Nietzsche had some kind of neurodegenerative disease, and started withdrawing after 1879. It got worse bit by bit so he had to resign from his position of professor, which he obtained at the age of 24. Knew everything about the Greeks, studied in Bonne.
Easy to read, so there’s a lot of ways to understand his position. Because of this, many different groups claim his philosophy: Nazis, Socialists, Marxists, Feminists, etc.
Is there one “correct” interpretation of Nietzsche?
The notion of “perspectivism” is has the same heterogeneous viewpoint as Nietzsche’s work.
He uses aphorisms, metaphors and allegories, which is uncommon for philosophers (because they’re ass at writing for some reason)
Can we still consider Nietzsche as philosophy? Good thoughts, but is it closer to literature?
Nietzsche uses aesthetics to renew philosophy, by implementing an artistic scheme of interpretation into it.
“The philosopher is this kind of violent persona that expresses themselves at the expense of others”
The oeuvre of Nietzsche cannot be detached from his persona.
To understand Nietzsche one has to read between the lines, to extract the deeper meaning he imbues into his works.
Nietzsche’s immediate claims bad. Unbearable.
Nietzsche’s sister inherited all of his manuscripts and compiled “The Will to Power,” cherry-picking antisemitic claims.
Nietzsche was a trained philologist in Greek.
Nietzsche studied culture (somehow?) and because of this knew exactly how Germans had to act to make their culture better.
Wagner was an important figure to Nietzsche, and served as a friend and guru idk to Nietzsche.
Returning to the Greeks to understand culture was an idea Nietzsche took from him.
Birth of a Tragedy, then, is Nietzsche’s apology of Wagner. The Greek tragedy uncovers the secrets of Western culture. Culture is most fully and clearly revealed in the Greek tragedy, and studying it is what will help us prevent cultural decline.
According to Nietzsche culture is the outcome of a perpetuating conflict between two antagonist forces (Dionysus and Apollo).
He believes we must reconnect with Dionysus, who stands for a cultures potential for violence and destruction.
THE WILLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
The will sacrifices wittle old us for its own survival. If we all understood this, we would “all go nuts and kill ourselves.” “This is not good for the will, so it invents representation.”
“Existing for the human being is equal to suffering.”
The only way to live a happy life is to detach yourself from all earthly strivings.
Nietzsche thinks this is nuts. we gotta will to power and act and do shit and not sit at home and meditate or smthing.
Nietzsche is on the opposite side from Schopenhauer but still relies on him heavily for his own philosophy.
When we are in a dream we can’t check it, according to Schopenhauer.
Nietzsche thinks there’s a difference between dreams and reality. For him, dreams are unreal insofar as they are super-real. They are much more consistent and enjoyable than reality itself.
Dreams are an extreme subjectivation, which is why it’s super-real.
Dionysus makes us lose boundaries with everything, while Apollo fully individuates us.
The fight may be ultimately fruitless but only in the antagonism are we ever an individual.
Philosophy can’t answer some question, not a question of knowing but of “willing” will to power ig.
The problem of philosophy cannot be solved from within. I.e. the philosopher has to go beyond philosophy to resolve the problems it was facing at the time.
It oscillates??? between itself?? and its contrary??? wow so postmodern
Consciousness is structurally and inescapably driven by self-betrayal.
Moral codes require ongoing self-denial, which is why it’s the self-division of men, the disconnection of man from his will.