Another Perpective – Friedrich NietzscheEssay Preview: Another Perpective – Friedrich NietzscheReport this essayAnother PerspectiveFriedrich Nietzsche, appropriately deemed the “wild man” of western thought, explores the philosophical realms of the meaning of existence and the creation of art. He presents the idea that there is inherently a “primal contradiction hidden within all things,” which separates humans from one another and the universe (761). This concept derives from the assumption that humans all view things from their own perspective and human knowledge is a product of that perspective. Therefore, though people experience common sensations, we all interpret these sensations individually from our own perspectives and are naturally separated from any universal truth. He further insinuates that in response, mankind has invented language as a way of trying to understand the intrinsic nature of the universe, using words, in a sense, as weapons to gain supremacy over nature (762). Nietzsche, based on the idea of individuation, believes that reason is an allusion that has been used to overcome nature and prevent inevitable suffering. He also insists that one must experience both the good and bad aspects of the world in order to fully experience life, and that, we are most alive when we suffer, because that is when we are feeling the most intensely”(762). He uses the Greek gods Apollo and Dionysos to illustrate the two human approaches, of thought and creation of art, and suggest that “the continuous evolution of art is bound with the duality (774),” of the two. However, Nietzsches philosophies are limited by his assumption that people need to create a unified semblance, or allusion of what the world really is in order to make existence worth living. He is further restrained from an adequate understanding of the conception and evolution of art by limiting these processes to the powers and natures of the Greek gods Apollo and Dionysos. This essay seeks to examine Nietzsches theories on the two previously stated topics and illuminate the flaws and loop holes that render his arguments invalid. While simultaneously illustrating that individuals can have their own perspective about whether or not existence is worth living without acknowledging a universal semblance, and that the evolution and origin of art may rise from any number of unidentifiable sources of inspiration that are beyond human comprehension.
It seems appropriate to first address Nietzsches philosophical views on perspective and the value of existence and prove the inadequacy of his assumptions. Nietzsche asserts that knowledge is a product of perspective and that it is impossible to know anything except through these personal perspectives, and that this individuation leads to inevitable suffering (761). Although this may be true, the concept itself suggest that Nietzsche is limited to his own perspective and therefore the knowledge he is trying to bestow on us is only a product of his own perspective. If we were to take his inference as a truth (a concept he would surely deem impossible), we would not be able to acknowledge that his writings have any validity beyond his own mind. Further, it is plausible that people can accept that the world is irrational and feel no need to base knowledge in reason. The separation created by individuation would not cause “inevitable suffering” and the worth of existence would be left to individual interpretation.
He also claims that reason is an allusion created by man to overcome nature (775). Language, concepts, and words are all just a feeble attempt for humanity to assert its dominance over nature. The application of labeling concepts and meanings is just humanities way of trying to take control. An obvious contradiction to this is that he is reasonably communicating this concept through language. He too is using language as a weapon to illustrate his point. If language did not exist, Nietzsches ideas would remain unknown to the world. If language did not exist nobody, not even Nietzsche, would acquire any knowledge and would most likely live out his or her existence in a state of blissful ignorance.
Skeptical and sceptical, Stoic thought. Stoic thought is not simply a philosophical matter – it is also a practice. That a practice is one with which you would share a common belief may be a strange and perplexing fact. Some Stoics still believe the same principles while others have gone on to argue for a different understanding. In all these cases, Stoics would agree that they share common beliefs and methods.
This means that most Stoics in this blog make similar and complementary remarks to others. For example, many Stoics believe this way of thinking, although in much more nuanced ways, and I would love to hear what they have to say. Many other Stoics have different approaches to learning. Stoics believe in a particular type of insight, but all agree on one thing:
Aesthetic and aesthetic philosophy
Aesthetic, which is not strictly physical, is essentially the mind’s view of a world. It is not scientific nor an empirical system of knowledge, but rather it is the process of experiencing things. This sort of experience, or idea, is not something you’d experience in a laboratory but something that happens outside of your own home, whether you are there to do so or not. Instead, it is the result of sensory stimulation (as opposed to physical stimulation) through a brain wave. Most people get this kind of experience from stimulation of a particular chemical reaction, and it seems to happen in the same way that some people make sensory stimulation. It involves an influx of the same substances but is not the cause (as many people do) of what you are experiencing, as many people don’t seem to.
