Site Loader

How Nietzsche Outwits Descarte Essay, Research Paper

Friedrich Nietzsche is non merely one of the most influential

philosophers the universe has seen, but he is besides one of the most

controversial. He has influenced 20th century thought more than

about any other mind. In his legion plants, Nietzsche invariably

criticizes and restructures the strongly held philosophical and

spiritual beliefs of his clip. One such rule that he refutes

belongs to his predecessor Rene & # 8217 ; Descartes, and concerns the apparent

differentiation and significance of the human head over the organic structure. Descartes

explains this luxuriant theory in his Meditations on First Philosophy,

claiming that the head ( the conscious ) is the lone indispensable portion of the

human kernel. On the other manus, Nietzsche expresses in his work, On

the Genealogy of Morality, his beliefs that the organic structure ( the unconscious )

is cardinal to the human kernel. One may happen it hard to make up one’s mind

between these two thoughts, for both philosophers pose good statements on

the beliing sides of this celebrated quandary.

However, by analysing them farther, I realize

that the qualities of their statements are merely every bit good as the

foundations that they are based upon ; one can non hold an apprehension

of the head or the organic structure without first holding cognition of the kernel of

human being. With this in head, I will turn out that the organic structure is

superior to the head by demoing that the centre for Nietzsche & # 8217 ; s thoughts,

the human kernel, is more valid than that of Descartes.

Descartes & # 8217 ; thought of the human kernel is based entirely on his formed

construct of & # 8220 ; extremist doubt. & # 8221 ; He believes the kernel of human being

to be merely & # 8220 ; a believing thing & # 8221 ; [ 1 ] . We must now analyse how he

arrived at this decision. Descartes is celebrated for extremist uncertainty, a

construct that inquiries everything, and assumes nil to be true unless

it can be proved so with his thought of & # 8220 ; clear and distinguishable perception. & # 8221 ;

From this he states that the lone thing he can clearly and distinctively

perceive is that & # 8220 ; I exist & # 8221 ; [ 2 ] . He concludes that since he ceases to

exist when he ceases to believe, he can so clearly and distinctively

call himself a & # 8220 ; believing thing & # 8221 ; [ 3 ] . Descartes explains this train of

idea when he says:

From the fact that I know that I exist, and that at the same clip I

justice that evidently nil else belongs to my nature or kernel except

that I am a intelligent thing, I justly conclude that my kernel consists

wholly in my being a believing thing. And although possibly I have a

organic structure that is really closely joined to me, however, because on the 1

manus I have a clear and distinguishable thought of myself, in so far as I am simply

a intelligent thing and non an drawn-out thing, and because on the other

manus I have a distinguishable thought of a organic structure, in so far as it is simply an

drawn-out thing and non a believing thing, it is certain that I am truly

distinct from my organic structure, and can be without it [ 4 ] .

It is obvious that Descartes & # 8217 ; reaching of the human kernel as a

& # 8220 ; believing thing & # 8221 ; in this manner is to the full based on his beliefs of extremist

uncertainty and clear and distinguishable perceptual experience. He bases all of his illations

on other illations.

Descartes besides devaluates the human organic structure and places the head at the

kernel of the human being based on his construct. Due to his extremist

uncertainty, Descartes rapidly omits the organic structure and the full physical universe as

holding any significance because of the simple fact that they can be

doubted. He establishes a strong sense of uncertainty in his senses, because,

harmonizing to Descartes, one can non cognize clearly and clearly that they

are non being deceived into their physical esthesiss [ 5 ] . Descartes

therefore condemns the significance of the organic structure when he proclaims that it is

& # 8220 ; non a substance endowed with understanding & # 8221 ; [ 6 ] . He places the organic structure

into the physical, unintelligible kingdom of his construct of dualism,

face-to-face from the thought, knowing kingdom. Descartes now

acknowledges the organic structure as being utile merely within the bounds of & # 8220 ; traveling

from one topographic point to another, of taking on assorted forms, and so on & # 8221 ; [ 7 ] .

It is from this disapprobation of the organic structure into the physical,

unintelligible!

kingdom that Descartes farther topographic points the head on a base, and at the

kernel of human being. To him the head is superior because it

thinks, which is in itself our kernel. He explains this in the

indented quotation mark I have already cited ( 4 ) , stating that the head can be

without the organic structure. Analyzing things with extremist uncertainty clearly finalizes

all of Descartes & # 8217 ; thoughts.

Therefore, Descartes & # 8217 ; statement is non valid because of the fact that it

is entirely derived from premises. His thought of the high quality of the

head is based on the premise that worlds are believing things, which

itself is based on the premise of clear and distinguishable perceptual experience,

which is further based on the premise that extremist uncertainty is valid.

