Human, All Too Human: A Book for Free Spirits - A Modern English Translation: Version 2

by Friedrich Nietzsche, Dominic Cardelli Jr. (Translator), Language Model (Translator)

Leather Binding on Spine and Corners with Golden Leaf Printing on round Spine (extra customization on request like complete leather, Golden Screen printing in Front, Color Leather, Colored book etc. ) Reprinted in 2019 with the help of original edition published long back [1915]. This book is printed in black & white, sewing binding for longer life, printed on high quality Paper, re-sized as per Current standards, professionally processed without changing its contents. As these are old books, we processed each page manually and make them readable but in some cases some pages which are blur or missing or black spots. If it is multi volume set, then it is only single volume. We expect that you will understand our compulsion in these books. We found this book important for the readers who want to know more about our old treasure so we brought it back to the shelves. Hope you will like it and give your comments and suggestions. - English, Pages 188. COMPLETE LEATHER WILL COST YOU EXTRA US$ 25 APART FROM THE LEATHER BOUND BOOKS. {FOLIO EDITION IS ALSO AVAILABLE.} . Complete Human all too human a book for free spirits 1915 [Leather Bound] Friedrich Nietzsche, Alexander Harvey(Tr.)

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Classics, Psychology, German Literature, Essays, Literature

98 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 1878

About the author

Friedrich 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.

Reviews

[Bradley · Rating 5 out of 5]

Probably my favorite book by Nietzsche excluding Thus Spoke Zarathustra. If you love aphorisms that pack a punch then this will be right up your alley. Not a laborious read like some "treatise" philosophy, but witty, controversial, eloquent, and brutally honest.
My favorite aphorism - "Life consists of rare individual moments of the highest significance and countless intervals in which at best the phantoms of those moments hover over us. Love, spring, a beautiful melody, the mountains, the moon, the sea - they speak truly to our heart only once: if they ever do in fact find speech. For many people never experience these moments at all but are themselves intervals and pauses in the symphony of real life." (#586) So beautiful! Should be studied alongside Shakespeare. Breathtaking.

[Abdulaziz Al-Mannai · Rating 5 out of 5]

أبهرني في الكتاب دقة ملاحظات نيتشه، حول كل شيء، والتي لا تنتج إلا عن مراقبةٍ طويلةٍ جدًا، أو ذكية.
وكما أن القهوة تُشرب على مهل، كما يقول درويش، فإن نيتشه كذلك، يُقرأُ على مهل.

وستظل تقرأ لنيتشه حتى تظن أنهُ راقبَ العالم كله، دفعةً واحدة!

[Jason · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Nietzsche of his middle period is, in my view, the best, before his mental breakdown. There is less of the crazed polemic in this work than, say, in Ecce Homo, Zarathustra, or Twilight of the Idols, although Nietzsche, being Nietzsche, never takes prisoners in his attacks. Still, there is a good deal of thoughtful reflection on philosophy, culture, religion, family, and marriage that are worth considering.

[Lady Jane · Rating 5 out of 5]

Allegedly, Nietzsche wrote this piece after he broke his friendship with Wagner, the musician Nietzsche formerly idolized; soon after he began to break away from his fondness for the romanticism of music and art. This shift in attitude is strongly conveyed in this amazing work, Human, All Too Human. As Marion Faber writes in the introduction, "Judging from its sour title, it would certainly be a book which differed from its visionary and utopian predecessors. 'Human, all too human' is kind of a sigh in the face of the intractability of the human material to the projects of human sublimity." Indeed, it is neither a critical judgment of nature nor a defense; it is simply a forthright and unaffected analysis of the human condition and through the ages and stages under various passions and conditions.

“Human, All Too Human” is a collection of 638 aphorisms divided into nine categories in which Nietzsche reveals his observations of human nature and exposes common misunderstandings humans have regarding philosophy, religion, art, morality, society, relationships, men and women.

The book is divided into nine sections: 1) "Of First and Last Things," which deals primarily with ontology, epistemology, and miscellaneous metaphysical concepts. 2) "On the History of Moral Feelings," in which the author analyses the emotions and conditions that lead to the inventions and vacillations of morals and man-made rules in the social contract. 3) "Religious Life," in which he describes the different mental states and emotions revolving the human predisposition to inventing deities. 4) "From the Soul of Artists and Writers," in which he cynically critiques the so-called primitive euphoric states that artists and lovers of the arts undergo in this realm. 5) "Signs of Higher and Lower Culture," in which he defines and speculates on the two. 6) "Man In Society," in which he conducts further speculation of man in the social contract. 7) "Woman and Child," which is a collection of aphorisms that relate to the subject of relationships, marriage, and progeny. 8) "A Look At The State," in which Nietzsche describes his views on politics and power. Last but not least, 9) "Man Alone With Himself," in which he meditates and exposes man’s nature as an individual.

One of my favorite parts of the book is found in the first section and it is passage number two. In this passage, Nietzsche states that the congenital defect of the philosopher is a lack of historical sense. Nietzsche states that “Everything the philosopher asserts is basically no more than a statement about man within a very limited time span…. They will not understand that man has evolved, that the faculty of knowledge has also evolved, while some of them even permit themselves to spin the whole world from out of this faculty of knowledge…. The philosopher sees ‘insticts’ in present-day man, and assumes that they belong to the unchangeable facts of human nature, that they can, to that extent, provide a key to the understanding of the world in general. This entire teleology is predicated on the ability to speak about man of the last four thousand years as if he were eternal, the natural direction of all things in the world from the beginning. But everything has evolved; there are no eternal facts, nor are there any absolute truths. Thus historical philosophizing is necessary henceforth, and the virtue of modesty as well.” This is very significant not only to the entire branch of metaphysics, but also as an introduction to the book because Nietzsche admits that in the human condition that he has in common with the rest of us, even the most seemingly insightful speculations are based only on what we can see of the iceberg—namely, only about as far back as four thousand years from which we have found some evidence. The rest of our history is merely suspicion and nobody can possibly ascertain what the behaviors and thoughts were back then. Worse even, that most people do not even study the history that is available to us, and judge everything based on the even shorter time span that they know--- which can be a couple of centuries, or not even that; the simple-minded unread judge only by their own time period. In conclusion to this realization, one must accept that there are no absolute truths, for the “truths” do not last more than a few centuries, at most. They always change along with human whim and evolution of the mind and taste.

One of my favorite sections is the last one, "Man Alone With Himself," because Nietzsche provides insightful musings on the natural state of the individual and his motives, psychology, etc. Some of my favorite passages are as follows:

483

"Enemies of truth: Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."


484

"Topsy turvy world: We criticize a thinker more sharply when he proposes a tenet that disagreeable to us; and yet it would be more reasonable to do this when we find his tenet agreeable."


489

"Not too deep: People who comprehend a matter in all its depth seldom remain true to it forever. For they have brought its depths to the light; and then there is always much to see about it that is bad."

490

"Idealists' delusion: All idealists imagine that the causes they serve are significantly better than the other causes in the world; they do not want to believe that if their cause is to flourish at all, it needs exactly the same foul-smelling manure that all other human undertakings require."

492

"The right profession: Men seldom endure a profession if they do not believe or persuade themselves that it is basically more important than all others. Women do the same with their lovers."

509

"Everyone superior in one thing: In civilized circumstances, everyone feels superior to everyone else in at least one way; this is the basis of the general goodwill, inasmuch as everyone is someone who, under certain conditions, can be of help, and need therefore feel no shame in allowing himself to be helped."

537

"Value of a profession: A profession makes us thoughtless: therein lies its greatest blessing. For it is a bulwark, behind which we are allowed to withdraw when qualms and worries of a general kind attack us."

599

"The age of arrogance: The true period of arrogance for talented men comes between their twenty-sixth and thirtieth year; it is the time of first ripeness, with a good bit of sourness still remaining. On the basis of what one feels inside himself, one demands from other people, who see little or nothing of it, respect and humility; and because these are not at first forthcoming, one takes vengeance with a glance, an arrogant gesture, or a tone of voice. This a fine ear and eye will recognize in all the products of those years, be their poems, philosophies, or paintings and music. Older, experienced men smile about it, and remember with emotion beautiful time of life, in which one is angry at his lot of having to be so much and seem so little. Later, one really seems to be more-- but the faith in being much has been lost, unless one remain throughout his life vanity's hopeless fool."

I enjoyed aphorisms from many other sections as well.

From 18

"The first stage of logic is judgment, whose essence consists, as the best logicians have determined, in belief. All belief is based on the feeling of pleasure or pain in relation to the feeling subject. A new, third feeling as the result of two preceding feelings is judgment in its lowest form."

From 70

"How is it that every execution offends us more than a murder? Is it the coldness of the judges, the painful preparations, the understanding that a man is here being used as a means to deter others. For guilt is not being punished, even if there were guilt; guilt lies in the educators, the parents, the environment, in us, not in the murderer-- I am talking about the motivating circumstances.

87

"Luke 18:14, improved: He who humbleth himself wants to be exalted."

102

"'Man always acts for the good:' We don't accuse nature of immorality when it sends us a thunderstorm, and makes us wet: why do we call the injurious man immoral? Because in the first case, we assume necessity, and in the second a voluntarily governing free will. But this distinction is in error. Furthermore, even intentional injury is not called immoral in all circumstances: without hesitating, we intentionally kill a gnat, for example, simply because we do not like its buzz; we intentionally punish the criminal and do him harm, to protect ourselves and society. In the first case it is the individual who does harm intentionally, for self-preservation or simply to avoid discomfort; in the second case, the state does the harm. All morality allows the intentional infliction of harm for self defense; that is, when it is a matter of self-preservation! But these two points of view are sufficient to explain all evil acts which men practice against other men; man wants to get pleasure or resist unpleasure; in some sense it is always a matter of self-preservation. Socrates and Plato are right: whatever man does, he always acts for the good; that is, in a way that seems to him good (useful) according to the degree of his intellect, the prevailing measure of his rationality."


There are so many more passages that I underlined and that I deemed worth sharing. However, if I were to share all of my favorite passages, I might as well copy the entire book!

[Sadra Kharrazi · Rating 5 out of 5]

"پیش به سوی دانایی با گام‌های استوار و سرشار از اعتماد! مهم نیست که هستید، خودتان تجربه کنید. ناخشنودی از خویشتن را کناری نهید و خودتان را ببخشایید زیرا درونتان نردبانی است با صد پله که می‌توانید با بالا رفتن از آن به دانایی برسید..."


فکر می‌کنم این‌که نیچه رو فیلسوف شاعر یا شاعر فیلسوف بنامیم واقعا کم‌لطفیه
در کنار این دو، او یک روان‌شناس، جامعه‌شناس، سیاست‌مدار، انسان‌پژوه و یک دین‌پژوهِ قدره
و این کتاب، یعنی انسانی زیاده انسانی، شاید کامل‌ترین و جامع‌ترین اثرش باشه

نیچه روان‌شناس به ما یادآوری می‌کنه که
"ناهماهنگی‌های حل نشده میان شخصیت‌ها و امیال والدین، در سرشت کودک منعکس می‌شود و سرگذشت رنج‌های درونی اون را بنا می‌کند"

نیچه جامعه‌شناس به ما گوشزد می‌کنه که
"در هر حزب، کسی هست که با بیان مومنانۀ اصول حزب، دیگران را به ترک حزب برمی‌انگیزد!"

