THUS SPOKE ZARATHUSTRA A BOOK FOR ALL AND NONE BY: FRIEDRICH NIETZSCHE
THUS SPOKE ZARATHUSTRA
A BOOK FOR ALL AND NONE
BY: FRIEDRICH
NIETZSCHE
Contents
Introduction
“It is not a
matter of agreeing or disagreeing with his philosophical conclusion, but of
having passed through his corrosive of metaphysical, moral and psychological
doubts. They leave a man scarred or purified; certainly changed”.[1]
Truly, among the writers of the nineteen centuries, even to the era of
post-modernity, there has not being a writer whose work is so controversial,
difficult, tormenting and burdensome like that of the German Philosopher,
Friedrich Nietzsche. Though, this characters that was used to qualify the works
of Nietzsche is not without a background for it was said that no philosopher
philosophizes in a vacuum. Certainly, Nietzsche was born into a culture, he had
lived and shared with his fellow men, and he has practiced religion and had
studied. But, still, he finds it difficult to reconcile with the social, moral,
religious and political background of his time. Such sentiment is made manifest
in his works.
As such,
philosophy in the time of Nietzsche was almost at its peak. The power of
reasoning has brought lots of changes in the world of man. Revolutions like
industrial, agricultural and so on, have strongly developed the society and
enhancement of the life of man. But, in this revolution, also comes the lack of
faith in God. Morality becomes a thing of choice, man whom Aristotle qualified
as a zoon politikon (political
animal) has rather become Homo homini
lupus (a wolf for another). The philosophers who suppose to be finding the
way out for humanity in this situation are rather, engaging in the creation and
speculation of models that cannot be realized. Thus, Nietzsche tries to swim
against the current of this ocean of socio-political immorality through his
writings. Though, most times, his works were either opposed or
misinterpreted.
Consequently, in
his master pies Thus Spoke Zarathustra,
Nietzsche summoned the courage to speak about the ills of his contemporary
society. This he does using the imagery of a prophet-like being named
Zarathustra. Therefore, our aim in this paper is to make an exposition on the
words of Nietzsche in his above mentioned book. Methodologically, first, we
shall give the biography of Nietzsche which we shall see in the context of his
tragedies and success in life. Secondly, we shall discuss some of his works,
his philosophy of nihilism and the idea of Superman. Thirdly, some poems in the
words of Zarathustra on the happenings in the society will be evoked. Lastly,
we shall points out some loopholes in the philosophical idea of Nietzsche, and
then comes our conclusion.
1.0
Tragedy without end (The life of Friedrich Nietzsche)
The random survey
of adjectives used to describe Friedrich Nietzsche would come up with a list
such as “tragic, terrifying, strident, troubled, and mad as well as powerful,
intoxicating, charismatic and prophetic”.[2]
Nietzsche’s place in history is summarized as a “widely rejected as a brilliant
madman in the complacent atmosphere of pre-1914, a destructive and perverse
genius who could not be taken really seriously, but stands today as major
prophet of tortured twentieth century”.[3]
As such, the ideas left by him are disturbing and difficult, just as the life
he lived was tormenting and burdensome, full of tragedies but hopeful for
survival.
Born at Rocken, a
little village in the Prussian province of Saxony in 18th October,
1844 into a pious Lutheran family, the early death of Nietzsche’s father left
him and his four siblings under the care of his mother, grand-mother and two
aunts. Nietzsche was a brilliant student and thus, distinguished himself at the
University of Bonn and Leipzig, where he studied classics and philology. Made a
professor of classical philology in the University of Basel at the age of
twenty-five, Nietzsche had not yet received his doctorate but had already
attracted the attention of scholars through his published papers.[4]
Nevertheless, as
was foremost narrated, the life of Nietzsche was neither pleasant nor peaceful
and as such, the beginning of his tragedy. Being fascinated with the war
between the Prussian and Austria, for two times Nietzsche was turned down from
joining the army because of his shortsightedness. But, in autumn of 1867, his
service was called for by a new regulation and he joined the artillery at
Naumburg. Not long after, he was thrown down from a horse back and thus,
incurred an injury in his chest which necessitated his permanent withdrawal
from the service. Nietzsche suffered serious sickness of migraine headaches,
nausea, insomnia, diphtheria, severe dysentery and bad sight.[5]
This made him to become a wanderer for over a decade in search of healing for
he traveled throughout Italy, Switzerland, and Germany. His ill health made him
to resign his professorship at the age of thirty-four.
The final years of
Nietzsche were one of deep loneliness and pain. As he says in his letter to his
sister “A profound man has to have friends, unless he still has his god. But, I
have neither god nor friends”[6]
the question is, does Nietzsche has no friends or has he lost faith in his God?
As such, history told us that he once had a good friend, the famous musician
Wagner. Nietzsche was so influenced by the lyrics of Wagner’s music for it was under the influence of Wagner’s
music that he wrote his first work; The
Birth of Tragedy from the Spirit of Music in 1872.[7]
On the other hand, he had already lost his faith in God having been influence
by the atheism and anti-rationalism of Schopenhauer, the German famous atheist.
