
rejection of materialistic atomism Kaufmann’s footnote informs us that Nietzsche’s reference here is to an obscure 18th century Jesuit philosopher, Boscovich, who defined atoms as only centers of force and not particles of matter Nietzsche takes up Boscovich’s view with his notion of the will to power as play of forces before Einstein, Nietzsche is thinking through the notion of matter as force
questioning whether the instinct for self-preservation is really the most basic drive “A living thing seeks above all to discharge its strength—life itself is will to power ; self-preservation iss only one of the indirect and most frequent results .”
supposition that even physics is only an interpretation and exegesis of the world to what extent is Nietzsche’s supposition about physics correct? Is even physics only an interpretation? reference to Plato’s thinking as a noble way of thinking Plato’s thinking was an overcoming of the world (really what all philosophy does according to Nietzsche’s hypothesis about philosophy as the most spiritual will to power)
the previous passage suggest Nietzsche’s rejection of realism this passage shows his rejection of idealism Nietzsche’s position then evades the dichotomy of realism/idealism
criticizing the “immediate certainties”of philosophers especially Descartes “I think, therefore, I am” and Schopenhauer’s “I will”
the will to knowledge arises out of the will to ignorance the will to knowledge is not the opposite of the will to ignorance but its refinement
one might notice a theme drawn from the teaching of evolution just as it was shocking when Darwin showed that the human being arose out of what was animal the human being not as the opposite of the ape but its refinement Nietzsche suggests a similar evolution of knowledge man could not live without a constant simplification and falsification even science “at its best seeks most to keep us in this simplified , thoroughly artificial, suitably constructed and suitably falsified world—at the way in which, willy-nilly, it loves error, because, being alive, it loves life.”
warns philosophers to beware of martyrdom to sacrifice oneself for the sake of truth such philosophers take their truths too seriously Nietzsche finds more truthfulness in question marks than in solemn gestures necessity of the good solitude for the philosopher Nietzsche is especially critical of the stupidity of moral indignation such indignation is a sure sign one has lost his philosophical sense of humor
this “good solitude” further explored “every choice human being strives for a citadel and a secrecy where he is saved from the crowd, the many, the great majority”
Nietzsche calls attention to the difference in tempo of his thought it is hard to be understood when one thinks quickly (like the current of the Ganges) while everyone else thinks like the tortoise Nietzsche admits he does everything to be “hard to understand”
again the problem of tempo is considered “a German is almost incapable of presto [rapid tempo]”
on esoteric writing against the modern disposition toward equality and equal rights Nietzsche emphasizes the necessity of the esoteric for the philosopher the esoteric looks down from above the philosopher should aspire to such heights not seek what is common “What serves the higher type of man as nourishment or delectation must almost be poison for a very different and inferior type. The virtues of the common man might perhaps signify vices and weaknesses in the philosopher.”
a hint of his project concerning the self-overcoming of morality
the morality of self-denial is questioned along with the aesthetics of disinterestedness (Kant’s aesthetics)
important passage on Nietzsche’s perspectivism:
Forgive me the joke of this gloomy grimace and trope; for I myself have learned long ago to think differently, to estimate differently with regard to deceiving and being deceived, and I keep in reserve at least a couple of jostles for the blind rage with which the philosophers resist being deceived. W hy not? It is no more than a moral prejudice that truth is worth more than mere appearance; it is even the worst proved assumption there is in the world. Let at least this much be admitted: there would be no life at all if not on the basis of perspective estimates and appearances; and if, with the virtuous enthusiasm and clumsiness of some philosophers, one wanted to abolish the "apparent world" altogether well suppose you could do that, at least nothing would be left of your "truth" either. Indeed, what forces us at all to suppose that there is an essential opposition of "true" and "false"? Is it not sufficient to assume degrees of apparentness and, as it were, lighter and darker shadows and shades of appearance different "values," to use the language of painters? W hy couldn't the world that concerns us be a fiction?
