Thus Spoke Zarathustra

Nietzsche's notion of the Übermensch is one of his most famous. While he himself never defined or explained what he meant by it, many philosophical interpretations have been offered in secondary literature. None of these, however, has examined the significance of the notion for Nietzsche the man, and this essay therefore attempts to address this gap. The idea of the Übermensch occurred to Nietzsche rather suddenly in the winter of 1882-1883, when his life was in turmoil after yet another deep personal setback. The early loss of his father had deprived Nietzsche of a meaningful "mirroring" and a chance to experience realistic, age appropriate disappointment. This left him with a lifelong tendency towards idealisation. It became his proverbial Achilles' heel and the source of repeated disillusionments and sorrow. The Übermensch may thus have been a culmination of his impulse to create altars and worlds before which he could kneel. Trying to cope with his own vulnerability, Nietzsche evoked an ideal of the Übermensch, a mask of hardness that was designed, if unconsciously, to ward off any future assaults on his fragile self. The double aspect of Nietzsche's personality is explored in this essay. While a highly provocative, belligerent and uncompromising Nietzsche often emerges from his published works, a vulnerable, lonely and sometimes self-pitying Nietzsche lurks in his letters and the accounts of his friends and acquaintances. But could an "ideal of strength", such as the Übermensch, serve as a protective mask for someone with a sensitive, passionate interior? Nietzsche's descent into madness would suggest that no ideal can be a substitute for human, all too human, compassion. Everything profound loves a mask ...

Surprisingly one of Nietzsche’s most famous texts, his poem “Oh Mensch! Gieb Acht!” from Also sprach Zarathustra, has hardly been interpreted with respect to its philosophical content, its poetic form, and the context of each. Also, the very context Nietzsche creates between the endings of the IIIrd and the IVth part of Also sprach Zarathustra by copiously commenting on the Midnight Song within the Sleepwalker Song has not been considered so far. The claim is that Nietzsche lets through song his Zarathustra get free from his need for teaching doctrines and especially through the Midnight Song, whose singer and origin is artfully concealed, from the teachability of the thought of eternal recurrence.

In this article, through Nietzsche’s criticisms about moral sentiments which were dominant in his era, the theme of affirmation of life -which exists in almost all of his works- is be presented. This theme can be seen in his criticisms towards Christian morals ethically, in the understanding of eternal recurrence which has more of a metaphysical ground or in the famous character of Zoroaster which can be read as a theory about how a human can live more authentically and as himself/herself. This yes-saying attitude towards life has
penetrated into all of his philosophical views. And in this article, an attempt is made to clarify the attitude towards life has an essential and central place in Nietzsche’s philosophy. The aim is to show how important the idea of the uniqueness of the human and the extollment of human life in a positive manner was for
Nietzsche.

In quella stravagante autobiografia che è Ecce homo. Come si diventa ciò che si è, Nietzsche tornò sul significato dello Zarathustra, narrandone la genesi e proponendo la sua chiave di lettura. In quel testo spiccano tre passaggi, che sarà opportuno ricordare. Nel primo brano, che apre il capitolo, Nietzsche collocò subito il pensiero dell'eterno ritorno alla base dell'opera, definendolo come «la concezione fondamentale». Ecco il testo: E ora racconterò la storia dello Zarathustra. La concezione fondamentale dell'opera, il pensiero dell'eterno ritorno, la suprema forma dell'affermazione che possa mai essere raggiunta -, è dell'agosto 1881; è annotato su di un foglio, in fondo al quale è scritto: «6000 piedi al di là dell'uomo e del tempo». Camminavo in quel giorno lungo il lago di Silvaplana attraverso i boschi; presso una potente roccia che si levava in figura di piramide, vicino a Surlei, mi arrestai. Ed ecco giunse a me quel pensiero» (Ecce homo, p. 94).

This paper is an interpretive history and analysis of why the idea of the first Superman was popular in the United States in the first few decades of the turn of the twentieth century. It was well known at the time the idea of Superman came from the German Philosopher Fredrick Nietzsche. The central question to be addressed is why the first Superman flourished and was a success. There is very little contemporary historiography on this topic. However, a large body of primary sources exist. There is also a large body of secondary sources that were close to the period. By examination of these sources, the first Superman can be explained within its historical context: Modernity, popular culture, and the eugenic movement. These three factors help explain why the first Superman flourished in America – and why the idea could not have succeeded at any other period in United States history.

Resumen

Se abordarán las bases del perspectivismo de Nietzsche, así como uno de sus supuestos fundamentales: el carácter ficcional de la realidad. De igual forma se profundizará en la concepción antropológica según la cual el hombre es un animal de ficciones para el cual conocer es simplemente trabajar con su metáfora favorita, siendo así la construcción de metáforas el instinto fundamental del hombre. Asimismo, siguiendo a Nietzsche, se intentará demostrar el carácter ficticio de la noción de sujeto, con las consecuencias epistemológicas que esta tesis comporta para el método genealógico.
Dr. Adolfo Vásquez Rocca

La solitude est le sujet à la fois fondamental et filigrané de l'oeuvre de Friedrich Nietzsche, Ainsi parlait Zarathoustra, parce qu'elle est le destin du prophète, celui qui descend apporter sa connaissance parmi les hommes, et qui donc se trouve irrémédiablement éloigné d'eux parce qu'il apporte l'avenir avec lui, mais elle est aussi le terreau du penseur, son lieu de création et d'apprentissage, celui où fleurit la connaissance qu'il a de lui-même et de l'homme. La solitude est le destin de celui qui pense l'homme mais ne peut vivre avec lui, dans l'instant et dans la foule, elle est le destin mais aussi l'aspiration de ce que Nietzsche nomme « l'esprit libre », libre des valeurs anciennes, inertes et mortes. Quelle est donc la place de la solitude dans Ainsi parlait Zarathoustra ? Quelles sont ses caractéristiques, en quoi est-elle un fondement des discours de Zarathoustra, mais aussi une clé majeure pour comprendre l'oeuvre, et la pensée de Nietzsche qui y est sédimentée ?

Western Worldview Research Program Part 6

-- Abstract:  Does Thus Spake Zarathustra by Nietzsche conform to the Structure of the Divided Line? Initial hints that this may be the case. The an exploration of the Quadralectic of Will, Desire, Freedom and Necessity as the way that the the Eternal Return of the Different develops in the Subject who creates the object of Design.

-- Key Words:  Nietzsche, Will, Desire, Freedom, Necessity, Quadralectic, Thus Spake Zarathustra, Divided Line, meta-levels, higher logical types.

Celem tej pracy jest ustalenie roli, jaką koncepcja wiecznego powrotu odgrywa w szerszym projekcie filozoficznym Friedricha Nietzschego. W opublikowanych za życia pismach myśliciela jest to motyw, który pojawia się jedynie w kilku fragmentach: po raz pierwszy w słynnym aforyzmie o numerze 341 z "Radosnej wiedzy", następnie w kilku kluczowych ustępach "Tako rzecze Zaratustra", a wreszcie w jednym paragrafie z pracy "Poza dobrem i złem". Wątek wiecznego powrotu pojawia się także w nieopublikowanych fragmentach pism i wielokrotnie powraca w niedokończonym projekcie ostatniej filozofii Nietzschego, wydawanym aktualnie jako zbiór pod nazwą "Wola mocy".

W tej pracy chcę udowodnić, że chociaż wieczny powrót nie jest mocno eksponowany w pismach myśliciela, to stanowi jedną z centralnych osi całego jego przedsięwzięcia filozoficznego. Uważam, że odczytanie filozofii Nietzschego za pomocą klucza interpretacyjnego wiecznego powrotu może dostarczyć wielu fascynujących i nieoczywistych rozstrzygnięć. Ważnym tropem do takiego postawienia roli wiecznego powrotu jest fragment monografii Karla Jaspersa "Nietzsche. Wprowadzenie do rozumienia jego filozofii". Jaspers zwraca uwagę na stosunek samego Nietzschego do myśli o wiecznym powrocie tego samego - dla filozofa było to najważniejsze odkrycie myślowe jego życia.

This paper argues that Nietzsche’s central concern is the diagnosing and overcoming of nihilism. It traces the development of Nietzsche’s thought in order to show how nihilism came to be Nietzsche’s central concern. It then examines the vexing question of what exactly Nietzsche takes to be the core of nihilism. Sometimes Nietzsche treats nihilism as a belief; at other times he seems to treats it as an affective disorder.  It is argued that beyond the nihilism of despair and the nihilism of disorientation identified by Bernard Reginster there must be a deeper core nihilism, which is identified as affective nihilism; the drives turned against themselves.  The key evidence being that while Nietzsche identifies Christianity as being intrinsically nihilistic, the Christian suffers from neither disorientation or despair. Similarly,regarding Nietzsche’s notion of the affirmation of life, his antidote to nihilism, it remains unclear whether this is a matter of adopting some cognitive attitude, for instance affirming the eternal recurrence of life, or of  adopting a form of life that does not involve the repression of our fundamental drives.  Throughout the paper the question of Nietzsche’s attitude to the relation between myth, nihilism and affirmation is examined.  This sheds light on both his relationship to Wagner and the ambition behind his Thus spoke Zarathustra, the work he took to be his most important.

El presente libre se encuentra conformado por diversos caminos interpretativos que guardan un concepto en común: el espíritu libre. La dificultad de definir que entiende Nietzsche por espíritu libre se debe precisamente a que se trata de un concepto que no puede ser determinado bajo un único punto de vista. Por el contrario, el espíritu libre se manifiesta de tal o cual manera según lo que demanda la circunstancia en la que se encuentra. Limitar en palabras al espíritu libre es atentar y entrar en contradicción contra su esencia danzarina. El espíritu libre mantiene una conexión directa con el nihilismo, el ultrahombre, la voluntad de poder y la doctrina del eterno retorno. Cada ensayo es un viaje en el cual se interpela al lector desde una perspectiva distinta, pero con una misma pregunta de fondo: ¿somos artistas de nuestra propia vida?

El artículo de Heidegger que lleva por título Wer ist Nietzsches Zarathustra?[2] (¿Quién es el Zaratustra de Nietzsche?) (1953) presenta al lector un triple juego. La pregunta que Heidegger instaura invita a que el lector se pregunte: quién es Zaratustra, quién es Nietzsche y quiénes son estos para Heidegger. Es decir, desde dónde se pregunta Heidegger por el Zaratustra de Nietzsche y hacia dónde conduce su preguntar. Debido a que sería inadmisible considerar al preguntar de Heidegger como un preguntar ingenuo, es posible tomar la pregunta como un camino hacia la comprensión del ser en Nietzsche a partir de la figura profética de Zaratustra.

Das Γνῶθι σεαυτόν steht am Beginn des abendländischen Fragens und auch heute noch gilt es, sich dieser rätselhaften Aufgabe anzunehmen. Rätselhaft ist sie wenigstens aus zwei Gründen: Zuerst deshalb, da das Selbst nie ein Selbstverständliches war und auch heute noch nicht ist, und zweitens deshalb, da der Sinn der Aufgabe nicht unmittelbar einsichtig ist. Warum ist Selbsterkenntnis nötig? Im folgenden Essay werden wir versuchen, Antworten und weitere Fragen darauf anhand einer einzigen Rede aus Friedrich Nietzsches Also sprach Zarathustra zu gewinnen. Vorab sei das Resultat der hermetischen Lektüre benannt: Das Erkennen des Selbst geschieht durch einen Einbruch. Dieser Bruch stellt die Differenz zwischen Ich und Selbst, bzw. Geist und Leib dar, welche nur in einer Krise erfahrbar werden kann. Diese Krise ist eine Krise des Selbst-Vertrauens, welche somit dem Selbsterkennen vorangeht und dieses wesentlich motiviert. Wie im Folgenden gezeigt
werden wird, kann sich dieses Krisengeschehen aus einem bestimmten
strukturellen Verständnis von Höhenstrebsamkeit ergeben, wenn der Aufstieg und das Aufsteigen selbst das Problem sind. Da nun ebenfalls seit dem Beginn des abendländischen Fragens der Aufstieg als Symbol für Transzendenz galt, liefert dieser Essay anhand der Zarathustra-Rede auch einen Beitrag zum Zusammenhang zwischen Selbstvertrauen/Selbsterkenntnis und dem Bedürfnis nach  Transzendenz.