All are the tragedies of his life. But in all this struggles, Nietzsche still
have the strength to produce enormous work which some will be discussed in the
next topic. After collapsing in the street of Turin in 1888, Nietzsche spent his
last days in total solitude both under the care of his mother and sister. He
died on 25th August, 1990.[8]
1.1 The wandered Thinker
Having seen the
tragedy that surrounds the life of Nietzsche, especially due to his sickness,
we were told that he was made a wanderer in search of healing. But, Nietzsche turned his weakness into
strength by making a rational thinking on the ways of the life of men in his
society.[9]
As he wonders from one place to another, Nietzsche started ruminating on the
nature, habits and behaviors of his contemporary European culture which he had
come to despise as decadence. As such, in the midst of nineteenth century’s
optimism, Nietzsche saw storm clouds looming on the horizon. He thought that
the time would soon come when we would find all our dearest dreams shattered to
the extent that the notions of God, truth, reality, objective values and human
progress would be exposed as empty illusions that were no longer viable.[10]
All these ideas Nietzsche was thinking and pondering as he wonders and such
were made visible from his works. Vital information we should not as we read
Nietzsche’s work is that he always uses imagery, allegories and ironies to
convey his intended messages to his readers. This made his work hard to
understand.
Consequently, in his first work The Birth of Tragedy from the Spirit of
Music (1872), Nietzsche used the analogy of the tragedy in the Greek
cosmology to reflect on the state of the modern culture in Germany, both in its
decline and possible rebirth.[11]
Thus, by using the imagery of Dionysus and Apollo, Nietzsche analyzed that it
is only through one’s immersion in the formal essence of primordial unity can
the redemption from the sufferings of the world could be achieved. Therefore,
to be a tragic man is to connect oneself to the divine essence of Dionysus for
Nietzsche believes that man reality does not end with his presence experience
in this immanent world but, supersedes it. Ironically, Nietzsche is advocating
for backward movement to dogmatism, for he categorically says that pure science
lacked the principal ingredient to explain the realities of man’s nature and
the universe. [12]
Furthermore, in
his book: Ecce Homo (1895),
Nietzsche, seeing that his contemporaries were either mocking him or confusing
him as a sick irrational man tries to declare to them “who and what I am”.[13]
As he said “listen, I am such and such a man, please for heaven sake do not
confuse me with anyone else”. Thus, as a way of exoneration from their
misrepresentation of his personality, Nietzsche confessed to his contemporaries
that “truly, I know that my way of nature is in contrast with those of other
men, I am only a disciple of Dionysus. I did not come to improve mankind or to
set up a new idol (ideals), but, I only want the old idol to know what it means
to have feet of clay for we have deprived reality of its value and truth”.[14]
As such, to “have feet of clay” means inability to move which in other words,
Nietzsche is talking about the inability of reason alone to move man’s society
towards the actualization its dreams.
Now in his mater
pies: Thus Spoke Zarathustra written
in 1885, Nietzsche narrates his personal experience in life which includes his
friendship, ideals, raptures, disappointment and sorrows. It also harbors the
image of Nietzsche’s greatest hope and remotest aims. Zarathustra itself is an
imaginary concept used by Nietzsche to speak on the happenings of his society.
Thus, after much disappointment and lose of hope of good friend whom he will
trust and will understand his weaknesses in life, Nietzsche created himself a
perfect friend. So, in an ideal of a majestic philosopher, he made a creation
(Zarathustra) to be the preacher of his gospel to the world.
1.1.1 Nietzsche’s Philosophy of Nihilism
The word
“nihilism” comes from the Latin word ‘nihil’,
which means ‘nothing’.[15]
As a term, ‘nihilism’ first came into wide use in the period extending from the
1870s into the early years of the twentieth century, perhaps, due to the
influence of three writers: the Russian novelists Ivan Turgenev and Fëdor
Dostoevskii, and the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche. Prior to
this, the scattered uses of ‘nihilism’
can be found in philosophical, theological, political and literary writings of
the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries in Europe to refer to atheism
and its alleged inability to provide support for knowledge and morality, or to
impart purpose to human life. Nihilism as “the radical repudiation of value,
meaning, and desirability” is a force contrary to the will to create something
that is valuable, meaningful and desirable.[16]
There
are different perspective views on the idea of nihilism. Aquinas’s conception
of nothingness (nihilism) was so absolute that it disbarred any idea of
“succession or even motion”.[17] In
the pre-creation, there was only the immanence of God and no other thing for
God’s existence supersedes all other existence. Sergius Bulgakov states of this
absolute and total singularity of God’s existence, “It is not even a void,
since a void is conceived as a receptacle, that is, as a bounded, concrete
being. Thus for Aquinas, there is only
God and outside of and apart from God there is nothing, just as there is not
even any “outside of’ or “apart from”. … Nothing is a relative concept; it is
correlative with something; that is, with already existing.[18]
Anselm of
Canterbury speaks of creatio ex-nihilo
(creation out of nothing). In his inquiry of the source of things in existence,
Anselm asserts in his monologium that, from whatever source anything is
created, that source is the cause of what is created from it. Accordingly, if
anything was created from nothing, this very nothing was the cause of what was
created from it.[19]
However, the whole idea of Anselm about creatio
ex-nihlo is total denial or rejection of emanation as posited by Plotinus.
In order words, philosophical nihilism is a philosophy of negation, rejection,
or denial of some or all aspects of thought or life.[20]
Similarly, epistemological nihilism denies the possibility of justifying or
criticizing claims to knowledge, because it assumes that a foundation of
infallible, universal truths would be required for such assessments and no such
thing is available; because it views all claims to knowledge as entirely
relative to historical epochs.
Consequently,
Friedrich Nietzsche understands nihilism in another perspective that is quite
different from the previous views we formally listed. Nietzsche in his book
titled The Will To Power, published
in 1901, announced ‘the advent of nihilism’ in European culture, its character
and causes.[21] There
he attributed nihilism to the declining influence of Christianity and loss of
faith in God, for without God human life seemed deprived of purpose and value.
He may have taken nihilism seriously, but only as part of an effort to provide
an alternative to the void that it offered. Nietzsche could be categorized as a
nihilist in the descriptive sense that he believed that there was no longer any
real substance to traditional, social, political, moral, and religious values.[22]
He denied that those values had any objective validity or that they imposed any
binding obligations upon us. He argues further that they could at times have
negative consequences for us. We could also categorize Nietzsche as a nihilist
in the descriptive sense for he saw that many people in the society around him
was effectively nihilists themselves for they did not believe in the existing
moral and socio-political principle in there society.[23]
More so, Nietzsche saw that the old values and
old morality simply did not have the same power that they once did. It is here
that he announced the “death of God”, arguing that the traditional source of
ultimate and transcendental value; God, no longer mattered in modern culture
and was effectively dead to us. In view to this, Nietzsche could also be
described as a nihilist in a normative sense because he regarded the “death of
God” as being ultimately a good thing
for society. For he believed that traditional moral values, and in particular
those stemming from traditional Christianity, were ultimate harmful to
humanity.[24]As such,
Nietzsche is not simply interested in tearing down traditional beliefs based on
traditional values; instead, he also wanted to help build new values. It is in
line with this that he pointed out a ‘Superman’ who would be able to construct
his own set of values independent of what anyone else thought.
1.1.2 The idea of the Superman
The
concept of Superman is both the best known of Nietzsche’s philosophy as well as the more complex. This
concept goes throughout the works of Nietzsche, but appears vividly in Thus Spoke
Zarathustra. Superman, from the German
Übermensch,
in philosophy means the superior man, who justifies the existence of the human
race. It is indeed from the Superman that one can access Nietzsche’s thought, and as such, all his other
themes: morals, art, religion and so on, needs be understood from his idea of
the Superman.
In
Nietzsche, the Superman is not a new species created as a result of genetic
selection, nor product of long evolution; rather, he would emerge when any man with
superior potential completely masters himself.[25]
While Nietzsche compares humanity to a “polluted stream”, he says that the
Superman or the Overman is like a great sea that can absorb minuscule pollution
without being corrupted.[26]
Zarathustra first announces the Übermensch as goal humanity can set for itself. In other to become
a superman, one needs to indulge in the cultivation of self which can only be
achieved through an act of the will.[27]
According to him, “what is needed in life is to redefine what it means to be
human by overcoming the limitations of human nature for man is something that
needs to be overcome”.[28]
Consequently, the Superman as described in Thus Spoke Zarathustra is the one who is willing to risk all for
the sake of the enhancement of humanity. He is opposed
to the terms such as modern men, good men, Christian men and other nihilists.[29]
He is the harbinger of hope, and he overcomes the meaningless of life. Nietzsche’s idea of human life is that it is an
eternal recurrence with no beginning or end but a repetition of the very same
life over and over again. With all sufferings, unhappiness and misdeeds in
life, one may feel cursed and despaired if he inevitably were to repeat the
same life with the same pain and joy. However, the most important point may not
be whether life is really an eternal recurrence. Rather, the important point is
that the Superman should view it differently such that in the very same life,
he should be content with and be happy to repeat that very same life again and
again, amidst all these uncertainties and sufferings.[30]
Furthermore, a Superman
is someone who can, with appreciation, face life that may seem so suffering and
absurd, knowing that the basic conditions of life will not change even when he
is in the ideal state of a Superman. Nietzsche does not
view the Superman as one without challenges or one above challenges and
limitations, he does not accept Socrates idea that man through reason could
overcome all limitations which the current day science and technology is geared
to. As such, he is of the view that the Superman must recognize his limitations
and fight towards it to overcome.[31]
A Superman, in his view, should
not be restricted by tradition nor bounded by convention but has independent
values of his own.The Superman is a franchisor, a
wrestler for the earth, a being of will, a pure act, a work. Nevertheless,
Unlike Karl Marx who posits the equality of all men, Nietzsche states that not
all men have the quality of becoming a Superman for men are not equal. As such,
it is only the talented and gifted man can reach the ideal state of a Superman,
as he said “A highly educated, self-control, a man of tolerance who knows how