نیچه سیاست‌مدار می‌گه
"اعتقادات، دشمنان خطرناک‌تری برای حقیقتند تا دروغ‌ها"

نیچه انسان پژوه تاکید می‌کنه که
"بهترین روش برای کمک کردن به کسانی که از پریشانی خاطر رنج می‌برند و بهترین روش آرام ساختن ایشان، ستایش فراوان آنان است"
و نیز
"اشتیاق به برابری هم می‌تواند به به معنای اشتیاق به تنزل دیگران تا سطح خود باشد"

و این دقیقا اون چیزی که مطالعه این کتاب رو جذاب می‌کنه
راجع به همه چیز زندگی صحبت میشه
صحبت‌های واقعا خوندنی و تفکربرانگیز

ولی حیف که آدم هر چی بیشتر بخونه، بیشتر می‌فهمه و درواقع بیشتر نمی‌فهمه...

"اندوه دانش است! آنان که بیشتر می‌دانند باید برای حقیقت محتوم بسیار بگریند..."

[Mohammed omran · Rating 3 out of 5]

" عيب كل الفلاسفة المشترك هو كونهم ينطلقون من الإنسان الحالى ويتخيلون أنهم قد بلغوا الهدف من خلال تحليلهم له. بشكل غامض يتخيلون الإنسان – دون أن يقصدوا – وكأنه حقيقة خالدة، يتخيلونه واقعا ثابتا وسط دوامة الكل، ومقياسا ثابتا للأشياء."
***
" الحلم وقد أسىء فهمه: إن أصل كل ميتا فيزيقا هو كون الإنسان، فى الأزمنة الأولى لحضارة لما تزل بدائية، قد اعتقد أنه اكتشف فى الحلم عالما حقيقيا ثانيا. لولا الحلم لما وجد الناس أدنى سبب لتقسيم العالم إلى قسمين. إن انفصال الروح والجسد يرتبط هو كذلك بأقدم تصور للحلم تماما مثل فرضية صورة جسدية للروح، كما يرتبط به إجمالا أصل كل اعتقاد فى الأرواح، وربما أصل الإيمان بالآلهة. "إن الميت يظل حيا، لأنه يظهر للأحياء فى الحلم.": هذا هو الاستدلال الذى ساد فيما مضى طيلة ألفيات."
***
"ضرورة اللا منطقى: من ضمن الأشياء التى قد تؤدى بمفكر ما إلى اليأس، معرفته أن اللا منطقى ضرورى للإنسان، وأنه ينجم عنه خير عميم. يرتبط اللا منطقى ارتباطا وثيقا بعمق الانفعالات؛ بعمق اللغة والفن والدين، وبشكل عام بكل ما يضفى قيمة على الحياة، بحيث لا نستطيع أن نفصله عن هذه الأشياء الجميلة دون أن نفسدها بشكل لا يمكن إصلاحه. وحدهم الناس المفرطو السذاجة هم من يمكن أن يعتقدوا فى إمكانية تحويل الطبع الإنسانى إلى طبع منطقى صرف؛ ولو أن الاقتراب من هذا الهدف كان على درجات فكم من أشياء سنتخلى عنها ونحن فى الطريق إليه! حتى الشخص الأكثر تعقلا يحتاج من حين لآخر للعودة إلى الطبيعة، أى إلى العمق اللا منطقى لعلاقته مع الأشياء."
***
"لدى هوميروس نجد أن الطروادى والإغريقى خيران كلاهما. لا يعتبر شريرا ذلك الذى يصيبنا ببعض الأذى بل ذلك الذى هو موضع احتقار."
***
"الكذب: لماذا يقول الناس الحقيقة فى أغلب أوقات الحياة اليومية؟- ليس لأن إلها ما قد حرم الكذب، بكل تأكيد. بل أولا لأن ذلك شىء مريح، لأن الكذب يتطلب ابتكارا وإخفاء وذاكرة، (وهو ما جعل سويفت يقول: نادرا ما ينتبه الذى يكذب إلى العبء الثقيل الذى يلقيه على كاهله، سيلزمه، كى يدعم كذبته، أن يبتكر عشرين كذبة أخرى)، ثم، لأنه من المفيد التكلم بصراحة حين يبدو كل شىء بسيطا: أريد هذا، فعلت ذلك، وهلم جرا، أى لأن طرق الإكراه والسلطة آمن من طرق الحيلة. لكن لو حدث أن طفلا نشأ فى جو من التعقيدات العائلية فإنه سيمارس الكذب بشكل طبيعى وسيقول بشكل تلقائى ما يتوافق ومصلحته؛ إنه يجهل تماما معنى الحقيقة، يجهل النفور من الكذب بما هو كذب، وهكذا فهو يكذب بكل براءة."
***
"لا تستطيع أية قوة أن تفرض نفسها إن لم يكن ممثلوها سوى منافقين. مهما يكن عدد العناصر العلمانية التى تضمها الكنيسة الكاثوليكية فإن قوتها ترتكز على الرهبان، الكثيرين فى أيامنا هذه، الذين يجعلون الحياة شاقة بالنسبة لهم حتى يعمقوا معناها، والتى تنبئ نظرتهم وجسدهم النحيل عن قيام الليل، عن الصوم، عن الصلوات الحارة، وربما عن التسوط، إنهم هم الذين يزعزعون الناس، يخيفونهم: ماذا لو كان لازما أن نحيا بهذا الشكل؟ هذا هو السؤال المرعب الذى يتبادر إلى الذهن فى رأيهم. إنهم فى كل مرة يشيعون فيها هذا الشك يؤمنون دعامة من دعامات قوتهم."
***
"الأخلاق، تجزئ تلقائى للإنسان: الكاتب الذى ينكب بحماس على موضوعه يتمنى مجئ من يقوّض كل ما فعله بمعالجته لنفس الموضوع بوضوح أكثر وبإعطاء إجابة نهائية على الأسئلة التى يتضمنها. العاشقة الشابة تتمنى أن يخونها عشيقها كى تضع على المحك إخلاصها وتفانيها فى حبها له. الجندى يتمنى أن يسقط فى ميدان القتال من أجل وطنه الظافر؛ لأن فى انتصار وطنه انتصار لطموحه الأسمى. الأم تمنح طفلها ما تحرم هى نفسها منه، النوم، الغذاء الأفضل، صحتها إن اقتضى الحال ذلك، ثروتها. لكن هل كل هذه السمات هى سمات غيرية؟ هل هذه التصرفات الأخلاقية معجزات حتى تكون، حسب قول شوبنهاور، "مستحيلة ولكن واقعية"؟ أليس جليا فى كل هذه الحالات أن الإنسان يحب جزءا من ذاته، فكرة، رغبة ، إبداعا، أكثر من جزء آخر من ذاته، إنه يجزئ كيانه ويضحى بجزء من أجل جزء آخر؟ هل يعتبر شيئا مختلفا اختلافا جوهريا إعلان شخص سيء الطبع: "أفضّل أن أدحَر على أن أتنحى لأفسح الطريق لهذا الشخص"؟ النزوع إلى شىء ما (أمنية، نزوة، رغبة) حاضر فى كل الحالات السابقة الذكر؛ والاستسلام لها، مع تحمل كل التبعات، ليس "غيرية" على أية حال. – فى الأخلاق لا يعامَل الإنسان على أنه كائن لا يتجزأ، بل على أنه يتجزأ."
***
"ما يمكننا الوعد به: يمكننا أن نعد بأفعال وليس بعواطف؛ لأن هذه لا شعورية. الذى يعد شخصا آخر بأن يحبه أو بأن يكرهه أو بأن يخلص له على الدوام إنما يعده بشىء لا سلطان له عليه؛ ما يمكنه أن يعد به هى أفعال عادة ما تكون، ولا شك، تبعات الحب أو الحقد أو الإخلاص، لكنها قد تنجم عن أسباب أخرى كذلك: لأن الأسباب والطرق التى تؤدى إلى نفس الفعل متعددة. الوعد بحب شخص ما دائما يعنى: ما دام حبى لك قائما فسأعبر لك عنه بأفعال تدل على الحب؛ وإذا كففت عن حبك فستظل موضوع نفس الأفعال من طرفى، وإن كان ذلك يتم لأسباب أخرى: بحيث سيستمر الناس فى توهم كون الحب يظل ثابتا ولا يتغير. – إننا حين نُقسِم لشخص ما، دون أن نخدع أنفسنا، بأننا سنحبه إلى الأبد، فإن ما نعده به هو استمرار مظاهر الحب."
***
"حيث نخطئ فاعلين ومتلقين: حين يأخذ الغنى من الفقير أحد ممتلكاته (كأن يختطف أحد الأمراء من أحد العاميين عشيقته)، فإن خطأ يولد لدى الفقير؛ يعتقد أن الآخر ليس سوى حقير ما دام قد أخذ منه القليل الذى يمتلكه. لكن الآخر بعيد عن الإحساس القوى بقيمة متاع يتم النظر إليه على حدة، لأنه قد اعتاد أن يملك منه الكثير: إنه لا يستطيع إذن أن يدرك ما بنفس الفقير، وهو لا يرتكب ظلما كبيرا مثلما يعتقد هذا الفقير، فالأمر يتطلب منه الكثير كى يدرك ذلك. كل واحد منهما يكوّن فكرة خاطئة عن الآخر. إن ظلم القوى الذى يثير سخطا عبر التاريخ، ليس خطيرا جدا مثلما يبدو لنا. فالإحساس الوراثى لدى الأعلى مقاما بأن له حقوقا أسمى يجعله لا مباليا ومرتاح الضمير؛ بل إننا جميعا، حيث يكون الفرق شاسعا بيننا وبين كائن آخر، نفقد أدنى إحساس بالظلم ونقتل ذبابة مثلا دون أى تبكيت للضمير... إن الفظ ليس فظا بالقدر الذى يتصوره ذلك الذى يسئ معاملته؛ فالفكرة التى يكونها عن الألم ليست مطابقة لمعاناة الآخر. نفس الشىء ينطبق على القاضى الجائر، وعلى الصحفى الذى يُضِل الرأى العام بلؤمه التافه. فى كل الحالات تنتمى العلة والمعلول إلى مجموعات شديدة الاختلاف من الأحاسيس والأفكار؛ ومع ذلك فإننا نفترض تلقائيا أن صاحب صنيع ما وضحيته يفكران ويحسان بنفس الطريقة، ونقيس خطأ الواحد منهما بألم الآخر طبقا لهذا الافتراض."
***
"جلد الروح: مثل العظام، العضلات، الأمعاء والعروق يغطيها جلد يجعل منظر الإنسان مقبولا، فإن عواطف الروح وأهواءها هى كذلك يلفها الغرور: الغرور جِلْد الروح."
***
"حدود حب الناس: الذى يدعى أن فلانا غبى ودنئ يغضب حين يُظهر ذلك الشخص أنه ليس كذلك."
***
"الإنسان دائما يحسن التصرف: إننا لا نتهم الطبيعة باللا أخلاقية حين تأتى عاصفة وتبللنا: لماذا إذن نقول عن الإنسان الذى يفعل شرا ما أنه لا أخلاقى؟ لأننا نفترض هنا إرادة غير خاضعة لأوامر تعسفية، وهناك جبر. لكن هذا التمييز خطأ. إننا، فضلا عن ذلك، لا نصف فعلا يسبب الضرر عن عمد بأنه لا أخلاقى؛ نقتل ذبابة مثلا عن عمد، لكن دون أدنى تردد، لمجرد أن طنينها يزعجنا، نعاقب مجرما ونعذبه عن عمد، كى نحمى نفسنا والمجتمع. فى الحالة الأولى، الفرد هو الذى يسبب ضررا وذلك من أجل بقائه أو لكى يتجنب إزعاجا؛ أما فى الحالة الثانية فالدولة هى التى تفعل. كل الأخلاق تقبل التصرفات التى تسبب الضرر عن عمد فى حالة الدفاع عن النفس، أى حين يتعلق الأمر بالبقاء! لكن وجهتى النظر هاتين تكفيان لتفسير كل القبائح التى يرتكبها الناس فى حق الناس: المرء دائما ما يريد متعته، يريد تجنب الإنزعاج، أيا كان ذلك فإن الأمر يتعلق دائما ببقائه. لقد كان سقراط وأفلاطون على حق: مهما يفعل الإنسان فإنه خيرا يفعل دائما، أى أنه يفعل ما يبدو له خيرا (نافعا) حسب درجة ذكائه وحسب مستواه العقلى فى ذلك الحين."
***
"المسيحية، هذا القدم: حين نسمع دقات الأجراس القديمة، صباح الأحد، نتساءل: أيعقل كل هذا! من أجل يهودى تم صلبه منذ ألفى عام وكان يدعى أنه ابن الله. إن الإثبات الذى يحظى به هذا الإدعاء ينقصه البرهان، - مؤكد أن الديانة المسيحية قِدَم ينحدر من ليل العصور حتى قلب عصرنا، والإيمان الذى يحظى به هذا الإثبات المزعوم – والحال أننا عادة ما نكون صارمين فى اختبار الإدعاءات – هو لا شك أقدم جزء من هذا الإرث. إله تلد منه امرأة فانية؛ حكيم ينصح بعدم العمل، بعدم العدل وبمراقبة علامات الساعة الوشيكة؛ عدالة تقبل اعتبار البرئ ضحية بالنيابة؛ واحد يأمر أتباعه بشرب دمه؛ صلوات من أجل حدوث المعجزة؛ خطايا ترتكب فى حق إله ويكفر عنها إله؛ الخوف من ما وراء الموت، اتخاذ الصليب كرمز، فى عصر لا يعرف غاية الصليب ولا خزيه، أية قشعريرة رعب يبعثها فينا كل هذا، كنفثة تنبعث من قبر ماض سحيق! من يصدق أننا لا زلنا نؤمن بمثل هذه الأشياء؟"
***
"مزية التدين: هناك أناس متزنون وبارعون فى التجارة يحملون دينهم مطرزا كشريطة حاشية الإنسانية المتفوقة: حسنا يفعل هؤلاء بحفاظهم على دينهم وذلك لأنه يجمّلهم. – كل الناس الذين لا يتقنون عملا من أعمال الحرب (بما فى ذلك حرب الكلمة والقلم) ينتهون بأن يصيروا عبيدا: وهؤلاء تكون الديانة المسيحية مفيدة لهم كثيرا، لأن العبودية تأخذ فيها مظهر فضيلة مسيحية، الشىء الذى يكسبها جمالا رائعا. الناس الذين تبدو لهم حياتهم اليومية فارغة ورتيبة يتحولوا إلى الدين بسهولة: إنه شىء يمكن تفهمه والصفح عنه، إلا أنهم لا يملكون الحق فى أن يتطلبوا التدين من أولئك الذين ليس فى حياتهم اليومية لا فراغ ولا رتابة."
***
"سخاء محرّم: ليس هناك فى العالم ما يكفى من الحب والطيبة كى يُسمح لنا ببذل القليل منهما لكائنات خيالية."
***
"يسعى الزاهد، تحت اعتبارات عدة، إلى جعل حياته سهلة، وذلك بخضوعه الكامل لإرادة أجنبية أو لقانون، لطقس تشمله دائرته كلية؛ نوعا ما على طريقة البراهمانى الذى لا يقرر شيئا هو بنفسه، وفى كل مرة يتخذ قرارا بمقتضى وصية مقدسة يعتبر هذا الخضوع وسيلة ناجعة للإمساك بزمام التحكم فى النفس؛ يُشغل المرء فلا يعرف الضجر ولا تطاله إثارة الإرادة الأنانية والانفعال، فلا يشعر، وقد قام بفعل ما، بأى إحساس بالمسئولية، ومن ثم لا يعذبه الندم. لقد تخلى بالمرة عن إرادته الشخصية، وذلك أسهل من التخلى عنها من حين لآخر فقط؛ تماما كما يكون التخلى بالكامل عن رغبة ما أسهل من التزام الحذر. لو تفكرنا فى العلاقات الحالية بين المواطن والدولة فسنجد هنا أيضا أن الطاعة المطلقة مريحة أكثر مما هى متلائمة مع الظروف. فالقديس يجعل حياته سهلة إذن بهذا التخلى الكامل عن شخصيته، ويخدع نفسه من يُعجب فى هذه الظاهرة بأثرة أخلاقية منقطعة النظير. على كل حال، إن إثبات الشخصية بلا اضطراب ولا تردد أصعب من التخلص منها بالطريقة السالفة الذكر، زد على ذلك أن هذا يتطلب الكثير من النباهة ومن التفكير."
***
" وعى حِرَفى: لا تحدثونى عن المواهب الطبيعية ، عن المواهب الفطرية ، إذ يمكننا أن نذكر ، فى كل المجالات ، عظماء كانت موهبتهم ضعيفة ، لكن العظمة أتت إليهم ، جعلوا من أنفسهم عباقرة ، بفضل بعض الخاصيات التى لا يود أحد كشف نقصها حين يكون واعيا بذلك. كان لديهم كلهم ذلك الوعى الحرفى الذى يبدأ بتعلم اتقان الأجزاء قبل المجازفة بالقيام بعمل شمولى كبير ؛ كانوا يتأنون لأنهم كانوا يجدون متعة فى إتقان صنع الجزء المتمم ، أكثر مما يجدونها فى الأثر الذى يحدثه كل برّاق. من السهل مثلا أن نصف لشخص ما كيف يصير كاتب قصة ، لكن تنفيذ ذلك يتطلب مهارات نتغاضى عنها حين نقول "ليست لدىّ موهبة كافية." لنكتب مائة مشروع قصة أو أكثر ، دون أن يتعدى أى منها صفحتين إثنتين ، لكنه يكون من الدقة بحيث لا يمكن الاستغناء عن أى كلمة من كلماته. لنسجل كل يوم بعض النوادر إلى أن نجد لها الشكل الأخاذ والفعّال ، لا نكلّن من جمع ورسم طباع ونماذج إنسانية ، لا نضيعن بالخصوص أية فرصة لنحكى ونسمع الآخرين يحكون ، والعين والآذان منتبهتان لأثر ذلك على الآخرين. لنسافر كما رسام الطبيعة، كما مصمم الأزياء. لنفكر فى نهاية المطاف فى بواعث فعال الإنسانية ، ولا نحقرن منها أية إشارة قد تفيدنا ، ولنجمع الأشياء من هذا النوع ليل نهار. سندع عقداً من الزمن ينصرم ونحن نكرر هذه العمليات ، وسيمكن لما سنبدعه آنذاك فى المحتَرَف أن يظهر فى الشارع فى واضحة النهار. لكن كيف تفعل الأغلبية ذلك؟ عوض أن يبدأوا بالجزء يباشرون الكل. قد يتفق أن يحالفهم الحظ مرة، أن يثيروا الاهتمام، وبعد ذلك سيصير عملهم من سىء إلى أسوأ لأسباب معقولة وطبيعية. – أحيانا، حين لا يكون هناك ذكاء ولا طبع لرسم خطة حياة فنية من هذا الطراز، فإن القدر واللزوم يتكلفان عوضا عنهما بقيادة البارع المستقبلى، خطوة خطوة، عبر كل المراحل التى تتطلبها مهنته."
***
"الجمهور: كل ما يطلبه الجمهور من المأساة هو أن تؤثر فيه إلى حد جعله يذرف نهائيا كل ما لديه من دموع. على العكس من ذلك، فالفنان الذى يذهب لمشاهدة المأساة الجديدة يجد متعة فى الابتكارات التقنية والأساليب الماهرة، فى تناول المادة وتوزيعها، فى الطريقة الجديدة التى وظفت بها بواعث وأفكار قديمة. إنه ينظر إلى العمل الفنى من زاوية جمالية، زاوية المبدع. النظرة التى أشرنا إليها فى البداية، الباحثة عن منفعتها الشخصية فى المأساة، هى نظرة عامة الناس. أما الإنسان الذى فى موقع بين الإثنين، فلا شىء يقال عنه، إنه ليس عامة الناس وليس فنانا، ولا يعرف ما يريد: كما أن متعته غامضة وبين بين."
***
"نوعان من الإنكار: إن سوء حظ الكتاب الثاقبين والواضحين هو كون القارئ يجدهم مسطحين، ومن ثمة لا يتكلف أى عناء لفهمهم؛ وحظ الكتاب الغامضين هو كون القارئ يجهد نفسه قدر الإمكان ليفهمهم ويعزو إليهم المتعة التى مصدرها مجهوده هو."
***
"قانون جائر ضد الكتب: ينبغى أن نعامل الكاتب وكأنه مجرم لا يستحق إخلاء سبيله أو العفو عنه إلا فى حالات نادرة جدا: سيكون ذلك علاجا ناجعا لتكاثر الكتب."
***
"ضرورة الكتاب الرديئين: من الضرورى دائما أن يكون هناك كتاب رديئون، لأنهم يرضون ذوق الأجيال الناشئة التى لم تنضج بعد، هؤلاء أيضا لهم حاجياتهم تماما مثل الآخرين الناضجين. لو أن حياة الإنسان كانت أطول لكان عدد الأفراد الناضجين يفوق، أو على الأقل يساوى، عدد الأفراد غير الناضجين، وبما هى عليه الآن فإن الناس يموتون شبابا فى أغلب الأحيان، أى أن أغلبية الناس هم دائما ناقصو الذكاء ذوو الذوق الردئ. وهم يطالبون زيادة على ذلك، بكل ما أوتو من قوة الشباب، بإرضاء حاجياتهم ويُوجدون بالقوة كتابا رديئين يخدمونهم."
***
"الوفاء، دليل الرسوخ: إنه لمن الأدلة القاطعة على جودة نظرية ما أن يكون صاحبها قد ظل وفيا لها أربعين سنة دون أن تخامره أدنى ريبة بخصوصها. لكننى أزعم أنه ليس هناك فيلسوف واحد لم تفلت منه، فى الأخير، نظرة ازدراء – أو على الأقل نظرة ريبة – تجاه الفلسفة التى أتى بها أيام شبابه. – لكنه ربما لم يقل شيئا عن ذلك التغير بدافع من الكبرياء أو – وهذا شىء محتمل لدى ذوى الطباع النبيلة – بدافع رفقه بمريديه."
***
"مواهب طبيعية: فى خضم إنسانيتنا المتطورة بشكل سام جدا تمنح الطبيعة كل واحد منا إمكانية الحصول على مواهب متعددة. لكل واحد موهبة فطرية، لكنه نادر من تنعم عليه الطبيعة والتربية بهذه الدرجة من الصلابة، من التحمل، ومن الطاقة التى ستمكنه من أن يصبح موهوبا فعلا، إذن أن يصير ما هو، أى أن يحيل موهبته آثارا وأعمالا."
***
"عيب الرجال النشيطين الكبير: إن ما ينقص الرجال النشيطين عادة هو النشاط الراقى، أعنى النشاط الفردى، إنهم يتصرفون بوصفهم موظفين، تجارا، علماء، أى بصفتهم ممثلين لصنف وليس كأفراد لهم فردانية محددة المعالم جيدا، إنهم، بهذا الاعتبار، كسالى. – إنها لتعاسة الرجال النشيطين أن نشاطهم يكاد دائما يكون غير معقول شيئا ما. لن نستطيع – مثلا – أن نسأل الموظف البنكى الذى يدخر المال عن الهدف من نشاطه المحموم: فنشاطه ليس وراءه أى سبب. الرجال النشيطون يتدحرجون مثلم تتدحرج الصخرة، طبقا لعبثية الإوالة. – كل الناس ينقسمون إلى عبيد وأحرار، يصبح هذا فى أيامنا هذه مثلما صح فى كل العصور، لأن الذى لا يملك الثلثين من يومه فهو عبد، وليكن ما يشاء: رجل دولة، بائعا، موظفا، أو عالما."
***
"يخجل العلماء من البطالة. ومع ذلك فإن الفراغ والاستهتار شىء نبيل. – إن صح أن البطالة أم الرذائل فإنها على الأقل تجد نفسها، بكونها كذلك، أقرب ما تكون إلى الفضائل. العاطل دائما ينتصر، باعتباره إنسانا، على المتشاغل. – لكن بذكر الفراغ والبطالة لا تحسبوا أنكم أنتم المقصودون، بعد كل حساب، أيها الكسالى؟..."
***
"لنسر إذن إلى الأمام فى طريق الحكمة، بخطوة حازمة، وبكامل الثقة فى النفس! أيا تكن، استغل منبع التجارب الذى تشكله أنت ذاتك! ألق عنك عدم الرضى الذى يأتيك من كينونتك، اغفر لنفسك أناك، لأن فيك، فى كل الحالات، سلما من مائة درجة يمكنك أن ترتقيه إلى المعرفة. القرن الذى تغتم فيه بشعورك أنك مرفوض يعلنك سعيدا بأن يكون لك هذا الحظ، إنه يؤنبك بقوله إنه منحك نصيبا من التجارب التى قد يستغنى عنها دون شك رجال عصور أخرى. لا تحتقر تدينك فيما مضى، اكتشف معنى أن تكون قد وجدت رسميا، فيما مضى منفذا إلى الفن.... إنك تملك سلطة أن تجعل كل لحظات حياتك: من محاولات، أخطاء، زلات، أوهام، أهواء، حبك وأملك، أن تجعلها تنسجم تماما مع الهدف الذى رسمته لحياتك، هذا الهدف هو أن تصير أنت نفسك."
***
"كتمان عطوف: غالبا ما نحتاج، فى معاشرتنا للناس، إلى كتمان إرعائى نتظاهر من خلاله بأننا لم نكتشف دواعى تصرفاتهم."
***
"صور: إننا عادة ما نصادف صورا من الناس المتفوقين، وكما اللوحات فإن هذه الصور تعجب أغلب الناس أكثر من الأصل."
***
"المريض وناصحوه: إن الذى يسدى النصائح للمريض يشعر بالتفوق عليه، سواء قُبلت نصيحته أو رُفضت. لذلك يكره المرضى الأباء والحساسون ناصحيهم أكثر مما يكرهون مرضهم."
***
"لماذا المعارضة: غالبا ما نعارض رأيا بينما نحن لا نشعر بالنفور إلا من الطريقة التى بها تم التعبير عنه."
***
"وسيلة إقناع الشجعان: وسيلة جعل الشجعان يدعمون عملا ما هى أن نصوره لهم أخطر مما هو فعلا."
***
"اللطافة: اللطافة التى يبديها لنا الذين لا نحبهم نعتبرها جريمة"
***
"عائلة المنتحر: يحفظ والدا المنتحر له الضغينة لكونه لم يبق على حياته مراعاة لسمعتهما."
***
"توقع نكران الجميل: الذى يمنح عطاء كبيرا لن يقابل بالشكران، لأن قبول عطائه يشكل بالنسبة للمستفيد عبء ثقيلا."
***
"فى حضرة الشهود: بسرور مضاعف نرتمى فى الماء لننقذ شخصا وقع فيه إن كان ذلك فى حضرة أناس لا يجرؤون على نجدته."
**
"ندم بعد مغادرة عالم الناس: لماذا نشعر بالندم حين نغادر جماعة تافهة؟ لأننا تناولنا فيها أشياء مهمة بلا ترو، لأننا لم نتكلم بحسن نية حين تعلق الأمر بالأشخاص، أو لأننا التزمنا الصمت حين لزم الأمر التحدث، لأننا لم نقفز وننصرف حين واتت الفرصة، باختصار، لإننا تصرفنا فى عالم الناس كما لو كنا من عالم الناس."
***
"وسط الطبيعة: إن ما يجعلنا نحب كثيرا أن نكون وسط الطبيعة هو كون الطبيعة ليس لها رأى فينا."
***
"الحقيقة: لا أحد يموت اليوم من الحقائق القاتلة: إذ هناك كم هائل من الترياق."
***
"لو دققنا النظر للاحظنا أن الأغلبية الساحقة من الناس المثقفين لا تزال تطلب من المفكر قناعات ولا شىء غير القناعات، وأن أقلية صغيرة فقط هى التى تريد يقينا.

