Nietzsche  

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (153 of them)

neh i ain't got much to say, certainly nothing mordy wants to hear ('read slower!')

j., Monday, 12 February 2018 04:05 (six years ago) link

i'm not sure my reading comprehension is the problem! if anything maybe i need to read quicker to see more contradictions or complications.

Mordy, Monday, 12 February 2018 04:10 (six years ago) link

make him sound less like a goon, you mean

j., Monday, 12 February 2018 04:46 (six years ago) link

of GM in Ecce Homo N writes:

"Every time a beginning that is calculated to mislead: cool, scientific, even ironic, deliberately foreground, deliberately holding off. Gradually more unrest; sporadic lightning; very disagreeable truths are heard grumbling in the distance---until eventually a tempo feroce is attained in which everything rushes ahead in a tremendous tension. In the end, in the midst of perfectly gruesome detonations, a new truth becomes visible every time among thick clouds."

droit au butt (Euler), Monday, 12 February 2018 13:49 (six years ago) link

and then what is the "new truth" of Book I (the subject of your quotes, Mordy)? In Section 13 of Book I, N writes:

"For just as common people separate the lightning from its flash and take the latter as a doing, as an effect of a subject called lightning, so popular morality also separates strength from the expressions of strength as if there were behind the strong an indifferent substratum that is free to express strength—or not to. But there is no such substratum: there is no 'being' behind the doing, effecting, becoming; 'the doer' is simply fabricated into the doing—the doing is everything."

This is the will to power: a wholesale replacement of the traditional metaphysics of actor and action into a new metaphysics wherein there is only action, only motion; or maybe not such a new metaphysics, for maybe we are back to Heraclitus. But what N highlights here is the consequence of this new metaphysics for attributions of responsibility, on which traditional morality rests: there is no responsibility, the actor cannot be held responsible for his actions, the actor is his actions.

And yet. In the preface to GM (so important, and so neglected) and in Book III N indicates how there is no perspective-independent knowledge. So all the claims of the book, all claims whatsoever, including this one, are only glimpses of something wider, something perhaps ungraspable as a whole by agents like us. In the end a shrug, this is just my opinion, man; and the reader is left to assemble more and more such opinions, and if she has the power, to make herself into more and more of these opinions, of these perspectives, to have one's pro and contra in one's power.

"Admittedly, to practice reading as an art in this way one thing above all is necessary, something which these days has been unlearned better than anything else—and it will therefore be a while before my writings are "readable"—something for which one must almost be a cow and in any case not a "modern man": ruminating..."

droit au butt (Euler), Monday, 12 February 2018 14:04 (six years ago) link

two years pass...

Mordy did you ever read BGE?

Oor Neechy, Thursday, 30 July 2020 19:24 (three years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.