to use his strength has the nature of the Superman”.[32]
1.2 The Discovering of the Golden
Camel
Like we once said,
Nietzsche in his work Thus spoke
Zarathustra uses imageries beginning from the very name ‘Zarathustra’ which
etymologically is the combination of two words in Old Italian which possibly
means “golden camel”. The two words in which it is derived from are: ‘zarat’ meaning ‘golden’ and ‘ushra’
meaning ‘camel’[33]. This
very name was first discovered in history as a name of a Persian prophet; the
traditional founder of the ancient Persian religion, believed to have lived
about 600 B.C. also called Zoroastrian. This religion recognizes two creative
powers of good and evil, but teaches the final triumph of good over evil.[34]
The choice of the
name Zarathustra by Nietzsche may not be farfetched. But, in discovering the
‘golden camel’, we need to conceptualize the two possible origin of the name,
Zarathustra which are the ‘Golden camel’ and ‘a Prophet’. The integration of
the two gives rise to the meaning Nietzsche tries to portray; which is nothing
but the Church or dogmatic era. This is the Golden Camel which speaks (thus
spoke Zarathustra) according to Nietzsche. Characteristically, camels are large
mammals that can weigh up to 1,800 pounds and stand over seven feet tall, the
limbs and neck of the camel are elongated, the upper lip is cleft, and the ears
are small. The significance of the weight of camel depicts the size of the
Church, its long neck portrays the discerning ability of the church which see
far beyond the present and the small ear of camel shows the wisdom of the
church to pretend not to hear so as to show mercy; slow in judgment. Camel is
an animal that can survive in the desert. Its enduring patience is practically
seen in the Church
Also, the element
‘gold’ is among the 79th special element on the periodic table of natural
elements with its melting point as high as 1,945oF. Gold is not
corroded, tarnished by moisture, or oxidized (rust) by the effects of oxygen
and water, or affected by ordinary acids, as most other metals are. It is not
magnetic, but it is an excellent conductor of electricity; that is faith or the
Church for you, having all these tremendous qualities one begins to wonder how
modernity could have succeeded it killing faith. With the picture of Golden
Camel, we could simply allege that nothing could kill faith or the Church per
se, though one can succeed in killing it in many people’s lives and in one’s
life own life too. This is what Nietzsche tries to communicate in his famous
statement ‘God is dead.’ Furthermore, this Golden camel is also crowned with
the quality of a prophet. A prophet is one who utters divinely inspired
revelations.[35] Thus,
as a prophet, Zarathustra spoke the
following words below poetically.
1.2.1 The Three Metamorphoses
Like every
philosopher, Fredrick Nietzsche was philosophizing in this text within a
context. As one who lived in the era of modernity, he knew all the problematic
associated with modernity in terms of strength and weaknesses and was making an
effort to propose the way forward to the era of post – modernity. The three
metamorphoses of spirit in Nietzsche’s Zarathustra represented three different
era of philosophical thought in the image of a Camel, Lion and a Child.[36]
The first metamorphose; Camel is a representation of medieval period of
philosophy, heavily burdened with dogmatism. At some point, the society grew
weary of dogmatism and perceived been caged and limited by the commandment of
the medieval tradition. Thus, people began to seek for freedom, from the bound
of dogmatism. So, in order to do away
with dogmatism, a force is needed. Here comes the second metamorphose in the
image of a lion, a ferocious animal, and very pure. This lion came in the form
of reason for philosophers like Rene Descartes posits the supremacy of
reason. As was stated in the poem that
“The
spirit becomes a Lion who would conquer his freedom and be master in his own
desert. Here, he seeks out his last master: he wants to fight him and his last
god; for ultimate victory, he wants to fight the dragon” [37]
But, for three centuries, reason
which men upholds, instead of bringing peace and serenity in the human society,
rather brings pains, death, subjugation and wars. This is what Zarathustra saw,
and thus spoke on the way forward. Basically, the problematic of modernity is
that of “I hood”. Descartes after being trained in the medieval tradition felt
unsatisfactory with the foundation of his knowledge and entered into the desert
of meditation to found a firm foundation for his knowledge apart from dogma[38]. In this meditation he came up with the popular
diction; “cogito ergo sum”, I think therefore I am.[39]
As such,
Descartes’ aim was to break any from the impediments imposed by the laws of the
Church. The weapon he employed for the fight was reason. He held that reason
was what all men shared in common and with reason we can solve all our
problems. This era of modernity was the age of great enlightenment, and
scientific revolution. Reason replaced dogma (faith), bringing with it
secularization, individuation and loss of moral value. Out of this profound
cultural transformation, science and rationality emerged as the western new
faith.[40]
It was still within this social context of loss of sense of the sacred and
moral values at the societal level that Nietzsche announced that “God is dead”.
Now, if such is the case, what shall we do then? Here, comes the third metamorphose; the
Child. Nietzsche says that after modernity had succeeded in taking everything
away from the Church, then the Lion must become like a child; innocent,
forgetting, a new beginning, a self-propelled wheel, a first movement for a new
creation to become possible.[41]
This implies that the society cannot do without the Church. The Church with its
long history of tradition is an embodiment of values and experience. We cannot
just push the Church aside. In this sense, Nietzsche is trying to reconcile
modernity and medieval otherwise, “we end up in Nihilism–left with nothing.”
