Show description

There are also some contemporary philosophers, Nietzsche notes, who are “stronger [stärker] and more full of life”, who treat the problem differently. Later in the passage he names these philosophers “sceptical anti-realists” and “knowledge-microscopists”. ) These philosophers argue against appearance and arrogantly use the word “perspective”. Nietzsche could not, up to a point, agree more. Modern approaches to the pursuit of philosophy (especially positivism) are indeed to be rejected, but not so as to go backwards.

They belong to the “perspectival optics of life” – a reference back to the optical metaphor with which Nietzsche introduced the general notion of perspective in §2. qxd 11/20/06 14:24 Page 27 “On the Prejudices of the Philosophers” 27 However, Nietzsche is being disingenuous here. Although Kant famously expressed his basic question in terms of possibility, elsewhere he makes two claims that accord with Nietzsche’s own. First, Kant argues that it is characteristic of a synthetic a priori judgement to be necessary in two different ways: first, the truth claim in such a judgement must appear to be necessary; secondly, such judgements are necessary for any experience and consciousness whatsoever.

Nietzsche lists four constituent elements. g. hunger), the state towards which (eating or satiated), and the feelings of this away and towards. Moreover, there is a habituated feeling of the muscles, even without their actual movement. Secondly, in every act of will there is a “commanding thought”. This thought is not separable from the willing, but is integral to it. Thirdly, the will is above all else an “affect” [Affect] of command. What is often called free will is the consciousness of the “affect of superiority” with respect to someone or something that must obey.