[Evripidis Gousiaris · Rating 5 out of 5]

Πλούσια θεματολογία που καλύπτει κάθε πτυχή της ανθρώπινης ύπαρξης, γραμμένο με ένα αρκετά προσωπικό Νιτσεϊκό ύφος.
Πράγματι, είναι ένα Ανθρώπινο, πάρα πολύ Ανθρώπινο, βιβλίο.

[sologdin · Rating 2 out of 5]

A curious mix, which should be predictable from the gnomic form, about which I have elsewhere recorded my loathing. The form allows little rigorous argument, so mostly it is assertion, sometimes by enthymeme and sometimes by metaphor. That can make for snappy statements, but leaves little room to do actual work.

Anything he says about socialism and gender is just wrong--but not even interestingly wrong, rather traditional objections drawn from unthinking banalities. These sort of wrongnesses do not enhance his reputation as a 'free spirit' (the primary positive figure lauded by these aphorisms) but rather place him firmly within the 'herd' he otherwise deplores--similar to how JL Nancy identifies Heidegger's anti-semitism to be the regurgitated banalities of ancient prejudice. So, for instance, in No. 473, when he states 'Socialism is the visionary younger brother of an almost decrepit despotism, whose heir it wants to be. Thus its efforts are reactionary in the deepest sense,' we see a chain of errors that commences with a silly personification of socialism in general that 'wants' something. This allows him to make up anything insofar as there is no general socialism writing a diary of its desires--all we have are socialist writers describing theirs. Of course no socialist writer is cited for the proposition that its doctrine is rooted in ancient despotism (whether Aristotle's political discussion of the concept, the plain etymological interpretation regarding the head of a private household, or the later Byzantine usage--all of which should be familiar to philologist Nietzsche)--so the assertion hangs around as a vague metaphor, which might be the point (recall elsewhere he argues truth is a moving army of metaphors and personifications).

He's stronger, on first impression, when going after religion--though I note some complexity there, which must be self-reflexive. Consider No. 121, on its face part of the critique of Christianity, 'An agreeable opinion is accepted as true; this is the proof by pleasure.' Rigor requires then a merciless bracketing away of aesthetic responses from the evaluation of arguments. This is difficult to do insofar as evaluation is inherently normative. I'm certain that I can accept his mean-spirited comments about religion here and elsewhere despite his fugly surliness on other topics precisely because they are aesthetically palatable. One wonders how far he regarded his own atheism to be contaminated by aesthetics.

Generally this early Nietzsche is revealed as willing to discuss items in a way that later Nietzsche might mock. That's fine, though, as herein is a mechanism for overthrowing prior opinion, in No. 629: 'Are we obliged to be faithful to our errors, even if we perceive that by this faithfulness we do damage to our higher self? No--there is no law, no obligation of that kind: we must become traitors, act unfaithfully, forsake our ideals again and again.' This line of inquiry is taken up in Zarathustra.

Definitely some thoughtful gems amidst the weeds.

[Sepehr Rahmani · Rating 3 out of 5]

وقتی کتاب های نیچه رو میخونی، مدام از خودت یک سوال رو میپرسی. نویسنده چجوری این حجم از اط��اعات و نتیجه گیری های درست و منطقی رو تو اون دوران داشته ؟!؟
ولی انصافا برای شخص من مطالعه اثار نیچه خیلی سخت و وقتگیره.

[StefanP · Rating 5 out of 5]

Zašto si tako mudar? Zašto pišeš tako dobre knjige?

Iako nekih šestotinjak strana, za nekoga to možda može da bude bolno i da kaže: kako ću ja ovo da čitam? Ali zaista to nije tako. Ako je zadatak filozofije da vas razočara na jedan fin način onda Niče to suviše dobro radi. Njegovo pisanje je vulkan koji uspaljuje čovjeka do te mjere da on ne može mirno da sjedi posle pročitanog. Svaki aforizam ima neku svoju spoznaju i vedrinu. Njegovi aforizmi su talasi koji ushićuju i zavode. Ova knjiga sadrži čitavo breme čovječanstva koje Niče nastoji da razobliči, upita, kritikuje polazeći od porodice, države, nauke, individualnog samoprevlađivanja i umjetnosti. Karakteristično je što Niče ne piše sistemski, pa tako svako dobije neku svoju paralelu (sliku) o onome, o nečemu. Zaista se nemoguće ne nasmijati nekim njegovim oštroumnim dosjetkama. Iako napisano prije nešto više od sto godina tu je pored vas, vaša sjenka. Sjenka koja ne truli.

[Teacherhuman · Rating 5 out of 5]

I am still not certain it is really possible in this culture to become--or perhaps remain a free spirit. In the oppressive expectations of a world that requires conformity for sustinence may well be a kind of caging we may never escape. We must be always worried our expression of spirit is too unleashed, too sexual, too ethnic, too loud, too inspired--too free for everyone who is not. Nothing scarier than someone who is who and what she (or he) is with no apologies for it to those who are uncomfortable in their own skins.
Still Nietzsche's treatise is on my must read list for all who wish to be truly human.

[Dan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Nietzsche is finding his style here - aphorisms, ironical, profound, irreverent, sharp, aesthete, and all over the place. He is rather an art critic and a psychologist here; but slowly he is moving towards philosophy. I love how Nietzsche is taking aim at the basic pillars of philosophy, religion, and culture and shakes them with insights, doubts, and turns of phrases. Quite funny is Nietzsche’s indignation at the fact that Wagner embraced Christianity - given the reverence shown to Wagner in the previous two books.