1.2.2 The Way of the Creator
The way of the
creator is the way of the modern philosophers. A creator is one who invents new
ideology and value systems. Modernity with the instrumentality of reason was
doing away with traditional values to be free to create a new value orientation
for the society. Modernity was a search for enhancement and autonomy. Man
separated from God (tradition) to create his own values. Thus, in his words
Zarathustra spoke “the lonely one, you are going the way of the creator; you
would create a god for yourself out of your seven devils. Behold thou wouldst
go into thine affliction, which is the way unto thineself, then show me thine
authority to do so”.[42]
The whole attack
of the lion on the camel is to wound and destroy morality and become free to
create its own values.[43]
This was the achievement of the modern philosophers. Thomas Hobbes Created the
mortal god-Leviathan, in place of God and the Ten Commandments for governance.[44]
Spinoza holds that nature is but one and that everything in nature follow
necessarily from nature. In this position, he does not subscribe to any
creating being like God who is apart from nature through whom all things were
made, for God and nature is one. All of these happened to our world because;
modernity has disregarded tradition (morality) and gone on its way to create.
These are some of the problematic of modernity which Nietzsche’s poem captured
in the following way:
“Alas
there is so much lusting for the heights! There are so many convulsions of the
ambitious Show me that you are not one of the lustful and ambitious. Alas,
there are so many great thoughts which do no more than a bellows: they puff up
and make emptier. You call yourself free? Your dominant thought I want to hear,
and not that you have escaped from a yoke. Are you one of those who had the right to escape from a yoke? There are
some who threw away their last value when they threw away their servitude. Free
from what? As if that mattered to Zarathustra! But your eyes could tell me
brightly: Free for what?’’[45]
1.2.3 The Famous
Wise Men
In this song
Friedrich Nietzsche shows that it is impossible to serve two masters at a
time-to serve modern philosophers[46]
whom signify the famous wise men and to serve the true faith, a figure of
dogmatism represented by Zarathustra. He showed how the famous wise men has
lured the people away from their faith and won the respect of the people.
Thus, Zarathustra confronts the
Famous wise men, disclosing their deceit against the people:
“Stiff-necked and
artful, like the ass, have you always been, as the advocates of the people. And
many a powerful one, who wanted to run well with the people, has harnessed in
front of his horses - a donkey, a famous wise man. And now, you famous wise
men, I would have you finally throw off entirely the skin of the lion! (Nature
of disguise) The skin of the beast of prey, the speckled skin, and the
dishevelled locks of the investigator, the searcher, and the conqueror!”[47]
Then, Zarathustra discloses that if the
Famous wise men should be believed, they must live a completely life of
sacrifice. “Truthful, I call him who goes into godless desert, having broken
his revering heart. In the yellow sands burned by the sun, he squints thirstly
at the islands abounding in wells…”[48]
he must discomfort himself even though he is surrounded by comfort for where
there is oasis, there are idols. The truthful dwells in the desert as masters
of the desert but the well-fed dwells in the cities. Such cities are where they
dwell. The Famous wise men who were beasts of burden who grew in the spirit of
the people. And yet they don’t know the happiness of the spirit: to be anointed
and through tears to be consecrated as sacrificial animal.[49]
Nietzsche used many figurative languages to express how the famous wise men
cannot be the companion, much less the friend of the people. He warned them:
You are not
eagles: thus have you never experienced the happiness of the alarm of the
spirit. And he who is not a bird should not camp above abysses .You seem to me
lukewarm ones: but coldly flows all deep knowledge. Ice-cold are the innermost
wells of the spirit: a refreshment to hurt hand sand handlers. Respectable do
you there stand, and stiff, and with straight backs, you famous wise ones! - no
strong wind or will impels you. Have you never seen a sail crossing the sea,
rounded and inflated, and trembling with the violence of the wind?[50]
Nietzsche through the speeches of
Zarathustra praised solitude and life of sacrifice so much that Richard Schachi
critiqued him by observing that such life is not possible for someone who is
hungry. “A person who lacks shelter, basic health care, basic necessities of
life and is hungry cannot think well and cannot be great philosopher, no matter
her innate equipment. Who are his ascetic philosophers if not Heraclitus,
Plato, Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz, Kant, Schopenhauer, non is a poor person or
a person who had to perform menial labour in order to survive”.[51]
By a Famous Wise Men, Nietzsche is confronting the comfortable philosophers of
German Universities when he had not experienced what it is to be a beggar or to
lose ones only child.
