Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Thinking out loud about Nietzsche's philosophy
Blog Archive
About Me
- Brian Leiter
- Brian Leiter is Karl N. Llewellyn Professor of Jurisprudence and Director of the Center for Law, Philosophy, & Human Values at the University of Chicago. He works on a variety of topics in moral, political, and legal philosophy. His current Nietzsche-related work concerns Nietzsche's theory of agency and its intersection with recent work in empirical psychology; Nietzsche's arguments for moral skepticism; and the role of naturalism in Nietzsche's philosophy.
Links
- "Nietzsche's Moral and Political Philosophy" (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
- Brian Leiter
- Brian Leiter (personal homepage)
- Brian Leiter (personal homepage)
- Brian Leiter's "Nietzsche on Morality" (Routledge, 2002)
- Brian Leiter's "The Future for Philosophy" (OUP, 2004)
- Brian Leiter's Philosophy Blog
- Clark & Leiter's edition of Nietzsche's "Daybreak" (CUP, 1997)
- Leiter & Rosen's "Oxford Handbook of Continental Philosophy" (2007)
- Leiter and Sinhababu's "Nietzsche and Morality" (OUP, 2007)
- Richardson & Leiter's "Nietzsche" (Oxford Readings in Philosophy, 2001)
5 comments:
Nietzsche's article is pretty bad, but on the plus side, the Kierkegaard article is spot on on the great Dane.
Paragraph two is of particular annoyance.
Nietzsche has not "influenced" "existentialism and postmodernism", nor the so called "continental tradition" which harbours them.
Nietzsche was stolen by them, misappropriated, by Conti-idealists, religious mystics, and quasi-Christians and Platonists who lacked the courage to admit to their Nietzsche hating, anti- Nietzscheanism.
So they grew cunning, as is the way of slaves, and tried to turn him into another "ideal castrate", just like them.
But one of Nietzsche's main critical sledgehammers is the term "denaturalisation".
And it's a knock down refutation of all would be Conti-idealist, existentialist, post-modern or post-structuralist appropriators of Nietzsche -- because in them, "nature" does not figure, and its elision is apparently not even a problem.
They have no real interest in this world, as it is: that is, as completely naturalised -- they simply walk the earth they pretend does not exist by sticking their heads in Conti-cloud-cuckoo land.
It's time they left Nietzsche out of it. In terms of a misappropriation, that silly Hitler could have done him no better [that is, "worse"].
For what's worse: Nietzsche the German Nationalist? or Nietzsche the anti-naturalist? Both are errors. That is all. And victory to Wagner, to the copy of the actor, in the theatre where is valorised only the vulgar art of lying.
Why don't you do it yourself, Brian? We will all be grateful.
After Martha Nussbaum's experience with her own wikipedia entry, I don't want to get into an "edit war" with anonymous ignoramuses. Someone who knows the 'ways' of wikipedia would be in a better position to navigate them.
Nietzsche has has not "influenced" "existentialism and postmodernism", nor the so called "continental tradition" which harbours them.
Oh, good heavens. Misunderstood influence is still influence.
Post a Comment