Friedrich Nietzsche

 

Nietzsche (I remember the spelling as ‘Niet’ being a bit like a Russian negative, ‘tz’ being a pleasantly electric noise, and ‘sch’ being a common series of letters in German (and I pronounce it neecherneechy is ridiculous)) is one of my favourite writers, beating most of my favourite novelists without even bothering to make stuff up. I don’t read philosophy books, as a rule, but I only had to glance at the photocopied pages from Beyond Good And Evil and Human, All Too Human that we’d been given at uni, and suddenly it was 4am and I was buried in the full texts online.

We all know some Nietzsche, of course. You’re thinking of “God is dead,” but there’s also “That which does not kill me makes me stronger.” I like “Without music, life would be an error,” and “Plato is boring.”

The Origin Of The Species came out when Nietzsche was fifteen, so mankind had just understood itself for the first time since its inception. That’s what “God is dead,” meant, that the Enlightenment was underway and religion was no longer our best source of knowledge. He realised it hadn’t sunk in yet, and rather cleverly he didn’t say it himself – he wrote a passage in The Gay Science about a ‘madman’ who ran into a village shouting this over and over.

 
 
  “We have killed him – you and I. We are his murderers. But how have we done this? How were we able to drink up the sea? Who gave us the sponge to wipe away the entire horizon? What did we do when we unchained the earth from its sun? Whither is it moving now? Whither are we moving now? Away from all suns? Are we not perpetually falling? Backward, sideward, forward, in all directions? Is there any up or down left? Are we not straying as through an infinite nothing? Do we not feel the breath of empty space? Has it not become colder? Is it not more and more night coming on all the time? Must not lanterns be lit in the morning? Do we not hear anything yet of the noise of the gravediggers who are burying God? Do we not smell anything yet of God’s decomposition? Gods too decompose. God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we, murderers of all murderers, console ourselves? That which was the holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet possessed has bled to death under our knives. Who will wipe this blood off us? With what water could we purify ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we need to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we not ourselves become gods simply to be worthy of it? There has never been a greater deed; and whosoever shall be born after us – for the sake of this deed he shall be part of a higher history than all history hitherto.”

Here the madman fell silent and again regarded his listeners; and they too were silent and stared at him in astonishment. At last he threw his lantern to the ground, and it broke and went out. “I have come too early.”

 
 
  The madman isn’t Nietzsche, but the sense of dizzying lack of orientation, shocking loss and nauseating decay were what he saw as deterring the remaining religious types from relinquishing their desperate grasp of the limp body of their deity. He saw Christianity as a mental illness, and morality a flaw in humanity that would one day be looked upon with the same pity and disgust with which we view apes flinging their faeces at each other.

Nietzsche had an enormous moustache, and was the anti-Christ. He was Hitler’s favourite philosopher, and his sister was a twat.

Comment   More   
 
 
bob_arctor: Neechy is wrong. Basically. E is always pronounced in German with a kind of a "a" or "uh" sound. Eine Frau. Eye-nuh Frow. Yeah. Right on.

valmordae: Your idea that Nietzsche had "noticed" that Man was just an animal, hopefully, does not refer to the fallacy that Nietzsche accepted Evolution or Darwinism. In fact, if you read some of his literature he was quite a polemic against Darwinism - as he believed it was contradictory and incompatible with the idea of the Overman.

It seems that Nietzsche was opposed to the idea of Modernism, in the same vein as Jonathan Swift and others. His criticism of a complete devotion to science is obvious and is seen in a large quantity of instances.

Anyway, back to the point, Nietzsche did not accept evolution.

And he probably did not "notice" that man was an animal from The Origin of Species, either, although I do not know of any sources that would support either argument.

Jason L: Er, what? No. Darwinian evolution, at least as it was seen at the time, is absolutely fundamental to his philosophy. The Ubermensch, as far 'above' modern and historical humanity as we are 'above' apes, is a direct descendant of the zeitgeist of progress, succession and hierarchy which Darwin's work inspired.

He did describe evolution as a tremendously destructive and dangerous idea, which at a stroke destroyed previous theories of morality and humanity. That revolution was the very reason he felt it necessary to propose a new theory, with evolution at its root.

Jason L: Yeah, here we go. http://www.fathom.co... ...index.html

Nietzsche was a philosopher, and his polemics are directed against 'Darwin and his followers' - that is, those philosophers who claimed to derive inspiration from Darwin and to whom Nietzsche was exposed. His objection was to the social implications they drew - that altruism was the rule within a species, that the cream would naturally rise to the top in society as they did in evolutionary history. He was right at home with the core of competition and selection, and would ondoubtedly have applauded the more selfish refinements which have been made.