[Unknown · Rating 4 out of 5]

The people no doubt possess something that might be called an artistic need, but it is small and cheap to satisfy. The refuse of art is at bottom all that is required: we should honestly admit that to ourselves. Just consider, for instance, the kind of songs and tunes the most vigorous, soundest and most naive strata of our populace nowadays take true delight in, dwelling among shepherds, cowherds, farmers, huntsmen, soldiers, seamen, and then supply yourself with an answer. And in the small town, in precisely the homes that are the seat of those civic virtues inherited from of old, do they not love, indeed dote on the very worst music in any way produced today? Whoever talks of a profound need for art, of an unfilled desire for art, on the part of the people as it is, is either raving or lying . . . Nowadays it is only in exceptional men that there exists an artistic need of an exalted kind. (2.1.169)

Active men are generally wanting in the higher activity: I mean that of the individual. They are active as officials, businessmen, scholars, that is to say as generic creatures, but not as distinct individual and unique human beings; in this regard they are lazy. —It is the misfortune of the active that their activity is always a little irrational. One ought not to ask the cash-amassing banker, for example, what the purpose of his restless activity is: it is irrational. The active roll as the stone rolls, in obedience to the stupidity of the laws of mechanics—As at all times, so now too, men are divided into the slaves and the free; for he who does not have two-thirds of his day to himself is a slave, let him be what he may otherwise: statesman, businessman, official, scholar. (1.283)
__________
If someone obstinately and for a long time wants to appear something it is in the end hard for him to be anything else. The profession of almost every man, even that of the artist, begins with hypocrisy, with an imitation from without, with a copying of what is most effective. He who is always wearing a mask of friendly countenance must finally acquire a power over benevolent moods without which the impression of friendliness cannot be obtained—and finally these acquire power over him, he is benevolent. (1.51)

There is one thing one has to have: either a cheerful disposition by nature or a disposition made cheerful by art and knowledge. (1.486)

__________
Drunk with the odour of blossoms. (1.29)

While there may be much talk about people, there is none at all about man. (1.35)

No one is accountable for his deeds, no one for his nature; to judge is the same thing as to be unjust. This also applies when the individual judges himself. The proposition is as clear as daylight, and yet here everyone prefers to retreat back into the shadows and untruth: from fear of the consequences. (1.39)

One can promise actions but not feelings; for the latter are involuntary. He who promises someone he will always love him or always hate him or always be faithful to him, promises something that does not reside in his power. (1.58)

There are not a few people (perhaps it is even most people) who, in order to maintain in themselves a sense of self-respect and a certain efficiency in action, are obliged to disparage and diminish in their minds all the other people they know. (1.63)

Vanity enriches.—How poor the human spirit would be without vanity! (1.79)

Men are not ashamed of thinking something dirty, but they are when they imagine they are credited with this dirty thought. (1.84)

Socrates and Plato are right: whatever man does he always does the good, that is to say: that which seems to him good (useful) according to the relative degree of his intellect, the measure of his rationality. (1.102)

At the sight of a waterfall we think we see in the countless carvings, twisting, and breaking of the waves capriciousness and freedom of will; but everything here is necessary, every motion mathematically calculable. So it is too in the case of human actions; if one were all-knowing, one would be able to calculate every individual action, likewise every advance in knowledge, every error, every piece of wickedness. The actor himself, to be sure, is fixed in the illusion of free will; if for one moment the wheel of the world were to stand still, and there were an all-knowing, calculating intelligence there to make use of this pause, it could narrate the future of every creature to the remotest ages and describe every track along which this wheel had yet to roll. The actor’s description regarding himself, the assumption of free-will, is itself part of the mechanism it would have to compute. (1.106)

It is easier to relinquish a desire altogether than enjoy it in moderation. (1.139)

We all think that a work of art, an artist, is proved to be of high quality if it seizes hold on us and profoundly moves us. But for this to be so our own high quality in judgement and sensibility would first have to have been proved. (1.161)

The reader and the author often fail to understand one another because the author knows his theme too well and almost finds it boring, so that he dispenses with the examples and illustrations of which he knows hundreds; the reader, however, is unfamiliar with the subject and can easily find it ill-established if examples and illustrations are withheld from him. (1.202)

One can clearly observe this decline from decade to decade if one keeps an eye on the public behaviour, which is plainly growing more and more plebeian. (1.250)

Why is knowledge, the element of the scholar and philosopher, associated with pleasure? Firstly and above all, because one here becomes conscious of one’s strength; for the same reason, that is to say, that gymnastic exercises are pleasurably even when there are no spectators. Secondly, because in the course of acquiring knowledge one goes beyond former conceptions and their advocates and is victor over them, or at least believes oneself to be., Thirdly, because through a new piece of knowledge, however small, we become superior to all and feel ourselves as the only ones who in this matter know aright., These three causes of pleasure are the most important, though there are many other subsidiary causes, according to the nature of the man who acquires knowledge. (1.252)

The value of having for a time rigorously pursued a rigorous science does not derive precisely from the results obtained from it: for in relation to the ocean of things worth knowing these will be a mere vanishing droplet. But there will eventuate an increase in energy, in reasoning capacity, in toughness of endurance; one will have learned how to achieve an objective by the appropriate means. To this extent it is invaluable, with regard to everything one will afterwards do, once to have been a man of science. (1.256)

Men overvalue everything big and conspicuous. (1.260)

He who has furnished his instrument with only two strings—like the scholars, who apart from the drive to knowledge have only an acquired religious drive—cannot understand those men who are able to play on more strings than two. It lies in the nature of higher, many-stringed culture that it should always be falsely interpreted by the lower; as happens, for example, when art is counted a disguised form of religiousness. Indeed, people who are only religious understand even science as a seeking on the part of the religious feeling, just as the deaf-and-dumb do not know what music is if it is not visible movement. (1.281)

Epictetus, Seneca, and Plutarch are little read now, that work and industry—formerly adherents of the great goddess health—sometimes seem to rage like an epidemic. Because time for thinking and quietness in thinking are lacking, one no longer ponders deviant views: one contents oneself with hating them. (1.282)

We quite often encounter copies of significant men; and, as also in the case of paintings, most people prefer the copies to the originals. (1.294)

When entering into a marriage one ought to ask oneself: do you believe you are going to enjoy talking with this woman up into your old age? Everything else in marriage is transitory, but most of the time you are together will be devoted to conversation. (1.406)

If one sets aside the demands of custom for a moment, one might very well consider whether nature and reason do not dictate that a man ought to have two marriages, perhaps in the following form. At first, at the age of twenty-two, he would marry a girl older than him who is intellectually and morally his superior and who can lead him through the perils of the twenties (ambition, hatred, self-contempt, passions of all kinds). Later, her love would pass over wholly into the motherly, and she would not merely endure it but actively encourage it if, in his thirties, the man should enter into an alliance with a young girl whose education he would himself take in hand—For the twenties marriage is a necessary institution, for the thirties a useful but not a necessary one: in later life it is often harmful and promotes the spiritual retrogression of the man. (1.421)

. . . broadens his egoism in respect of duration and enables him seriously to pursue objectives that transcend his individual lifespan. (1.455)

That we place more value on satisfaction of vanity than on any other form of well-being (security, accommodation, pleasure of all kinds) is demonstrated to a ludicrous degree in the act that, quite apart from any political reasons, everyone desires the abolition of slavery and abominates the idea of reducing people to this condition: whereas everyone must at the same time realize that slaves live in every respect more happily and in greater security than the modern worker, and that the work done by slaves is very little work compared with that done by the ‘worker’. One protests in the name of ‘human dignity’: but that, expressed more simply, is that precious vanity which feels being unequal, being publicly rated lower, as the hardest lot. — The Cynic thinks differently, because he despises honour: — and thus Diogenes was for a time a slave and private tutor. (1.457)

He who directs his passion upon causes (the sciences, the common weal, cultural interests, the arts) deprives his passion for people of much of its fire. (1.487)

Young people love what is strange and interesting, regardless of whether it is true or false. More mature spirits love in truth that which is strange and interesting in it. Heads fully mature, finally, love truth also where it appears plain and simple and is boring to ordinary people: they have noticed that truth is accustomed to impart its highest spiritual possessions with an air of simplicity. (1.609)

The tone in which young people speak, praise, blame, poeticise displeases their elders because it is too loud and yet at the same time hollow and indistinct, like a sound in a vaunt that acquires such volume through the emptiness surrounding it: for most of what young people think does not proceed from the abundance of their own nature but is a resonance and echo of what has been thought, said praised, and blamed in their presence. (1.613)

Belief in truth begins with doubt as to all truths believed hitherto. (2.1.20)

At all times arrogance has rightly been designated the ‘vice of the intellectual’—yet without the motive power of this vice truth and the respect accorded to it would be miserable accommodated on this earth. (2.1.26)

Farce of many of the industrious.—Through an excess of exertion they gain for themselves time, and afterwards have no idea what to do with it except to count the hours until is has expired. (2.1.47)

Every good book is written for a definite reader and those like him, and for just this reason will be viewed unfavourably by all other readers, the great majority: which is why its reputation rests on a narrow basis and can be erected only slowly—The mediocre and bad book is so because it tries to please many and does please them. (2.1.158)

They themselves are not educated: how should they be able to educate? (2.1.181)

We can distinguish five grades of traveller: those of the first and lowest grade are those who travel and, instead of seeing, are themselves seen—they are as though blind; next come those who actually see the world; the third experience something as a consequence of what they have seen; the fourth absorb into themselves what they have experienced and bear it away with them; lastly there re a few men of the highest energy whom after they have experienced and absorbed all they have seen, necessarily have to body it forth again out of themselves in works and actions as soon as they have returned home—It is like these five species of traveller that all men travel through the whole journey of life, the lowest purely passive, the highest those who transform into action and exhaust everything they experience. (2.1.228)

Of him who surrenders himself to events there remains less and less. (2.1.315)

What significance can we then accord the press as it is now, with its daily expenses diture of lung power on exclaiming, deafening, inciting, shocling—is it anything more than the permanent false alarm that leads ears and senses off in the wrong direction? (2.1.321)

The bad acquires esteem by being imitated, the good loses it—especially in art. (2.1.381)

We possess the conscience of an industrious age: and this conscience does not permit us to bestow our best hours and mornings on art, however grand and worthy this art may be,. To us art counts as a leisure, a recreational activity: we devote to it the remnants of our time and energies. (2.2.170)

A little garden, figs, little cheeses and in addition three or four good friends—these were the sensual pleasures of Epicurus. (2.2.192)

An excellent quotation can annihilate entire pages, indeed an entire book, in that it warns the reader and seems to cry out to him: ‘Beware, I am the jewel and around me there is lead, pallid, ignominious lead!’ Every word, every idea, wants to dwell only in its own company: that is the moral of high style. (2.2.111)

[Ricky · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fun read for the iconoclastic teenager, as all teenagers should be - and, well, everybody else, too. Try to read the book without prejudice, or rather in spite of it, no: in conflict with it. And remember, as probably with all books, where and when it was written - long before the Nazis and the European World Wars, after the Enlightenment, at the end of Romanticism and the birth of Existentialism (loved Dostoevsky), 30 years after "The Origin of the Species", 100 years before The Satanic Verses.

A few ignorant Nazis may have liked him, decided to borrow some of his ideas (Übermensch, will to power - which they clearly didn't get), but they also borrowed from Darwin and Hegel and a lot of other famous people. FYI, Nietzsche broke with his publisher because the publisher was anti-Semitic (not to mention Wagner), called on European powers to attack Germany, at one point ordered the Kaiser to be shot, and generally put out a literary riot (with the help - or hindrance - of a little syphilis).

He apparently liked to shock, to burst bubbles, to trash the favorite idols of his time, but not frivolously. The author of "The Gay Science" seems like a pretty somber dude. The famous "death of God" is really about the passing of an era, not the literal death of a supernatural being (that would be silly), but also an attack on an idea he sees as not just false, not just outmoded, but inferior. That's key - inferior because it holds people back, keeps us down, while the life-affirming "will to power" (ouch! watch out!) inspires us to rise above it all. Something like that. When he wrote this book Nietzsche thought Voltaire was the bee's knees (he may have been right: have you read "Candide"?), and maybe Voltaire would have enjoyed Nietzsche's irreverent dissing of the notion of 'free will' - we see, Nietzsche says, free will in all the waves and splashes of a waterfall when it's just the action of physical laws, and so are we.

There's poetry here, really - maybe sophomoric sometimes, but young people do write a lot of bad poetry that is still poetry. But this is fun stuff. A little wacky at times. (Hey, Fred, man, stay off that metaphysics!) But every teenager should read it.

By your 20's at least.

30's at the latest.

OK, it's probably never too late, but pretend to be a teenager when you do.

[Antonia Weber]

Ich habe es besonders für seine Ausführungen zu Moral und Ästhetik gelesen, das hat an vielen Stellen sehr Spaß gemacht! Nietzsche schafft es für mich, sich in fast allem in einer unvergleichlichen Spannung aus einer beachtlichen Sachlichkeit und Objektivität und einer immer durchschimmernden Tragik des Seins zu bewegen. Man will ihm zugleich beeindruckt zuhören und von ihm lernen und ihm dabei eine heiße Schokolade machen und ihn in den Arm nehmen.

[Mahdie · Rating 3 out of 5]

من ترجمه ی سعید فیروز آبادی رو خوندم و باید بگم بسیار ثقیل و آزار دهنده بود کلماتی که به کار برده بود و حتی جمله بندیش


روزی فرا خواهد رسید که شک را مبنای تمام امور بپذیرند

آزردگی پس از عمل اصلا و ابدا خردمندانه نیست زیرا آزردگی مبتنی بر این اشتباه است که انجام عمل ضرورت نداشته است یعنی چون انسان خود را آزاد میداند و نه به این دلیل که آزاد است احساس پشیمانی و عذاب وجدان میکند

تفاوت بانیان ادیان با این فریبکاران بزرگ در این است که آنان از حالت فریب خویشتن رهایی نمی یابند یا به ندرت به لحظات روشنی می اندیشند که شک بر آنان مستولی می شود اما آنان معمولا این شک و تردید ها را به پلیدی ها نسبت میدهند و این چنین خود را تسلی میبخشند

اگر کودکی در خانواده ای بزرگ شود که روابط پیچیده ای دارند به طور طبیعی دروغ میگوید و این دروغ ها دقیقا غیر ارادی و مطابق با آن امری است که او دوست دارد.درک مفهوم حقیقت و انزجار از دروغ برای او ناممکن و بیگانه است و به همین دلیل دروغ گفتن او در عین بی گناهی تمام انجام میشود

هر کس به کسی قول دهد که همیشه او را دوست داشته باشد یا همیشه از او متنفر باشد و یا پیوسته به او وفادار بماند قولی داده است که خارج از توان اوست
آیا عشق ابلهانه تر از عدالت نیست؟

امید در واقع پلیدترین پلیدی هاست چرا که به عذاب انسان ها تداوم بخشید

دین به دلیل ترس و نیاز پا به عرصه ی وجود نهاده است

مخالفت با امیال ساده تر از حفظ تعادل در آنهاست

تمامی کسانی که با کشف یا اختراعی در علم به آن دلبسته میشوند در اصل علاقه ی واقعی به آن ندارند

علاقه به تربیت زمانی فزونی خواهد گرفت که ایمان به خدا و نگهداری او از آدمیان از بین برود همچون علم پزشکی که زمانی به شکوفایی رسید که ایمان به معجزه را خاتمه بخشید

علم تنها تمرینی برای توانایی است و نه دانایی

مردمی که تنها مذهبی هستند علم را تنها کند و کاوی برای یافتن حس دینی میدانند

باید دین و هنر را همچون مادر و دایه ای دوست داشت در غیر این صورت نمیتوان به فرزانگی رسید اما در عین حال باید به فراسوی آنها نگریست و از آنان فراتر رفت زیرا اگر مجذوب آنها شوی دیگر قادر به درکشان نیستی
افراد دوست نداشتنی را تنها زمانی بانزاکت میدانیم که دست از سر ما بردارند

هیچ کاری برای انسان ها کم بهاتر از فروتنی نیست

بهترین دوست احتمالا با بهترین زن ازدواج خواهد کرد زیرا ازدواج خوب مبنی بر استعداد در دوستی است

اگر آدمی پدری خوب نداشته باشد باید یکی را برای خود پیدا کند.

زنان با وقار فکر میکنند اگر نتوان از امری سخن گفت آن امر اصلا وجود ندارد

برای مبارزه با بیماری خاص مردان یعنی تحقیر خویشتن، مطمئن ترین درمان آن است که زنی باهوش آنها را دوست بدارد

ازدواج هایی که از سر عشق انجام میپذیرد پدرشان خطا و مادرشان نیاز است

میتوانیم هر کسی را با تشویق،ترس و انبوهی کار و اندیشه چنان مبهوت و ضعیف کنیم که در برابر امری به ظاهر پیچیده نتواند مخالفت کند و تسلیم شود ،از این نکته زنان و سیاستمداران آگاه هستند

بزرگ ترین خطا در قضاوت درباره ی انسان را پدر و مادرش انجام میدهند

باورها دشمنان خطرناک تری از دروغ برای حقیقت هستند

افرادی که به امری با ژرف نگری کامل میپردازند کم تر به آن وفادار میمانند

آدمی زمانی با شخصیت تر به نظر میرسد که بیشتر به پیروی از حال و هوای درونی خویش بپردازد تا در پی پیروی از اصول خود باشد

اصلا درباره ی خویش سخن نگفتن از بزرگوارانه ترین ریاکاری هاست

اشتباه سبب شد که از حیوان،بشر پدید آید
آیا حقیقت این قدرت را دارد تا دوباره از بشر حیوانی پدید آورد

[Ana]

I have wanted to read this book many times, I have stopped a lot of times before even reaching page 100. Now I finally see its whitened spine and the bookmark resting at page 510. I am proud of myself as I have always been kind of scared of philosophy in English, of not understanding the references, of not grasping the nuances of speech. I can proudly say that my worries have not been in vain, as expected, I haven't understood all of it, I got lost in Nietzsche's understanding of the world, especially politics, as it has never been of interest to me. However, his thoughts on arts, humanity, existence, values, vivid descriptions and sometime poetic grip on his surroundings, made me want to read more. I will miss reading Nietzsche and I will forever cherish his imaginative description of the world. I have never thought to be fair to rate philosophy, except Cioran, as I have read him at a different time in my life when I could emphasize with him on a different, more sentimental level. Nevertheless, I have extracted from the book some aphorisms that made me smile. I think it is of relevance and kind of eerie in the most pleasant way to smile when reading philosophy, be it to agree with the philosopher, to feel what the philosopher feels and to perceive with his/her pair of eyes as with your own.

pg. 325 "172 - The poet no longer a teacher. - Strange as it may sound to our time, there were once poets and artists whose soul was above the passions with their delights and convulsions, and who therefore took their pleasure in purer materials, worthier men, more delicate complications and dénouements. If the artists of our day for the most part unfetter the will, and so are under certain circumstances for that very reason emancipators of life, those were tamers of the will, enchanters of animals, creators of men. In fact, they moulded, re-moulded, and new-moulded life, whereas the fame of poets of our day lies in unharnessing, unchaining, and shattering. The ancient Greeks demanded of the poet that he should be the teacher of grown men. How ashamed the poet would be now if this demand were made of him! He is not even a good student of himself, and so never himself becomes a good poem or a fine picture. Under the most favourable circumstances he remains the shy, attractive ruin of a temple, but at the same time a cavern of cravings, overgrown like a ruin with flowers, nettles, and poisonous weeds, inhabited and haunted by snakes, worms, spiders, and birds; an object for sad reflection as to why the noblest and most precious must grow up at once like a ruin, without the past and future of perfection."

pg. 350 "237 - The wanderer in the mountains to himself. - There are certain signs that you have gone farther and higher. There is a freer, wider prospect before you, the air blows cooler yet milder in your face (you have unlearned the folly of confounding mildness with warmth), your gait is more firm and vigorous, courage and discretion have waxed together. On all these grounds your journey may now be more lonely and in any case more perilous than heretofore, if indeed not to the extent believed by those who from the misty valley see you, the roamer, striding on the mountains."

pg. 378 "366 - 'Will a self'. - Active, successful natures act, not according to the maxim, 'Know thyself', but as if always confronted with the command, 'Will a self, so you will become a self.' - Fate seems always to have left them a choice. Inactive, contemplative natures, on the other hand, reflect on how they have chosen their self 'once for all' at their entry into life."

pg. 383 "399 - Being satisfied. - We show that we have attained maturity of understanding when we no longer go where rare flowers lurk under the thorniest hedges of knowledge, but are satisfied with gardens, forests, meadows, and ploughlands, remembering that life is too short for the rare and uncommon."

pg. 397 "14 - Man as the comic actor of the world. - It would require beings more intellectual than men to relish to the full the humorous side of man's view of himself as the goal of all existence and of his serious pronouncement that he is satisfied only with the prospect of fulfilling a world-mission. If a God created the world, he created man to be his ape, as a perpetual source of amusement in the midst of his rather tedious eternities. The music of the spheres surrounding the world would then presumably be the mocking laughter of all the other creatures around mankind. God in his boredom uses pain for the tickling of his favourite animal, in order to enjoy his proudly tragic gestures and expressions of suffering, and, in general, the intellectual inventiveness of the vainest of his creatures - as inventor of this inventor. For he who invented man as a joke had more intellect and more joy in intellect than has man. Even here, where our human nature is willing to humble itself, our vanity again plays us a trick, in that we men should like in this vanity at least to be quite marvellous and incomparable. Our uniqueness in the world! Oh, what an improbable thing it is! Astronomers, who occasionally acquire a horizon outside our world, give us to understand that the drop of life on the earth is without significance for the total character of the mighty ocean of birth and decay; that countless stars present conditions for the generation of life similar to those of the earth - and yet these are but a handful in comparison with the endless number that have never known, or have long been cured, of the eruption of life; that life on each of these stars, measured by the period of its existence, has been but an instant, a flicker, with long, long intervals afterwards - and thus in no way the aim and final purpose of their existence. Possibly the ant in the forest is quite as firmly convinced that it is the aim and purpose of the existence of the forest, as we are convinced in our imaginations (almost unconsciously) that the destruction of mankind involves the destruction of the world. It is even modesty on our part to go no farther than this, and not to arrange a universal twilight of the world and the gods as the funeral ceremony of the last man. Even to the eye of the most unbiased astronomer a lifeless world can scarcely appear otherwise than as a shining and swinging star wherein man lies buried."

pg.417 - "52 - The sum-total of conscience. - The sum-total of our conscience is all that has regularly been demanded of us, without reason, in the days of our childhood, by people whom we respected or feared. From conscience comes that feeling of obligation ('This I must do, this omit') which does not ask, Why must I? - In all cases where a thing is done with 'because' and 'why', man acts without conscience, but not necessarily on that account against conscience. The belief in authority is the source of conscience; which is therefore not the voice of God in the heart of man, but the voice of some men in man."

pg.422 - "67 - The habit of contrasts. - Superficial, inexact observation sees contrasts everywhere in nature (for instance, 'hot and cold'), where there are no contrasts, only differences of degree. This bad habit has induced us to try to understand and interpret even the inner nature, the intellectual and moral world, in accordance with such contrasts. An infinite amount of cruelty, arrogance, harshness, estrangement, and coldness has entered into human emotion, because men imagined they saw contrasts where there were only transitions."

pg.463 - "194 - Dreams. - Our dreams, if for once in a way they succeed and are complete - generally a dream is a bungled piece of work - are symbolic concatenations of scenes and images in place of a narrative poetical language. They paraphrase our experiences or expectations or relations with poetic boldness and definiteness, so that in the morning we are always astonished at ourselves when we remember the nature of our dream. In dreams we use up too much artistry - and hence are often too poor in artistry in the daytime."

[Fatbardha Smona · Rating 5 out of 5]

Dashamirësi. - Mes gjërave të vogla, por pafundësisht të zakonshme dhe, për këtë arsye, tepër efikase, të cilave shkenca duhet t'u kushtojë më shumë vëmendje se gjërave më të rralla dhe të mëdha, duhet llogaritur edhe dashamirësia; dua të them, ajo shfaqje e mentalitetit miqësor në shoqëri, ajo buzëqeshje me sy, ai shtrëngim dore, ai humor i mirë, te të cilat zakonisht përfshihet pothuajse çdo veprim njerëzor. Çdo mësues, çdo funksionar, ia shton këtë stoli asaj që është detyra e tij; kjo është veprimtaria e vazhdueshme e njerëzimit, në një farë mënyre, valët e dritës së tij, në të cilat jeton gjithçka, veçanërisht në rrethin më të ngushtë, brenda familjes, jeta bleron dhe lulëzon vetëm falë kësaj dashamirësie. Përzemërsia, gëzimi, mirësia e zemrës, janë rrjedha që kanë buruar gjithnjë nga instinkti jo egoist dhe kanë kontribuar te kultura jonë shumë më fuqishëm se ato shfaqjet e famshme të të njëjtit instinkt që quhen mëshirë, përdëllesë dhe sakrificë. Por njeriu i vlerëson pak ato, dhe të themi të vërtetën, tek ato nuk ka shumë altruizëm. Megjithatë, shuma e këtyre dozave të vogla është e mrekullueshme, forca e tyre e përgjithshme është një nga forcat më të mëdha. – Po kështu, në botë gjendet shumë më tepër lumturi nga sa mund të shikojnë sytë e ngrysur: nëse i bëjmë mirë llogaritë dhe nuk harrojmë ato çaste mirëqenieje me të cilat është e pasur çdo ditë në çdo jetë njerëzore, edhe tek ajo më e sfilitura.

[Liedzeit Liedzeit · Rating 3 out of 5]

Einer meiner Professoren wurde nicht müde, Nietzsche zu zitieren. Mindestens in jeder dritten Vorlesung erinnerte er uns daran: „Ich fürchte, wir werden Gott nicht los, weil wir noch an die Grammatik glauben.“ (Wobei er, meine ich, das weil durch solange ersetzte, aber vielleicht bilde ich mir das ein.)

Und in der Tat, gibt es kaum ein anderes Beispiel, wo ein einziger Satz eine ganze Philosophie repräsentiert.

Vielleicht war dieser eine Satz so mächtig, dass ich glaubte, mir die Lektüre von Nietzsche ersparen zu können. Außerdem missfiel mir, dass Nietzsche von Menschen geschätzt wird, die sonst nicht viel von Philosophie verstehen. (Ein aktuelles Beispiel ist Jordan Peterson). Und mir schien, dass Nietzsche im wesentlichen philosophische Floskeln produziert hat.

Nun also, Menschliches, Allzumenschliches, ein Buch, das Die Zeit zu den 100 besten Büchern zählt. Zu Recht?

Der Titel ist schon mal großartig. Der Untertitel Ein Buch für freie Geister dagegen so abgeschmackt dämlich, dass ich es am liebsten gleich wieder zuklappen möchte.

Ich gehe also mit einer gewissen Voreingenommenheit an die Lektüre. Und die wird in Abschnitt 19 erstmals belohnt:

„Die Erfindung der Gesetze der Zahlen ist aufgrund des ursprünglich schon herrschenden Irrtums gemacht, dass es mehrere gleiche Dinge gebe (aber tatsächlich gibt es nichts Gleiches), mindestens dass es Dinge gebe (aber es gibt keine «Dinge»). Die Annahme der Vielheit setzt immer schon voraus dass es etwas gebe, was vielfach vorkommt: aber gerade hier schon waltet der Irrtum, schon da fingieren wir Wesen, Einhalten, die es nicht gibt.“

Es gibt keine Dinge? Oh, je.

Und dann gibt es jede Menge belanglose Plauderei, bis zum Abschnitt 39, wo er uns die Fabel der intelligiblen Freiheit schenkt.

„Die Geschichte der Empfindung, vermöge deren wir jemanden verantwortlich machen, also der so genannten moralischen Empfindung, verläuft in folgenden Hauptphasen. Zuerst nennt man einzelne Handlungen gut oder böse ohne alle Rücksicht auf deren Motive, sondern allein der nützlichen oder schädlichen Folgen wegen. Bald vergisst man die Herkunft dieser Bezeichnung und wähnt, dass den Handlung an sich, ohne Rücksicht auf deren Folgen, die Eigenschaft «gut» oder «böse» innewohne: mit dem selben Irrtume, nach welchem die Sprache den Stein selber als hart, den Baum selber als grün bezeichnet – also dadurch, dass man, was Wirkung ist, als Ursache fasst. Sodann legt man das Gut- oder Böse-sein in die Motive hinein und betrachtet die Taten an sich als moralisch zweideutig. Man geht weiter und gibt es Prädikat gut oder böse nicht mehr dem einzelnen Motive, sondern dem ganzen Wesen eines Menschen, aus dem das Motiv, wie die Pflanze aus dem Erdreich, herauswächst. So macht man der Reihe nach den Menschen für seine Wirkung, dann für seine Handlung, dann für seine Motive und endlich für sein Wesen verantwortlich.“

Das ist allerdings noch viel schlauer als der Abschnitt 19 dumm war.

Und ein Beispiel für eine Nietzsche-Ansicht, die zumindest bedenkenswert ist, ist diese (Abschnitt 45):


„Der Begriff gut und böse hat eine doppelte Vorgeschichte: nämlich einmal in der Seele der herrschenden Stämme und Kasten. Wer die Macht zu vergelten hat, Gutes mit Gutem, Böses mit Bösem, und auch wirklich Vergeltung übt, also dankbar und rachsüchtig ist, wird wird gut genannt; wer unmächtig ist und nicht vergelten kann, gilt als schlecht. Wann gehört alles Guter zu den «Guten», einer Gemeinde, welche Gemeingefühl hat, weil die einzelnen durch den Sinn der Vergeltung miteinander verflochten sind. Man gehört als Schlechter zu den «Schlechten», zu einem Haufen unterworfener, ohnmächtiger Menschen, welche kein Gemeingefühl haben.“


Und so geht es weiter. Belanglosigkeiten, dumme und kluge Beobachtungen und dann und wann Bemerkungen, über die nachzudenken sich lohnt.

Und vermutlich wird jeder etwas finden, was als Zitat eingeflochten, jedes Gespräch belebt (Abschnitt 115):

„Leute, welchen ihr tägliches Leben zu leer und eintönig vorkommt, werden leicht religiös: dieses begreiflich unverzeihlich; nur haben sie kein Recht, Religiosität von denen zu fordern, denen das tägliche Leben nicht leer und eintönig verfließt.“

Oder noch besser: „Der Stein ist mehr Stein als früher.” (218) „Überzeugungen sind gefährlichere Feinde der Wahrheit als Lügen.” (483)

Und so weiter. Das Problem bei einem Buch, das weitgehend aus Aphorismen besteht, liegt darin, dass die Belanglosigkeiten und Unsinnigkeiten mit derselben Würde vorgetragen werden wie die Perlen, wodurch die Perlen an Glanz verlieren.


7/10

[Andrew]

Who knew that the early Nietzsche could be so likable? The Nietzsche of Human, All Too Human is the funny guy at the cocktail party, who deploys his zingers against religion, art, society, and other such things. If we were Victorians, we'd call him a popinjay. Nowadays, we'd say he's a little like Christopher Hitchens or something. Later Nietzsche, just a douchebag. Early Nietzsche, hilarious! And OK with other humans!

It's hard to call this philosophy. There's no system. I don't however, have a shelf for "funny things I'd like to highlight," so that's as good as we're going to get.

[Adnan · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is my very first Nietzsche book. As the original book was written in German and Nietzsche's sentence constructions are often long, the English translator did a very good job of translating this. After finishing this book, I ended up getting a more clear perception about certain things and some of his arguments eradicated confusions those I was having for a very long time. The point of this whole book is to demonstrate that, eventually, we are erroneous human being. Our thinkings, perceptions, and logics have limitations. Nietzsche stated, "We are primordially illogical and hence unjust beings and can recognize that fact: this is one of the greatest and most baffling discords of existence". Perhaps this was a confession in contrast to some of his previous metaphysical and psychological assumptions.

To answer the most fundamental questions about the origin of the universe and the life itself, Stephen Hawking and his co-authors in their groundbreaking book "The grand Design" stated that "Philosophy is dead", and that's what I believed until reading this book. Interestingly, Nietzsche demonstrated the limitation of science by saying, "In all scientific demonstration, we always unavoidably base our calculations upon some false standards....One can keep building upon them until is reached that final limit at which the erroneous fundamental conceptions come in conflict with the results established." The classic conflict between science and philosophy!

One thing I liked the most about this book is that, Nietzsche was sceptical about metaphysics and metaphysical explanations, although he accepted the fact that one can't deny the existence of a metaphysical world by saying "It is true, there maybe a metaphysical world; the absolute possibility of it can scarcely be disputed", but also admitted the fact that "Nothing could be predicted of the metaphysical world beyond the fact that it is an elsewhere, another sphere, inaccessible and incomprehensible to us."

Everything he described in his aphorisms is from neutral perspectives and based on the fact that our human mind is fundamentally erroneous and illogical. Nietzsche covered soo many distinct topics in this book, all related to human thinkings and behaviors, that this review will get much longer if I continue to write about. Although I'm not a hardcore reader of philosophy, and definitely one can argue about some(or many) of his opinions, but this book gave me much more elements to think about that it deserves a five star.

[مكتبجي]

الكتاب: إنساني مفرط في إنسانية
الكاتب: فريدريك نيتشه
النوع: فلسفة
الصفحات: 829

" على المرء أن لا يتكلم إلا حيث لا يحق له أن يسكت، وأن لا يتكلم إلا عن الأشياء التي يكون قد تغلّب عليها. وكل ما عدا ذلك سيكون ثرثرة ".

ربما نعجب بنيتشه وكفاحه ومثابرته في سبيل الحفاظ على أفكاره ونشفق عليه في وحدته ومرضه وموته، يبدأ الإنسان العظيم عندما يدرك حجم مأساته، ومع ذلك ناقش نيتشه في شقي كتابه كيف يرتقي الإنسان بذاته ويوسع الهوة بينه وبين الحيوان .

يتناول الكتاب موضوع الميتافيزيقا، وحاول تفسيره وبيان منابعه، وأعلى في المقابل من مكانة العلوم الطبيعية، كما طرح مفهوم الخير والشر من المنظور المسيحي، وأيضا أنكر أي دور للعبقرية الشخصية أو الوحي الإلهي في الإبداع الفني، ومر بشكل طفيف على فكرة الإنسان الأعلى .

كما احتوى على إيماءات حزينه لا تلتقتها سوى قلة، عبر فيها عن الوحده العميقه وذاك الحرمان الذي عرفهما خلال كل فترات سنواته الانتقالية.


هذا الكتاب سيتطلب منك شجاعة كبيرة لإتمامه واستيعابه وقراءته بتجرد وحيادية كاملة، و معرفة هل فرضت على الانسان قيود كثيره كي يتخلص من السلوكيات الحيوانية؟؟ هذا ما سنعرفه وأكتر في كتابيه.


#مكتبجي 📚👤
#مراجعات_مكتبجين 📚👤

[Sye]

Something about this book feeds my soul. I think the world should be more open to Nietzche. His thoughts and speculations were so different from mine, but it did change me a little in that I should rely less on my emotions and abandon some of my irrational and emotional conclusions about the world. I think much of what he says is quite interesting and worth the read.

[محمد عادل]

كلمة واحدة: صادق.
من أمتع القراءات التي اختبرتها إلى الآن!

[Usman Raza · Rating 5 out of 5]

Simply one of the greatest book ever written, highly recommend this book to everyone.

[AHmed Muhammed · Rating 4 out of 5]

كتاب عظيم

[Mohammad]

«زندگی شامل لحظات نادر و منحصر به فردی است که اهمیتی بسیار دارند، و فواصل بی شماری که در آنها، اگر بخت یاری کند، اشباح آن لحظات گرداگرد ما جولان می دهند. عشق، بهار، ملودی زیبا، کوه ها، ماه، و دریا - همگی تنها یک بار به راستی با قلب ما سخن می گویند: البته اگر فرصتی برای صحبت کردن بیابند. زیرا بسیاری از مردم هرگز این لحظات را تجربه نمی کنند بلکه خود آنتراکتی در
سمفونی زندگی واقعی اند. »


«پس از آن، هنگامی که صبحگاهان در زیر درختان آرام استراحت می کند، از بالای درختان و از میان شاخسار انبوه آنها چیزهایی زیبا و درخشان روی او می افتد، هدایای همه ی جان های آزادی که در کوهساران و جنگلها و انزوا خانه کرده اند، آنان که، چون او، راه سرور آذین و تفکر برانگیز خود را میپویند، سرگردانان و فیلسوفان.»

فعالانه فکر کردن است از برترین صفات جان آزاد، انسانی زیاده انسانی

[Mohamed Amin · Rating 4 out of 5]

كتاب عن أفكار نيتشه في نواحي مختلفه .. عن الإنسان، الأخلاق، الدين والدوله، المرأه، المجتمع ، الحضاره، السمات الشخصيه... سواء نتفق أو نختلف معاه هايظل نيتشه فيلسوف لكل العصور صاحب آراء تحتمل التطبيق علي أزمنه ماضيه وحاضره بحضور غير عادي..

[Louis · Rating 5 out of 5]

Clocking in at 509 pages, with 638 (part I) and 350 (part II) aphorisms, not taking into account the introduction, this book truly was a behemoth.

I think a lot of misconceptions are circulating about Nietzsche. The fact that he is a pure nihilist, for instance.
For starters, nihilism is a term difficult to delineate.
Wikipedia says that nihilism is a "philosophical doctrine that suggests the lack of belief in one or more reputedly meaningful aspects of life.
Most commonly, nihilism is presented in the form of existential nihilism, which argues that life is without objective meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value."
But is anyone really free from believing in value? If one does not value something, anything, in the world, what reason can one have for living?
Nietzsche wrote a lot on the term nihilism, but in different contexts and with many possible interpretations. Oftentimes he wrote with a negative connotation. (at least that is what I've read while researching the man)
I find nihilism a term worth racking one's brains over because the discussion is important.
We once talked about values during philosophy (in my Bachelor Degree). We had to think of one value we would mark ourselves with and around which we could build our reality.
It was one of the hardest questions I ever faced in my life, but still being directly proportional to its essentiality.
Basically it boiled down to this: which direction are you willing to take with your life?
I could tell you my value, but what's more important is for you to figure out your own.

Anyway, continuing on nihilism, Nietzsche repeatedly brought up the term in his works, all with negative connotations (dixit Wikipedia).
I wouldn't know as this is the first (but most likely not the last) of his books I have read.
Wikipedia: "Nietzsche characterized nihilism as emptying the world and especially human existence of meaning, purpose, comprehensible truth, or essential value. This observation stems in part from Nietzsche's perspectivism, or his notion that "knowledge" is always by someone of some thing: it is always bound by perspective, and it is never mere fact. Rather, there are interpretations through which we understand the world and give it meaning. "
Again, whether this is true or not, I know not, but it sets one thinking: forget all you know, because what you know and what is to you considered "wisdom" up till this point is actually a coherent collection of perceptions. And as we all know: perceptions are biased or prone to bias at any rate. Or: how truth is a relative notion.
This way of thinking, thinking without any predefined conditions or bias, seems to me the definition of a 'free spirit' although Nietzsche himself defined 'free spirit' rather as "someone who knows how the world thinks but still chooses to think his own thoughts, regardless of their controversiality in relation to those of the world."
Although this latter definition I would rather label as "non-conformism". What's in a word? (okay, 2 words, fine)

Maybe enough with the introduction already although I must say I thoroughly enjoy writing about philosophical thought streams (always been an interest of mine)
"Human, all too human" is in essence a collection of seemingly random thoughts, collected around a variety of loose themes.
What struck me as bizarre is that Nietzsche occassionally, if not oftentimes, contradicts himself here. I read somewhere how Human, all too human was a thought-experiment to Nietzsche, exploring many different trains of thought.
Many times I found myself saying "what is he talking about" and "well that's disrespectful".
Because yes, sometimes Nietzsche was in my eyes disrespectful towards women and at times the meaning in his writing was lost on me.
The book features not only thoughts, but also opinions, political ones amongst others. These biased parts I mostly skipped because they don't work for me.
(Yeah so I skipped large parts of this book. So what? It's my life, my time, my investment. Try and stop me.)
Maybe later I will add quotes and such but for now let's just say the book was a deep ocean and if you pay close attention you might find pearls
(and I don't mean the pearls of the itsy-bitsy type, but ginormous oysters containing ginormous pearls in the murky depths below)

Example:

"Posthumous fame. It makes sense to hope for recognition in a distant future only if one assumes that manking will
remain essentially unchanged and that all greatness must be perceived as great, not for one time only, but for all times.
However, this is a mistake; in all its perceptions and judgments of what is beautiful and good, mankind changes very greatly;
it is fantasy to believe of ourselves that we have a mile's head start and that all manking is followig our path. (...)"

Straight to the bone and confrontational, Nietzsche presents his view on fame and its relativity.
I very much like the writing style: putting the conditions first to create a reliëf, making a positive statement (luring the reader in a manner of speaking)
then directly nullifying the latter by stating the exact opposite. More than anything, it makes me humble reading it because it conveys the inherent
pointlessness of "wanting to matter", a theme apparent in the book I am reading now, actually, "An Abundance of Katherines" by Greene (worthy reading material by the way)

So anyway, why on earth should anyone wish to read Nietzsche?
Some unexpected nudges in his direction:

- "Fight Club" quotes like "it's only when we've lost everything that we're free to do anything"
and "the things you own end up owning you." are directly influenced by nihilism, the theme on which Nietzsche had so much to say.
Actually my initial thought on those quotes was "you must discard everything if you wish to be truly free".
Even though that may be true (I have not ventured into such drastic measures yet), an interesting video I saw today proved that you need not go that far:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVmIV...
Actually, the key is to be able to walk away from people/objects and not get so attached that you become their slave, that they end up owning you instead of the other way around.
The video is really interesting if you wish to dig deeper.
- Nietzsche takes fixed - and thus powerful - ideas, unmantles them and rebuilds them in a different way.
For instance he has a quote on talent where he talks about 'inborn talent' where one is born with a special gift (language proficiency for instance),
but whereas contemporary society limits the semantic field of talent to intrinsic capability, Nietzsche argues one can also 'become' something,
that is build a talent through power of sheer will and investment. He speaks of 'becoming who you are' so actually of unlocking dormant possible
life paths and fueling them with your own person. What life-empowering enthusiasm!
- Above all, Nietzsche is known for having pierced the myth of christianity with his famous words 'God is dead!' (actually Nietzsche did neither know nor speak English
so "Gott ist tot! Gott bleibt tot! Und wir haben ihn getötet!" would be more exact) In spite of his rambling on christianity (I sometimes found it tiring),
in his time (1844-1900) he dared challenge public catholic opinion and question religious belief.
Changing time perspective from ours to his allows us to better grasp the consequences of uttering such - in those days - blasphemous thoughts.
Given the death of God, Nietzsche exclaimed that man had to find a new mode of being, a new way of living.
Because, after all, in those days evil was prescribed to being God's work and "God works", after all, "in mysterious ways."
When there is no afterlife and evil is without reason, life suddenly took a different turn for people and they had to find their own meaning in life instead
of the meaning prescribed by priests in those days. Although the transition did not occur so suddenly, Nietzsche was an important shaker in his days
and we should respect the man for that.

I guess I can conclude this review by saying how much I enjoyed his work and that I am now off to mark all passages I find relevant (my favorite part of reading)
in order to apply them to my own life. How that works out is another story for another day (maybe for my next Nietzsche review?).

[Vytautas Vyšniauskas · Rating 3 out of 5]

Tai viena prasčiausių Nietzsche’s knygų. Nepaisant to, pasižymėjau net 83 atskiras vietas, kuriose manau esant ką nors vertingo ar cituotino. Toks yra Nietzsche’s lygis.

Nebūdingai sunkiai skaitėsi, nors Nietzche pasižymi stiliaus lengvumu, kuris labai įtraukia ir pavergia, suklaidindamas paiką skaitytoją, apsigavusį, kad tai lengvi skaitiniai, kuriuos perprasti nereikia didelio proto. Anaiptol.

Nietzsche – vienas labiausiai nesuprastų vienišių filosofijos istorijoje, vienų dievinamas, kitų nekenčiamas, ir vis ne dėl tų priežasčių, kurios liudytų jo filosofijos supratimą.

Bandęs pasaulį apsaugoti nuo nihilizmo, ateinančio visų pirma iš krikščionybės, kurios sukeltą priklausomybę nuo Dievo išsigydžius lieka tik žiaurus tuštumos ir beprasmybės patyrimas, jis išgyveno lėtą savęs atstatymą, kurio troško ir likusiam pasauliui, o ypač – labiausiai nuo tokių patirčių kentėjusiems žmonėms, kurie, net ir praėjus beveik pusantro šimto metų nuo ryškiausių filosofo darbų, lieka nesuprasti ir atstumti, neretai dar ir patys, kaip ir patsai Nietzsche, apkaltinami nihilizmu. Todėl knyga ir yra „laisviesiems protams“, t. y. tokiems, kurie gali disponuoti patys savimi.

„Jeigu jau vieną kartą panorai būti asmeniu, tai turi gerbti ir savo šešėlį.“ (p. 292)

Deja, dažniausiai bėgame nuo savo šešėlių, ir tik retas įsikimbame į juos, kad ištvertume pačius save, rizikuodami virsti vien tik šešėliais to, kuo kažkada buvome...

Gal dėl to sunkiai ir skaitėsi. Nes daug metų šešėlio manyje būta daugiau nei to, kas jį meta. Prisiimti atsakomybę už savo šešėlį ir pačiam juo nevirsti – labai sunkus darbas, kuriam vieno gyvenimo yra per maža. Gerai, kad yra Nietzsche, kuris savuoju gyvenimu paremia, galbūt suteikdamas tai, ko trūksta, jog gyvenimo tam užtektų.