More on this book
Community
Kindle Notes & Highlights
The Will to Truth, which is to tempt us to many a hazardous enterprise, the famous Truthfulness of which all philosophers have hitherto spoken with respect, what questions has this Will to Truth not laid before us! What strange, perplexing, questionable questions! It is already a long story; yet it seems as if it were hardly commenced. Is it any wonder if we at last grow distrustful, lose patience, and turn impatiently away? That this Sphinx teaches us at last to ask questions ourselves? WHO is it really that puts questions to us here? WHAT really is this "Will to Truth" in us?
Nietzsche's opening first paragraph ambitionsly warns of the perils of pursuing the truth and its origins· who is that puts these questions to us here?
WHY NOT RATHER untruth? And uncertainty? Even ignorance? The problem of the value of truth presented itself before us—or
In a sense what gets to the nub of US politics today that the truth becomes trivial, almost irrelevant or at best subjective
to understand how the abstrusest metaphysical assertions of a philosopher have been arrived at, it is always well (and wise) to first ask oneself: "What morality do they (or does he) aim at?" Accordingly, I do not believe that an "impulse to knowledge" is the father of philosophy; but that another impulse, here as elsewhere, has only made use of knowledge (and mistaken knowledge!) as an instrument.
Philosophy isnt the "impulse to knowledge" according to Nietzsche but instead a refkection of the "morality they aim at"
You desire to LIVE "according to Nature"? Oh, you noble Stoics, what fraud of words! Imagine to yourselves a being like Nature, boundlessly extravagant, boundlessly indifferent, without purpose or consideration, without pity or justice, at once fruitful and barren and uncertain: imagine to yourselves INDIFFERENCE as a power—how COULD you live in accordance with such indifference? To live—is not that just endeavouring to be otherwise than this Nature? Is not living valuing, preferring, being unjust, being limited, endeavouring to be different? And granted that your imperative, "living according
...more
The nub i think of nihilism that taking a position of living a life in tune with nature is nonsensical
O sancta simplicitas! In what strange simplification and falsification man lives! One can never cease wondering when once one has got eyes for beholding this marvel! How we have made everything around us clear and free and easy and simple! how we have been able to give our senses a passport to everything superficial, our thoughts a godlike desire for wanton pranks and wrong inferences!—how from the beginning, we have contrived to retain our ignorance in order to enjoy an almost inconceivable freedom, thoughtlessness, imprudence, heartiness, and gaiety—in order to enjoy life!
One of the most breathtaking opening gambits to a chapter i have read it which Nietzsche outines the great delusion that man tells himself and the ignorance he lives in to avoid pain. Its in a similar vain to Dostoevskys quote on suffering
As regards "the good friends," however, who are always too easy-going, and think that as friends they have a right to ease, one does well at the very first to grant them a play-ground and romping-place for misunderstanding—one can thus laugh still; or get rid of them altogether, these good friends—and laugh then also!
A simple message here on friendship and the importance of having those closest who will challenve you
Our deepest insights must—and should—appear as follies, and under certain circumstances as crimes, when they come unauthorizedly to the ears of those who are not disposed and predestined for them.
How very few can ever become truly independent as with Raskolnikov and napolean abd the suffering that must come with that
Our deepest insights must—and should—appear as follies, and under certain circumstances as crimes, when they come unauthorizedly to the ears of those who are not disposed and predestined for them.
There are classes of men/women tbat operate due to superior intellect at a higher level abd must therefore face reproach. What is considered the woe or detriment to the majority may be the inverse for the higher man
at least among us immoralists, the suspicion arises that the decisive value of an action lies precisely in that which is NOT INTENTIONAL, and that all its intentionalness, all that is seen, sensible, or "sensed" in it, belongs to its surface or skin—which, like every skin, betrays something, but CONCEALS still more?
On the value of an action Nietzsche’s position is that judgement should not be based on the intention as this is superficial and easily ill informed and misguided
Love to one only is a barbarity, for it is exercised at the expense of all others.
A commical statement on why monogamy is an act of selfishness
"But why"—he said to himself—"should one on that account separate oneself from the instincts! One must set them right, and the reason ALSO—one must follow the instincts, but at the same time persuade the reason to support them with good arguments." This was the real FALSENESS of that great and mysterious ironist; he brought his conscience up to the point that he was satisfied with a kind of self-outwitting: in fact, he perceived the irrationality in the moral judgment.—Plato,
Socrates was eventually convinced it was the job of his reason his justify his faith/"instincts" thus betraying himself and logic
