What do you think?
Rate this book
من جلجامش إلى نيتشه "بحث في الثقافة العالمية
معادلة ذات طرفين.. إن ذكرت أحدهما عرفت الثاني من غير حاجة إلى ذكره. فما ذكر بلد قط إلا وارتسمت في مخيلتك أسماء عظمائه وما ذُكر عظيمٌ أيضاً إلا وقفز إلى ذاكرتك اسم بلده الذي ينتمي إليه والذي أبدع فيه أو ناضل من أجله واستشهد في سبيله. فـ(كونفوشيوس يذكرك بالصين والعكس صحيح) و(شكسبير يذكرك بإنكلترا والعكس صحيح أيضاً) و(موليير بفرنسا) و(ناظم حكمت بتركيا) و(بابلو نيرودا بالتشيللي) و(غارسيا لوركا بإسبانيا) و(بوذا يذكرك بالهند) وهكذا دواليك.
216 pages, Kindle Edition
Published September 17, 2019
1 person is currently reading
5 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
April 12, 2021
Initially I thought it is Great read & I still somehow believe so, However I question the validity of his analysis of the world's greats. Especially when he started talking about Nietzsche. Quick look at the references he used to discuss the German philosopher, you would notice a couple of things: 1- He only used writers who disapproved of philosopher's ideas. 2- Among the 61 reference he used, Only one of them is by Nietzsche himself "This Spoke Zarathustra" which indicate that he might not have read any of his writings. I picked Nietzsche to comment on since I read the philosopher's work and I am very familiar with his ideas.
Nietzsche's influence spans many generations & of course a couple of centuries, affecting great thinkers as well as across multiple disciplines. Thinkers such as Max Scheler, Karl Jaspers, Martin Heidegger, Albert Camus, Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault, theologians Paul Tillich, Thomas J.J. Altizer; Martin Buber (Judaism’s greatest 20th-century thinker), Alfred Adler/Carl Jung/Sigmund Freud (Greatest psychologists of our time) were deeply effected by him. Other Novelists such as Thomas Mann, Hermann Hesse, André Malraux, André Gide, Gibran Khalil Gibran and John Gardner were all inspired by him and wrote about him, as did the poets and playwrights George Bernard Shaw, Rainer Maria Rilke, Stefan George, and William Butler Yeats, among many others. Disciplines he touched on: psychology, philosophy, religion, social & political domains, Poetry, Drama, others.
"Nietzsche’s great influence is due not only to his originality but also to the fact that he was one of the German language’s most-brilliant prose writers." Source: Britannica.
Yet, the writer (مصطفى محمود), failed to mentioned any of this, negating his claimed objectivity toward Nietzsche in his initial paragraph. His analysis on the idea of "Superman" is totally misrepresented, misinterpreted and lies in some instances. Nietzsche whole superman philosophical idea is centered around the concept that man has been created between animal & superman and it meant for this poor man to chart his course toward the superman state which he will never achieve yet that doesn't matter since the journey what counts and what he learns during that journey, ideas such as value creation (re-valuation) meant to help. Many of us go the other direction, toward the animal state totally failing to grasp the concept.
"God is dead" also known "The Death of God" is Nietzsche famous quoted statement. it is so often misunderstood & misinterpreted that Nietzsche believed in a literal death or end of God. Instead, the line points to the general decline of Christianity and to the western world’s reliance on religion as a moral compass and source of meaning. In our quest to understand God the infinite with our finite mind, we have created Gods in our own image not in God's own image. those Gods are dead, we (human beings) killed them. As he explains in The Gay Science (Section 125, The Madman): “God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?” (مصطفى محمود) never took the liberty to explain, either because he gravely misunderstood or never read Nietzsche's work.
My questioning of his analysis spans to other greats (مصطفى محمود) wrote about. I don't have the background to comment but if his approach is similar to those of his Nietzsche's approach then I have a problem. I still give him 4 stars since the book is really good, it is rich with concepts & ideas to build on. the style is research-based, I personally liked it. I do respect the writer's ideas greatly although I disagree on certain things. I will surely do my own research on those greats he mention in this book. I really highly recommend reading it since it will expand your horizon especially if you are going to read some of the resource & reference he mention.
Thanks
Sami
Nietzsche's influence spans many generations & of course a couple of centuries, affecting great thinkers as well as across multiple disciplines. Thinkers such as Max Scheler, Karl Jaspers, Martin Heidegger, Albert Camus, Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault, theologians Paul Tillich, Thomas J.J. Altizer; Martin Buber (Judaism’s greatest 20th-century thinker), Alfred Adler/Carl Jung/Sigmund Freud (Greatest psychologists of our time) were deeply effected by him. Other Novelists such as Thomas Mann, Hermann Hesse, André Malraux, André Gide, Gibran Khalil Gibran and John Gardner were all inspired by him and wrote about him, as did the poets and playwrights George Bernard Shaw, Rainer Maria Rilke, Stefan George, and William Butler Yeats, among many others. Disciplines he touched on: psychology, philosophy, religion, social & political domains, Poetry, Drama, others.
"Nietzsche’s great influence is due not only to his originality but also to the fact that he was one of the German language’s most-brilliant prose writers." Source: Britannica.
Yet, the writer (مصطفى محمود), failed to mentioned any of this, negating his claimed objectivity toward Nietzsche in his initial paragraph. His analysis on the idea of "Superman" is totally misrepresented, misinterpreted and lies in some instances. Nietzsche whole superman philosophical idea is centered around the concept that man has been created between animal & superman and it meant for this poor man to chart his course toward the superman state which he will never achieve yet that doesn't matter since the journey what counts and what he learns during that journey, ideas such as value creation (re-valuation) meant to help. Many of us go the other direction, toward the animal state totally failing to grasp the concept.
"God is dead" also known "The Death of God" is Nietzsche famous quoted statement. it is so often misunderstood & misinterpreted that Nietzsche believed in a literal death or end of God. Instead, the line points to the general decline of Christianity and to the western world’s reliance on religion as a moral compass and source of meaning. In our quest to understand God the infinite with our finite mind, we have created Gods in our own image not in God's own image. those Gods are dead, we (human beings) killed them. As he explains in The Gay Science (Section 125, The Madman): “God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?” (مصطفى محمود) never took the liberty to explain, either because he gravely misunderstood or never read Nietzsche's work.
My questioning of his analysis spans to other greats (مصطفى محمود) wrote about. I don't have the background to comment but if his approach is similar to those of his Nietzsche's approach then I have a problem. I still give him 4 stars since the book is really good, it is rich with concepts & ideas to build on. the style is research-based, I personally liked it. I do respect the writer's ideas greatly although I disagree on certain things. I will surely do my own research on those greats he mention in this book. I really highly recommend reading it since it will expand your horizon especially if you are going to read some of the resource & reference he mention.
Thanks
Sami
Displaying 1 of 1 review