In 1873, a German philosopher named Frederich Nietzsche wrote an essay entitled “On Truth and Lying in a Non- moral sense”, which deals with a large epistemological question of truth and language, including the formation of concepts. In this essay, Nietzsche attempts to explain the origin of people’s understanding of truth and lies. Nietzsche highlights that the brain forms categorizes everything it comes across into groups of systematically similar objects which are called concepts. He uses the formation of concepts and the usage of metaphors to demonstrate that although many metaphors do not correspond to reality, they lead to the argument of whether their “truth” actually exists. Nietzsche stated that “we believe that we know something about the things themselves when we speak of trees, colors, snow, and flowers; and yet we possess nothing but metaphors for things- metaphors which correspond in no way to the original entities” (118). He is suggesting that although one may understand the language used to describe certain concepts such as trees, colors and snow, these are just generalizations and no real knowledge on the topic exists within the metaphors. Language and metaphors are something every human uses and Nietzsche’s argues that humans forget that after creating these metaphoric words and/or phrases, humans jump to conclusion that they are true because they sound acceptable and they forget to need to link actual reality to the language being used (Glenn 2004). This exegetical paper will reflect upon the last couple of lines on page 144 and the first couple of lines on 145 of the text. This section occurs during the middle of the text when Nietzsche explains that language does not completely explain meaning.
Nietzsche stat...
... middle of paper ...
...jects are described by using a language that is accepted by those around them, does not give an exact realistic knowledge of what people are actually experiencing. This suggests that because each human experiences situations differently, they cannot or should not be explained using the same words or language. Nietzsche argues that because one word can mean many different things to many different people, there is no exact truth or complete explanation. Nietzsche argues that understanding objects and/or things through systematic groupings or concepts is not possible since every single organism and object is individualized and unique in one way or another and therefore, can’t be considered to be similar to any other object and/or thing. As a result, Nietzsche suggests that the only “truth” the results from the use of metaphors is that of a form of deception or lies.
Nietzsche believes that the way intellect works is to deceive people. They naturally play that role in order to keep a secret or to restrict sharing information with another person. In other words he means people lie in order to not share the agreed upon lie. He says, “…individuals so far wants to maintain himself against other individuals, he will under
“Metaphor.” Dictionary of World Literature: Criticism - Forms - Technique. Ed. Joseph T. Shipley. New York: Philosophical Library, 1943. 377-8.
... A metaphor, used as a communication skill, is best described in a political way. Think of Reagan’s Voodoo economics, or Bill Clinton building a bridge to the 21st century. Politicians can easily scam an ignorant voter, should one not understand a metaphor. For example: Clinton refers to building a bridge, but does not tell us with which tools he intends to build it with. This particular concept is valid alone for the above reason. Whether you are talking to a teacher or watching television, metaphors need to understand.
Nietzsche believed we create the self through our experiences and our actions, and in order to be a complete self, we must accept everything we have done. I agree with him in this sense. Although it is easy to learn from the mistakes of others, there is no greater lesson than learning from our own mistakes. He also believed there is much more to the self than we know about. This is another example about how we learn about ourselves through our experiences and actions.
Nietzsche: Philosophizing Without Categorizing. How are we to philosophize without "Ism?" For, although defining a person in terms of an Ism is dangerous--both because it encourages identification of the individual with the doctrine and because it denies her the possibility of becoming that, as a human, she is heir to--grouping people according to a doctrine to which they subscribe is a convenient mental shortcut. Although grouping people into verbal boxes entails the danger of eventually seeing all of the boxes as equal, or similar enough to make no difference, the necessity of seeing the totality of a single human being is impossible. And although the qualities of my existence, or anyone else's existence (an individual's isness), are constantly undergoing a process, both conscious and unconscious, of revaluation and change, the change is usually not great enough over short lengths of time to qualify as noticeable.