1.2.4 The Song of
Melancholy
Before the song of melancholy is a
song, On the Higher Man, where
Zarathustra remembered what happened to him while he was struggling to bring
man back to his conscience in the market place but no one dared to listen to
him. The only thing he could boast of having kept him company is tightrope
walkers and corpses. Though, the higher men signifying the science of modern
philosophers refused to listen to him. The plans of the higher men has fallen
apart, According to Nietzsche, “…man’s greatest distance and depth and what in
him is lofty to the star his tremendous strength – are not all these frothing
against each other in your pot?[52]
Now, in the song of melancholy,
Zarathustra remembered that with higher men there is no company. But, soon he
began to feel the presence of his companions: the eagle and the serpent which
represent the silence and wisdom of dogmatism.[53]
Thus he cried out, “O pure smells about me! O happy silence about me! But where
are my animals. Come here my eagle and my serpent! Tell me my animals: these
higher men, of them all – do they perhaps all smell bad... ”[54] Then as soon as Zarathustra left the cave
with his companions, the old magician got up. The image of ‘the magician’ was
clearly presented in the fourth part of the book, Thus Spoke Zarathustra. We can simply call him ‘Ancient
Philosophy’. The old magician employed all his magic tactics to overcome
Zarathustra by pity, rolling in convulsion with painful moaning. He even
employed ascetic spirit to deceive Zarathustra. Having overcome him with
silence, the old magician replied to Zarathustra who asked him, in all the
demonstration you exhibited, who are you imitating? “The ascetic spirit”, he
replied, “I played him, I played the poet and magician…”[55]
At the cave of Zarathustra, the old
magician was seized with the wicked spirit of melancholy and he decided to tickle
the higher men, those who celebrate the death of the old God and refused to
welcome the new god lying in cradle and swaddling clothes. The old magician
confessed that he knew Zarathustra who he loves though against his will. He
warned the higher men that his evil spirit of melancholy has desired to come
for them, to come naked. This signifies the battle between science and
philosophy in modernity. Nietzsche used many figurative languages to disclose
the danger of modernity together with its science and philosophy: an animal,
cunning, preying, prowling, that must lie, that must knowingly, willingly lie,
lusting for prey. Yet Nietzsche proclaimed that only the fool, only the poet
will survive the magic of the magician. The fool must be the overman-the man who
following the dictate of dogmatism subdues human nature.[56]
2.0 Critiques and possible debates on
the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche
Having listened to Nietzsche, his
views on the happenings in his society, the lost of moral value, and the birth
of the Superman which Zarathustra speaks of, lots of criticisms abounds.
Famously, there are two major critics on Nietzsche’s philosophy. In the
biography of Nietzsche, we were told that he was formally a devoted Christian
but, was made an atheist through the influence of his master Schopenhauer. Now,
if Nietzsche does not believe in the supremacy of God in the universe, why did
he not agree with his contemporaries on the supremacy of reason? He pointed out
all the ills that reason has caused men. In his Famous Wise Men he castigates philosophers on being intoxicated
with the power of reason to the extent that they no more distinguished between
good and evil. But, the fact that Nietzsche still laments on the ills of human
reason raised the question whether he wants humanity to go back to its dogmatic
slumber or to blend dogma with reason for he did not set forth the way forward
for man.
Secondly, in presenting the world as
chaotic, meaningless and valueless, Nietzsche went further to posits the
possibility of man becoming a Superman. He praises the Superman as one who can
still affirm the value of existence. However, isn’t this optimistic attitude
actually a rejection of the world as we find it, rather than an honest
acceptance of it? May be, nihilism, the denial of all values is the most honest
approach. Now, granted that nihilism is unlivable, is Nietzsche’s call to
overcome nihilism by assigning meaning to our existence not merely asking us to
create another illusion in order to go on living?[57]
Also, if we should follow Nietzsche’s requirement on what will make one a
Superman, then hardly could anyone live up to that. This is true because man is
both a being of nature and nurture. The
society of man has much influence on both his rational and moral behavior. So,
if that is the case, then, it is only a super-human that can overcome the detects
of his reality and, divert to a pattern of life totally different, which seems
impossible.
In addition,
Nietzsche was also said to have committed a genetic fallacy. This criticism was
raised from his philosophical method. Nietzsche always finds succor in
dismissing traditional philosophical ideas by merely demonstrating that they
have psychological origins and fulfill subjective needs within us.[58]
But, is it not possible that a belief in God or rational world order fulfill
subjective needs? As such, that an idea is not psychologically or rationally
satisfying does not necessitate its rejection. This and many more are the
critics on Nietzsche’s philosophy.
Conclusion
From our
discussion so far, we see the life of Nietzsche that was filled with tragedies,
sufferings and complement of sickness and pains. We also got to note that his deteriorating
health does not hinder him from exhibiting his natural intelligence made
visible through the compendium of works he wrote. His works, Thus Spoke Zarathustra tries to lay bay
the problems associated with reason and a need for a total reformation on the
life of the modern man. It speaks on the three metamorphoses of Camel, Lion and
Child, a symbol representing the relationship that exist between the dogmatic,
modern and a possible post-modern era of human development. Zarathustra also
speaks on the famous wise men; the philosophers and scientist whom were
proposing that reason without faith can give salvation to mankind. We also see
some critics leveled against the philosophical method of Nietzsche especially
on his total rejection of traditional philosophical ideas.
Nevertheless, not
minding how harsh or disgusting the work of Nietzsche is, and on how his
philosophical assumptions are been criticized, we cannot deny the fact that he
was very perceptive in anticipating the century that lay ahead. The rise of
secularism, the crumbling of culture into a divisive plurality, the tendency of
moral discourse to turn into power struggles, the growing sense of alienation
and the crisis of values are just a few trends in the twentieth century which
Nietzsche saw coming.
