Nietzsche Third Essay Summary

Nietzsche Third Essay Summary-44
Therefore, since there is evil in the world, either God did not create it, thus, He is not all-powerful, or he did create evil and He is, thus, not all good.

Tags: How To Solve Venn Diagram ProblemsHomework WriterBusiness Plan Action PlanThesis On Oneida CommunityHow To Start An Essay For CollegeSmall Cell EssayRace Socially Constructed EssaySparkle Paper Towels ResearchVirginia Woolf Essay On Biography

They differ and disagree, and constantly raise new doubts with regard to them, because their minds are bend on comprehending such things, that is to say, they are moved by desire; and every one of them believes that he has discovered the way leading to a true knowledge of the thing, although human reason is entirely unable to demonstrate the fact by convincing evidence” (Moses Maimonides, “Yesterday’s meditation has thrown me into such doubts that I can no longer ignore them, yet I fail to see how they are to be resolved.Nietzsche, better than most any other Western philosopher, understood the power and necessity of Platonic indirection—which means that his style is MORE than style—he does not want you to rationally comprehend his critiques of rationality, but to EXPERIENCE it. This seeking leads to an examination of life (for, “The unexamined life is not worth living,” as he says at 38a in the , the perplexity at the end of the dialogues wherein we discover we do not know the truth that we thought, unreflectively, that we did know.Like Socrates’ generation of aporia in his interlocutors, Nietzsche often induces a vehement revulsion—but one from which we cannot tear our eyes or minds away from. Just as his interlocutors always run away at the end, refusing to bear Socrates’ revelation of their ignorance any longer, coming to truth is a very difficult process.For Nietzsche, the difference is more extreme and given value judgments: reaction is like the dialectical—it is rational and moral and, thus, utterly negative and that which has harmed us; reflection is more like the aesthetic—it is closer to an affective or intuitive or passionate ‘thinking’ on the self that is outside of morality and reason and is, thus, positive, but, also, that which we no longer seem capable of these days…his guiding method is “faith seeking understanding,” wherein faith is a passionate directedness towards God and understanding is conducted as an obedient response to his faith and proceeds through rational argument.Or, as mentioned in the beginning of chapter of aphorisms on paradoxes (faith, like paradoxes, demands an understanding that is not logical, linear, restrictive, etc.)—where faith would be like Nietzsche’s reaction and reason would be like his reaction.This over-rationalization has blinded us to the true essential nature of ourselves and our world—the essential truth is that there is no truth and we continually commit a Cartesian “material falsity,” mistaking the false rationality for reality.While many will argue that Nietzsche and Socrates embody the two opposing views within philosophy, I believe that there is a fundamental affinity in their projects and approaches. I) “We knowers are unknown to ourselves…” Our “treasure,” our “heart,” (matthew ) rests in the expansion of our knowledge; yet, in seeking knowledge we are ignorant of experience, which essentially means we are ignorant to ourselves, the seekers. We must understand the difference between REACTION and REFLECTION—the first is negative, gave birth to morals; the latter is positive, and is now necessary to re-learn in order to see beyond these morals, because in always reacting we forget to, neglect to reflect.” 2) What is the meaning of the phenomenon of “bad conscience” or “guilt?” 3) What is the meaning of asceticism, or systematic self-denial?The most agreed upon characterization of God is that He is omnipotent (all-powerful), omniscient (all-knowing), and omnipresent (everywhere, always). However, God is also absolutely good (partially justified because evil is a lack, God’s perfection prohibits him lacking anything).So, if he created everything, than he must have created evil—but if he is all-good, then he cannot have created evil.


Comments Nietzsche Third Essay Summary

The Latest from ©