There is a long and successful scholarly tradition of commenting on Nietzsche's deep affinity for the philosophy of Heraclitus. But scholars remain puzzled as to why he suggested at the end of his career, in Ecce Homo, that the doctrine he valued most, the eternal recurrence of the same, might also have been taught by Heraclitus. This essay aims to answer this question through a close examination of Nietzsche's allusions to Heraclitus in his first published mention of eternal recurrence in The Joyful Science and in a related set of notes from the period when he was formulating and defending his doctrine of eternal recurrence while writing Thus Spoke Zarathustra. The key to answering this question, it is argued, is that Nietzsche came to believe that the doctrine of eternal recurrence, when properly understood as requiring identical repetition, has to presuppose a Heraclitean reality of eternal, absolute, and universal flux.

This dissertation argues that musical dissonance is a master metaphor in the works of Friedrich Nietzsche.  In The Birth of Tragedy, Nietzsche claims that musical dissonance constitutes the “foundations of all existence.”  I contend that it forms the foundation of a radical, life-affirming, and dynamic epistemology.  Musical dissonance provides Nietzsche with the means to “overcome” the ascetic, life-denying, metaphysical philosophies that he believes have enervated and depleted Western civilization since the advent of Platonic and Judeo-Christian thought.  An analysis of Nietzsche’s major works through the lens of musical dissonance reveals that it constitutes a powerful extended metaphor throughout his writings, and inspires his understanding of tragedy, science, eternal recurrence, the Übermensch, the will to power, Bildung, and other concepts.  The theoretical approach taken is informed by Arnold Schoenberg’s concept of the “emancipation of the dissonance,” which he claims to be the guiding principle of his twelve-tone system of musical composition.  Nietzsche “emancipates” dissonance from the constrictions of metaphysical philosophies––a category that includes modern science in Nietzsche’s outlook––in order to facilitate a complete “revaluation of all values,” a project that Nietzsche outlines in his late works, which I contend involves the continual rethinking of all values with respect to a musical, dissonant epistemology.  Musical, dissonant thinking does not rely upon a central authority for deriving truth and meaning, but rather a dynamic and pluralistic method of understanding that is without a unitary, fixed centre.  This study demonstrates how Nietzsche’s fascination with musical dissonance in his early texts inspired the “revaluation of all values”––an act that represents the overcoming of modernity––through a close reading of The Birth of Tragedy, The Gay Science, Thus Spoke Zarathustra, and Ecce Homo.  Gilles Deleuze, Claude Lévesque, Sarah Kofman, and Bruce Benson are among the other key thinkers whose works inspire the framework for my analysis.  The concluding section explores the far-reaching implications of Nietzsche’s musical, dissonant philosophy and aesthetics in the twentieth century through an exploration of its legacy in the writings of Thomas Mann, Theodor Adorno, and Arnold Schoenberg.

Osho: um dos líderes espirituais mais controversos do século XX. Ame-o ou odeie-o, é inegável a extensão da popularidade e influência do antiguru indiano. Este trabalho destaca a dívida do grande expoente do neotantrismo no Ocidente para com Wilhelm Reich. Foca-se em como a obra e a vida de Reich foram acolhidas e valoradas – e, por vezes, criticadas – por Osho. Em específico, o papel das neuroses nos bloqueios energéticos, a relação indireta de Reich com o tantra e os paralelos do orgone na religiosidade oriental. Além disso, são abordados os comentários de Osho sobre a perseguição política de Reich e o fato de "Escute, zé-ninguém!" ser um de seus livros prediletos.

