tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post5498090680998447832..comments2023-11-30T06:32:59.453-06:00Comments on Brian Leiter's Nietzsche Blog: Nietzsche, Stirner, DostoyevskyBrian Leiterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08749548844483929392noreply@blogger.comBlogger27125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post-28129271884621551902014-04-09T19:12:35.253-06:002014-04-09T19:12:35.253-06:00I seem to remember Nietzsche saying something alon...I seem to remember Nietzsche saying something along the lines: "there is not one Prince Mishkin among you." But I don't remember where... At the time I made a mental note suggesting that Nietzsche must have read the Idiot. <br /><br />All the best.<br /><br />MagnúsAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06083876378821684097noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post-61752457823397985242013-10-16T02:00:43.709-06:002013-10-16T02:00:43.709-06:00@ Robert Allen, I had the same thoughts as your so...@ Robert Allen, I had the same thoughts as your son, the horse incident/dream can't be unrelated. Nietzsche called Dostoevsky "the only psychologist from whom I have anything to learn."<br /><br /> It actually strikes me that this is not more documented, the only significant analysis I found is this one:<br />http://www4.hmc.edu:8001/humanities/beckman/nietzsche/reading/Ion Andersonhttp://www.dreamstime.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post-7854418725873859772013-04-16T07:51:46.084-06:002013-04-16T07:51:46.084-06:00Has anyone ever suggested a connection between the...Has anyone ever suggested a connection between the circumstances surrounding Nietzsche's unfortunate breakdown- specifically, his attempt to prevent a horse from being whipped, and Raskolnikov's dream while sleeping in the park, in which he also tries to save a horse from a flogging? When I told my son of the former incident he immediately responded 'That's straight out of C&RFGA, Ph.D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/11981669525574676528noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post-14885394198479749272012-04-21T19:32:24.198-06:002012-04-21T19:32:24.198-06:00David you write:
It seems clear to me that what&...David you write: <br /><br />It seems clear to me that what's being proposed here is not a rejection of either "truth" or "morality". <br /><br />Quite so As I have repeated several times in this exchange Nietzsche a) rejects the morality current in in his day but b) wants to replace it with another. But it does not follow from this that he thinks that the new and Charles Pigdennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post-55832933732895436602012-04-20T07:01:46.361-06:002012-04-20T07:01:46.361-06:00Brian,
Yes, but it depends upon what type of &quo...Brian,<br /><br />Yes, but it depends upon what type of "objectivity", "fact" and "nature" we're (Nietzsche's) interested in. Why are relational concepts of truth not sufficient? Charles interprets Nietzsche as claiming that "all moralities are systematically false". <br /><br />But this is <i>not</i> the same thing as saying that no morality is Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post-2551530532296646112012-04-19T12:22:54.128-06:002012-04-19T12:22:54.128-06:00This comment has been removed by the author.Brian Leiterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08749548844483929392noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post-72515998335132453852012-04-19T12:22:53.901-06:002012-04-19T12:22:53.901-06:00Let me just note that the fact that Nietzsche expr...Let me just note that the fact that Nietzsche expresses moral views, as he certainly does, is quite compatible with the thought that there is no objective fact of the matter about moral questions. Since Nietzsche is rather explicit that, as he says in The Gay Science, nature itself is always valueless, that value is a "gift" we bestow on nature, it would be natural to think that no Brian Leiterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08749548844483929392noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post-4384827690028438142012-04-19T12:14:02.538-06:002012-04-19T12:14:02.538-06:00Charles,
