Friedrich Nietzsche- Prejudice and the Philosophers
The ‘will for (objective) truth’ is a theme that is played out in the literature of many past and present philosophers. Seeking objective truthfulness in morals and art seems to be one of the main themes of the philosopher’s quest, however it seems that there is never an end to this process and we actually get the feeling as if we’ve hardly commenced. This inability to conclude and find the ‘real objective artistic truth’ and ‘correct moral standard’ causes us to question its validity and more so its ‘value’. Nietzsche explains the most fundamental question we need to ask ourselves is what is the ‘value’ of finding the ‘objective moral truth’, what is the value of this objective truth, why not live with the truth of the ‘untruth’, meaning, why not live with our artistic ‘subjectivity’, why not create our own self standards of morality and creativity, which is the untruth’s truth. What is the importance of ‘external truth’, perhaps we are better off with the ‘untruth’, with the internal world of instincts, wishes, imagination, beauty, art, and illusion, which is the real truth. This is the fundamental argument Nietzsche puts forth, perhaps the ‘untruth’, the subjectivity, is the external truth. Nietzsche adds that perhaps there is no such thing as an objective truth; perhaps our perceptual creative reality is the real ‘true’ creative reality. Perhaps untruth is compatible and even essence of the truth.
Nietzsche argues with philosophers who conclude that there is a split between objective morality, which come from a world that has an ‘essence in itself’ and the ‘subjective world’ of deceptions and illusions that come from another distant realm of transitory. They claim that these two concepts are divided into two separated realities. They claim that the realm of transitory, seduction, and illusory can only connect with deception and illusion and the realm of true qualities must come from the in-transitory, the world of a concealed truth, a realm that has an essence in itself, which must be the source of the truthful attributes, whereas deception, illusion, and selfishness must originate from the realm of the transitory and illusory reality. Nietzsche asserts that the belief of ‘antithesis of values’ is the logical producer of the belief of moral metaphysics. At the core of their entire philosophy, lies what they call the objective ‘knowledge’, which is based on the antithesis of values. This is the backbone of they’re entire, so called, external objective ‘truth’.
Nietzsche disagrees with the entire hypothesis of the ‘antithesis of values’. Nietzsche argues “Is there actually an antithesis at all, perhaps it’s a superficial assumption that is coming from a ‘frog perspective’ meaning a narrow minded one sided opinion”. Is there actually an antithesis, perhaps the value that belongs to the truth, unselfishness, and positive also belongs to the pretense, to the will of delusion, to subjectivity, and to the self. More so the value of the truth and positive includes the opposites, it actually includes the subjectivity and it is the subjectivity that gives the objectivity value. Perhaps the value originates in the untruthful and illusion of the subjective life and it gets projected outwards.
Nietzsche asserts that ‘Philosophical Thinking’ is really just the manifestation of our inner instincts and there really isn’t such a thing as total abstract knowledge that is not contingent on our subjectivity. Philosophy is the defense of justifying and wrapping our inner desires with the name of ‘philosophy’ and ‘truth’. The impulse to knowledge really means the impulse of our heart’s desire. The philosophy of the philosopher is really his ‘auto biography’. And although there may be some small abstract real knowledge, its usually filtered through much of the philosophers own innate wishes.
Nietzsche also argues that the stoic concept of living ‘according to nature’ really means living ‘according to oneself’. What the philosopher is really doing is projected his own instinct onto reality and trying to tyrannize it in a narcissistic and aggressive manner. What he is really saying is that nature was created in ‘my image’. Nietzsche believes that according to nature would mean to live in accordance with the ‘boundless indifference of nature with total surrendering to it’. The stoics are doing quite the opposite they are calling nature themselves and their desires. Nietzsche asserts that We all have a deep and innate desire for power and we try to tyrannize nature until it seems to be under our control.