Scopo di questo elaborato è quello di analizzare da un punto di vista alternativo il rapporto tra alcuni aspetti del pensiero nietzschiano e ciò che è incarnato da uno dei protagonisti di quello che è forse il più grande romanzo del celebre scrittore russo Fëdor Michajlovič Dostoevskij: I Fratelli Karamazov («Братья Карамазовы», 1878-80). Come interlocutore ideale del filosofo di Röcken verrà privilegiato quindi non l’autore stesso, bensì il giovane ateo Ivan Karamazov, protagonista del romanzo. Presupposto teorico di questo “dialogo” sarà la lettura di Michail Bachtin del romanzo Dostoevskij in un senso “polifonico”, con la connessa tesi dell‘indipendenza ideologica dell’eroe rispetto all’autore.
A partire dalla “Morte di Dio” annunciata nell’opera nietzschiana, si cercherà di mostrare quindi come quella che potremmo chiamare una “geistige Endzeitstimmung” non costituisca un evento isolato profetizzato dall’Uomo Folle nietzschiano, bensì una condizione già comune a molti in particolare negli ultimi decenni dell’Ottocento, la quale a sua volta costituirà la base dell’Esistenzialismo e, più in generale, di vari movimenti culturali del Novecento improntati alla crisi dell’uomo e alla percezione della fine dei tempi.

In this essay, I examine the conversation between Zarathustra and his soul in the
concluding chapters of Part 3 of Nietzsche’s Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Building on my study’s claim that Zarathustra dies at the end of Part 3, I argue that this conversation is taking place between two of his person-stages: the person-stage who has grown old and is now ending his own life, and the person-stage who has been reborn and is now entering childhood. This conversation shows how Zarathustra’s older self has awakened his own childhood consciousness and is now using all of his wisdom to shape and educate it—a wisdom that then informs and propels his many journeys and teachings throughout the narrative. This conversation also shows that Zarathustra’s most important dying gift to his own childhood soul is his newly recovered
knowledge of eternal recurrence. This knowledge lies dormant in Zarathustra’s soul until he gains the lion’s strength needed to summon it up and then perishes as a result. Nietzsche thus invents a parthenogenetic protagonist whose life illustrates what is perhaps the first time-travel paradox ever written.

(Published version)

Zhuangzi and Nietzsche have both been said to advocate some kind of perspectivism, as well as being against anthropocentrism. A comparison of the two thinkers raises some interesting questions, the answers to which help us get clearer about what each is saying about these two topics. Some commentators claim that Nietzsche believes we can never transcend the human perspective, but a comparison with Zhuangzi highlights passages that suggest otherwise. An examination of the ‘Equalizing Assessments of Things’ (Qiwulun) chapter of the Zhuangzi along with the ‘Before the Sunrise’ chapter of Thus Spoke Zarathustra prompts the question: How does the Daoist sage’s ‘letting all things bask in the broad daylight of Heaven’ compare with Zarathustra’s blessing, ‘to stand over each and every thing as its own Heaven’? The answer brings to light some previously unnoticed parallels that enhance our appreciation of both thinkers.

In this article, I examine the linguistic features in Nietzsche's presentations that have led readers to assume that "the same" means numerical identity. I also evaluate the following argument about personal identity that has been used to support this assumption: if we are not numerically identical to our recurring counterparts, then we have no reason to be concerned about the prospect of reliving our lives and Nietzsche's theory cannot have any of the existential significance he ascribes to it. My conclusion is that Nietzsche actually has in mind a complete qualitative identity that includes all spatiotemporal properties. Thus, the supporting argument fails because the problem of persistence through change over time is not relevant to a theory in which persons are neither recurring at a later time nor undergoing any change when they recur.

Nietzsche regarded Thus Spoke Zarathustra as his most important philosophical contribution because it proposes solutions to the problems and questions he poses in his later books – for example, his cure for the human disposition to vengefulness and his creation of new values as the antidote to nihilism. It is also the only place where he elaborates his concepts of the superhuman and the eternal recurrence of the same. In this Critical Guide, an international group of distinguished scholars analyze the philosophical ideas in Thus Spoke Zarathustra, discussing a range of topics that include literary parody as philosophical critique, philosophy as a way of life, the meaning of human life, philosophical naturalism, fatalism, radical flux, human passions and virtues, great politics, transhumanism, and ecological conscience. The volume will be invaluable for philosophers, scholars and students interested in Nietzsche's thought.