Also, no one can
deny that Nietzsche greatly influenced lots of people through his work.
Unfortunately, he his ideas were easily misused or misinterpreted by people and
such always brings bad image the dead man (Nietzsche). For examples, it was the
idea in his work Will to Power and Master Morality that Adolf Hitler and
companions stick to for they see themselves as the Superman which Nietzsche
proposes. Thus, as we known, was what ended up into the Second World War
because the Nazi understood Nietzsche literarily.[59] On the positive aspect, some literary
theories such as deconstructionism have been built on Nietzsche’s denial that
there is a single, authoritative interpretation of a text apart from the
multiple perspectives meaning it may project to his reader. His works also influenced number of
theologians like the protestant Paul Tillich and Jewish Martin Buber. Though, a
century has passed since Nietzsche’s dead, his voice has not lost its power.
REFERENCE
Bennetta
A. Craft et al, The Philosophy of
Nietzsche, USA: Random Pub. 1998.
David
Cawthon, Philosophical Foundations of
Leadership. Uk: Transaction Publications, 2002.
Donald
A. Crosby, Nihilism; from the Routledge
Encyclopedia of Philosophy.vol 3. 2001
Douglas
Bornham and Martin Jesinhausen, Nietzsche’s Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Edinburgh
University Press, 2010.
Emmett
Barcalow, Moral Philosophy: Theory and
issues. California: Wadsworth Publication Company, 1994.
Friederich
Nietzsche, Ecche homo, “Why I Am a
Destiny” Trans. Walter Kaufmann. New York: Vintage Books,1969.
Friedrich
Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra,
Bill Chapko (ed.),. New York: Feedbooks Publishers, 2010.
Friedrich
Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra,
Walter Kaufmann (ed.), New York: The Viking Press, 1966.
Hollingdale,
R. J., Rieu, E.V, (1961). Thus Spoke Zarathustra (Nietzsche, F.).
Penguin Classics: Penguin Publishing, 1885.
Karl
Jaspers, Nietzsche: An introduction to
the understanding of His Philosophical Activity, Transl. Chicago: Regnery ,
1965.
Lampert,
Laurence. Nietzsche's Teaching: An Interpretation of Thus Spoke Zarathustra.
New Haven: Yale University Press, 1986.
Lucien
Rechard, Christ: The self-Emptying of God.
Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1997.
Nietzsche,
Friedrich. Philosophy in the Tragic Age of the Greeks. Transl. with an
introduction by Marianne Cowan. Washington, D.C.: Regnery Publishing, Inc.,
1962.
Richard Scharcht, Nietzsche, Genealogy, Morality: Essays on
Nietzsche’s Genealogy of Morals, London: University of California Press,
1994.
Richard
Tarnas, Passion of the Western Mind.
Britain: Pimlico, 2010.
Samuel
E. Stumpf, Philosophy: History and
Problems, 5th ed. New York: Mcgraw-Hill, Inc. 1994.
Sergius
Bulgakov, The Lamb of God, Trans.
Boris Jakim, and Grand Rapids, London: Erdman’s press, 2008.
Seung
T.K., Goethe, Nietzsche and Wagner: Their
Spinoza Epic of Love and Power. New York: Lexington Books, 2006.
The New
international Webster’s Dictionary: Encyclopedic Edition. Trident
Press International: Naples, Florida, 2004.
Thomas
Hobbes, Leviathan, H. w. Schneider Ed., New York: The Bobbs-Merrill Inc. 1958.
Tom
Darby, Bela Egyed, Ben Jones, Nietzsche
and the Rhetoric of Nihilism. Carleton University Press, Canada, 1989.
Werner
Pelz, Jesus and Nietzsche, the encyclopedia of
philosophy.
William
F. Lawhead, The Voyage of Discovery. Belmont:Wadeworth/Thomson Learning Inc.,
2002.
www.britannica.com/topic/superman-philosophy
(Accessed 21th March, 2017).
www.ccrma.stanford.edu/~pj97/Nietzsche.htm
(Accessed March 12th, 2017).
www.Logicmuseum.com/authors/anselm/monolgium
(Accessed 21th March,2017).
www.thoughtco.com/nietzsche-and-nihilism-250454
(Accessed 19th March, 2017).
www.thoughtco.com/Nietzsche-and-nihilism-250454
(Accessed 20th March, 2017).
[2] Cf. William F. Lawhead,
The Voyage of Discovery: A Historical
Introduction to Philosophy (London: Wadsworth pub. 2002),p. 415
[3] Cf. Roland N.
Stromberg, An Intellectual History
Of Europe ( New York:
Appleton-Century press, 1996), p. 333
[4] Cf. William F. Lawhead,
The Voyage of Discovery: A Historical
Introduction to Philosophy (London: Wadsworth pub. 2002),p. 416
[6] Cf. Karl Jaspers, Nietzsche : An introduction to the
understanding of His Philosophical Activity, Transl. ( Chicago: Regnery ,
1965),p.436
[7] Cf. Samuel E.
