[FoRK] Nietzsche's Severe Rationalism

Corinna Schultz <corinna.schultz at gmail.com> on Tue Jan 29 14:28:08 PST 2008

> and showed that Enlightened faith in progress was
> just as illusory as belief in an afterlife.

I agree with this sentiment, and I would think that it's obvious. Look
at all those dystopic/post-apocalyptic sci-fi stories. "Progress" is
as much a fallacy as the notion of "more evolved".

> a critical philosophy stop pretending to be a substitute religion

I don't know enough to respond to this, sorry. :)

> If nature trumps knowledge at every turn,

What does this refer to? The finiteness of human knowledge? Or...?

> essentially moral nature entailed in the search for truth

I disagree with this premise. Does he prove it anywhere? Or is there a
standard argument somewhere for this idea?

> Sympathy for the decadents, equal rights for the ill-constituted—that would be the
> profoundest immorality, that would be anti-nature itself as morality!

Several good arguments can be made for this point of view; I don't
think it's patently ridiculous. On the other hand, the sustenance of
society as we know it demands ideas like this. So then the question
becomes, what kind of society is best, and how could it be sustained?
Put another way, what kind of morality is the best? (And of course
you'd have to define "best".)


More information about the FoRK mailing list