Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Beyond Good and Devil. Chapter 1. Prejuices of philosophers. 3.

"HOW COULD anything originate out of its opposite? For example, truth

out of error? or the Will to Truth out of the will to deception? or the

generous deed out of selfishness? or the pure sun-bright vision of the

wise man out of covetousness? Such genesis is impossible; whoever dreams

of it is a fool, nay, worse than a fool; things of the highest

value must have a different origin, an origin of THEIR own--in this

transitory, seductive, illusory, paltry world, in this turmoil of

delusion and cupidity, they cannot have their source. But rather in

the lap of Being, in the intransitory, in the concealed God, in the

'Thing-in-itself--THERE must be their source, and nowhere else!"--This

mode of reasoning discloses the typical prejudice by which

metaphysicians of all times can be recognized, this mode of valuation

is at the back of all their logical procedure; through this "belief" of

theirs, they exert themselves for their "knowledge," for something that

is in the end solemnly christened "the Truth." The fundamental belief of

metaphysicians is THE BELIEF IN ANTITHESES OF VALUES. It never occurred

even to the wariest of them to doubt here on the very threshold (where

doubt, however, was most necessary); though they had made a solemn

vow, "DE OMNIBUS DUBITANDUM." For it may be doubted, firstly, whether

antitheses exist at all; and secondly, whether the popular valuations

and antitheses of value upon which metaphysicians have set their

seal, are not perhaps merely superficial estimates, merely provisional

perspectives, besides being probably made from some corner, perhaps from

below--"frog perspectives," as it were, to borrow an expression current

among painters. In spite of all the value which may belong to the true,

the positive, and the unselfish, it might be possible that a higher

and more fundamental value for life generally should be assigned to

pretence, to the will to delusion, to selfishness, and cupidity. It

might even be possible that WHAT constitutes the value of those good and

respected things, consists precisely in their being insidiously

related, knotted, and crocheted to these evil and apparently opposed

things--perhaps even in being essentially identical with them. Perhaps!

But who wishes to concern himself with such dangerous "Perhapses"!

For that investigation one must await the advent of a new order of

philosophers, such as will have other tastes and inclinations, the

reverse of those hitherto prevalent--philosophers of the dangerous

"Perhaps" in every sense of the term. And to speak in all seriousness, I

see such new philosophers beginning to appear.


I ain´t fool, i´m realist. All points of views should be respected, besides,
theories are based on other theories formerly annulled by a destructive criticism. We cannot talk about essence, the world is changing, nobody have inclinations or distinct ideas.

No comments:

Post a Comment