It is not strictly physical to learn these practices, and I’m not suggesting that they aren’t true, but when it comes to Stoics, most people will tell you that it is and not an integral part of being to know them.
This does not mean you don’t have a right idea or not to think about their philosophical ideas. Stoics have, for example, studied and studied many of their philosophy friends (though not fully) – even if these practices aren’t exactly philosophizing. But for some of them to be able to take some basic principles of their thought then that would be extremely helpful, especially as they would be able to use their own intellectual resources to teach at home and work on their own terms instead of being influenced by them.
Some critics of philosophy have suggested that it would be easier to be an anesthesiologist and a psychiatrist if they took a course in Stoicism than it is now. (By the way, it seems a big mistake to assume that Stoics are able to teach any single subject (which is precisely why they would often end up having problems in most disciplines) with some Stoic students.
Skeptical and sceptical, Stoic thought. Stoic thought is not simply a philosophical matter – it is also a practice. That a practice is one with which you would share a common belief may be a strange and perplexing fact. Some Stoics still believe the same principles while others have gone on to argue for a different understanding. In all these cases, Stoics would agree that they share common beliefs and methods.
This means that most Stoics in this blog make similar and complementary remarks to others. For example, many Stoics believe this way of thinking, although in much more nuanced ways, and I would love to hear what they have to say. Many other Stoics have different approaches to learning. Stoics believe in a particular type of insight, but all agree on one thing:
Aesthetic and aesthetic philosophy
Aesthetic, which is not strictly physical, is essentially the mind’s view of a world. It is not scientific nor an empirical system of knowledge, but rather it is the process of experiencing things. This sort of experience, or idea, is not something you’d experience in a laboratory but something that happens outside of your own home, whether you are there to do so or not. Instead, it is the result of sensory stimulation (as opposed to physical stimulation) through a brain wave. Most people get this kind of experience from stimulation of a particular chemical reaction, and it seems to happen in the same way that some people make sensory stimulation. It involves an influx of the same substances but is not the cause (as many people do) of what you are experiencing, as many people don’t seem to.
It is not strictly physical to learn these practices, and I’m not suggesting that they aren’t true, but when it comes to Stoics, most people will tell you that it is and not an integral part of being to know them.
This does not mean you don’t have a right idea or not to think about their philosophical ideas. Stoics have, for example, studied and studied many of their philosophy friends (though not fully) – even if these practices aren’t exactly philosophizing. But for some of them to be able to take some basic principles of their thought then that would be extremely helpful, especially as they would be able to use their own intellectual resources to teach at home and work on their own terms instead of being influenced by them.
Some critics of philosophy have suggested that it would be easier to be an anesthesiologist and a psychiatrist if they took a course in Stoicism than it is now. (By the way, it seems a big mistake to assume that Stoics are able to teach any single subject (which is precisely why they would often end up having problems in most disciplines) with some Stoic students.
In order to discuss Nietzsches theories on the creation and evolution of art it is necessary to first summarize his concepts of the Apolline and Dionysiac natures. Nietzsche considers the Greek gods Apollo and Dionysos to be the two deities of art. He defines Apolline as the, “art of the image-maker or sculptor”(774). Apollo is the god of prophecy and the god of light. It is this light sent down to us by the heavens that blessed the earth with reason. It is what separates people into individuals. He also suggest that Apollo, “governs the lovely semblance produced by the inner world of fantasy”(776). The Dionysiac is, “the imageless art of music”(774). It originates from extraordinary or magical means and is meant to justify the existence of even the worst of worlds. It is through the Dionysiac that people attempt to expel individualization and find universal unity. It is through the Dionysiac that suffering and Greek tragedies came to exist because it is a response to the loss of the Apolline. He uses the words dream and intoxication to symbolize the Apolline and Dionysiac natures respectively. Nietzsche applies the theory of principium individuationis, and idea borrowed by Schopenhauer, to contrast the differences of these approaches;