Nietzsche is regarded by some as a great liberator, a thinker far more radical than Marx. For others, he is an ideologue of power, a spokesman for domination, a protofascist. Ofelia Schutte holds that these conflicting assessments result from a failure to distinguish between two paradigms of power found in Nietzsche's work: power as recurring energy and power as domination. Schutte uses this fundamental distinction to analyze comprehensively Nietzsche's metaphysics, ethics, and politics. She addresses both the positive and the negative in the whole of his thought, seeking to read Nietzsche 'without masks'--without the cultural and intellectual biases of many of his previous interpreters.
Martin Heidegger's (1889-1976) criticism of Friedrich Nietzsche's nihilism represented a 'turn' in his thought. In this new and perceptive book, Dominic Kelly explores nihilism through the work of two relatively modern and much studied philosophers; Heidegger and Nietzsche and shows how Heidegger began to think in a way that was not solely philosophical and instead used poetry to achieve a new relation to being. In doing so, Heidegger was able to move past Nietzsche's concepts and thus, nihilism itself. Through his exploration of Heidegger's journey to a form of thinking beyond the philosophical then, Kelly exposes nihilism's crucial place in Continental philosophy and has written a book that is essential for students and academics working in Heidegger studies. Kelly's engagement with Heidegger's more poetic philosophy also benefits students of metaphysics, the philosophy of art and aesthetics, and visual culture more widely. By putting nihilism into its historical context and examining its Ancient Greek origins, Kelly's book will also be of use to those studying early philosophical thought - a requirement for all philosophy courses – and provides a valuable account of nihilism's historical trajectory.
In this work the author presents Nietzsche as a counter-nihilistic philosopher-educator who aimed, very much like Plato and Rousseau, to set forth a healing education for western man in a characteristically decadent era. The principal pedagogical or edifying dimension of his philosophy, it is argued, consists of a redefinition of the educational aim of modern humanityóformulated in medical and cultural termsóas the recovery of health and worth. The work considers Nietzsche's investigations of noble and nihilistic forms of life as well as his doctrines of the Dionysian, the Will to Power, and the Overman, as aiming to establish a new wisdomódelineating the conditions necessary for the evaluation, enhancement, and prosperity of man. A useful book for courses in philosophy, philosophy of education, history of education and ethics.
In 1969, Emanuele Severino underwent a Vatican trial for the 'fundamental incompatibility' between his thought and the Christian doctrine, and was removed from his position as professor of philosophy at the Catholic University in Milan. The Essence of Nihilism published in 1972, was the first book to follow his expulsion, and to firmly establish Severino's preeminent position within the constellation of contemporary philosophy. In this groundbreaking book, Severino reinterprets the history of Western philosophy as the unfolding of 'the greatest folly', that is, of the belief that 'things come out of nothing and fall back into nothing'. According to Severino, such a typically Western understanding of reality has produced a belief in the radical 'nothingness' of things. This, in turn has justified the treatment of the world as an object of exploitation, degradation and destruction. To move beyond Western nihilism, suggests Severino, we must first of all 'return to Parmenides'. Joining forces with the most venerable of Greek philosophers, Severino confutes the 'path of night' of nihilism, and develops a new philosophy grounded on the principle of the eternity of reality and of every single existent.
Medical nihilism is the view that we should have little confidence in the effectiveness of medical interventions. Jacob Stegenga argues persuasively that this is how we should see modern medicine, and suggests that medical research must be modified, clinical practice should be less aggressive, and regulatory standards should be enhanced.
This book is a thorough study of Nietzsche’s thoughts on nihilism, the history of the concept, the different ways in which he tries to explain his ideas on nihilism, the way these ideas were received in the 20th century, and, ultimately, what these ideas should mean to us. It begins with an exploration of how we can understand the strange situation that Nietzsche, about 130 years ago, predicted that nihilism would break through one or two centuries from then, and why, despite the philosopher describing it as the greatest catastrophe that could befall humankind, we hardly seem to be aware of it, let alone be frightened by it. The book shows that most of us are still living within the old frameworks of faith, and, therefore, can hardly imagine what it would mean if the idea of God (as the summit and summary of all our epistemic, moral, and esthetic beliefs) would become unbelievable. The comfortable situation in which we live allows us to conceive of such a possibility in a rather harmless way: while distancing ourselves from explicit religiosity, we still maintain the old framework in our scientific and humanistic ideals. This book highlights that contemporary science and humanism are not alternatives to, but rather variations of the old metaphysical and Christian faith. The inconceivability of real nihilism is elaborated by showing that people either do not take it seriously enough to feel its threat, or – when it is considered properly – suffer from the threat, and by this very suffering prove to be attached to the old nihilistic structures. Because of this paradoxical situation, this text suggests that the literary imagination might bring us closer to the experience of nihilism than philosophy ever could. This is further elaborated with the help of a novel by Juli Zeh and a play by Samuel Beckett. In the final chapter of the book, Nietzsche’s life and philosophy are themselves interpreted as a kind of literary metaphorical presentation of the answer to the question of how to live in an age of nihilism.
A German writer's aphoristic, poetic, and difficult reflections on Heidegger's Being and Time. There is a beyond of reason and unreason. It is the human psyche. —Positive Nihilism Like many German intellectuals, Hartmut Lange has long grappled with Heidegger. Positive Nihilism is the result of a lifetime of reading Being and Time and offers a series of reflections that are aphoristic, poetic, and (appropriately, considering his object of study) difficult. Lange begins with an abyss (“There is an abyss of the finite. It is temporality”) and proceeds almost immediately to extremity: “The twentieth century was governed by psychopaths. They collapsed the boundaries of moral reason and refuted Kant's analysis of consciousness.” He reflects further: “But who shall punish whom? One man's virtue is another man's crime. Thus Hitler could feel unwaveringly, as he wiped out entire populations, the starry sky above him and the moral law within him, as stipulated by Kant.” He considers the concept of civilization (“misleading”; “how should one oppose the remedies of civilization to the egomania, the murderous appetites of such outright psychopaths as Stalin or Pol Pot?”), the act of thinking (a fata morgana), the psyche, and Heidegger's Dasein. Positive Nihilism can be considered a pocket companion to Being and Time. “Heidegger's understanding of Being is nihilistic,” Lange writes, and then explains his assertion. He draws on Kant, Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, and Shakespeare's Othello for supporting arguments and illustrations. “Everyone is possessed of the courage to have angst about death. The question is whether this courage necessarily secures those vital advantages Heidegger alleges”–that “self-understanding [is] the mental anticipation of death.” Lange wrestles with Heidegger's position, calling on Tolstoy, Georg Trakl, Herman Bang, and Heinrich von Kleist to argue against it.
