Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm, 1844-1900; Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm, 1844-1900 -- Criticism and interpretation; Philosophy
truth of a proposition has no bearing on philosophical doctrines so
long as a contrary belief is present, a belief such as we exert toward
the illusions of the world of reality when we make practical use of
that world's perspective.
The schemes of personal philosophy, such, for instance, as we find in
Schopenhauer, are dealt with by Nietzsche in a single paragraph: "When
I analyse the process that is expressed in the sentence, 'I think,' I
find a whole series of daring assertions, the argumentative proof of
which would be difficult, perhaps impossible: for instance, that it is
I who think, that there must necessarily be something that thinks,
that thinking is an activity and operation on the part of a being who
is thought of as a cause, that there is an 'ego,' and finally, that
it is already determined what is to be designated by thinking--that I
_know_ what thinking is. For if I had not already decided within myself
what it is, by what standard could I determine whether that which is
just happening is not perhaps 'willing' or 'feeling'? In short, the
assertion 'I think,' assumes that I _compare_ my state at the present
moment with other states of myself which I know, in order to determine
what it is: on account of this retrospective connection with further
'knowledge,' it has at any rate no immediate certainty for me." Thus
the smug materialistic philosopher finds himself necessitated to fall
back on purely metaphysical explanations for answers to the questions
arising out of his definition of truth.
Locke falls under a critical survey in this chapter. In answer to
this thinker's theory regarding the origin of ideas, Nietzsche names
the great cycles of philosophical systems and calls attention to the
similarity of processes in such cycles. Furthermore, he shows that the
foundations of all previous philosophies are discoverable in the new
styles of contemporaneous thought. And in those national schools of
philosophy conceived in languages which stem from the same origin, he
finds an undeniable resemblance. All of which leads to a conclusion
incompatible with Locke's theory. Nietzsche attacks the conclusions
of the physicists, denying them any place in philosophy because
their research consists solely in interpretations of natural laws in
accordance with their own prejudices and beliefs. The theories which
might be deduced from natural phenomena are not discoverable in their
doctrines; their activities have consisted in twisting natural events
to suit preconceived valuations.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account