The following paper was written by an eleventh grade student in my Introduction to Philosophy class. It deserves a wide reading.--Alice C. Linsley
Perspectives of the Immortal Nietzsche
John A. Williams
In
2009 I had my first run-in with Friedrich Nietzsche. While on a trip with my
youth group to Ichthus Music Festival in Wilmore, Kentucky, I was walking
around the merchandise tent with my youth minister when he saw a t-shirt that
caused him to be overwhelmed with joy. It stated in bold white all-caps font
against a black background:
“GOD IS DEAD” – NIETZCHE 1882
“NIETZCHE IS DEAD” – GOD 2009
My
youth minister chuckled gleefully and commented on how clever he found the
message. I asked him if Nietzsche ever claimed immortality (he would have had
to for me to find the joke to be even remotely humorous). He gave me an odd
look and a shrug. I knew
little of philosophy as a whole apart from that it was a subject that was
generally restricted to members of academia and I wondered why, of all of the
atheist philosophers of history, this one, over a century after his career, was
drawing the mock and ridicule of this festival of the faithful.
I
later learned what I believe to be the reason. Although Nietzsche would have
claimed not to be the killer of God, but only the deliverer of his obituary, he
undoubtedly drove the nails into the coffin of Christendom, and has not been
forgiven, even to this day, for his trespasses against the Church. One might
ask, “How did he do it?” Most would say that his book, Antichrist, was his most effective assault on religion. I
would disagree. Although Antichrist was
his most explicit critique of Christianity, Nietzsche attacks all organized
religion (and organized philosophy, for that matter) at its core by encouraging
nonconformity and individualism, adopting skepticism and open criticism of
authority as a way of life.
Nietzsche undoubtedly saw Kierkegaard’s
attempt to reconcile Christianity with this new existentialism and the grief
that it caused him[i].
Through his own existentialism, Nietzsche starts with a new premise, taking
Kierkegaard’s work to its logical conclusion, not only rejecting the
organization of religion, but the belief systems that built it; casting off Kierkegaard’s
faith in paradoxes and encouraging his readers to develop their own existential
perspectives. This is the aspect of
Nietzsche I wish to further explore with this essay. Nietzsche’s entire
philosophy is built around a profound epistemological claim that everything
that a person knows is built around the compilation of perspectives.
When
considering the thoughts of any philosopher, there is always controversy
regarding how much their social milieu affected their philosophy. In a British
Broadcasting Channel documentary, Martin Heidegger said of Aristotle “He was
born, he thought, and he died.”[ii],
and explains that after we get that bit of biographical information out of the
way, we can begin to explore his abstractions. Of Nietzsche I would state that
he was born, he thought, he fought, and he died.
It
can be said that Nietzsche was a social critic as well as a philosopher, which
offers some insight on his continued relevance and influence. He spent his life
philosophizing and creating concepts, and from them deriving applicable
principles which he used to war against the culture which he perceived as
anti-intellectual. His basic existential philosophies are timeless and easily
observable in psychological observation and the human experience, but his
expressions of these thoughts were fine tuned to break down the philosophies of
the time that opposed his.
Nietzsche
was born on October 15, 1844 in Rokken, Germany. His father was a Lutheran pastor
and he accepted the family religion until his college studies. It has been
speculated that Nietzsche’s philological studies profoundly shaped his beliefs.
Through his linguistic studies, he realized how morals were shaped through
society and communication, and characterized two sets of observable moralities
in every social: that of the master and that of the slave.[iii]
One
part of Nietzsche’s personal life that must be considered to understand his
philosophy is his sexuality. In his early life, he asked his love, Lou Salome,
to marry him, and she declined.[iv]
It is noted historically that Nietzsche was extremely unlucky with his romantic
interests. When one hears theories (albeit disputed) about Nietzsche
contracting syphilis at a brothel (which ultimately is speculated to have lead to
his madness), it almost seems that he was cursed by sex. I would theorize that
the social anxiety resulting from his trouble relating to women caused some of
his negative (at best condescending) attitudes toward them. These attitudes
also correspond with his infamous generalizations.