Let me be as clear here as I can: In Day...Charles,<br /><br />Let me be as clear here as I can: In <i>Daybreak</i>. 96. Nietzsche draws attention to the progress that "Europe" still has to make in moral matters. Only once the gods, observances, mediators and priests have been abandoned does the "religion of self-redemption", the Buddha, appear. "When, finally" Nietzsche continues "morality in the old Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post-34376982540437835812012-04-19T09:05:21.591-06:002012-04-19T09:05:21.591-06:00Charles,
Your second paragraph seems to define &q...Charles,<br /><br />Your second paragraph seems to define "morality" as being unavoidably wedded to error, the error that ANY of the individual's affirmations or negations "represent something over and above" the constitution, context, and goals of the individual in question. <br /><br />But why should <i>this</i> kind of definition of morality prevail? Does one Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post-843046506816312162012-04-18T18:22:18.000-06:002012-04-18T18:22:18.000-06:00I did not say that you could not subscribe to a mo...I did not say that you could not subscribe to a morality without having preferences - I said that you could have preferences without subscribing to a morality. Thus the fact that prudent and complex preferences are still preferences does not show that that you cannot reject morality whilst still having preferences whether prudent and complex or otherwise.<br /><br />To subscribe to a morality Charles Pigdennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post-40947968316200509452012-04-16T09:36:21.925-06:002012-04-16T09:36:21.925-06:00Dear Charles,
Having more prudent and complex pr...Dear Charles,<br /><br />Having more prudent and complex preferences; involving foresight, testing and subtle dialectic, doesn't, in my view, negate their status as "preferences".<br /><br />See e.g. D.26.<br /><br />It would help me if you offered your view of just what you think "morality" <i>is</i>, rather than what, in your view, it <i>isn't</i>.<br /><br />DavidAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post-27311424159685814962012-04-16T00:27:09.097-06:002012-04-16T00:27:09.097-06:00Dear 'David'
I can want things I believe ...Dear 'David'<br /><br />I can want things I believe to be bad and can fail to want what I believe to be good. Hence wanting something and believing it to be good are distinct. <br /><br />On the larger question, animals have preferences, but they don't, so far as we can tell, have anything like a morality. We can conceive of a person who is animal-like in this respect: she has Charles Pigdennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post-81939744344951135812012-04-14T17:30:22.149-06:002012-04-14T17:30:22.149-06:00Is it? Given that you haven't offered a defini...Is it? Given that you haven't offered a definition of just what you mean by "morally justified", I don't see how you're justified in making the distinction you're seeking to make.<br /><br />There's nothing necessarily arbitrary or trivial about "preferring this to that", as you seem to imply. This "preferring" can be a matter of life and death, Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post-58219069374340177852012-04-14T06:31:33.535-06:002012-04-14T06:31:33.535-06:00Preferring this to that is one thing. Regarding on...Preferring this to that is one thing. Regarding ones preferences as morally justified is is quite another.Charles Pigdennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post-66258552629829753112012-04-13T07:29:19.279-06:002012-04-13T07:29:19.279-06:00In response to Charles Pigden, April 7, post 3, a....In response to Charles Pigden, April 7, post 3, a.<br /><br />How can any organism possibly "get along without any morality whatsoever"? If our morality relates to our perceived conditions of preservation and growth, then it necessitates a (contingent) ranking among options, and this ranking (whatever form it takes) constitutes a de facto "morality". e.g. BGE.9. Indifference Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post-29222074787234167102012-04-12T18:46:05.725-06:002012-04-12T18:46:05.725-06:00In response to Anonymous 11/12: 10:19
Thanks for t...In response to Anonymous 11/12: 10:19<br />Thanks for the pointer but the article seems to me a bit thin. MAYBE Nietzsche's intellectual romance with Schopenhauer was precipitated by a confrontation with Stirner's (then unacceptable) ideas delivered via the conduit of Mushacke senior, an old associate of the Young Hegelians generally and of Stirner in particular. Well, MAYBE but it seemsCharles Pigdennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post-76158222922253591822012-04-11T10:19:58.133-06:002012-04-11T10:19:58.133-06:00for the Stirner Nietzsche Question see:
http://ww...for the Stirner Nietzsche Question see:<br /><br />http://www.lsr-projekt.de/poly/ennietzsche.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post-77104913178811862102012-04-07T19:30:48.740-06:002012-04-07T19:30:48.740-06:00Post 3
I want to come back to an issue which prom...Post 3<br /><br />I want to come back to an issue which prompted my query - the affinities between Stirner and Nietzsche. I want to suggest two important DISsimilarities. I’m fairly certain about the one but stand to be corrected about the other. <br /><br />a) In my view both Stirner and Nietzsche were (in today’s terminology) error theorists about ethics. (Brian disagrees: he thinks that Charles Pigdennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post-54632179595602311442012-04-07T19:28:59.785-06:002012-04-07T19:28:59.785-06:00Post 2
2) Nietzsche read at least the following n...Post 2<br /><br />2) Nietzsche read at least the following novels of Dostoevsky, apparently in French translations. <br /><br />i] NOTES FROM THE UNDERGROUND, translated as L’Esprit Souterrain. Source: letter to Overbeck excepted in Kaufmann’s THE PORTABLE NIETZSCHE, pp. 454-455.<br />ii] HOUSE OF THE DEAD, translated as La maison des morts). Source: Letter to Gast, Briefwechsel, III, 5, op. cit.Charles Pigdennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post-61210890233440508182012-04-07T19:26:59.591-06:002012-04-07T19:26:59.591-06:00Post 1
Thanks to everyone thus far for their usef...Post 1<br /><br />Thanks to everyone thus far for their useful comments and recommendations. Brobjer's article (thanks Wolter!) was particularly illuminating as were the citations to Nietzsche's notes and correspondence concerning those novels of Dostoevsky that Nietzsche is known to have read. The situation seems to be this:<br /><br />1) Wrt Stirner. Apart form the dubious testimony Charles Pigdennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post-67988803184065379092012-04-05T16:28:00.342-06:002012-04-05T16:28:00.342-06:00Wow, this all very interesting! My German is prett...Wow, this all very interesting! My German is pretty poor, but if I am not mistaken, Nietzsche, in his notes, is, in part, paraphrasing Stavrogin's final letter to Darya Shatova, in the last chapter of THE POSSESSED. <br /><br />More later.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post-39359122261856503122012-04-05T15:21:19.424-06:002012-04-05T15:21:19.424-06:00To Isobel: From a letter to Gast one can infer tha...To Isobel: From a letter to Gast one can infer that Nietzsche indeed read, in French, "La maison des morts", plus "Humilés et offensés". There's a recent, highly informative study by Paolo Stellino on Nietzsche's knowledge of Dostoevsky's work, in Spanish. <br /><br />This is the link to the pdf:<br />http://www.uma.es/contrastes/pdfs/013/05_Stellino-Paolo.pdf.<br Mattianoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post-45709819699776674242012-04-05T01:15:19.347-06:002012-04-05T01:15:19.347-06:00The notes, which Nietzsche probably took from the ...The notes, which Nietzsche probably took from the French translation, Les Possédés, trans. by Victor Derély (Paris 1886), are in <a href="http://www.nietzschesource.org/texts/eKGWB/NF-1887,11%5B331%5D" rel="nofollow">KSA 13, 11[331]-[333]</a>.<br /><br />Thomas Brobjer has properly dealt with the historical <a href="http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/20717810?uid=3737592&uid=2&uid=4&Wolterhttp://kuleuven.academia.edu/WolterHartognoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post-43462546745014189342012-04-04T16:33:41.948-06:002012-04-04T16:33:41.948-06:00Thanks Isobel!
I have (of course!) read Frank'...Thanks Isobel!<br /> I have (of course!) read Frank's superb biography of Dostoevsky but I missed that.Charles Pigdennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4373556239088388790.post-11311026207475146922012-04-04T16:12:55.921-06:002012-04-04T16:12:55.921-06:00And there's the reference in AC 31.And there's the reference in <a href="http://books.google.com/books?ei=0MV8T4rGKsrg0QHPu7ibDA&id=DcVl57jzP2gC&dq=nietzsche+and+antichrist+and+cambridge&q=%22like+a+Russian+novel%22#v=snippet&q=%22like%20a%20Russian%20novel%22&f=false" rel="nofollow">AC 31</a>.Robhttps://twitter.com/#!/robsicanoreply@blogger.com