Book Description
This digital document, covering the life and work of Friedrich (Wilhelm) Nietzsche, is an entry from Contemporary Authors, a reference volume published by Thompson Gale. The length of the entry is 13020 words. The page length listed above is based on a typical 300-word page. Although the exact content of each entry from this volume can vary, typical entries include the following information:

• Place and date of birth and death (if deceased)
• Family members
• Education
• Professional associations and honors
• Employment
• Writings, including books and periodicals
• A description of the author's work
• References to further readings about the author

Book Description
This book was converted from its physical edition to the digital format by a community of volunteers. You may find it for free on the web. Purchase of the Kindle edition includes wireless delivery. Translation of: Wir Philologen ... Read more

Book Description
This book was converted from its physical edition to the digital format by a community of volunteers. You may find it for free on the web. Purchase of the Kindle edition includes wireless delivery. ... Read more

Book Description
This book was converted from its physical edition to the digital format by a community of volunteers. You may find it for free on the web. Purchase of the Kindle edition includes wireless delivery. ... Read more

Book Description

Until now, Friedrich Nietzsches influence on the development of modern social sciences has not been well documented. This volume reconsiders some of Nietzsches writings on economics and the science of state and in doing so pioneers a line of research not previously available in English.

Book Description
On the Future of Our Educational Institutions, the work that was to have been Nietzsche's second book until he canceled the contract and used portions in his Untimely Meditations, is a substantial call for radical educational reform presented in the form of a prolonged narrative dialogue. It is presented here in the first English translation ever from the standard critical edition (a little-known translation was made for the Complete Works of 1909, long out of print). Here Nietzsche, through the characters of this prolonged narrative dialogue, starts from a consideration of German educational institutions and rises to a consideration of what is needed for true, or classical, education. Though Nietzsche engages his contemporary world more in this work than in perhaps any other, this engagement is neither arbitrary nor limiting. Starting where one is and has grown up happens to be the necessary grounding of the organic unity that belongs to true culture: "Every so-called classical education has only one healthy and natural starting point, the artistic, serious, and rigorous habituation in the use of the mother tongue. . . . Here where gradually the distinguishing feeling for form and for barbarism awakes, the wing bestirs itself for the first time that carries to the right and sole home of education, to Greek antiquity. Of course we would not come very far with the help of that wing all alone in the attempt to bring ourselves close to that castle of the Hellenic, infinitely distant and enclosed within diamond ramparts: rather anew we need the same leaders, the same teachers, our German classics, in order ourselves to become swept away under the wingbeat of their ancient endeavors - to the land of longing, to Greece."

In this dialogue, Nietzsche considers what it would mean to put education, culture, first in priority above all else, above religion, above economics, even above the state. The dialogue's call for educational reform goes so far as to require that the state be completely subordinated to the demands and needs of culture. The state must not be "a border guard, regulator, or overseer for his culture; rather the robust, muscular comrade, ready for battle, and companion on the way, who gives the admired, nobler, and, as it were, unearthly friend safe conduct through the harsh realities and for that earns his thankfulness."

Not only does the dialogue demand that the state subordinate itself to education, but it goes on to suggest that widespread educational institutions are for the sake of only a small number of beneficiaries. This radical and uncompromising devotion to the education of a very few sketches Nietzsche's thoughts on education perhaps more completely than any other work.

In addition, this dialogue offers numerous other objects of interests. The dialogue form shows off Nietzsche's literary art and offers an occasion to think carefully about the special tasks involved in reading philosophic texts well. The circumstances of this text's writing and its nearly being published offer insights both into Nietzsche's development and into the production of his works, especially regarding the Untimely Meditations. The letters and notes in the appendices help to flesh out the thinking that surrounds this text as well as to suggest the form of the never-written sixth lecture. Also Nietzsche's engagement with the immediate tradition of his contemporary milieu, not only with Goethe, Schiller, and Lessing but also with lesser figures such as Koetzebue, Grillparzer, and Gutzkow, should be of interest to intellectual historians and students of European culture.

Nietzsche read On the Future of Our Educational Institutions publicly in the form of five lectures. He then tried to rush it into publication, and it very nearly became Nietzsche's second book. Only at the last moment did he withdraw the book from the public. Now it is available in English. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

all RIGHT!
ANOTHER reissue of one of Nietzsche's essays from his schooldayz! just what we all need! the future of our educational institutions, no less! ah yes, many parallels to be drawn twixt Basle and Berkeley U, one may be sure.... ... Read more

Book Description
Friedrich Nietzsche haunts the modern world. His elusive writings with their characteristic combination of trenchant analysis of the modern predicament and suggestive but ambiguous proposals for dealing with it have fascinated generations of artists, scholars, critics, philosophers, and ordinary readers. Maudemarie Clark's highly original study gives a lucid and penetrating analytical account of all the central topics of Nietzsche's epistemology and metaphysics, including his views on truth and language, his perspectivism, and his doctrines of the will-to-power and the eternal recurrence. The Nietzsche who emerges from these pages is a subtle and sophisticated philosopher, whose highly articulated views are of continuing interest as contributions to a whole range of philosphical issues. This remarkable reading of Nietzsche will interest not only philosophers, but also readers in neighboring disciplines such as literature and intellectual history. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (5)

Provocative, thought-provoking, but poorly argued
I really admire the ambitiousness and courageousness of Clark's highly controversial readings of Nietzsche.It takes guts--and hard work--to defend her more outlandish claims, and I even admire the undercurrent of unmitigated contrariness that seems to motivate this aspect of her work ("Well, if everybody's going to say Nietzsche's anti-democratic, I'll say he's pro-democracy!Yes, that's the ticket!)

Unfortunately, she just doesn't make a very good case for her more interesting views.Even when I agree with the conclusions, I find her arguments far-fetched or just silly.Take, e.g., her treatment of the puzzling and well-known section 36 of Beyond Good and Evil, where Nietzsche appears to seriously entertain the view that the world is the will to power.Clark's solution to this admittedly problematic passage is to argue that Nietzsche inserts an argument and conclusion into his text that he disagrees with in order to show that he disagrees with it.You'd think the best way to show that would be to actually say so--or better yet, never to bring it up in the first place.

In any case, Clark does make a brave attempt to back up this reading, but ultimately it requires far too much cherry picking, twisting, and torturing of the text.By way of comparison, did you know that Nietzsche believes in God?It's true, he says so! "I" (p.20) "believe" (p.430) "in" (p.27) "God" (p.388)

Ultimately, Clark's book suffers from the same problem as so many interpretations (particularly the po-mo ones) do: her interpretation begins with what she wants Nietzsche to be, then forces him to be it.

Too analytical/scholarly and misses the point
My main problem with this book is that Clark is too analytical. The book reads like a thesis. She often "intellectulizes" her way too a point that is either obvious or that she could have gotten to in a lot less time and with more straight forward language. Don't get me wrong - she does have some insights into Nietzsche but they are few and far between. I actually thought that her chapter on the Eternal Recurrence was the best in the whole book. Overall, not that great a read.

A book whose failings are as provocative as it's successes
I began this book with no small trepidation.I am not generally fond of Nietzsche, but have recently felt that he at least deserved to be engaged with systematically.I have been reading his works and I picked up this book on an off chance, knowing little about it except that Clark sought to systematically present Nietzsche as an anti-metaphysical author.And in doing this, she highlights his strengths and weaknesses.

I appreciate her sophisticated rebuttal of much current and past Nietzsche scholarship, especially the mis-reading of him by the so-called 'post-structuralists'/'deconstructionists'.Her critique of their absolute relativism, and Nietzsche's eventual rejection of that in favor of a radical perspectivism, which at bottom is founded on a kind of neo-Kantianism, won me over to the value of the book.And that kind of thing is necessary when you slog through the first two chapters, which may be necessary, but which are also ponderous.

The failure I find most interesting, however, ultimately undermines her own argument and releases Nietzsche from any kind of coherence in relation to truth.She basically premises her reading of Nietzsche at a key point contra Magnus on the question of whether Nietzsche is arguing against 'truth as the whole'.She argues that he is not and that Nietzsche was familiar with no philosopher who would have argued as such.It is here that I must reject her argument, for Hegel very much championed this notion of 'truth is the whole' and Nietzsche seems, contrary to Clark's otherwise well-thought out scholarship, not only familiar with Hegel, but also in debate with Hegel throughout much of his work.Hegel is the hidden text to Nietzsche as Aristotle is the hidden text to Hegel's Philosophy of Right.

In recognizing this, not only does Clark's reading of Nietzsche unravel, but, IMO since Clark is largely right in her reading of Nietzsche as a neo-Kantian, Nietzsche unravels.

Now, Nietzsche was infamously hostile to 'the craving for consistency' as a mark of the weak person, so the Nietzscheans out there will have a back door through which to escape.But that is their problem.

Secondarily, I think that this unraveling causes problems for Clark's argument that Will to Power and Eternal Recurrence are non-metaphysical, or at least consistently so.However, I appreciate the thoughtfulness of the argument, even when she is obliged to engage in gymanastics to sustain it.

Finally, this work really convinced me that the appropriation of Nietzsche by Deleuze, Guattari, Foucault, etc. is not based upon Nietzsche's philosophical heritage, since they stop at his earliest work and effectively gloss over the rest of what Nietzsche writes.Rather, Nietzsche provides a radical re-affirmation of the role of intellectuals as privileged specialists.But Guy Debord knew the value of such people better than most, and the obnoxious politics which follow from such self-glamorization of the would-be revaluers of values.

does Clark speak for Nietzsche on truth and philosophy?
While Nietzsche is certainly more known as a moral philosopher, or as some are certain to remark, an immoral philosopher, one finds a certain necessary connection between his moral philosophy and his epistemology (and naturally aesthetic, scientific, political thought too, its all very much connected).Thus it was with open eyes that I began this work, as I knew Clark to be so very critical of much that Kaufmann, Wilcox, Derrida, Nehamas, and Schacht had written on Nietzsche.The majority of the work was overtly analytic, which I shall neither condemn nor praise at the moment.Clark did her best to demonstrate the faults of the aforementioned Nietzsche scholars insofar as Nietzsche himself would allow.

Although there is much I could say regarding the opening chapters of the book, I shall refrain from such things, as I found them generally to be on target, insofar as Clark's exegetical work found what was necessary to support her claims.Whether or not I agree with them all is still under debate, for I question how much Nietzsche felt consistency was absolutely necessary for his early writings and ideas (look at The Birth of Tragedy or a later work like The Antichrist for examples of this, while each is brilliant in its own way they still lack scholarship all too often in exchange for Nietzsche's polemics).As Danto (I believe it was him) commented somewhere in his work though, one thing is certain with Nietzsche, you have truly not read him until you have found a contradiction to every statement he made.While this is not true in every case, there is a sense in which Nietzsche's maturing philosophy demonstrates this claim, which Clark seems to have dismissed at times.Granted, Clark does demonstrate that Nietzsche underwent such changes in his thought, as would be expected of a philosopher set on such an experimental way.

In taking Nietzsche to completely dismiss metaphysics Clark does herself a great injustice, for it forces her to radically reinterpret the will to power and the eternal recurrence.And in doing so she becomes guilty of a certain intellectual uncleanliness (as someone or another once called it).I wholeheartedly agree that the eternal recurrence is best understood not as a cosmological doctrine, but rather as something of an existential imperative (if such a thing exists). Nonetheless, as Nietzsche's Nachlass testifies, he may still have believed it to be demonstrable as a cosmological claim though he had yet to demonstrate it as such.But the will to power as anything but a metaphysical claim?As a theology professor of mine often said to me, thats just not happening.And it is within these two chapters, the last two of the book, that Clark gets sloppy in her work.At one point she simply dismisses the text of Zarathustra as too metaphorical (the second to last chapter) to cite in evidence, yet, come the last chapter of the work, lo and behold, the metaphorical problems Zarathustra posed in the previous chapter disappear - citations abound.Naturally one asks, why should she do this?To help reinforce her point perhaps?Or to help her point by not introducing certain textual problems with her reading?

As it is, do read the last two chapters, on the will to power and the eternal recurrence respectively, with a careful eye and such inconsistent readings will become apparent.It was here then that I found fault with the book, which makes me want to reread it and see how often this problem occurs.But that will have to wait until the semester ends.So, overall, a mostly consistent reading, with obvious faults, which, as Nietzsche himself would have said, reflects Clark's desires to make Nietzsche consistent.Is such consistency in Nietzsche possible though?Probably not, as his writings seem to attest, if not his experimental nature of going about his work.But then again, how much do I really know?To best understand Nietzsche, sit down with The Birth of Tragedy and read chronologically until you get to Ecce Homo, and then start all over again.

Nietzsche on Truth and Philosophy by Maudemarie Clark
This is possibly the best overall book ever written about Nietzsche. Several others have brilliant insights such as Martin Heidegger's Nietzsche which gives a powerful interpretation of art as the only purpose andmeaning of life, and debunks the pseudo-concept of the 'superman' as themodern CEO of world technology, but completely misses Nietzsche's joke,which Clark does not, about the 'will to power' especially as acosmological doctrine (something he toyed with seriously ONLY in thenotebooks for years). Maudemarie Clark shows he made it into a trick uponthe reader (amongst many!) in BEYOND GOOD AND EVIL (pp.218-227, esp.221-2,of her book). She starts her book by destroying the Frenchdeconstructionist 'irrationalist' version of Nietzsche by demonstratingthat he dropped this irrationalism early starting with HUMAN, ALL TOO HUMAN(originally dedicated to Voltaire), and coming to a completely rationalstance in THE GENEOLOGY OF MORALS. She makes the brilliantly obvious point(so obvious it makes you feel stupid, but definitely goes against the majortrend of Nietzsche interpretation)that THUS SPOKE ZARATHUSTRA was a novel,not a philosophical treatise or religious tract. Walter Kaufman implicitelymade this same point by comparing it to ULYSSES and FINNEGAN'S WAKE. Thisessentially puts a logical question mark on 'eternal recurrence', 'will topower', and the 'superman' as distinct philosophical ideas and actuallymakes them literary concepts, a distinction postmodernists may entirelymiss. She also, after having undermined most American commentators -- NOTWalter Kaufman --on Nietzsche by destroying the basic tenant of the Frenchthrough applying the unimpeacheable arguments against scepticism andcynicism (essentially, as the Cretan philosopher said, "All Cretansare liars", one must step somehow into a higher order of reality forthat to be judged true or false)against Nehamas'perspectivism and Danto's,Schacht's, and Rorty's ultimately meaningless relativism. Nietzsche was inno way a relativist. But one must apprize from that something verydifferent Hegel's systematic absolutism. He knew the validity of reason andreality as an absolutely alone individual (singulare tantum)very much likeHeidegger. Maudemarie Clark has essentially brought Nietzsche back into thequestion mark he deliberately placed himself. But it is a meaningfulquestion that is rational. Maudemarie Clark makes part of this pointexplicitely clear when she states that on the one hand Neitszche says he isan immoralist and 'means' it, but on the other hand quotes him as saying,"Honesty is the only virtue". Honesty presupposes consistency.Consistency presupposes rationality. To end on an interesting sidenote AynRand also went through a similar evolution to Nietzsche's. In her firstedition of WE THE LIVING she preaches a populist version of Nietzsche's'immoralism', then renounces him later on as an irrationalist when shetakes up the primacy of reason herself. She never realized she stillfollowed his path to some extent even in ATLAS SHRUGGED. ... Read more

Book Description
This is a lively and engaging introduction to the contentious topic of Nietzsche's politics, tracing the development of his thinking and confronting directly his appropriation by the Nazis. The key ideas of the will to power, eternal return and the overman are discussed and all Nietzsche's major works analyzed in detail. This textbook will be essential for all students of Nietzsche and of the history of political ideas. It includes a chronology of Nietzsche's life and works, and a guide to further reading. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

Interesting reading
If you want to gain insight into Nietzsche's thinking outside of his usual philosophical writings, or follow his chain of thought throughtout his life, this collection of letters is somewhat helpful, but he does not seem to engage in the manner in which he does in his formal philosophical works. One of the features I found surprising in his letters is the courtesy he showed to his recipients. It is evident that Nietzsche treasured the friendships he had, and this is very apparent in his letters. And interestingly, I did not find any hostility in any of the letters addressed to Richard Wagner, considering the history of their relationship.

