Nietzsche's Critique of Past Philosophers

423 Words1 Page

Nietzsche's Critique of Past Philosophers

The desire of most philosophers, Nietzsche says, is to find truth.

Nietzsche doesn't see why this is. In the second aphorism, he asks why

don't we look for untruth? He believes that beliefs are more important

than finding truth because, for him, there is no real truth.

Philosophers state a truth or known fact as if it were the ultimate

knowledge, but Nietzsche says that really they are giving their

opinions about things. Philosophers don't have knowledge - just

beliefs. He says that philosophers' prejudices about the world

influence the things they say and what they think they know and so we

shouldn't pay too much attention to the actual things they're saying.

He believes that we shouldn't focus on what the philosophers are

saying, because it is probably wrong, but we should focus on why they

are saying it. Although, this could appear to be more to do with

Psychology than Philosophy, and so maybe Nietzsche shouldn't be

worrying about it.

Nietzsche believes that philosophers are wrong when they say that

truth is the most important thing - for Nietzsche, life is most

important. And therefore, if we hold a false belief, that is OK

because as long as our lives are better for having this belief, then

it is better that we remain ignorant of the truth and stay happy. Too

much emphasis has been made of truth.

However, there must be some truths in the world, even if it is very

basic without our perceptions. For example, if I see a can on a table,

I know that there is one object on top of another object, even if it

is only my perception telling me what the objects are?

Plato is a philosopher that Nietzsche heavily disagrees with. Plato

said that this life isn't the real one and that when we die, we will

go on to a real world that is better than this one. Nietzsche says

this is not true. There is not another world or life apart from the

Show More
Related

  • Comparing and Contrasting Nietzsche’s Preparatory Human Being and Kierkegaard’s Knight of Faith

    1475 Words  | 3 Pages

    Take a minute to relax. Enjoy the lightness, or surprising heaviness, of the paper, the crispness of the ink, and the regularity of the type. There are over four pages in this stack, brimming with the answer to some question, proposed about subjects that are necessarily personal in nature. All of philosophy is personal, but some philosophers may deny this. Discussed here are philosophers that would not be that silly. Two proto-existentialists, Søren Kierkegaard and Friedrich Nietzsche, were keen observers of humanity, and yet their conclusions were different enough to seem contradictory. Discussed here will be Nietzsche’s “preparatory human being” and Kierkegaard’s “knight of faith”. Both are archetypal human beings that exist in accordance to their respective philosopher’s values, and as such, each serve different functions and have different qualities. Both serve the same purpose, though. The free spirit and the knight of faith are both human beings that brace themselves against the implosion of the god concept in western society.

    Read More

  • Depiction of Nietzsche's Theory of the Übermensch in Pedro Paramo

    1080 Words  | 3 Pages

    Characters in Pedro Paramo depict Nietzsche’s Theory of the Übermensch as they embody the idea that they are superior, almost like god. The theory states that an Übermensch is an ideal man who transcends the ordinary morals and values set by society and the actions of an Übermensch are inherently for the best, no matter what the actions are. Pedro Paramo is a prominent character who depicts the theory whereas Juan Preciado is the foil who is just an normal, average human being. The difference between each of them is how they react to crimes. Pedro as well as his son, Miguel Paraml, both possess a strong feeling to not feel guilty for the crimes they have committed and therefore, do not have the fear of punishment because they can use their power or dominance over others. Characters such as Pedro Paramo or Miguel Paramo are depicted as the Übermensch because both characters feel “normal” after committing a dreadful crime because the characters believe that there isn’t a higher power beyond them. Thus, are able to assert any type of gruesome, unjustified or blunt action without feeling remorse or responsibility.

    Read More

  • Examples Of Hester Prynne Being Forgiven

    561 Words  | 2 Pages

    “Be true! Be true! Be true!”. Throughout his life he stayed true to his moral

    Read More

  • Nietzsche: Moving Beyond Good and Evil

    1022 Words  | 3 Pages

    We have grown weary of man. Nietzsche wants something better, to believe in human ability once again. Nietzsche’s weariness is based almost entirely in the culmination of ressentiment, the dissolution of Nietzsche’s concept of morality and the prevailing priestly morality. Nietzsche wants to move beyond simple concepts of good and evil, abandon the assessment of individuals through ressentiment, and restore men to their former wonderful ability.

    Read More

  • Death be not Proud and Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night

    438 Words  | 1 Pages

    life is gone.  That to give up life is the coward's way.  To his father,

    Read More

  • Nietzsche’s Response to Schopenhauer’s Philosophy

    659 Words  | 2 Pages

    In order to understand Schopenhauer’s philosophy, one must understand the concept of the will. Schopenhauer seems to describe the will as a blind force of our feelings, our thoughts, and our perception. The only way we see the world is through the will. We are limited because we only see our representation of it through the will, not the actual reality, the thing in of itself. For this reason the world is will, our will, and it has desires. These desires are insatiable, so life becomes defined by suffering. Suffering, however, is only our representation. The world in of itself, aside from our representation, has no suffering. Schopenhauer says the only way to escape the will, which is suffering, is through knowledge and art. There is a distinction between ordinary knowledge and pure knowledge, however. Ordinary knowledge, according to Schopenhauer, was a result of the will. Pure knowledge is actual contemplation of the world in of itself without influence from the will. This can only be attained through art that is able to separate us from our perceptions of reality and reach a state of pure knowledge. In the Birth of Tragedy, Nietzsche responds to this by agreeing with Schopenhauer’s philosophy in that art is the way to avoid suffering. He argues that the art capable of ending suffering is tragedy, which is a fusion of the Apollonian and the Dionysian.