Stumpf, Philosophy: History and Problems, 5th ed. (New York:
Mcgraw-Hill, Inc. 1994),p. 420
[9] Cf. Samuel E. Stumpf, Philosophy: History and Problems, 5th
ed. (New York: Mcgraw-Hill, Inc. 1994),Stump 419
[10] Cf. William F. Lawhead,
The Voyage of Discovery: A Historical
Introduction to Philosophy (London: Wadsworth pub. 2002),p.417
[13]Cf. Friederich
Nietzsche, Ecche homo, “Why I Am a
Destiny” Trans. Walter Kaufmann (New York: Vintage Books,1969),p.33
[15]Cf. Emmett Barcalow, Moral Philosophy: Theory and issues(California:
Wadsworth Publication Company, 1994), P. 36.
[16] Cf. Alessandra Tomasi, Nihilism and Creativity in the philosophy
of Nietzsche the encyclopedia of philosophy. Vol. 1. 1999
[18]Cf. Sergius Bulgakov, The Lamb of God, Boris Jakim, trans.
(Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2008), P124-125.
[20] Cf. Emmett Barcalow, Moral Philosophy: Theory and issues (California:
Wadsworth Publication Company, 1994), P. 36.
[26]Cf. William F. Lawhead, The Voyage of Discovery: A Historical
Introduction to Philosophy (London: Wadsworth pub. 2002),p. 427
[27]Cf. Hollingdale, R. J.,
Rieu, E.V, (1961). Thus Spoke Zarathustra (Nietzsche, F.) (Penguin
Classics: Penguin Publishing, 1885),p.118
[28] Lampert, Laurence. Nietzsche's
Teaching: An Interpretation of Thus Spoke Zarathustra. (New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1986),p.3
[31]Cf. Nietzsche,
Friedrich. Philosophy in the Tragic Age of the Greeks. Transl. with an
introduction by Marianne Cowan (Washington, D.C. : Regnery Publishing, Inc.,
1962), P. 37
[34]Cf, The New international Webster’s Dictionary: Encyclopedic
Edition(Trident Press International: Naples Florida, 2004)
[35] Cf The New international Webster’s Dictionary: Encyclopedic Edition (Trident
Press International: Naples
Florida, 2004).
[36] Fredritch Nietzsche Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Walter Kaufmann
Ed., (New York: The Viking Press, 1966), p.26,
[37]Fredritch NietzscheThus Spoke Zarathustra, Wsalter Kaufmann
Ed., (New York: The Viking Press, 1966), p.26.
[38] Cf. David Cawthon, Philosophical Foundations of Leadership
(Uk: Transaction Publications, 2002), p.41.
[39]CF. William F. Lawhead,
The Voyage of Discovery (Belmont:Wadeworth/Thomson Learnin Inc., 2002),pp.231-232.
[41]Fredritch Nietzsche Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Wsalter
Kaufmann Ed., (New York: The Viking Press, 1966), p.27,
[43]Fredritch Nietzsche Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Wsalter
Kaufmann Ed., (New York: The Viking Press, 1966), p.27.
[44] Cf. Thomas Hobbes,
Leviathan, H. w. Schneider Ed., (New York: The Bobbs-Merrill Inc. 1958), p.vii
[46] Douglas Bornham and
Martin Jesinhausen, Nietzsche’s Thus Spoke Zarathustra, (Edinburgh University
Press, 2010), p. 90
[47] Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Bill Chapko
(ed.), (Feedbooks Publishers, New York, 2010), p.84
[48] Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Walter Kaufmann
(ed.), (The Viking Press, New York, 1966), p. 103
[50] Friedrich
Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra,
Walter Kaufmann (ed.), (The Viking Press, New York, 1966), p. 105
[51]Cf. Richard Scharcht, Nietzsche, Genealogy, Morality: Essays on
Nietzsche’s Genealogy of Morals, ( London; University of California Press,1994),
pp. 158-161
[52]Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Walter Kaufmann
(ed.), (The Viking Press, New York, 1966),
p.293
[53] Cf. Seung T.K., Goethe, Nietzsche and Wagner: Their Spinoza
Epic of Love and Power, (New York: Lexington Books, 2006), pp. 233-241
[54]Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Walter Kaufmann
(ed.), (New York: The Viking Press, 1966), p. 296
[55]Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Walter Kaufmann
(ed.), (The Viking Press, New York, 1966), p. 256
[56]Cf. Tom Darby, Bela Egyed, Ben Jones, Nietzsche and the Rhetoric of Nihilism,
(Carleton University Press, Canada, 1989), pp.176-191
[57] Cf. William F. Lawhead,
The Voyage of Discovery (Belmont:Wadeworth/Thomson Learning Inc., 2002),p.429
[58] CF. William F. Lawhead,
The Voyage of Discovery (Belmont:Wadeworth/Thomson Learnin Inc., 2002),p.430
[59] Cf. William F. Lawhead,
The Voyage of Discovery: A Historical
Introduction to Philosophy (London: Wadsworth pub. 2002),p. 430.
Comments
Post a Comment