Thursday, July 20

Human all too Human- Analysis of Aphorisms 630 & 631

 Introduction

 Nietzsche’s “Only to Human” was his first in the aphoristic style after he retired as a professor from Basil University due to ill health.

 

Although it pre dates the emergence of his “will to power” and his later vigour against morality (Genealogy of Morals) those early seeds of thought are already evident.    

 

Overview

 

Herein in the aphorisms we observe his contempt for societal views based on absolute truths arising from convictions.   

Rather, Nietzsche believed truth (with a small t) depends upon whichever interpretation prevails at a given time which is a function of power.  Page 45 - "What Nietzsche Really Said" - Solomon /Higgins. 

The appearance of a postmodernist view is negated by his quest (never realised since his mental breakdown precluded this project) to create human values in respect of the inescapable sense of self. He also concurred with the aims of the empiricists and adopted a western style in his philosophy.  

He saw history as bedevilled by abstract delusional religious convictions which could be overcome by a new civilization (redemption if you will) emerging via the superman – “The Übermensch”. But he never outlined the new values that would subsequently emerge to support such a vision  

 

Discussion TopicBelief and Conviction: Good or Bad?

 

Affirmative 

Nietzsche’s philosophy represents a narrative expressing his conviction of the foolishness one can covet or know absolute truth.

To embark on such a quest he believed is illusory, a view that has wide acceptance today as it brings with it the risk of unnecessary irrational suffering if one clings to childlike abstract ideas linked to an unhealthy devotion to a cause- whether religious or secular.  

 

Doubtful 

In respect to Nietzsche that opposition to abstract values and childlike belief belonged to Christianity -but not to Christ, who he believed was the only true Christian.  

The problem with this assertion is that alternative ideologies could just as easily arise with similar adverse outcomes to the inquisition.       

 

Quotes out of context and conflation

 

I believe it because it is absurd  credo quia absurdum est” as the standard of extreme fanaticism.  

It is not the struggle of opinions that has made history so turbulent; but the struggle of belief in opinions,—that is to say, of convictions.

 

Note his use of this quote is out of context and the phrase ……but the struggle of belief in opinions is a conflation of two different things. 

 

An opinion is a judgment based on facts in attempting to draw a reasonable conclusion from factual evidence whereas a belief is a conviction based on cultural or personal faith, morality, or values.

 

Although one gets the gist of what Nietzsche is trying to say in fact you wouldn’t usually conflate a belief with opinions – since strictly speaking opinions are not beliefs. 

   

Determine what is/are the conclusion of this writing, i.e. what is he asserting is the case?

 

In a nutshell Nietzsche is asserting:

 The disastrous societal belief that one can ascertain absolute truth has led to untold suffering and strife.  

The fanatical adoption of abstract beliefs and sacrificial undertakings based or promises of an after- life risks overriding rational thought.  The yield of catastrophic results such as was the case in the Inquisition.   

 The unnecessary suffering that has occurred could have been avoided if such beliefs were substituted by a will to investigate what was right as per the scientific inquiry method.              

 

Then work out what are the supporting arguments (premises) for the conclusion(s) and what is mere rhetoric or polemic.

 

  A valid argument is made against the idea we can ascertain absolute truth.

 The subsequent arguments against societal views based on opinions and matters of faith or belief are polemic or a narrative.

  A weakness is he makes no allowance for secular outcomes to yield the same disastrous results as the childlike religious ones.

 

And finally whether you agree with him or not and why; how does it relate to past and present day issues of belief and conviction in our world and the actions they inspire...

 

Mostly I believe he is on the right track given our propensity to hold strong convictions about things which have alternate views in that context.

 

In a number of respects he provides a precursor to post modernism which has influenced the way we view the world to provide a brake on fundamentalist type religious thinking.

 

A catalyst for one to think about our values and the often subjective manner they arise.   

 

How does it relate to your belief system?

 

I don’t think he influences my belief system to any great extent since I don’t knowingly subscribe to any of the excesses he rallied against.

 

Nietzsche wanted to reclaim that divine element he saw as a potential in humanity so he was totally devoted to the here and now. That’s an important lesson.  

No comments: