Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Special Section: Nietzsche Studies Now | 253 wish Nietzsche scholarship would move away from: fear of emphasizing Nietzsche’s distinctiveness. Until quite recently, Nietzsche was not widely regarded as one of the giants of philosophy: he was not set alongside Kant, Hume, Plato, Aristotle, and so on. That has changed, or at least has begun to change. But it has bred an insecurity that is still manifest in the litera- ture. A large segment of the Nietzsche literature focuses on showing that Nietzsche is important because he said x and someone else who is thought to be important also says x. Thus, we have writers on Nietzsche whose high- est aspiration is to show that Nietzsche anticipates some (soon to be over- turned) claim in contemporary empirical psychology, or that his theory of x is analogous to “leading philosopher so-and-so’s” musings, or that he develops an idea that Hume or some other widely respected philosopher also develops. This uncritical deference to contemporary philosophical and psychological fashions is something that Nietzsche himself derided. Aside from that, the rewards of these readings tend to be exceptionally low. At best, Nietzsche turns out to be someone who oer ff ed an obscure, fumbling
The Journal of Nietzsche Studies – Penn State University Press
Published: Dec 5, 2018
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.