    Read More

  • What Does Descartes Mean By Thinking Essay

    1081 Words  | 3 Pages

    What you can see could be wrong. Even if you can smell, see the color of things, touch it you can’t be

    Read More

  • Kahlil Gibran's On Death And Dying

    1076 Words  | 3 Pages

    ...when they lose someone dear to them. However, we need to make the distinction that his words do not dictate how everyone should feel when coping with a loss.

    Read More

  • Perspectivism and Truth in Nietzsche’s Philosophy: A Critical Look at the Apparent Contradiction

    2457 Words  | 5 Pages

    “There are no truths,” states one. “Well, if so, then is your statement true?” asks another. This statement and following question go a long way in demonstrating the crucial problem that any investigator of Nietzsche’s conceptions of perspectivism and truth encounters. How can one who believes that one’s conception of truth depends on the perspective from which one writes (as Nietzsche seems to believe) also posit anything resembling a universal truth (as Nietzsche seems to present the will to power, eternal recurrence, and the Übermensch)? Given this idea that there is no truth outside of a perspective, a transcendent truth, how can a philosopher make any claims at all which are valid outside his personal perspective? This is the question that Maudemarie Clark declares Nietzsche commentators from Heidegger and Kaufmann to Derrida and even herself have been trying to answer. The sheer amount of material that has been written and continues to be written on this conundrum demonstrates that this question will not be satisfactorily resolved here, but I will try to show that a resolution can be found. And this resolution need not sacrifice Nietzsche’s idea of perspectivism for finding some “truth” in his philosophy, or vice versa. One, however, ought to look at Nietzsche’s philosophical “truths” not in a metaphysical manner but as, when taken collectively, the best way to live one’s life in the absence of an absolute truth.

    Read More

  • Nietzsche

    1664 Words  | 4 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of In Memory Of My Dear Grandchild Anne Bradstreet

    1349 Words  | 3 Pages

    The speaker starts sadly with a little anger, but sooner after that she changes her tone to accept God’s will. She believes that he is not going to be alone because he will meet the other deceased in the eternal life. She proclaims: “ Three flowers, two scarcely blown, the last i’th’ bud, / Cropped by th’ Almighty’s hand; yet is He good” (3-4). She is happy because her grandchildren will be more secure in heaven under the grace of God. She begins to accept God’s will: “Such was His [God] will, but why, let’s not dispute” (6). She knows it is a sin to interfere and complain about God’s plan for the universe. Thus, she reforms her hypocrisy and dissatisfaction and considers God to be “merciful as well as just”

    Read More

  • Nietzsche's Critique of Religion

    1196 Words  | 3 Pages

    Nietzsche's critique of religion is largely based on his critique of Christianity. Nietzsche says that in modern Europe, people are atheistic, even though they don't realise it. People who say they are religious aren't really and those who say they have moved on haven't actually moved on. Certain people in society retain features of Christianity. For example, socialists still believe in equality in all people.

    Read More

  • The Controtorical Analysis Of Nietzsche's Moral Nihilism

    2660 Words  | 6 Pages

    In philosophy “Nihilism” is a position of radical skepticism. It is the belief that all values are baseless and nothing is known. The word “Nihilism” itself conveys a sense of abolishing or destroying (IEP). Nietzsche’s work and writings are mostly associated with nihilism in general, and moral nihilism especially. Moral nihilism questions the reality and the foundation of moral values. Nietzsche supported his view on morality by many arguments and discussions on the true nature of our inner self. Through my paper on Moral Nihilism, I will explain 5 major arguments and then try to construct a deductive argument for each, relying on Nietzsche’s book II “Daybreak”.

    Read More

  • Good And Evil In John Milton's Paradise Lost

    1306 Words  | 3 Pages

    expresses that he knows he would rebel again if given the chance to be back in Heaven,

    Read More

  • Doctor Faustus Essays: Critical Analysis of Faustus

    610 Words  | 2 Pages

    In this essay the critical approach on (Mythological and Archetypal Approach) played a big role in forming my opinion of the signet classic book, "Doctor Faustus"  It is to my knowledge that mythology does not meet our current standards of factual reality, but unlike the 16th century which this play was presented, men like Faustus saw myth as fundamental and a dramatic representation of the deepest instinctual life in the universe.

    Read More

More about Nietzsche's Critique of Past Philosophers

Open Document