Gabriel: Jason L is correct, Nietzsche not only wrote much polemic against evolutionary naturalism because random mutations harm an organism long before (if ever) they help it, but he also praised Christianity in the anti-Christ for the central point of its religious message: that man is not the center of things nor has he the power to reach the divine.

The Overman is only incidentally opposed to religions like Buddhism and Christianity because at the time he read them as praising weakness. Even he realized, as he pointed out in Kant, that he had a theologians blood. And indeed, the great thinker Paul Tillich has pointed out, anyone who poses the existential question of the despair of meaningless (death of God, loss of absolutes) and attempts to answer it affirmatively (what Nietzsche called the positive nihillism of the overman) is in essence a theologian.

Gabriel: Correction, my entry was intended to support valmordae's post.

Gabriel: To supplement:

"Let us beware of saying that there are laws in nature." N. Gay Science, entry 109.

Nietzsche criticized the "cult of science" for upholding to absolute laws as if the universe were a mechanism or organism (including darwinism). To him, science was guilty of the same naiveties that religion was: it made absolute claims about the world. Here is another:

"An intellect that saw cause and effect as a continuum, not with our sort of arbitrary division and fragmentation, an intellect that saw the flux of events, would throw aside the concept of cause and effect and deny all determination." ibid, entry 111.

To supplement his praise of Christianity:

"Even Christianity has made a great contribution to enlightenment: it taught moral skepticism -- in a very impressive and effective way, accusing, embittering, but with tireless patience and subtlety. It destroyed in every individual human being the belief in one's "virtues." ibid, entry 122.

Remember that N. was accustomed to speak not just of the death of God in a final sense, but that the "old God is dead" (ibid, 143). N.'s philosophy is neither dependent on the old monarchic monotheism nor on evolutionary science. He states that only one thing is needful: "Giving style to one's character -- a great and rare art!" (ibid, 290).

God's reality does not contradict N.'s philosophy. His conception of the overman is on the horizon of a society that has lost its belief in an idol: the old monarchic God of Europe's religion. This was because it provided an easy and uncritical defense of moral absolutism. Just because darwinism inspired his conception of the geneology (and therefore relativity) of moral values does not mean that there can be neither, but that they must not be taken for granted. Every value is affirmed positively all the time, in a life which the overman wills to recur for all eternity. This same sort of view is embeded in the religious philosophy of Soren Kierkegaard, who understood religious faith in much the same way as N understood the will to power: to live with the risk of absolutely everything on the line. An overman is one who has the courage to affirm their existence positively despite its lack of inherent value.

My teacher, Dr Charles Guignon, was instructed at the University of California Berkeley by Dr Derk Pereboom. They are leading scholars in existentialism. Dr Guignon is the editor of the Cambridge Companion to Martin Heidegger. I have had the fortune to study under him, where I formulated these interpretations of the work of Nietzsche.

Nice blog! Kudos.

Gabriel

 
Pentadact: Thanks Gabriel. I've finally got round to snipping a few presumptuous sentences from this post - I don't truly know or care how his thoughts came about.

If you're suggesting Nietzsche was a fan of Christianity, though, that's going to be a tough sell. Even the sentences you quote drip with sarcasm. And if someone wrote a book called The Anti-Christ: A Curse On Christianity, and it ends like this:

"This eternal accusation against Christianity I shall write upon all walls, wherever walls are to be found--I have letters that even the blind will be able to see... I call Christianity the one great curse, the one great intrinsic depravity, the one great instinct of revenge, for which no means are venomous enough, or secret, subterranean and small enough,--I call it the one immortal blemish upon the human race."

... Probably not a church-goer.
 

J-Man: Just bought 3 Nietzsche books, going to start them tonight.

icouldbeahero: So, between the facts you like Nietzsche and math and write amusing prose I have decided you are awesome.

Jazmeister: I support this decision.

Palms: I'm in the middle of reading Thus Spake Zarathustra after rewatching 2001. That whole film is like a Nietzsche love-in. Incidentally, I've also been getting into Bowie recently and a lot of his stuff has Nietzscherian (is that a word?) undertones.

icouldbeahero: Nietzschean, I think.
 
 

Comment

 
URLs get turned into links automatically. You can use <i>HTML</i> but not [b]forum[/b] code. If your comment doesn't show up, e-mail me - the spam filter's just detained it for questioning.






 
 

The silence here lately has been down to a dangerous daily routine of falling asleep in front of Star Trek: The Next Generation, waking up at 5am and playing Prototype until work. Dangerous, but not unpleasant. Prototype has caused me to break a mouse, and Star Trek has my brain quietly working on a master