The great Cyclops eye of Socrates-that eye that had never glowed with the sweet madness of artistic inspiration-turned upon tragedy. 1 Nietzsche All a priori judgments are lost, the philosophy of Kant and Count Tolstoy is ended, and there begins the realm of the Ding an sich. Would you like to follow Dostoevsky and Nietzsche there? 2 Shestov

O papel essencial que a personagem de Zaratustra desempenha no contexto da filosofia madura de Nietzsche é, sem dúvidas, dar forma ao projeto da Transvaloração de todos os valores. Nesse interim, tal tarefa é perpassada pelo meio-dia e pelo grande meio-dia. O primeiro refere-se, sobretudo, ao momento a partir do qual a tarefa da personagem se inicia, enquanto que o último, é marcado pela efetivação desta. Ademais, é a partir do evento do grande meio dia que o filósofo projeta o engendramento de uma nova forma de interpretação de mundo e de uma nova concepção de homem. Tal concepção apoia-se, sobretudo, na afirmação dionisíaca da existência enquanto consequência da experiência e aceitação do eterno retorno do mesmo. Sendo assim, nossa tarefa consiste em evidenciar que a tarefa zaratustriana só pode ser levada a cabo mediante a afirmação incondicional do vir-a-ser, a afirmação dionisíaca da existência. Tal afirmação, portanto, figura enquanto um critério para que o grande meio-dia e, consequentemente, o projeto de uma Transvaloração de todos os valores possam efetivarem-se.

While a common view in the literature is that Nietzsche cannot successfully argue against Schopenhauer’s pessimism, a detailed explanation of why this is so is lacking. In this paper I provide such a detailed analysis. Specifically, a consideration of three of Nietzsche’s strategies for a revaluation of pain and suffering reveals two problems: the problem of “the direction of revaluation” and the “dilemma of the intransigence of hedonism”. According to the first, the success of a revaluation cannot be guaranteed on strictly argumentative grounds and can in principle bring about a revaluation that proceeds in the opposite direction than the one desired. According to the second, Nietzsche‘s revaluations are of no significance since they either ground an un-Nietzschean affirmation of life, or they do not engage pessimism’s hedonistic perspective on the basis of which it condemns life. I then examine two strategies that Nietzsche can be seen to employ in his attempts to revalue the hedonistic perspective itself and explain why they too are unsatisfactory. The analysis illuminates the nature of the dialectical stand-off between Nietzsche and Schopenhauer and clarifies the limitations of Nietzschean revaluations as a philosophical tool.

In the reception of Nietzsche's thought, a curious detail has gone substantially unnoticed: Why did Nietzsche choose Zarathustra as his prophet of the eternal recurrence of the same? The historical character known by that name was actually a prophet, but his message had nothing to do with the idea of a circular time. So why exactly him? I think the answer was found by the great novelist Thomas Mann, who placed a clue in his Doktor Faustus (whose protagonist was widely inspired by Nietzsche): In my essay, I argue that there are good reasons to believe that Zarathustra was a kind of “reply” to St. Augustine's De civitate Dei, book XXI, and that this so far neglected connection gives us an important key to many of Thus Spoke Zarathustra's symbols.

In Ecce Homo, Nietzsche discusses retrospectively some of his personal struggles during the writing of Thus Spoke Zarathustra, one of which included a profound lack of understanding from his friends. 1 Nietzsche's protagonist, Zarathustra, a man of "the great health" 2 faces a similar experience during his narrative journey: he seeks companions who will understand and join him in agonistic inter-relation, but instead finds only followers and disciples. Although Zarathustra hesitates to order his disciples towards one specific direction, he does accept the role of educator and offers his teachings to his prospective friends as a gift that they may eventually do with as they like.