(and gladly I receive public assistance that follows, in reply to post on Nietzsche in recent days. It 'written by my friend, philosopher Marco Baldino and contains my answer below. I therefore limit myself here to a thank you from my heart: for the attention and contribution. But also for the seriousness with which he approached my eccentric ride inside the mind of the great German philosopher. Which, admittedly, rather than be guided by the strict criteria of philology, owes much to free flashes of literary metonymy. So I hope to still have Marco guest in this space. gh)
shame I would not say "sentimental" (as an alternative to "moral"), but despite the "ontological" (sorry for the unpleasant alliteration. The apparent commonality of the root is indeed irrelevant) in the sense that what is saved is the shame of having fallen in value of life, of having diminished the value of life, which, for Nietzsche, as we know, is the supreme value.
The shame is "ontological" to be affected because it is not man but Being itself, ie Life or, more generally, the Force, and go even further in terms of metaphors, what is the propulsion force, the wellspring, the energy (a concept that could not escape Nietzsche). The shame is for Nietzsche the insult to life, and life does not suffer another insult that the decline in its creative power. All attempts to limit the life, of falling, they are being insulting. The moral is, in Nietzsche, the broader concept of what diminishes the value of life, Christianity, the most dramatic historical event.
Man as such, the human man, the man of humanism, man as culture develops, as cultivating the spirit of education, the man who weaves a life public, who cultivates a form of godliness, even the man who abandons himself to the compassion in the sense of Schopenhauer (and Foscolo) is, for Nietzsche, nothing 'nothing but dung. The pity for the dead forms, weak, helpless life, compassion for the detritus of becoming, for the dirty remnant of the great flow to the shit, the filth, the dross, worthless for the fallout resulting from the movement absolute being, is being insulting, the true "evil" metaphysical.
Nietzsche comes into effect very soon to set up being as becoming, as the eternal flow that turns every thing into another was enough to read the Presocratics. We will return, however, making an extensive tour through the problem of value (this point is not welcome). Nietzsche's argument in favor of being as life is that life is worth. Flux, Energheia, the universal be the work of becoming is, for Nietzsche, the most desirable. I want it (Amor fati) because it is especially worth or what, that is the same, especially because it is what it is. The will is to desire life, and therefore its continued deepening, its continual expansion and magnified, it will want the power (of life), which is creative power (of forms). This is the will to power that Nietzsche spoke about: fate and will, therefore, not wanting to themselves, the man, his identity as a subject of public responsibility and private, moral and metaphysical subject - as if the man had a 'stable essence, something takeable, as if the man was an absolute reference that Hegel said that history: the place of self-consciousness and self-realization of the absolute spirit. So it is a disgrace
daze, nell'inebetimento shame is to see something that is still to love, something to be compassionate, something that still applies our will. Shame would want that life, in its greatest helplessness remained with us, with a reversal that puts in place of value (life) lack thereof (the death, the Nerd, disease, decay ...) instead of being (= value) non-being (negative value = = nihilism), instead of all that is good (the strength and power of life) all that is bad (the rot, the decayed, the 'information, dull life ...).
So I would say that the movie is a posthumous challenge, the challenge to escape and mock statue that survived his great thought. The shame belongs to those who allow themselves ensnared the web of pity. It is also a sign, a sign that you've reached the limit and that touches withdrew.
Here is my interpretation: If pity is the insult as being metaphysical value, shame is a sign that it is time to abandon the weakened his fate and turn back to power, that is life.
Nietzsche was a reprehensible optimistic. Shame then had to have a very special meaning for him.
Marco Baldino
Dear Mark,
admitted that your text - it is not obvious, in fact - contain some form of "responsibility" towards what I had previously written, I feel I can summarize it this way: Nietzsche, with biographical inaugural gesture of embracing a horse beaten by the driver of a coach, not materializes his mind, but rather it radically denies. This step of interpretation seems to me very delicate and significant. Why are you are I implicitly admit to this way a text value of the biography, which enters into a relationship (dialectical in me, while you opposing) side with the expression of thought. The only difference between your approach and mine is that you, with philological precision and tenacity, you then again appeals to the authority of the texts prior truthful. On the basis of which conclude that, from that crazy gesture on, Nietzsche is considered a 'else. " Well Mark, the narrator and non-philosopher who I am, otherwise I find that "other thing" from which you must leave lends credence to a philosophical reflection - while not denying the expressive value, the fact that it is a "thing murmuring" - go instead to charge a decisive significance: it is an event that is to continue to semantic query, and the implicit meaning of which ends coll'irradiarsi also on the previous stage (as in dialectical processes, in fact). So while you look at that "fact" through the grid of antithetical thinking - Nietzsche the man becomes in this way, the denial of Nietzschean super-man, forcing a break biographical development of thought - I take seriously the very notion of becoming to you repeatedly and legitimately invoked, creating a relationship of continuity with the work the explicit expression of the philosopher. But the objection, which certainly does not escape me, it would be: you're mixing the cards on the table, playing basketball and football with your feet with your hands! In fact, with this in mind we're not talking about personnel within the confines normative philosophical hermeneutics, but, at most, in that of art criticism . Where explanatory tools become much more mobile and hence discretionary, subject to whims and sudden imaginative waste analog, which does not allow philosophical rigor. Well Mark, I think just this way. That is, I find that the last Nietzsche - particularly that which affects us directly through the form of this is the posthumous video-graphy - represents something like a ready-made art. Without objection, therefore, nothing in relation to your correct philosophical interpretation of the phase, the public, before the infamous hug between different animal species but also defeats, I tried to overstepping the interpretation of art. Who sees the philosophy of Nietzsche "becoming" within his own tragic experience as a shabby and intellectually and physically-powerful. Until, with great freedom of interpretation but without encroaching arbitrariness - the analog connections are demonstrable and I think also demonstrated - that ' else "from his official thinking that just shines through the CV, monsters, last and dialectically, as " the thing itself. "
guido hauser
new coin in the fountain 
0 comments:
Post a Comment