- important passage taking up an experiment ( Versuch ) concerning the drives: thinking is merely the relation of the drives to each other
Suppose, finally, we succeeded in explaining our entire drive life as the development and ramification of one basic form of the will— namely, of the will to power, as my proposition has it; suppose all organic functions could be traced back to this will to power and one could also find in it the solution of the problem of procreation and nourishment— it is one problem— then one would have gained the right to determine all efficient force universally as— will to power. The world viewed from inside, the world defined and determined according to its “intelligible character”— it would be “will to power” and nothing else.
raising the problem of interpretation on the one hand criticizes the many interpretations of the French Revolution the event so widely interpreted “that the text disappeared under the interpretation ” yet his concluding remarks suggest it is questionable whether one can ever discover the text behind the interpretation
“Nobody is very likely to consider a doctrine true merely because it makes people happy or virtuous” wonder what Nietzsche would have said of the pragmatist William James? “Something might be true while being harmful and dangerous in the highest degree.” Thus, once again, the experiment concerning the necessity of untruth or “we have art lest we perish of the truth” ( WP , 822)
important passage on the mask “Whatever is profound loves masks.... Every profound spirit needs a mask”
importance of not remaining stuck (being attached) to a person, a fatherland, or even science, not even to one’s own detachment
the new species of philosophers A new species of philosophers is coming up: I venture to baptize them with a name that is not free of danger. As I unriddle them, insofar as they allow themselves to be unriddled for it belongs to their nature to want to remain riddles at some point these philosophers of the future may have a right it might also be a wrong to be called (at)tempters ( Versucher ). This name itself is in the end a mere attempt ( Versuch ) and, if you will, a temptation ( Versuchung ).
will these new philosophers still love truth? Are these coming philosophers new friends of "truth"? That is probable enough, for all philosophers so far have loved their truths. But they will certainly not be dogmatists. It must offend their pride, also their taste, if their
every interpretation of existence, even the saint’s, is an expression of the “will to power” or “life force” the question for Nietzsche in examining various interpretations of existence is not whether this “force” is there, but rather what kind or what quality of “will to power” expresses itself in that interpretation of existence generally, Nietzsche’s perspective is to ask whether the “will to power” expresses an affirmation or a weariness with life
on religious cruelty Nietzsche writes of a “ladder of religious cruelty, with three principle rungs:
once one sacrificed human beings to one’s god
then,”during the moral epoch of mankind” (Christianity), one sacrificed one’s own strongest instincts
it became necessary to sacrifice God himself (the death of God as the outcome of the Enlightenment)
‘eternal recurrence’ as a counter-movement to world-denying interpretations of existence in this important passage Nietzsche suggests that it was thinking through pessimism to its depths which led him to open his eyes to the opposite ideal: “the ideal of the most high-spirited, alive, and world-affirming human being who has not only come to terms and learned to get along with whatever was and is, but who wants to have what was and is repeated into all eternity”
further examination of pessimism it was a suspicious fear of an incurable pessimism that led whole millennia to the religious interpretation of existence a fear that man is not strong enough, not artist enough
the philosopher as Nietzsche understands him also will use religions in his project of cultivation and education here he acknowledges that asceticism can be a means of self-overcoming a means of ennobling a people refers to the Brahmins—thus the asceticism of ancient India suggests a common sort of overcoming in Christianity and Buddhism both taught the lowliest how to place themselves into an illusory higher order of things
concluding section of this chapter emphasizes his condemnation of Christianity the passage begins emphasizing the theme that “man is the as yet undetermined animal ” this obviously one should recognize as the idea of the Übermensch from Zarathustra the Overhuman Zarathustra speaks of is the one willing to continually overcome him or herself I think perhaps one should not think of the Übermensch as something already accomplished this perhaps would be one thing to think about in comparing and contrasting Nietzsche’s Übermensch with the notion of Enlightenment in Asian traditions in India, especially in the Vedanta notion of the jivan-mukta , the idea is of one who has already completed the task of becoming enlightened the project of self-overcoming has been completed this notion is also there in Buddhism with the notion of the ‘Buddha,’ the one who has been ‘awakened’ I think of the Übermensch as the goal of continual self-overcoming
necessary to this process of continual self-overcoming is that aspects of the self must perish this is a common theme in Asian traditions of self-overcoming the great Zen master Hakuin spoke of “the Great Death”
the problem with the “above mentioned two greatest religions” (here he is obviously referring to Christianity and Buddhism mentioned at the end of the previous section) is that their concern to ease suffering leads to the desire to “preserve whatever can possibly be preserved” the problem is that this leads to the preservation of “ what ought to perish ” this thought certainly leads to the dangerous, “wicked” thoughts Nietzsche takes up at the beginning of the final chapter thus it is crucial to see the context of this thought-experiment Christianity, Nietzsche suggests, worsens the European race it has led to the preservation of what should have perished and that is the self-destructive, life-denying will to power of the sufferer the Christian revaluation of the values of antiquity inverted “all the love of the earthly and of dominion over the earth into hatred of the earth and the earthly” Christianity is thus ‘the most calamitous arrogance’ in not seeing man strong enough to “form man as artists” in other words, in not seeing humankind as an artistic project not seeing man as the undetermined animal not seeing humankind as noble enough for an order of rank have thus led to the preservation of man as the herd animal
