What do you think?
Rate this book
Twilight of the Idols/The Antichrist/Ecce Homo
Translated by Antony M. Ludovici. With an Introduction by Ray Furness.
The three works in this collection, all dating from Nietzsche's last lucid months, show him at his most stimulating and controversial: the portentous utterances of the prophet (together with the ill-defined figure of the �bermensch) are forsaken, as wit, exuberance and dazzling insights predominate, forcing the reader to face unpalatable insights and to rethink every commonly accepted 'truth'. Thinking with Nietzsche, in Jaspers' words, means holding one's own against him, and we are indeed refreshed and challenged by the vortex of his thoughts, by concepts which test and probe.
In The Twilight of the Idols, The Antichrist, and Ecce Homo Nietzsche writes at breakneck speed of his provenance, his adversaries and his hopes for mankind; the books are largely epigrammatic and aphoristic, allowing this poet-philosopher to bewilder and fascinate us with their strangeness and their daring. He who fights with monsters, Nietzsche once told us, should look to it that he himself does not become one, and when you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss also gazes into you. Reader, beware.
The three works in this collection, all dating from Nietzsche's last lucid months, show him at his most stimulating and controversial: the portentous utterances of the prophet (together with the ill-defined figure of the �bermensch) are forsaken, as wit, exuberance and dazzling insights predominate, forcing the reader to face unpalatable insights and to rethink every commonly accepted 'truth'. Thinking with Nietzsche, in Jaspers' words, means holding one's own against him, and we are indeed refreshed and challenged by the vortex of his thoughts, by concepts which test and probe.
In The Twilight of the Idols, The Antichrist, and Ecce Homo Nietzsche writes at breakneck speed of his provenance, his adversaries and his hopes for mankind; the books are largely epigrammatic and aphoristic, allowing this poet-philosopher to bewilder and fascinate us with their strangeness and their daring. He who fights with monsters, Nietzsche once told us, should look to it that he himself does not become one, and when you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss also gazes into you. Reader, beware.
260 pages, Paperback
First published June 5, 2001
67 people are currently reading
356 people want to read
About the author
Friedrich Nietzsche
4,296 books25.3k followersFriedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche was a German classical scholar, philosopher, and critic of culture, who became one of the most influential of all modern thinkers. He began his career as a classical philologist before turning to philosophy. He became the youngest person to hold the Chair of Classical Philology at the University of Basel in 1869 at the age of 24, but resigned in 1879 due to health problems that plagued him most of his life; he completed much of his core writing in the following decade. In 1889, at age 44, he suffered a collapse and afterward a complete loss of his mental faculties, with paralysis and probably vascular dementia. He lived his remaining years in the care of his mother until her death in 1897 and then with his sister Elisabeth Förster-Nietzsche. Nietzsche died in 1900, after experiencing pneumonia and multiple strokes.
Nietzsche's work spans philosophical polemics, poetry, cultural criticism, and fiction while displaying a fondness for aphorism and irony. Prominent elements of his philosophy include his radical critique of truth in favour of perspectivism; a genealogical critique of religion and Christian morality and a related theory of master–slave morality; the aesthetic affirmation of life in response to both the "death of God" and the profound crisis of nihilism; the notion of Apollonian and Dionysian forces; and a characterisation of the human subject as the expression of competing wills, collectively understood as the will to power. He also developed influential concepts such as the Übermensch and his doctrine of eternal return. In his later work, he became increasingly preoccupied with the creative powers of the individual to overcome cultural and moral mores in pursuit of new values and aesthetic health. His body of work touched a wide range of topics, including art, philology, history, music, religion, tragedy, culture, and science, and drew inspiration from Greek tragedy as well as figures such as Zoroaster, Arthur Schopenhauer, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Richard Wagner, Fyodor Dostoevsky, and Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
After his death, Nietzsche's sister Elisabeth became the curator and editor of his manuscripts. She edited his unpublished writings to fit her German ultranationalist ideology, often contradicting or obfuscating Nietzsche's stated opinions, which were explicitly opposed to antisemitism and nationalism. Through her published editions, Nietzsche's work became associated with fascism and Nazism. 20th-century scholars such as Walter Kaufmann, R.J. Hollingdale, and Georges Bataille defended Nietzsche against this interpretation, and corrected editions of his writings were soon made available. Nietzsche's thought enjoyed renewed popularity in the 1960s and his ideas have since had a profound impact on 20th- and early 21st-century thinkers across philosophy—especially in schools of continental philosophy such as existentialism, postmodernism, and post-structuralism—as well as art, literature, music, poetry, politics, and popular culture.
Nietzsche's work spans philosophical polemics, poetry, cultural criticism, and fiction while displaying a fondness for aphorism and irony. Prominent elements of his philosophy include his radical critique of truth in favour of perspectivism; a genealogical critique of religion and Christian morality and a related theory of master–slave morality; the aesthetic affirmation of life in response to both the "death of God" and the profound crisis of nihilism; the notion of Apollonian and Dionysian forces; and a characterisation of the human subject as the expression of competing wills, collectively understood as the will to power. He also developed influential concepts such as the Übermensch and his doctrine of eternal return. In his later work, he became increasingly preoccupied with the creative powers of the individual to overcome cultural and moral mores in pursuit of new values and aesthetic health. His body of work touched a wide range of topics, including art, philology, history, music, religion, tragedy, culture, and science, and drew inspiration from Greek tragedy as well as figures such as Zoroaster, Arthur Schopenhauer, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Richard Wagner, Fyodor Dostoevsky, and Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
After his death, Nietzsche's sister Elisabeth became the curator and editor of his manuscripts. She edited his unpublished writings to fit her German ultranationalist ideology, often contradicting or obfuscating Nietzsche's stated opinions, which were explicitly opposed to antisemitism and nationalism. Through her published editions, Nietzsche's work became associated with fascism and Nazism. 20th-century scholars such as Walter Kaufmann, R.J. Hollingdale, and Georges Bataille defended Nietzsche against this interpretation, and corrected editions of his writings were soon made available. Nietzsche's thought enjoyed renewed popularity in the 1960s and his ideas have since had a profound impact on 20th- and early 21st-century thinkers across philosophy—especially in schools of continental philosophy such as existentialism, postmodernism, and post-structuralism—as well as art, literature, music, poetry, politics, and popular culture.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 31 reviews
July 17, 2022
Nietzsche's thinking is sharp, brilliant and accurate at some points
sometimes through reading i found him troubled, sarcastic and even narcissist
but he has his own philosophy to analyze and clarifies his ideas
for sure i don't like some of his views, but it's ok
generally his thoughts encourage and open many areas of life, emotions, and motives to think about.
sometimes through reading i found him troubled, sarcastic and even narcissist
but he has his own philosophy to analyze and clarifies his ideas
for sure i don't like some of his views, but it's ok
generally his thoughts encourage and open many areas of life, emotions, and motives to think about.
February 29, 2020
Η φιλοσοφία με το σφυρί λοιπόν... Αναμικτα συναισθήματα μπορώ να πω... Δε θέλω να μείνω στα ίδια, γιατί τα έχω ξαναπεί, επομένως θα σταθώ στα νέα ψηγματα γνώσης που κατάφερα να αποσπασω από τις εξορυξεις μου πάνω στα εδάφη του Νίτσε. Μεγάλος αντίπαλος του Νιτσε σε αυτό το βιβλίο ήταν ως επί το πλείστον το ιδεαλιστικο κίνημα που δεν ήταν άλλο από έναν καμουφλαρισμενο Σωκρατισμο. Η επιχειρηματολογια του για την κατακερματιση του Σωκρατικου πνεύματος, μου φάνηκε πολύ ελκυστική γιατί δεν ήταν καθόλου φιλοσοφικη. Κάθε άλλο! Η απάντηση ήταν η αίσθηση, η ποίηση, η μεθη! Εκεί που ο ισχνος Καντ δισασκε την σκέψη και την ανάλυση, προσπαθώντας να κρύψει την δειλία του απέναντι στο δράμα της στιγμής, ο Νιτσε, πατώντας πάνω στους προ-Σωκρατικους εξυψωνει την αμαλαγη καθαρή δράση, που δεν νοσει από τον ιό της υπεραναλυσης. Ένα τεράστιο Ναι σε όλα, είναι κάτι που ο καθένας χρειάζεται στη ζωή του, και ο νιτσε σχεδόν δια ροπαλου αλυχταει σε κάθε σελίδα προσπαθώντας να διδάξει το πνεύμα της τραγωδίας (το πραγματικό γενναιο οπτιμιστικο πνεύμα) όπως κάθε δάσκαλος που νοιάζεται τον μαθητή του, και σέβεται τον εαυτό του.
Ενδιαφέρουσες επίσης είναι και οι απόψεις του, περί στυλιστικου φιλοσοφικου ύφους πολλών συγκαιρινων του όπως Καρλαιλ, σπενσερ, εμερσον κλπ. Λίγοι βγαίνουν αλωβητοι όμως μετά την κρουση τους με το σφυρί. Ένα μέρος που πραγματικά με συναρπασε ήταν η πνευματική συγγένεια και ο σεβασμός που ένιωθε ο Νίτσε για τον ντοστογιεφσκι καθώς και οι απόψεις του σχετικά με το μυαλό του εγκληματία και της αποξενωσης του. Και είμαι σίγουρος πως εκείνο ήταν και το κομβικο σημείο της παρεξηγησης του, που τελικά έφερε διθυραμβους παραφιλολογιας και κουβέντες περι γενεαλογίας του ναζισμου.
Τέσσερα αστέρια γιατί, το αστέρι που χάθηκε πήγε σε παλιά κεκτημενα που τώρα θεωρώ τετριμμενα, ίσως λίγο φλυαρα και αχρειαστα λόγια.. Αλλά σίγουρα δε διαβάζεις Νίτσε αν δεν διαβάζεις σε κάθε βιβλίο μια καινοτομα ιδέα με την εσανς της παλιάς απαρεγκλητης φιλοσοφίας.
Ενδιαφέρουσες επίσης είναι και οι απόψεις του, περί στυλιστικου φιλοσοφικου ύφους πολλών συγκαιρινων του όπως Καρλαιλ, σπενσερ, εμερσον κλπ. Λίγοι βγαίνουν αλωβητοι όμως μετά την κρουση τους με το σφυρί. Ένα μέρος που πραγματικά με συναρπασε ήταν η πνευματική συγγένεια και ο σεβασμός που ένιωθε ο Νίτσε για τον ντοστογιεφσκι καθώς και οι απόψεις του σχετικά με το μυαλό του εγκληματία και της αποξενωσης του. Και είμαι σίγουρος πως εκείνο ήταν και το κομβικο σημείο της παρεξηγησης του, που τελικά έφερε διθυραμβους παραφιλολογιας και κουβέντες περι γενεαλογίας του ναζισμου.
Τέσσερα αστέρια γιατί, το αστέρι που χάθηκε πήγε σε παλιά κεκτημενα που τώρα θεωρώ τετριμμενα, ίσως λίγο φλυαρα και αχρειαστα λόγια.. Αλλά σίγουρα δε διαβάζεις Νίτσε αν δεν διαβάζεις σε κάθε βιβλίο μια καινοτομα ιδέα με την εσανς της παλιάς απαρεγκλητης φιλοσοφίας.
December 1, 2018
These three short books are the last works Friedrich Nietzsche wrote - before he flung himself around the neck of a horse, proclaimed it a saint, and collapsed. The rest of his life he spent, paralysed, in bed, while being cared for by his sister. This makes all three works, which he wrote within one year (1888) a peculiar collection - historically and from a philosophical point of view. Students of Nietzsche have claimed time and again that one can already see the signs of his coming demise in these three works. This is the same pseudo-psychologism as claiming one could already see Stalin's reign of terror in the way he played with his fellow classmates when he was a child. With hindsight, everything is explainable.
Anyway, the works themseves vary in quality and attractiveness. Götzendämmerung, or Twilight of the Idols, is the first and most interesting work. Nietzsche claims he 'philosophizes with a hammer' and with it, he smashes Socrates, Plato and Christianity in thousands of pieces. Socrates was the first decadent philosopher, the one who destroyed thinking for millennia. Why? Because he, and especially Plato, fled from this world into an imaginary world, a perfect world of Ideas. Christianity took this to a whole new level with its New Testament, fleeing from this life into an afterlife. Plato destroyed Hellenic superiority; Christianity destroyed Judaism, as practiced by the superior Kings of old. As far as Judaism was practiced in a priestly way, it was as servile and weak as Plato's philosophy and Christianity.
Christianity tamed 'the blond beast', according to Nietzsche. It has created a sick man, who revels in weakness and victimhood. For him, it is time to leave this sick morality of the victim behind us, and give ourselves up to the Will to power that rests in each of us. What this means, is basically to live your own life, to determine who you are with your own decisions and actions. Nietzsche's existentialism is an ethic of strength, health and action, as opposed to the herd-mentality of the religious and the socialists. He calls this the Dionysian life - a life full of vigour and passions, lived to the fullest.
Anyway, after dispelling with (1) Socratic and Platonic 'Hintlerweltlerei' - i.e. the positing of a better, imaginary world behind this real world -, (2) Kant's perversion of this other world (his'Welt an sich', as opposed to the 'Anschauungswelt' ) (3) and Schopenhauer's extension of Kant ('Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung'), Nietzsche decides in Der Antichrist to mount a full frontal assault on Christianity.
He destroys the origins and morality of both Judaism and Christianity. In essence, both religions are dominated by priests, who prey on the weak to subvert morality. Rabbinic Judaism and Christianity see in the meek the heroes, while promising eternal punishment in the afterlife to the strong. Nietzsche doesn't seem to hold back - he utterly degrades Christianity as a moral code. But not only this, we - modern man, decadent man - have destroyed God through science and philosophy. We have dismantled Christianity, but the Christian slave morality is still dominating, albeit in a much more nihilistic fashion. Mankind hasn't realized yet (as of writing, 1888) what he has accomplished - the next 200 years will be a struggle for Mankind to come to grips with the death of God and the nihilism that remains.
Der Antichrist is interesting from a religious perspective, in that it offers a unique insight into the son of a Lutheran priest gone wild. Especially interesting is his thesis that Judaism accomplished the denaturalization of man - the eradication of all natural influences and the retreat into the 'spirit'. One can see here the development of Western thinking, and its reaction (Science from Descartes onwards). Nevertheless, it becomes a bit tiring after a while. Nietzsche's style of prose, unfortunately, isn't the best suited for a long treatise on religious criticism...
With Ecce Homo (or, Behold here, Man) the trilogy comes to a close. In this little work, Nietzsche tries to paint a picture of himself, through his own eyes. Although the earlier two works were both difficult to follow and seemed to border on the insane (if not for the fact that Nietzsche already proclaimed these doctrines in his earlier works), Ecce Homo seems to be to be uninterpretable....
Nietzsche starts of by describing how his dead father and his living mother influenced him to be a decadent, but at the same time a very un-decadent philosopher. Then he explains all his suffering - digestion problems, blindness, depressions, etc. - and after this, he goes into detailed analysis and review of all his earlier books. Since I haven't read all of his earlier works (just Morgenröte, Zur Genealogie der Moral, Götzendämmerung and Der Antichrist), I cannot really say anything useful about these parts of the book. He ends the book with, once more, a critique on the slave morality of Christianity and signs off with 'Dionysus versus the Crucified'.
At this point in his career as a philosopher of culture - because that was what Nietzsche in essence was - he had uncovered the germ that causes the sick society he saw around him. The Christian slave morality and the death of God through science, had tamed the 'blonde beasts'. In this sense, it is interesting to note that Götzendämmerung (Twilight of the Idols) was originally intended to be the first part of a larger work, 'Der Umwertung aller Werte' - the transvaluation of all values. Nietzsche saw it as his task to, after destroying the slave morality, offer us new guidelines to a supreme morality.
Anyway, shortly after he succumbed to psychotic attacks and spend the rest of his days, until 1900, as a paralyzed patient suffering from strokes and nervous breakdowns. The life of Nietzsche is a strange one, also a tragic one. It is the life of a sick and lonely man, who grew up in a religious context but looked down on these dogmatic delusions, and who resented the world around him. His obsession with strength, courage, action and determining one's own life seems to stem from his own shortcomings as a human being. His crusade against weakness and resentment seems in reality to be a deep seated self-hatred. But I will not continue my pseudo-psychologizing of Nietzsche - it's just that his life and his circumstances almost seem to beg for the obvious remark that his philosophy was his own version of Idealism (in the Platonic sense).
Is this collection of Nietzsche's last three works worth reading? Well...I don't think one can get anything from it if one is unfamiliar with some of Nietzsche's earlier works. And even then, Nietzsche is a very peculiar taste in literature - I personally don't like his style of prose, at all. So read it, or maybe not...
Anyway, the works themseves vary in quality and attractiveness. Götzendämmerung, or Twilight of the Idols, is the first and most interesting work. Nietzsche claims he 'philosophizes with a hammer' and with it, he smashes Socrates, Plato and Christianity in thousands of pieces. Socrates was the first decadent philosopher, the one who destroyed thinking for millennia. Why? Because he, and especially Plato, fled from this world into an imaginary world, a perfect world of Ideas. Christianity took this to a whole new level with its New Testament, fleeing from this life into an afterlife. Plato destroyed Hellenic superiority; Christianity destroyed Judaism, as practiced by the superior Kings of old. As far as Judaism was practiced in a priestly way, it was as servile and weak as Plato's philosophy and Christianity.
Christianity tamed 'the blond beast', according to Nietzsche. It has created a sick man, who revels in weakness and victimhood. For him, it is time to leave this sick morality of the victim behind us, and give ourselves up to the Will to power that rests in each of us. What this means, is basically to live your own life, to determine who you are with your own decisions and actions. Nietzsche's existentialism is an ethic of strength, health and action, as opposed to the herd-mentality of the religious and the socialists. He calls this the Dionysian life - a life full of vigour and passions, lived to the fullest.
Anyway, after dispelling with (1) Socratic and Platonic 'Hintlerweltlerei' - i.e. the positing of a better, imaginary world behind this real world -, (2) Kant's perversion of this other world (his'Welt an sich', as opposed to the 'Anschauungswelt' ) (3) and Schopenhauer's extension of Kant ('Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung'), Nietzsche decides in Der Antichrist to mount a full frontal assault on Christianity.
He destroys the origins and morality of both Judaism and Christianity. In essence, both religions are dominated by priests, who prey on the weak to subvert morality. Rabbinic Judaism and Christianity see in the meek the heroes, while promising eternal punishment in the afterlife to the strong. Nietzsche doesn't seem to hold back - he utterly degrades Christianity as a moral code. But not only this, we - modern man, decadent man - have destroyed God through science and philosophy. We have dismantled Christianity, but the Christian slave morality is still dominating, albeit in a much more nihilistic fashion. Mankind hasn't realized yet (as of writing, 1888) what he has accomplished - the next 200 years will be a struggle for Mankind to come to grips with the death of God and the nihilism that remains.
Der Antichrist is interesting from a religious perspective, in that it offers a unique insight into the son of a Lutheran priest gone wild. Especially interesting is his thesis that Judaism accomplished the denaturalization of man - the eradication of all natural influences and the retreat into the 'spirit'. One can see here the development of Western thinking, and its reaction (Science from Descartes onwards). Nevertheless, it becomes a bit tiring after a while. Nietzsche's style of prose, unfortunately, isn't the best suited for a long treatise on religious criticism...
With Ecce Homo (or, Behold here, Man) the trilogy comes to a close. In this little work, Nietzsche tries to paint a picture of himself, through his own eyes. Although the earlier two works were both difficult to follow and seemed to border on the insane (if not for the fact that Nietzsche already proclaimed these doctrines in his earlier works), Ecce Homo seems to be to be uninterpretable....
Nietzsche starts of by describing how his dead father and his living mother influenced him to be a decadent, but at the same time a very un-decadent philosopher. Then he explains all his suffering - digestion problems, blindness, depressions, etc. - and after this, he goes into detailed analysis and review of all his earlier books. Since I haven't read all of his earlier works (just Morgenröte, Zur Genealogie der Moral, Götzendämmerung and Der Antichrist), I cannot really say anything useful about these parts of the book. He ends the book with, once more, a critique on the slave morality of Christianity and signs off with 'Dionysus versus the Crucified'.
At this point in his career as a philosopher of culture - because that was what Nietzsche in essence was - he had uncovered the germ that causes the sick society he saw around him. The Christian slave morality and the death of God through science, had tamed the 'blonde beasts'. In this sense, it is interesting to note that Götzendämmerung (Twilight of the Idols) was originally intended to be the first part of a larger work, 'Der Umwertung aller Werte' - the transvaluation of all values. Nietzsche saw it as his task to, after destroying the slave morality, offer us new guidelines to a supreme morality.
Anyway, shortly after he succumbed to psychotic attacks and spend the rest of his days, until 1900, as a paralyzed patient suffering from strokes and nervous breakdowns. The life of Nietzsche is a strange one, also a tragic one. It is the life of a sick and lonely man, who grew up in a religious context but looked down on these dogmatic delusions, and who resented the world around him. His obsession with strength, courage, action and determining one's own life seems to stem from his own shortcomings as a human being. His crusade against weakness and resentment seems in reality to be a deep seated self-hatred. But I will not continue my pseudo-psychologizing of Nietzsche - it's just that his life and his circumstances almost seem to beg for the obvious remark that his philosophy was his own version of Idealism (in the Platonic sense).
Is this collection of Nietzsche's last three works worth reading? Well...I don't think one can get anything from it if one is unfamiliar with some of Nietzsche's earlier works. And even then, Nietzsche is a very peculiar taste in literature - I personally don't like his style of prose, at all. So read it, or maybe not...
May 12, 2014
This review is for Twilight of the Idols and Ecce Homo. See my previous review of The Anti Christ here: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
Nietzsche is utterly brilliant, and it doesn't take a skilled philosopher to realize this. In fact, most trained philosophers of the 21st century don't take Nietzsche seriously precisely because he was not a logician, or a systematic philosopher in any sense of the word. On the contrary, Nietzsche was a self-proclaimed disciple of Dionysus; the first immoralist, psychologist, and Antichrist, he did not utilize propositional logic, nay he wrote in thunderbolts with flashes of divine inspiration of lightning—artistic ecstasy, and the will to power, the yea to life in a Dionysean orgaism . This is Nietzsche the prophet, not just Nietzsche the philosopher or philologist.
It is in the spirit of the aforesaid that Nietzsche wrote Twilight and Ecce during his later years previous to his breakdown. "Twilight of the Idols" is a brilliant piece wherein Nietzsche discusses things from "the problem of Socrates," seeing Socratic reason and virtue, and also Plato's idealism and forms, as wholly opposite of what the true Greek spirit stood for. Nietzsche ruminates on a lot of what he put forth in The Birth of Tragedy (see my review here: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show... ) but he is here more concise and candid.
Nietzsche further discusses the "problems with the Germans," and rages pretty hard against nationalism, German culture or lack thereof, and German idealism (Nietzsche hates Kant as much as he hates Plato and Socrates, among others like Hegel and his ridiculous system). In short, Twilight is Nietzsche's harbinger against all idols which he defines as any idealism that takes away from the apparent world--which is the real world, and such a real world as postulated by the Christians, Kantians (or can't-ians as Nietzsche jested) is wholly a figment of projecting decadent morality to an ontological maximum, something unfounded and unwarranted given our natural Dionysian instincts of sensuality and power--and the senses, which is all humans have, and hence the truly strong willed must yield to their Dionysian nature. To hell with the Christian trick of free-will and consequent sin, remorse, and guilt—a grand trick by the priests and semi-priests of old, the weak and decadent.
"Ecce Homo" is Nietzsche's lucid thoughts concerning his life's work thitherto in his early forties. He recounts a lot of interesting personal notes one would not understand unless they were well acquainted with his works and life. Nietzsche also has, again, a nice diatribe against the Germans, and seems to want to exonerate his blood by trying to convince his readers he is mostly Polish anyway. To be sure, as much as Nietzsche was read and taught during his lifetime from Russia and Denmark to France and America, he was scarcely mentioned in his own native country, Germany.
In short, a great collection of Nietzschean thought, and as always, Nietzsche is dynamite with his aphorisms and maxims, but one needs to make sure that they are adept in Nietzschean hermeneutics, lest they wrestle the intended meaning of out of his wry and clever maxims.
Nietzsche is utterly brilliant, and it doesn't take a skilled philosopher to realize this. In fact, most trained philosophers of the 21st century don't take Nietzsche seriously precisely because he was not a logician, or a systematic philosopher in any sense of the word. On the contrary, Nietzsche was a self-proclaimed disciple of Dionysus; the first immoralist, psychologist, and Antichrist, he did not utilize propositional logic, nay he wrote in thunderbolts with flashes of divine inspiration of lightning—artistic ecstasy, and the will to power, the yea to life in a Dionysean orgaism . This is Nietzsche the prophet, not just Nietzsche the philosopher or philologist.
It is in the spirit of the aforesaid that Nietzsche wrote Twilight and Ecce during his later years previous to his breakdown. "Twilight of the Idols" is a brilliant piece wherein Nietzsche discusses things from "the problem of Socrates," seeing Socratic reason and virtue, and also Plato's idealism and forms, as wholly opposite of what the true Greek spirit stood for. Nietzsche ruminates on a lot of what he put forth in The Birth of Tragedy (see my review here: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show... ) but he is here more concise and candid.
Nietzsche further discusses the "problems with the Germans," and rages pretty hard against nationalism, German culture or lack thereof, and German idealism (Nietzsche hates Kant as much as he hates Plato and Socrates, among others like Hegel and his ridiculous system). In short, Twilight is Nietzsche's harbinger against all idols which he defines as any idealism that takes away from the apparent world--which is the real world, and such a real world as postulated by the Christians, Kantians (or can't-ians as Nietzsche jested) is wholly a figment of projecting decadent morality to an ontological maximum, something unfounded and unwarranted given our natural Dionysian instincts of sensuality and power--and the senses, which is all humans have, and hence the truly strong willed must yield to their Dionysian nature. To hell with the Christian trick of free-will and consequent sin, remorse, and guilt—a grand trick by the priests and semi-priests of old, the weak and decadent.
"Ecce Homo" is Nietzsche's lucid thoughts concerning his life's work thitherto in his early forties. He recounts a lot of interesting personal notes one would not understand unless they were well acquainted with his works and life. Nietzsche also has, again, a nice diatribe against the Germans, and seems to want to exonerate his blood by trying to convince his readers he is mostly Polish anyway. To be sure, as much as Nietzsche was read and taught during his lifetime from Russia and Denmark to France and America, he was scarcely mentioned in his own native country, Germany.
In short, a great collection of Nietzschean thought, and as always, Nietzsche is dynamite with his aphorisms and maxims, but one needs to make sure that they are adept in Nietzschean hermeneutics, lest they wrestle the intended meaning of out of his wry and clever maxims.
January 14, 2024
I simply am not smart enough to understand a lot of this. The ideas I could grasp were cool though.
January 22, 2025
Don’t let the rating fool you a very much enjoyed this book. Now the reason I think I really liked this book is I’ve never encountered someone as unique in their thought as Nietzsche, who turned philosophy onto its head like he? Nietzsche here really cements himself as a fierce critic of just about everything especially in Twilight of the idols where he attacks just about everything, whether it’s Religion, Socrates, Idealism, Kant and traditional views on Morality.
I think missiles and maxims was a fun introduction of just short sort of quotations packed full of Nietzsche’s personal philosophy.
Now it was only last review of Gorgias where I was heralding Socrates as such a fantastic anti authority figure, my views were heavily challenged in the sense that Neitzche would say that Socrates use of reason is as a counter-tyrant to get to his perverted end. In his critique of Socrates he is furious at the popularisation of dialectics for before Socrates they were a last resort.
I find Neitzches conclusions can be quite radical, as in I agree Reason can reach us to radical conclusions but to ‘pray’ upon our Instinct could just be as silly. However, his critiques of Reason are valid in the sense that Philosophers have used it to create fake worlds ignoring the marvels of sense.
Now in the Antichrist I think you can only be so unique when you are criticising religion so his criticsm of the priests is nothing we haven’t heard before. But I think Nietzsches philosophy of Christian Nihilism fascinating, viewing it as self denial where you can only affirm life by standing up for yourself not succumbing to shame, this melds the character for the ubermensch.
He views Christianity as an Anarchic Judaism, neither the anarchist can stand up and lead for in his eyes they are sheep, in a surprising fashion he advocates for a caste system as virtue is determined by status, now here’s where I think the Nazis really could misinterpret Neitzche and manipulate his ideas, there are other parts on the book where this is evident. There is a point in the book where Neitzche to my assessment mischaracterises Buddhism to fit his reality which I found intresting in the sense that he compared in its promises compared to Christianity, I still couldn’t bring myself to adopt it.
As for Ecce hommo there were drops I liked but I think it would’ve helped if I had more of a background in Nietzsche (I didn’t get it) so I couldn’t really enjoy ecce hommo.
Pretty damn good book, it will get you thinking.
I think missiles and maxims was a fun introduction of just short sort of quotations packed full of Nietzsche’s personal philosophy.
Now it was only last review of Gorgias where I was heralding Socrates as such a fantastic anti authority figure, my views were heavily challenged in the sense that Neitzche would say that Socrates use of reason is as a counter-tyrant to get to his perverted end. In his critique of Socrates he is furious at the popularisation of dialectics for before Socrates they were a last resort.
I find Neitzches conclusions can be quite radical, as in I agree Reason can reach us to radical conclusions but to ‘pray’ upon our Instinct could just be as silly. However, his critiques of Reason are valid in the sense that Philosophers have used it to create fake worlds ignoring the marvels of sense.
Now in the Antichrist I think you can only be so unique when you are criticising religion so his criticsm of the priests is nothing we haven’t heard before. But I think Nietzsches philosophy of Christian Nihilism fascinating, viewing it as self denial where you can only affirm life by standing up for yourself not succumbing to shame, this melds the character for the ubermensch.
He views Christianity as an Anarchic Judaism, neither the anarchist can stand up and lead for in his eyes they are sheep, in a surprising fashion he advocates for a caste system as virtue is determined by status, now here’s where I think the Nazis really could misinterpret Neitzche and manipulate his ideas, there are other parts on the book where this is evident. There is a point in the book where Neitzche to my assessment mischaracterises Buddhism to fit his reality which I found intresting in the sense that he compared in its promises compared to Christianity, I still couldn’t bring myself to adopt it.
As for Ecce hommo there were drops I liked but I think it would’ve helped if I had more of a background in Nietzsche (I didn’t get it) so I couldn’t really enjoy ecce hommo.
Pretty damn good book, it will get you thinking.
Read
September 11, 2022Excited to read more of his work now. Phenomenal writing and mind-opening ideas, gonna read ''Thus Spoke Zarathustra'' next, as It is regarded by himself as his masterpiece and he never stops referencing it in these 3 books. After that - ''Beyond Good and Evil'' and ''Human, all too Human''.
April 1, 2025
Nietzsche presents many thought-provoking arguments in the book. However, I find that I can't relate to or agree with most of them. While he was undoubtedly a great philosopher, his views don't align with my own perspective.
February 23, 2018
The first interesting thing I discovered about Nietzsche is something I suspected when I read Beyond Good and Evil: Nietzsche "learnt much from La Rochefoucauld" (p. viii). And to start off with first principles, Nietzsche makes an interesting observation: morality is "a misrepresentation of certain phenomena, for there are no moral facts whatever (p. xi). I have now come to terms with the idea of Dionysian "chaos" versus the Apollonian "order". Interestingly, this struck me last night at the Canberra Symphony Orchestra's performances of Prokofiev's Piano Concerto No. 2 in G minor, op. 16 (with acclaimed Australian pianist Tamara-Anna Cislowska as the soloist), and Shostakovich's Symphony No. 9 in E flat major, op. 70. My friend and colleague, a sociologist, who invited us to the concert, has often spoken of these two opposing approaches. But until now, I have been ignorant to the depth of meaning that is so readily missed when one's antennae are not properly directed. And so, Nietzsche sees art as "Dionysian. It is amoral". "Christian art" is an oxymoron, yet Islam is "a virile religion, a religion for men". Nietzsche sees Christianity and alcohol as "the two great means of corruption" (p. 160). A central message (one of too many!) is that, "where the will to power is lacking, degeneration sets in" (p. 97). Nietzsche blames Saint Paul for destroying Rome, and Luther for destroying the Renaissance. Well I never! Kant perpetuated some of the decay, but Goethe, the antipodes of Kant, "disciplined himself into a harmonious whole, he created himself" (p. 81). Further, and while Nietzsche may well have predicted the World Wars, he may also have predicted the decay of our current institutions. Nietzsche argued that we have forgotten the purpose of our institutions (something that would seem apparent in my understanding of theories of institutional change), in effect, institutions require:
...a sort of will, instinct, imperative, which cannot be otherwise than antiliberal to the point of wickedness: the will to tradition, to authority, to responsibility for centuries to come, to solidarity in long family lines forwards and backwards in infinitum. If this will is present, something is founded which resembles the imperium Romanum: or Russia, the only great nation today that has some lasting grit in her.In speaking of first principles, Nietzsche appears as a Neo-Con Flâneur (p. 72); yet he does not mince words:
First principle: a man must need to be strong, otherwise he will never attain it. - those great forcing-houses of the strong, of the strongest kind of men that have ever existed on earth, the aristocratic communities like those of Rome and Venice, understood freedom precisely as I understand the word: as something that one has and one has not, as something that one will have and that one seizes by force.I can't pretend to know everything about Nietzsche, and I doubt I can commit to further study beyond a once-reading of the majority of his work. But something has changed in me as a result. I will blog about Ecce Homo in a subsequent post, as I am reading it in a separate book with an easier-to-read type-font, but from Nietzsche's autobiography, he arose from illness (and, paradoxically, to return to it soon after) to suffer no longer from "'ill-luck' nor 'guilt'". He "is strong enough to make everything turn to his own advantage" (p. 176). In this way, Nietzsche is much like Marcus Aurelius: Amor Fati. And no longer can my response be "merely" academic: I feel a weight of centuries lifting, I see why our institutions are crumbling, I fear the solution will not be forthcoming until the next major crisis disrupts human society yet again; I know that this will all be forgotten by future generations. And so time will march on. But Nietzsche does not leave me pessimistic, nor does he leave me disturbed as Viktor Frankl does. He leaves me free. Is this too dramatic? Read what I have read and tell me. I am all ears.
October 27, 2022
I mean, I’m a one-trick pony, but oh boy am I tired of these massive scions of intellectual conquest who are at one at the same time so fucking anti-women. I’ve read stuff (caveat: on Tumblr) about Nietzsche’s personal life, that he was a sickly virgin who could barely talk to a woman, and that greatly informed his pre-incel attitude towards them. But reading the text as a text, you don’t get insight into that (presumably because Nietzsche didn’t possess it), and all you’re left with is this scathing screed against the duplicitous scheming weaker sex. It’s boring, my dude.
The gist of Twilight of the Idols is that Nietzsche thinks that the Christian virtues of humility, goodness, kindness, etc have weakened the human race by removing the instinct for self-preservation that is the first step to greatness. He repeats most of this in The Antichrist, and then Ecce Homo is this profoundly self-congratulatory autobiography that also contains potshots at various critics of his work. If Dorian Gray wrote a biography, it would sound like this.
In Twilight, he speaks of the ‘imaginary causes’ we use to account for our feelings. The unfamiliar feels anxious, so we want to dissipate its strangeness as soon as possible by explaining it. All religion and morality is thus ‘imaginary causes’ for sensations, such as ‘sin’. This is a pretty good take. He adds, in The Antichrist, that suffering is not respectable, and hence the ‘devil’ was invented as a reason not to be ashamed of suffering, because how could you help it, against such an enemy?
He also decided that free will was invented for the purposes of punishment. To hold someone guilty, all their actions must be voluntary. However, no one is responsible for the fact that they exist. It also denies God’s responsibility to save the world. This is also a fascinating insight.
His point about education is highly classist and exclusionary, but the fact is it’s true that educators need to be educated, to have ‘superior and noble instincts’. Higher education is no longer an elite privilege; he and I disagree that this change is a bad thing. I overall agree with his assertion that the overriding aim of education is to defer judgment and not respond immediately to a stimulus (hello, Twitter).
I also like his definition of an artist as someone who transfigures; ‘the impulse to transfigure into the beautiful is Art.’ The reason for the existence of beauty is procreation, both the lowest sensuality and the highest spirituality. The artist has a ‘fearless attitude towards that which is terrible and questionable’ and communicates this with a ‘cup of sweetest cruelty’. Love it.
I do not, however, agree that doctors should ‘impart contempt for the sick who should be dead’ and ‘eliminate degenerate life’. Hard pass. To Nietzsche, helping anyone makes everyone an invalid. His evidence is that we’d all die if we lived in the Renaissance. Okay, dude.
His concept of justice, by the way, is ‘to equals equality, to unequals inequality.’ He wants to never make unequal things equal. a ‘high civilisation’ has a ‘broad base of mediocrity’.
This is a good one: the most common lie is one you tell yourself, by comparison lying to other is relatively exceptional. Oof.
In Ecce, he says strong natures need an adversary against which to test themselves, and that where you despise you can’t wage war, and where you command you ought not. If you replace ‘wage war’ with ‘challenge,’ this actually makes sense. He also advises to ‘deal with great tasks as play’, and that he doesn’t suffer from solitude so much as multitude. I FELT that.
TWILIGHT OF THE IDOLS
Famous quotes:
‘If a man knows the wherefore of his existence, then the manner of it can take care of itself. Man does not aspire to happiness; only the Englishman does that.’
‘I fear we shall never be rid of God, so long as we believe in grammar.’
‘Only those thoughts that come by walking have any value.’
In which Fred Nietzsche expounds the very twenty-first century virtue of taking a stupid walk for your stupid mental health.
Examples of mundane misogyny you’d think a great intellect like this man claims to possess would be far above:
‘When woman possesses masculine virtues, she is enough to make you run away. When she possesses no msculine virtues, she herself runs away.’
Interesting takes:
‘Moral: morality must be shot at.’
‘The most intellectual men, provided they are also the most courageous, experience the most excruciating tragedies: but on that very account they honour life, because it confronts them with its most formidable antagonism.’
‘The very act of complaining, the mere fact that one bewails one’s lot, may lend such a charm to life that on that account alone one is ready to endure it. There is a small amount of revenge in every lamentation.’
This is pretty true, at least clinically.
‘But, again I ask, what do people want? If they desire a certain end, then they should desire the means thereto. If they will have slaves, then it is madness to educate them to be masters.’
HMM OKAY NO.
THE ANTICHRIST
‘One must be superior to humanity in power, in loftiness of soul – in contempt.’ ok fred
‘What is the only kind of man who has reasons for wriggling out of reality by lies? The man who suffers from reality. [...] The preponderance of pain over pleasure is the cause of that fictitious morality and religion: but any such preponderance furnishes the formula for decadence.’
‘We should feel just as little inclined to hobnob with “the first Christians” as with Polish Jews: not that we need to explain our objections … they simply smell bad.’ YEAH WOW NOT GOOD ENOUGH ACTUALLY
‘However small an amount of loving piety we might possess, a god who cured us in time of a cold in the nose, or who arranged for us to enter a carriage just at the moment when a cloud burst over our heads, would be such an absurd god that he would have to be abolished, even if he existed. God as a domestic servant, as a postman, as a general provider – in short, merely a word for the most foolish kind of accidents … ‘Divine Providence’, as it is believed in today buy almost every third man in ‘cultured Germany’, would be an argument against God, in fact it would be the strongest argument against God that could be imagined.’
This has the distinct flavour of CS Lewis’ pro-God argument. Curious!
‘’[...] save, of course, the abortions among them, the emancipated ones, those who lack the wherewithall to have children. Thank goodness I am not willing to let myself be torn to pieces! the perfect woman tears you to pieces when she loves you: I know these amiable Maenads …. Oh! what a dangerous, creeping, subterranean little beast of prey she is! and so agreeable withal! A little woman, pursuing her vengeance, would force open even the iron gates of Fate itself. Woman is incalculably more wicked than man, she is also cleverer. Goodness in a woman is already a sign of degeneration.’
I am. So tired.
The gist of Twilight of the Idols is that Nietzsche thinks that the Christian virtues of humility, goodness, kindness, etc have weakened the human race by removing the instinct for self-preservation that is the first step to greatness. He repeats most of this in The Antichrist, and then Ecce Homo is this profoundly self-congratulatory autobiography that also contains potshots at various critics of his work. If Dorian Gray wrote a biography, it would sound like this.
In Twilight, he speaks of the ‘imaginary causes’ we use to account for our feelings. The unfamiliar feels anxious, so we want to dissipate its strangeness as soon as possible by explaining it. All religion and morality is thus ‘imaginary causes’ for sensations, such as ‘sin’. This is a pretty good take. He adds, in The Antichrist, that suffering is not respectable, and hence the ‘devil’ was invented as a reason not to be ashamed of suffering, because how could you help it, against such an enemy?
He also decided that free will was invented for the purposes of punishment. To hold someone guilty, all their actions must be voluntary. However, no one is responsible for the fact that they exist. It also denies God’s responsibility to save the world. This is also a fascinating insight.
His point about education is highly classist and exclusionary, but the fact is it’s true that educators need to be educated, to have ‘superior and noble instincts’. Higher education is no longer an elite privilege; he and I disagree that this change is a bad thing. I overall agree with his assertion that the overriding aim of education is to defer judgment and not respond immediately to a stimulus (hello, Twitter).
I also like his definition of an artist as someone who transfigures; ‘the impulse to transfigure into the beautiful is Art.’ The reason for the existence of beauty is procreation, both the lowest sensuality and the highest spirituality. The artist has a ‘fearless attitude towards that which is terrible and questionable’ and communicates this with a ‘cup of sweetest cruelty’. Love it.
I do not, however, agree that doctors should ‘impart contempt for the sick who should be dead’ and ‘eliminate degenerate life’. Hard pass. To Nietzsche, helping anyone makes everyone an invalid. His evidence is that we’d all die if we lived in the Renaissance. Okay, dude.
His concept of justice, by the way, is ‘to equals equality, to unequals inequality.’ He wants to never make unequal things equal. a ‘high civilisation’ has a ‘broad base of mediocrity’.
This is a good one: the most common lie is one you tell yourself, by comparison lying to other is relatively exceptional. Oof.
In Ecce, he says strong natures need an adversary against which to test themselves, and that where you despise you can’t wage war, and where you command you ought not. If you replace ‘wage war’ with ‘challenge,’ this actually makes sense. He also advises to ‘deal with great tasks as play’, and that he doesn’t suffer from solitude so much as multitude. I FELT that.
TWILIGHT OF THE IDOLS
Famous quotes:
‘If a man knows the wherefore of his existence, then the manner of it can take care of itself. Man does not aspire to happiness; only the Englishman does that.’
‘I fear we shall never be rid of God, so long as we believe in grammar.’
‘Only those thoughts that come by walking have any value.’
In which Fred Nietzsche expounds the very twenty-first century virtue of taking a stupid walk for your stupid mental health.
Examples of mundane misogyny you’d think a great intellect like this man claims to possess would be far above:
‘When woman possesses masculine virtues, she is enough to make you run away. When she possesses no msculine virtues, she herself runs away.’
Interesting takes:
‘Moral: morality must be shot at.’
‘The most intellectual men, provided they are also the most courageous, experience the most excruciating tragedies: but on that very account they honour life, because it confronts them with its most formidable antagonism.’
‘The very act of complaining, the mere fact that one bewails one’s lot, may lend such a charm to life that on that account alone one is ready to endure it. There is a small amount of revenge in every lamentation.’
This is pretty true, at least clinically.
‘But, again I ask, what do people want? If they desire a certain end, then they should desire the means thereto. If they will have slaves, then it is madness to educate them to be masters.’
HMM OKAY NO.
THE ANTICHRIST
‘One must be superior to humanity in power, in loftiness of soul – in contempt.’ ok fred
‘What is the only kind of man who has reasons for wriggling out of reality by lies? The man who suffers from reality. [...] The preponderance of pain over pleasure is the cause of that fictitious morality and religion: but any such preponderance furnishes the formula for decadence.’
‘We should feel just as little inclined to hobnob with “the first Christians” as with Polish Jews: not that we need to explain our objections … they simply smell bad.’ YEAH WOW NOT GOOD ENOUGH ACTUALLY
‘However small an amount of loving piety we might possess, a god who cured us in time of a cold in the nose, or who arranged for us to enter a carriage just at the moment when a cloud burst over our heads, would be such an absurd god that he would have to be abolished, even if he existed. God as a domestic servant, as a postman, as a general provider – in short, merely a word for the most foolish kind of accidents … ‘Divine Providence’, as it is believed in today buy almost every third man in ‘cultured Germany’, would be an argument against God, in fact it would be the strongest argument against God that could be imagined.’
This has the distinct flavour of CS Lewis’ pro-God argument. Curious!
‘’[...] save, of course, the abortions among them, the emancipated ones, those who lack the wherewithall to have children. Thank goodness I am not willing to let myself be torn to pieces! the perfect woman tears you to pieces when she loves you: I know these amiable Maenads …. Oh! what a dangerous, creeping, subterranean little beast of prey she is! and so agreeable withal! A little woman, pursuing her vengeance, would force open even the iron gates of Fate itself. Woman is incalculably more wicked than man, she is also cleverer. Goodness in a woman is already a sign of degeneration.’
I am. So tired.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
August 4, 2007
I only read 'Twilight of the Idols' from this, but it was a blast. Nietzsche called himself the master of the aphorism, even said no one would top him. Typical Nietzschian bravado, posturing, verve and nuttiness with very little argument. I loved it. Great summer reading because it makes you want to be intoxicated with something, anything, especially yourself.
January 9, 2015
I opposed a lot of his views, but I respected his dialectical way of delivering his point of views. This book will challenge you to think outside the box and see religion, philosophy, and human rhetoric in a new light. It is definitely read worthy.
September 26, 2021
Κάθε λάθος, υπό οποιαδήποτε έννοια, είναι συνέπεια του εκφυλισμού του ενστίκτου, της αποσάθρωσης της θέλησης: σχεδόν ορίζει κάνεις μ'αυτό τον τρόπο το κακό. Καθετί καλό είναι ένστικτο - και κατά συνέπεια ελαφρό, αναγκαίο, ελεύθερο. Ο κόπος είναι μία ένσταση, ο Θεός είναι τυπικά διαφορετικός από τον ήρωα (στη δική μου γλώσσα: τα ελαφριά πόδια είναι το πρώτο κατηγόρημα της θεϊκότητας).
👓 Το σκουλήκι συσπειρώνεται όταν το πατούν. Έτσι είναι έξυπνο. Μ' αυτόν τον τρόπο μειώνει τις πιθανότητες να το ξαναπατήσουν. Στη γλώσσα της ηθικής: ταπεινοφροσύνη.
👓 Το σκουλήκι συσπειρώνεται όταν το πατούν. Έτσι είναι έξυπνο. Μ' αυτόν τον τρόπο μειώνει τις πιθανότητες να το ξαναπατήσουν. Στη γλώσσα της ηθικής: ταπεινοφροσύνη.
May 28, 2020
Popped the Nietzsche cherry with this aphoristic collection of his later works - Twilight of the Idols was certainly a provocative read, but I probably need to familiarise myself with his earlier writings (e.g. Zarathustra) in order to gain a better understanding of what he was rambling about in Antichrist and Ecce Homo.
January 7, 2023
This is the most sexist, racist, pretentious and rambling book I can remember reading. Any interesting points about the uselessness or hypocrisy of Christianity are lost in an incoherent mess of Nietzche applauding himself, railing against women doing anything academic, and verbally attacking other boring dead guys. I wish I could give zero stars.
July 18, 2023
4.25 ⭐️
“I cannot, at this point, stifle a sigh. There are days when I am visited by a feeling blacker than the blackest melancholy - the contempt of man.”
A self-described “criticism of modernity”, I thought that a lot of cheek shone through in his writing. I appreciated the somewhat frantic and surprisingly witty critiques of Christianity and the Church.
“I cannot, at this point, stifle a sigh. There are days when I am visited by a feeling blacker than the blackest melancholy - the contempt of man.”
A self-described “criticism of modernity”, I thought that a lot of cheek shone through in his writing. I appreciated the somewhat frantic and surprisingly witty critiques of Christianity and the Church.
December 29, 2024
Some of Nietzsche's most famous writings. So broad it's hard to really review. Always difficult to capture his thought, even he would struggle to give a systematic analysis. But wonderful to read, always thought provoking.
June 28, 2018
An excellent collection of Nitezsche writings
October 3, 2021
Noioso
Read
May 9, 2024Notes to follow.
Nietzsche at his most Nietzschean so far.
I might finish *The Antichrist* real quick but I want to jump to Foucault or Deleuze or maybe Kaufmann’s book on Nietzsche first.
Nietzsche at his most Nietzschean so far.
I might finish *The Antichrist* real quick but I want to jump to Foucault or Deleuze or maybe Kaufmann’s book on Nietzsche first.
October 2, 2024
Justified ego
Twilight of the idols 4/5
The antichrist 5/5 (loooooved)
Ecce Homo 2/5 - probably will change when I’ve actually read what he’s discussing
Twilight of the idols 4/5
The antichrist 5/5 (loooooved)
Ecce Homo 2/5 - probably will change when I’ve actually read what he’s discussing
August 18, 2025
Es un compilado de Nietzsche, vamos! Genial, pero algo denso de leer. Tarde mucho y necesitaba tiempo para procesar algunos extractos.
February 19, 2015
I first heard of Nietzsche when a friend had to write an essay on his theories. I researched one of his theories and was fascinated by his concept of the world being metaphysical and that how we perceive the world may not actually be how it exists in terms of planes. However the works described within these pages are nothing akin to a theory such as this. These works are simply opinion based descriptions of how Nietzsche believed himself to be above everyone else. I wonder if these delusions of grandeur were symptoms of something else as most of his presumptions are unfounded. I found it quite prattling as a whole as Nietzsche spends so much time trying to persuade the reader that religion is founded on the lies and corruption of men. I accept that at the time of his writings that it would be the same as trying to persuade people the Earth was not flat and so the prattling can be justified. However it is not fitting for a contemporary reader who already shares these views. Twilight of the Idols did have the odd quote of merit but the drudgery of the latter sections pales this into insignificance.
May 7, 2023
DNF at aprox. 40%, page 110ish.
After reading Twilight of the Gods, which I found to be interesting and good at times, but also weirdly wrong and stupid at others, I started to read The Antichrist. Now, I'm not familiar with Nietzsche nor his works beside these, but it struck me immediately when reading this second work how him challenging the status quo is a good thing, on one hand, but on the other hand, I can't help but see how utterly stupid some of his arguments are. They resonate subjective hatred for Christianity and missunderstanding of it all over the place. Some of his ideas from the Twilight are repeated here but they don't offer clarification on some of his statements nor are they "improvement" of any sort.
Again, I don't fully understand Nietzsche - yet - so all I can say is that for me this was rather boring and futile read. I'm somewhat familiar with his background, also broader historical background and the impact on philosophy as a whole, but till I read some of his arealier woks - when he was still sane - I can't say much about these last pieces he wrote.
2,5/5 stars for now. Maybe 3/5 to be fair.
After reading Twilight of the Gods, which I found to be interesting and good at times, but also weirdly wrong and stupid at others, I started to read The Antichrist. Now, I'm not familiar with Nietzsche nor his works beside these, but it struck me immediately when reading this second work how him challenging the status quo is a good thing, on one hand, but on the other hand, I can't help but see how utterly stupid some of his arguments are. They resonate subjective hatred for Christianity and missunderstanding of it all over the place. Some of his ideas from the Twilight are repeated here but they don't offer clarification on some of his statements nor are they "improvement" of any sort.
Again, I don't fully understand Nietzsche - yet - so all I can say is that for me this was rather boring and futile read. I'm somewhat familiar with his background, also broader historical background and the impact on philosophy as a whole, but till I read some of his arealier woks - when he was still sane - I can't say much about these last pieces he wrote.
2,5/5 stars for now. Maybe 3/5 to be fair.
June 2, 2011
I loved the structure, ideas and arguments in the first two books of this collection. I think I would have given them individually five stars, but Ecce Homo let's them down. E H reads like the liner notes to a "greatest hits" collection. I understand why it was included in the collection (last lucid works) but based on substance, it probably would be better suited in a collection of essays and pamphlets. But for anyone who has never read Nietzsche, Twilight of the Idols is a fantastic romp.
May 7, 2025
Säg ja till livet!
October 23, 2014
my fav
May 8, 2014
Just read "Twilight of the Idols." In short: Nietzsche is a real kick. Sardonic, sad, sarcastic, bitter, brilliant, troubled, direct, chauvinistic... Nietzsche is a veritable grab bag.
August 22, 2015
excelent introduction to Nietzsche's writings through softer themes. Very insightful.
Want to read
April 27, 2010Twilight of the Idols / The Anti-Christ by Friedrich Nietzsche (1968)
Displaying 1 - 30 of 31 reviews