At
first glance, it seems hypocritical that Nietzsche would categorize people, as
Existentialism, the school of philosophy in which he is commonly categorized
(and considered one of its fathers, particularly of its atheistic branch) is
highly individualistic. This can be explained by acquiring an understanding of
Nietzsche’s rhetoric. He was not a mathematician, and his arguments were not
entirely comprised of fact and syllogism. He had no shame in not only
disagreeing with, but openly ridiculing his opponents. Oftentimes, in attempts
to make relevant observations of humanity as a whole, pure individualistic
consideration and psychological evaluation was not an option. Nietzsche saw too
many correlations within people groups for that, and was entirely content with
depersonalization of humans when he perceived that they had forfeited their
individualism. During his life, much as today, Nietzsche was a magnet for
controversy, and he did not earn this reputation by being relativistic and
sympathetic in his scrutiny.
I
view Perspectivism as Friedrich Nietzsche’s primary contribution to the
philosophical project. In this epistemological theory he explores human
consciousness by explaining that everything that is knowable must be known
through compiling numerous perspectives, and weighing them against each other
in order to advance understanding. His views of identity, individualism,
existentialism, and the ideal of the Superman are all derived from this base
level theory.
What
must be understood of Perspectivism is that it does not imply that all
perspectives hold equal validity. Perspectivism is a development that is meant
to help the individual come to terms with abstraction and explain the
subjective in relation to the objective. Certain abstractions may be seen as
invalid because they do not correspond with physical reality. This is because what
exists in the abstract must be learned through an understanding of both the
abstract and the physical.
The
subjectivity in Nietzsche’s philosophy deals more with aesthetics and myth than
with propositions. He by no means believed that truth was relative, quite to the
contrary, truth in his view is supreme and ultimately beyond human grasp. The
human, after all, is in too close relation to other mammals and too young in
its own consciousness to grasp eternal truth. Everything that is eternal can
only be reached through metaphor, an indirect sort of understanding.
What
made his philosophy cohesive and set some perspectives on a higher plane than
others was logic. If any perspective appears to be too closely related to a
human construct or puts itself beyond question, it should be cast aside. If it
puts a synthetic moral ideal like pity above a naturally observable function
like the will to power, it should be rejected.
Through
this insight into the basis of Nietzschean philosophy we can see why it was
built into the philosophy that it was. It also decisively opposed Nietzsche’s
two worst enemies; nihilism and dogmatism. Most empirically leaning individuals
would agree with this Perspectivism, and most rationalists would at least agree
that it is a well thought out empirical theory. When it comes to disparagement
regarding Nietzsche’s philosophy, it usually regards the conclusions that
Nietzsche reached as a result of having these fundamentals.
Ironically,
much criticism of Nietzsche is made on the ground of his personal morality and
how it affected his ideas, which is a concept that he came to reject
altogether. For any other philosopher, moral criticism would be dismissed in
favor of a valid criticism of fallacy and ideological inconstancy. I will offer
Nietzsche the same courtesy.
My
critique of Nietzsche regards his view of free will. In Beyond Good and Evil he dismisses either the idea of free or bound
will as “boorishly simplistic”[v].
In this passage, Nietzsche reveals that he is capable of understanding paradox
and, when he sees it valid, acknowledging it even if it jeopardizes his
previous philosophies. In light of this, I must question his view on extra-dimensional
existence. I would think that an analytical philosopher like Nietzsche would consider
the possibility of entities that cannot be detected by any sort of human
observation. I have yet to find evidence that he ever considered this question
but, to be fair, I would not put it past him. I doubt Nietzsche considered any
dogmatic view of spirituality, but it would not be shocking to find some
consideration of phenomena beyond human understanding in his thoughts.
Nietzsche
is one of the most thought provoking and culturally relevant philosophers of
the 19th century. His Perspectivism has shaped much of western
philosophy since his career and his contributions to existentialism have
inspired countless individuals to take a more introspective approach to their
time on earth. It is my opinion Nietzsche’s analytical approach, regardless of
how I perceive his conclusions, is a vast assistance to any philosopher hoping
to achieve a greater understanding and come to conclusions of people and ideas through
their perspectives. Although, as the t-shirt states, Nietzsche is undoubtedly
dead, his ideas live on and don’t show signs of dissipating any
time soon.
[v] Nietzsche, Friedrich, “Beyond Good and Evil”
___ END___
Related reading: Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche
___ END___
Related reading: Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche
No comments:
Post a Comment