Merry Brain-diseases-of-sickly-web-spinners-mas everybody, and a happy New Year! Goodness, this book is making me feel so festive.
Neeche takes a pretty highbrow stance in Twilight of the Idols,
saying how many other ‘intellectuals’ are deluded. Yet considering his views on
the ‘real world’ are to not over-analyze life and to basically take what you
see at sensory face value, they aren’t very intellectual sounding. His version
of progress, as shown in How the “True
World” Finally Became a Fiction is also to abandon the delusions of celestial
or intellectual grandeur that characterize Plato or Christianity. Nieeqcher does
not want to elevate humanity or (in the case of Rousseau) necessarily regress
it, which also does not seem very intellectual. If you’re going to be an
Important Philosopher, at least say something exciting like everyone’s been
living in a metaphorical cave!
Nicherr criticizes Socrates, but isn’t he
essential doing what Socrates did? questioning values that most would contentedly
leave unquestioned. If there is a difference to Socrates’ dialectic and what
Neeziche is doing, I’d like to know what it is.
Netichee was also ahead of his time – though
maybe not in regards to his views on women.
It seems detrimental when discussing his philosophies to bring up his
persistent misogyny, but I wonder why someone who says how “reality shows us a
captivating treasury of types” (28) would tar all women with the same brush.
Dude, this is hilarious.
ReplyDeleteThank you!
Delete