Jenseits von Gut und Böse - Friedrich Nietzsche [BEYOND GOOD AND EVIL]
Vorrede/Preface
Vorausgesetzt, dass die Wahrheit ein Weib ist -, wie? [FN1] ist der Verdacht nicht
gegründet, dass alle Philosophen, sofern sie Dogmatiker waren, sich schlecht auf Weiber
verstanden? dass der schauerliche Ernst, die linkische Zudringlichkeit, mit der sie bisher
auf die Wahrheit zuzugehen pflegten, ungeschickte und unschickliche Mittel waren, um
gerade ein Frauenzimmer für sich einzunehmen? Gewiss ist, dass sie sich nicht hat
einnehmen lassen: - und jede Art Dogmatik steht heute mit betrübter und muthloser Haltung
da. Wenn sie überhaupt noch steht! Denn es giebt Spötter, welche behaupten, sie sei
gefallen, alle Dogmatik liege zu Boden, mehr noch, alle Dogmatik liege in den letzten
Zügen. Ernstlich geredet, es giebt gute Gründe zu der Hoffnung, dass alles Dogmatisiren in
der Philosophie, so feierlich, so end- und letztgültig es sich auch gebärdet hat, doch nur
eine edle Kinderei und Anfängerei gewesen sein möge; und die Zeit ist vielleicht sehr
nahe, wo man wieder und wieder begreifen wird, was eigentlich schon ausgereicht hat, um
den Grundstein zu solchen erhabenen und unbedingten Philosophen-Bauwerken abzugeben,
welche die Dogmatiker bisher aufbauten, - irgend ein Volks-Aberglaube aus unvordenklicher
Zeit (wie der Seelen-Aberglaube, der als Subjekt- und Ich-Aberglaube auch heute noch nicht
aufgehört hat, Unfug zu stiften), irgend ein Wortspiel vielleicht, eine Verführung von
Seiten der Grammatik her oder eine verwegene Verallgemeinerung von sehr engen, sehr
persönlichen, sehr menschlich-allzumenschlichen Thatsachen.
SUPPOSING that Truth is a woman—what then? Is there not ground for suspecting that all
philosophers, in so far as they have been dogmatists, have failed to understand women—that
the terrible seriousness and clumsy importunity with which they have usually paid their
addresses to Truth, have been unskilled and unseemly methods for winning a woman?
Certainly she has never allowed herself to be won; and at present every kind of dogma
stands with sad and discouraged mien—IF, indeed, it stands at all! For there are scoffers
who maintain that it has fallen, that all dogma lies on the ground—nay more, that it is at
its last gasp. But to speak seriously, there are good grounds for hoping that all
dogmatizing in philosophy, whatever solemn, whatever conclusive and decided airs it has
assumed, may have been only a noble puerilism and tyronism; and probably the time is at
hand when it will be once and again understood WHAT has actually sufficed for the basis of
such imposing and absolute philosophical edifices as the dogmatists have hitherto reared:
perhaps some popular superstition of immemorial time (such as the soul-superstition,
which, in the form of subject- and ego-superstition, has not yet ceased doing mischief):
perhaps some play upon words, a deception on the part of grammar, or an audacious
generalization of very restricted, very personal, very human—all-too-human facts.
[FN1] There has been a great deal of literature about Nietzsche's disastrous
relationship in theory and in life, and some have argued that certain writings are stained
by outright misogyny. For a critical review of this literature, Marilyn Pearsall's
edited volume Feminist Interpretations of Friedrich Nietzsche (Re-Reading the Canon)
(
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/941408.Feminist_Interpretations_of_Fried…)
is a good place to start.
In this particular case, I do not think that this is a problematic quote - the preface to
Beyond Good and Evil. I do think it reveals the extent to which Nietzsche understood women
as "the other" and foreign to his understanding and insights. And I think that
those parts of his writings are an embarrassment that undermines the points he's
trying to make.
On Nov 8, 2013, at 9:59 AM, Andrew <andrew(a)roshambomedia.com> wrote:
"there is no good and evil, only fun and
boring" - The Plague
On Nov 8, 2013 1:39 AM, "spectral imix" <solarimix(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
A "Sith"-like attitude insists on an innate "goodness" and
"badness" (or more appropriately "us-ness" and "them-ness")
in everything. The "Jedi" understand that no object or action is intrinsically
good or evil. Intention and effect matter, turning black and white into shades of gray.
The fundamental difference between the sides is not "good" and "evil".
(Everyone has the potential for both.) The real difference is between a desire to control
one's environment for personal power and security, and the desire to serve the greater
good of all. A "Sith" believes in him/herself, forming temporary alliances only
for the purpose of gaining greater personal advantage. A "Jedi" seeks and
fosters the good in everyone, risking and sacrificing personal safety and reputation to
benefit the whole. Their actions may occasionally resemble each other but their
motivations are very different.
The "Jedi" mentality DOES have "absolutes" of a sort. The
preservation of life (particularly intelligent life), freedom (physical and intellectual),
justice (without regard to status) and the like are enduring values for
"Jedi"-like people. But they understand that the universe is morally neutral,
that often one value is pitted against another by the unscrupulous, and that sometimes the
best that can be done is a moral compromise.
The "Sith" prefer to concretize their "morality". Disloyalty to THIS
leader is wrong. Partaking in THAT specific activity is evil. An uncensored discussion of
social alternatives is morally decadent. Categorically, without exception, never mind the
intent. A "virtuous" act is always "good". A troublemaker is always
"bad".
A "Jedi" can observe the ethical situation, note changes, and change his mind
about a good idea implemented badly, or a disreputable strategy that actually produces
good. A "Jedi" can apologize for being wrong. A "Sith" cannot afford
to be inconsistent for fear of losing credibility. Any change in allegiance must be framed
and propagandized to appear as part of the plan all along. The "Sith" is about
appearances rather than reality. The world is never black and white, but the
"Sith" pretends it is. That is what is meant by "dealing in
absolutes"."
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org
http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss