Nietzsche's "There are no facts." Our needs define our senses.
In Nietzsche's philosophy the will is a misnomer that sums up a multiplicity of drives/forces each fighting for dominance. These drives and forces equate to our needs as humans. Our needs change over time, and our needs is what drives the realm of facts, such that our facts change over time with our needs. (BGE 19)
What should be considered, as with the above on will, are the gradations of change. We prefer to give form to the whole of the subject of these gradations (such as the will) and to great differences in gradations (good/evil) as its easier and more calculable for us to manage. (BGE 24)
Long before morality, as with logic, came into existence, humans discovered events in which to burn their precursors of said systems into the flesh, the muscle memory, such that we created the entire constellations of thought behind morality, behind, logic, behind languages, behind math, behind science, behind philosophy, behind "man" himself... so that some could sleep soundly in a more calculable world. (BGE 9)
We see Nietzsche toying with this thought from the Birth of Tragedy to his final books. In which the Greek contrived for themselves, out of the Apollonian impulse, the Helenic Will (a multiplicity of Ideals and Gods to represent the highest forms of these ideals). In overcoming that brutal wisdom of Dionsysus and Silenus that "to die young" or "not be born at all" was the best thing in the world in a reversal that stated the best of all was to perhaps never die at all... Quoting Apparently Achilles at Troy
When you go through Nietzsche's books you'll find he uses the word "facts" to detail truths quite often... like, for example, in Beyond Good and Evil, he details facts (as a matter of fact, in fact, etc etc) at least 8 times by the 17th Aphorism.
Nietzsche develops this idea further in Human All Too Human, again in Joyful Wisdom/Gay Science, in TSZ&BGE, and in Genealogy, all the way through to will to power. All these various developments behind the idea are the multiplicity of concepts on the fact that facts change over time under one umbrella transformed by the "O Sancta Simplicitas!" of BGE 24 into the single simple, but awkward "There Are No Facts":
Nietzsche utilizes the awkwardness of the summation of these ideas in the saying "There are not facts." But fact is, Nietzsche details facts about many things, and utilizes the term fact to point out truths across different eras of time. Nietzsche was a philologists, first and foremost, who studied the evolution of ideas throughout time by examing our language.
The very few times that Nietzsche declares "there are no facts" are indeed within Aphorisms that detail very specifically what Nietzsche is determining that there are no facts about...
A lack of finesse in reading Nietzsche will lead to drivel like Russell's abysmally poor analysis of Nietzsche...
What should be considered, as with the above on will, are the gradations of change. We prefer to give form to the whole of the subject of these gradations (such as the will) and to great differences in gradations (good/evil) as its easier and more calculable for us to manage. (BGE 24)
Long before morality, as with logic, came into existence, humans discovered events in which to burn their precursors of said systems into the flesh, the muscle memory, such that we created the entire constellations of thought behind morality, behind, logic, behind languages, behind math, behind science, behind philosophy, behind "man" himself... so that some could sleep soundly in a more calculable world. (BGE 9)
We see Nietzsche toying with this thought from the Birth of Tragedy to his final books. In which the Greek contrived for themselves, out of the Apollonian impulse, the Helenic Will (a multiplicity of Ideals and Gods to represent the highest forms of these ideals). In overcoming that brutal wisdom of Dionsysus and Silenus that "to die young" or "not be born at all" was the best thing in the world in a reversal that stated the best of all was to perhaps never die at all... Quoting Apparently Achilles at Troy
"Immorality! Take it! It's yours!"
When you go through Nietzsche's books you'll find he uses the word "facts" to detail truths quite often... like, for example, in Beyond Good and Evil, he details facts (as a matter of fact, in fact, etc etc) at least 8 times by the 17th Aphorism.
Nietzsche develops this idea further in Human All Too Human, again in Joyful Wisdom/Gay Science, in TSZ&BGE, and in Genealogy, all the way through to will to power. All these various developments behind the idea are the multiplicity of concepts on the fact that facts change over time under one umbrella transformed by the "O Sancta Simplicitas!" of BGE 24 into the single simple, but awkward "There Are No Facts":
Nietzsche: BGE 24:It is to be hoped, indeed, that LANGUAGE, here as elsewhere, will not get over its awkwardness, and that it will continue to talk of [Forms] where there are only degrees and many refinements of gradation...
Nietzsche utilizes the awkwardness of the summation of these ideas in the saying "There are not facts." But fact is, Nietzsche details facts about many things, and utilizes the term fact to point out truths across different eras of time. Nietzsche was a philologists, first and foremost, who studied the evolution of ideas throughout time by examing our language.
The very few times that Nietzsche declares "there are no facts" are indeed within Aphorisms that detail very specifically what Nietzsche is determining that there are no facts about...
A lack of finesse in reading Nietzsche will lead to drivel like Russell's abysmally poor analysis of Nietzsche...
Comments (7)
Quoting DifferentiatingEgg
According to Foucault, Nietzsche details two kinds of truth, connaissance and savoir.
That's exactly the point of me pointing to the fact in Nietzsche's WtP 258
Leads directly into Nietzsche Quoting DifferentiatingEgg
From the second aphorism of HATH, and I explain this in the other post also (Quoting DifferentiatingEgg), had you read the aphorisms you'd see...
So you see, I did discuss it, just not directly point to it... but fact is, there wasn't a wrong interpretation in that other than you thinking you had me on a wrong interpretation...
Nice, thank you for that additional gradation. What book is that in?