It is important to understand that in real life experience can connect to so many things. A book is not just a book, a book is a pathway that allows the mind to make connections. A couple chapters can be describing one’s childhood as a whole book can make a person reminisce about their young adulthood. Authors are not using metaphors accidentally but on purpose. Some authors write books, but some may think they are writing to them. They are retelling somebody’s story that happen in their life. These great metaphors is a key that opens up a door to millions of
Nietzsche and Truth Throughout the course Nietzsche’s lifespan, his attitude towards truth and religion has shifted various times. He first left his Christian beliefs and changed his major from theology to Philology in order to search for truth. He did not want to have faith without knowing what he was having faith in beforehand. By his thirties Nietzsche started to interpret that people were making up myths and stories in order to keep themselves in denial from the truth of life, thus giving a different meaning.
The first important idea I find is interesting is in The Vision of Dialogue (1996), Bohm points out that there are many ways of defining what a metaphor is. These definitions lie within assumptions on what is the metaphorical expression versus what is the literal meaning of the metaphor. Depending on how one interprets a metaphor. One is able to understand its message. What Bohm argues about can be seen from our daily conversation. Like we sometimes like to send recipient an emoji or a sticker without a word in a conversation. For example, an emoji with tears could be interpreted as the person feels sad, or it could be the person burst into tears because of laughing out loudly, or other indescribable feelings that leads the tears come out,
Nietzsche starts by laying out the famous example of the madman screaming, “God is dead.” The madman exclaims that humanity doesn’t understand what it has done. They have killed god and they don’t seem to mind, they can’t see the consequences yet. He states that he thinks he has come too early and that this is just the beginning of the problem. This passage introduces the idea of a loss of religious fate in humanity. The madman has a negative outlook on this event, questioning what is next to come. Historically religion se...
...’s lack of a direct response to this apparent contradiction ensures that this matter will continue to be hotly debated well into the future. For this seemingly simple contradiction of positing truths when one has denied all absolute truths, Nietzsche gives a very complex and personal answer.
Friedrich Nietzsche’s On Truth and Lies in a Nonmoral Sense represents a deconstruction of the modern epistemological project. Instead of seeking for truth, he suggests that the ultimate truth is that we have to live without such truth, and without a sense of longing for that truth. This revolutionary work of his is divided into two main sections. The first part deals with the question on what is truth? Here he discusses the implication of language to our acquisition of knowledge. The second part deals with the dual nature of man, i.e. the rational and the intuitive. He establishes that neither rational nor intuitive man is ever successful in their pursuit of knowledge due to our illusion of truth. Therefore, Nietzsche concludes that all we can claim to know are interpretations of truth and not truth itself.
Although metaphors seem to be simple and easily understood, they possess the ability to give extra details about a writers beliefs and opinions. By dissecting language, the simplicity of a metaphor can lead to further intellect in an author and show something at a deeper, more precise level. Analyzing connotations, structure, and relationship leads to the discovery of ideologies and understanding. Spiritual truth is often communicated through the use of common, familiar objects. By the use of a simple rhetorical device, Anne Bradstreet and Edward Taylor effectively communicate their writing style through metaphors, which illustrates their Puritan ideology.
In 1915, Franz Kafka published the novella The Metamorphosis, a story that questioned the habits of humanity through the frame of a man transformed into an insect. Through this absurd premise, Kafka is metaphorically able to present hatred and prejudice in an insular display—where the reader’s own opinion of Gregor is not judged or shamed, where both Gregor and the family’s actions can be understood. However, the metaphor of Gregor’s metamorphosis is not rigid in its application. It is fluid and unique, and what gives The Metamorphosis its grim, haunting tone. Kafka’s special metaphor not only broadens the limits of literary analogies, but expands on the nature of alienation and antipathy.
But he objects to the values of the New Testament that shouldn't be linked to the Old Testament. They demote power. He sees religion as intensely nihilistic - it's all about denying life and being negative. Nietzsche feels that the New Testament is also like that. We have to go beyond this.
“There are no facts, only interpretations”, said famous French philologist Friedrich Nietzsche on the topic of deconstruction. It is this quote that we are opened into the world of deconstruction, a world where “language doesn’t reflect or convey our world but constitutes a world of its own”. Deconstructionists believe that language is the barrier that forces thoughts to lose their purpose. The moment you share an idea from the inner workings of your mind, whether it be written or spoken, is the moment the idea is lost in translation. In order to understand deconstruction, one mu...