The book is well-edited, and there is an index of recipients near the end of the book. The editor also includes a general index with subentries that allow the reader to scan an entire topic. This is a helpful aid for amateur readers of Nietzsche, such as myself, but could also be helpful I think to dedicated scholors of Nietzsche.

I was only disappointed that more letters did not address more of Nietzsche's thinking on Dionysus and Apollo. It would have been interesting to read what he had to say about them via the "freestyle" of letter writing. Nietzsche's philosophical writings are actually the most frank and unrestrained of all in nineteenth-century philosophy. He is very honest with himself, and because of this he might be viewed as somewhat narcisstic by some readers. This may be true to some degree, but Nietzsche is refreshing in his style of writing, and actually it is quite entertaining to randomly move through his books and read his maxims and opinions.

The most interesting letter is the one addressed to Carl von Gersdorff on April 6, 1867. He is writing about what he has called "the scholarly forms of disease", and tells of a story about a talented young man who enters the university to obtain a doctorate. He puts together a thesis he has been working on for years, submits it to the philosophical faculty. One rejects the work on the grounds that it advances views that are not taught there. The other states that the work is contrary to common sense and is paradoxical. His thesis is therefore rejected, and he does not therefore earn his doctorate. Nietzsche describes the "not humble enough to hear the voice of wisdom" in their negative judgment of his results. Further, the young man is "reckless enough", in Nietzsche's view, to believe that the faculty "lacks the faculty for philosophy. Nietzsche uses this story to emphasize the virtue of independence: "one cannot go one's own way independently enough. Truth seldom dwells where people have built temples for it and have ordained priests. We ourselves have to suffer for good or foolish things we do, nor those who give us the good or the foolish advice. Let us at least be allowed the pleasure of committing follies on our own initiative. There is no general recipe for how one man is to be helped. One must be one's own physician but at the same gather the medical experience at one's own cost. We really think too little about our own well-being; our egoism is not clever enough, our intellect not egoistic enough."

He's right.

What a strange but brilliant fellow...
This book is real fun to have, and shows a side of Nietzsche that is hard to come across in his formal works and the countless biographies. You can read first-hand the conflicts with his sister's anti-semitic husband, read his own giddyness about finishing a new book, and follow his decline into a state of insanity (during which he wrote the strangest letters of all). His wierd sense of humor is much more visible in his letters, which helps one to recognize when he is humoring himself at the expense of the suprised reader in his other works.

"Dear Professor: Actually I would much rather be a basel professor than God; but I have not yet ventured to cary my private egoism so far as to omit creating the world on his account. You see, one must make sacrifices, however and wherever one may be living..." (Jan. 6 1889, To Jacob Burkhart, from Turin).

Also, the index in the back of this book is very thorough, making it easy to find any person or concept that he deals with.

Note: If you are looking for other writers that write as intangible and beautiful as Nietzsche's works but less harsh on the world, try reading some Emmanuel Levinas, a briliant French Jewish Philospher who died in 1995, (Good book: Dificult Freedom) ... Read more

Book Description

Customer Reviews (1)

Excellent Intro to a brilliant Philosopher
Nietzsche would have to be one of the most misunderstood philosophers in present time and particularly during his life.Nietzsche's words that "God is Dead",for example, most scholars at the time interpreted this thesis literally, as if an announcement of the philosopher's move towards athiesim - nothing can be further from the truth. Nietzsche could well be called the founder of nihillsm.What Phillip Novak has done in this accessable text is to clarify the many misunderstandings of this important philosopher, revealing his uncanny insight into the ideas of modernism and, perhaps, so-called post modernism.

Firstly this is an introduction of the man, his time and his philosophy.

In Nietzsche's God is Dead writings, he truly forcasted the modern `sensibility', that is to say, as Novak states in his introduction:

" Nietzsche sought to create in its very midst a new redemptive vision for a world in which the old God had died. It would revolve around the figure of the superman and his life-affirming, earth embracing, despair-defying, joyful wisdom - recurrent themes in "Zarathustra" and later writings."

One could propose that he rejected the notion of guilt and punishment from an old testament, wrathful God and suggests we embrace life, engage in "becoming" who we really are and enjoy our existence in the pursuit of wisdom.

Nietzsche is a brilliant and fervent writer and quite inspiring. Novak has chosen some of the philosopher's most dazzling quotes and puts them in their proper context as the man's philosophy developed.

Nietzsche lived a lonely and tragic life, finally going insane - and in one of his lucid moments before he died said, "I've written a few good books."

Novak has made Nietzsche accessible for the curious or the undergraduate.

Excellent.


... Read more

Book Description
This is the first book-length treatment of the unique nature and development of Nietzsche's post-Zarathustran political philosophy.This later political philosophy is set in the context of the critique of modernity that Nietzsche advances in the years 1885-1888, in such texts as Beyond Good and Evil, On the Genealogy of Morals, Twilight of the Idols, The Antichrist, The Case of Wagner, and Ecce Homo. Daniel Conway has written a powerful book about Nietzsche's own appreciation of the limitations of both his writing style and of his famous prophetic "stance". ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

Ludicrous and Incompetent
This book is not well researched.It is based on a couple dozen short snippets of Nietzsche's work that Conway uses over and over again.The rest of what the other reviewer who gave it only one star said is correct.The whole point of Conway's book is to say that Nietzsche was vain, wanted nothing more than to control his followers, and that his readers are all fools -- which must surely include Conway.Conway is a postmodernist whose prose is mostly unreadable.His political orientation is Hegelian.But Nietzsche was free of the Hegelian nonsense.Conway rejects the individual.But the individual is the central concept of Nietzsche's political thought.Conway believes in totalitarianism, like Marx.He has no faith in people, only in groups and their leaders.Conway wants the PoMo future: utter ignorance and strong arm leaders who are allegedly benevolent because they have been freed of the fetters of law and existing contracts.Conway thinks Nietzsche is an irrationalist, but Nietzsche ridiculed irrationalism throughout his career.Conway and his postmodern moralist cohorts believe 'it is a sin against everything of value to become scientific' to cite just one bit of Nietzsche's mockery that fits the PoMo mind frame (CW Postscript 1).This book is worth almost no one's time, and all students should avoid it.

Clever but immature
This book is clever and well-written and thoroughly researched.In this sense it is a solid academic book.But it is superficial and immature, delighting in self-reference and merely reading Nietzsche against Nietzshe ('if everything is untrue is this claim also untrue?') without recognizing Nietzsche's response to this sort of thing.Rather than trying to show that he betters his subject matter, the author would have done well to consider, as any number of Continental philosophers have already done, how Nietzshce and Nietzscheans have responded to this criticism, and thus why Nietzsche is not playing a game at all. ... Read more

Book Description
Nietzsche, Aesthetics and Modernity analyzes Nietzsche's response to the aesthetic tradition, tracing in particular the complex relationship between the work and thought of Nietzsche, Kant, and Hegel. Focusing in particular on the critical role of negation and sublimity in Nietzsche's account of art, it explores his confrontation with modernity and his attempt to posit a revitalized artistic practice as the countermovement to modern nihilism.It also highlights the extent to which Nietzsche counters the culture of his own time with a dialectical notion of aesthetic interpretation and practice. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

illucidating concision without ruining graspable abstraction
For the reader who just needs a gentle boost to get atop the masks of Nietzsche, this book will enable you to appreciate sophistication that you may not have even known was there. Not coffee table material, but palpably attractive to the discerning mind. ... Read more