Natural History of Morals this chapter takes up a ‘natural history of morals’ the notion of such a ‘natural history’ already challenges the Christian conception of morality as something that has no history in the natural evolution of humankind but as something that comes to us already completed on tablets from God this project Nietzsche takes up more fully in the Genealogy
- a general critique of previous moral philosophy all moral philosophy so far only aimed at providing for a rational foundation for morality thus it missed the problem of morality itself
another mention of the will to power in the concluding paragraph what he suggests here is that the very attempt to provide such rational foundations for morality doesn’t make sense “in a world whose essence is will to power” the point here is that there are no rational foundations for morality morality has always been the “voice of the will to power” as Zarathustra put it the values of a people express the quality of their will to power in other words, the values of a people are the product of the hidden drive-life, the hidden psychology of the people the attempt to provide rational foundations is just an attempt to rationalize what this ‘soul’ at first desired
- toward new philosophers Nietzsche closes the chapter with a sketch of the new types of philosophers he sees coming if the previous sections were all parts of his critique of the past the lion-stage of saying ‘no’ to the values of the past (from the first chapter of Zarathustra ) then this passage would be the child-stage, the capacity to create new values
We Scholars this chapter looks forward to those new philosophers
at first, however, it begins by criticizing philosophy reduced to theory of knowledge it is often said that modern philosophy begins with Descartes putting epistemology or theory of knowledge as primary many philosophers today still consider epistemologically centered philosophy as the only legitimate philosophy criticizes the “philosophers of reality” or the “positivists” ‘positivism’ was a dominant trend in late 19 th^ early 20 thcentury philosophy the early Wittgenstein was a ‘Logical Positivist’ the later Wittgenstein rejected this ‘positivism’ much of analytic philosophy could still be regarded as epistemologically centered philosophy
the genuine philosopher is the one who “feels the burden and the duty of a hundred attempts ( Versuchen ) and temptations ( Versuchungen ) of life—he risks himself constantly, he plays the wicked game—“
a passage important for its political implications “The time for petty politics is over: the very next century will bring the fight for dominion of the earth—the compulsion to large-scale politics.” It is certainly obvious that the next century to which Nietzsche referred, which many have called “the Amercian century” due to the ascendancy of the U.S., was indeed such a fight; but it is equally obvious that this struggle is far from over. If the 20 thcentury is indeed “the American century” then one might ask what did indeed triumph? Was it the triumph of democracy and freedom or corporate control and private wealth?
the philosophers of the future again emphasizing the philosopher as attempter and tempter
important passage on will to power begins by emphasizing a difference between the genuine philosophers those who take up the wicked game of experimenting with knowledge and engaging with tempting, dangerous thought-experiments with philosophical laborers and scientific men I suspect most academic philosophers today would still be classified by Nietzsche as ‘philosophical laborers’ Nietzsche contrasts these laborers with genuine philosophers: Genuine philosophers, however, are commanders and legislators: they say, “thus it shall be!” They first determine the Whither and For What of man, and in doing so have at their disposal the preliminary labor of all philosophical laborers, all who have overcome the past. With a creative hand they reach for the future, and all that is and has been becomes a means for them, an instrument, a hammer. Their “knowing” is creating , their creating is a legislation, their will to truth is— will to power.
- these genuine philosophers will be the bad conscience of their time his point here is that the genuine philosopher will always be the one to question the established values he will always find himself in contradiction to popular opinion in this way the genuine philosopher is untimely this obviously develops a main theme of Nietzsche’s writings from the mid 1870's
213)drawing further comparisons between the philosophers of the future and artists emphasizes that there is an order of rank among states of the soul and the order of rank of problems accords with this the problems which preoccupy philosophical laborers correspond to a lower rank of soul to the problems which concern the genuine philosophers
Our Virtues This chapter takes up further Nietzsche’s revaluation of all values by examining ‘our virtues’
- what are the virtues of these philosophers of the future? Nietzsche begins answering this question by directing the reader to “look for them in our labyrinths—where, as is well known, all sorts of things lose themselves...” the labyrinth is an important metaphor for Nietzsche obviously the reference is to the story in Greek mythology in which Theseus must find his way in and out of a labyrinth to slay the minotaur we find the same reference in the crucial passage of Zarathustra in “The Vision and the Riddle” when Nietzsche addresses his readers in other words, the ones who will be able to read him the attempters and tempters who “do not want to grope along a thread with cowardly hand” Theseus found his way out of the labyrinth by leaving behind a thread on his way in. Nietzsche’s texts are a kind of labyrinth I guess I’m trying to lay down some threads for you to make your way through Nietzsche’s labyrinth reading Nietzsche requires courage for the labyrinth taking up the difficult questions and not groping along a thread with cowardly hand
the next few sections take up some of Nietzsche’s revaluations
in response to the Christian virtue of loving one’s enemies Nietzsche recommends something else: despising when one loves what is he getting at here? let’s say you find a weakness in your lover does one’s love lead one only to comfort the beloved and not challenge them to overcome this weakness or does the true lover challenge the beloved to self-overcoming?
one of the virtues celebrated by modern philosophers is that of disinterestedness especially one thinks of Kant, for whom this virtue is important in both morals and aesthetics Nietzsche ridicules this disinterestedness as masking from itself its interestedness at the end there is again a reference to truth as a woman the emphasis here is that this woman-truth should not be violated
another traditional virtue up for revaluation is pity this obviously poses a central problem in developing a comparison between Nietzsche’ thought and Buddhism
- some harsh words for the English “what is offensive even in the most humane Englishman is his lack of music, speaking metaphorically (but not only metaphorically): in the movement of his soul and body he has no rhythm and dance” wonder what he would have made of the Beatles? I suspect he and Lennon would have got along famously of course their rhythm and dance came from American rock and roll which came from the rhythm and blues which came from Africa...
254-256) has high praise for the French “the seat of the most spiritual and sophisticated culture of Europe” contrasts Bizet, “the south of music ,” with Wagner and German music while living in Genoa, thus southern Europe, Nietzsche frequents performances of Bizet’s opera Carmen during these years
What is Noble this chapter brings all these reflections to a culmination some of these passages contain some of Nietzsche’s most dangerous and wicked thoughts one has to make one’s way through his labyrinth very carefully if one is not to get lost one might also remember what he said earlier at § the “spiritual cruelty” he recommended in which one forces oneself to face difficult truths he now takes up in examining ‘what is noble’
- every enhancement or further evolution of man has required an aristocratic society “and it will be so again and again—a society that believes in the long order of rank and differences in value between man and man, and that needs slavery in some sense or other” well, just in exactly what sense is slavery needed?
Nietzsche inquires about the origin of a noble culture the hard, terrible truth Nietzsche emphasizes here is that every higher culture began as a consequence of a barbarian conquest of a weaker, more peaceful people the nobles were always originally the barbarians their strength, Nietzsche emphasizes, was not merely physical, but a “strength of soul”
- probably the most troubling passage every good and healthy aristocracy “accepts with a good conscience the sacrifice of untold human beings who, for its sake , must be reduced and lowered to incomplete human beings, to slaves, to instruments” how is one to respond to this? Is this simply where Nietzsche goes over the edge and where we must leave him? Interesting choice of metaphor follows: an aristocracy accepts that society must not exist for society’s sake the point, again, is that humankind as it is today or “society” is not an end if the goal is the continual self-overcoming of humankind then all of what we are now should be a sacrifice for the humankind of tomorrow [our society today seems to have the opposite value of sacrificing the future of humankind to come for the comfort and pleasure of society today] now the interesting metaphor: the society of today must be like the oak tree which is but the scaffolding for the tropical vine (the Sipo Matador ) to reach the heights
- one of the most important passages on will to power “life itself is essentially appropriation, injury, overpowering of what is alien and weaker...” It is naive to think that the “exploitative aspect” can be removed from human beings that is like inventing a way of life that would dispense with all organic functions
“Exploitation” does not belong to a corrupt or imperfect and primitive society: it belongs to the essence of what lives, as a basic organic function; it is a consequence of the will to power, which is after all the will of life.”
important passage on distinction between master and slave moralities this will be further developed in the Genealogy by “master morality” and “slave morality” Nietzsche means two basic types of moralities or like opposite polarities of moralities and between these extremes there may be many different moralities modern moralities are mixtures of these two basic types the two basic types may exist alongside one another even in a single soul
what is common here Nietzsche examines a number of forces which compel human beings into what is common or, in other words, into being herd animals communication in language itself requires having common experiences thus the average “common” person has the advantage
more on how suffering makes one noble
important passage on the philosopher’s text the philosopher as a hermit (certainly not one who is common, but one who stands outside the herd) does one not write books precisely to conceal? every word a mask
there is an order of rank among philosophers depending on the order of rank of their laughter
the return of Dionysus
written and painted thoughts in this last passage Nietzsche addresses what he has just written see my essay “Written and Painted Thoughts” extracted from my dissertation on the course web page