Descartes & # 8217 ; full statement includes the usage of clear and distinguishable

perceptual experience, a construct that he concocted, to measure what is true and

what is false. It is absurd to nickname something valid when it is based on

an premise, allow entirely many premises. Henceforth, it is false to

grant Descartes & # 8217 ; thoughts any relevancy because they are derived by judging

things on his footing. Steven J. Wagner, in his essay & # 8220 ; Descartes & # 8217 ; s

Arguments for Mind-Body Distinctness, & # 8221 ; supports this point when he says ;

& # 8220 ; Descartes & # 8217 ; s process merely makes good sense once we see it as a merchandise

of his system & # 8230 ; Too much in Descartes depends on things that are far excessively

tungsten!

rong & # 8221 ; [ 8 ] . He explains that Cartesian ( Descartes & # 8217 ; believing ) dualism and

the Cartesian head can merely be supported along Cartesian lines [ 9 ] . It

R / & gt ;

requires small intelligence to turn out a point when one bases their

statement for it on invalid theories of their ain fiction. The

high quality of the head in the human kernel, hence, has non been

clearly proven because its ideal is based on Descartes & # 8217 ; legion

premises.

Nietzsche & # 8217 ; s thought of the human kernel, on the other manus, clearly holds

more cogency than Descartes & # 8217 ; because it is non based on assumed

rules. Nietzsche believes the human kernel to be one of

competition, endurance and a will to power. Unlike Descartes,

Nietzsche & # 8217 ; s ideal is based on a foundation of facts. He concocts his

ideal largely by detecting nature and the universe around him. Bertram M.

Laing, in his essay & # 8220 ; The Metaphysics of Nietzsche & # 8217 ; s Immoralism, & # 8221 ;

explains Nietzsche & # 8217 ; s belief called the & # 8220 ; organic procedure, & # 8221 ; whereas the

universe is & # 8220 ; a continual distribution and redistribution of force or power & # 8221 ;

[ 10 ] . Nietzsche observes society as a barbaric, marauding universe that he

offprints it into two groups: one holding & # 8220 ; slave morality, & # 8221 ; and the other

& # 8220 ; maestro morality & # 8221 ; [ 11 ] . Those who possess maestro morality, or baronial

morality, are the 1s who live their lives instinctively by seeking to

achieve heightened power, frequently at the disbursal of others. These people,

harmonizing to Nietzsc!

he, are the active and productive members of society. They exude power

and assurance, and prioritise success over popularity [ 12 ] . They are

the 1s who gain the power in the & # 8220 ; organic process. & # 8221 ; Nietzsche

preaches for people to hold this sort of morality, for he sees this as

being & # 8220 ; good & # 8221 ; [ 13 ] . On the other manus, those who possess slave morality

are the 1s who do non move instinctively and therefore are weak. Their

failing is evident by detecting their deficiency of productiveness and success

[ 14 ] . They became clever in order to counterbalance for non being powerful,

making things like congregating for opportunities of greater defence. These

people, harmonizing to Nietzsche, developed & # 8220 ; ressentiment & # 8221 ; towards their

higher-ups & # 8217 ; power [ 15 ] . Nietzsche therefore calls them & # 8220 ; the arrested development of

world, & # 8221 ; because their morality develops out of hatred and a denial

of our bodily inherent aptitudes [ 16 ] . The human kernel, hence, is one of a

desire for power and success. Nietzsche smartly legitimizes this claim

!

by comparing it to the `survival of the fittest & # 8217 ; facets of nature [ 17 ] .

& # 8220 ; Animals of Prey & # 8221 ; keep the qualities of maestro morality, for they achieve

their ends instinctively at the disbursal of their quarry. They do what is

needed for them to last. Lambs, the quarry, are equal to those

included in Nietzsche & # 8217 ; s slave morality because they are weak, and

congregate in herds for protection [ 18 ] . The Beasts of Prey are

evidently the 1s who survive, so Nietzsche believes that we should

strive to move instinctively like them. Rather than following in

Descartes & # 8217 ; footfalls to taking a fiddling statement, it is clear that

Nietzsche based his mixture of the human kernel largely on

incontrovertible observations. In this manner his thought surpasses Descartes & # 8217 ; in

relevancy and cogency, therefore giving him clear land to use this

ideal in turn outing the high quality of the organic structure.

Finally, Nietzsche uses this valid averment of the human kernel to

prove that the organic structure is more indispensable to the human being than the

head. Nietzsche argues that since the human kernel is based on

predatory competition necessary in the & # 8220 ; organic procedure & # 8221 ; of the universe,

the organic structure is more of import than the head. Instinct, he says, is rooted

in the organic structure that we are given. Therefore our organic structures define who we are

because they determine what morality, maestro or slave, we adhere to.

Nietzsche believes that one & # 8217 ; s arrangement within these classs is

decided at birth as an inalterable & # 8220 ; assignment & # 8221 ; determined by the

family tree of a individual & # 8217 ; s ethical motives. Our organic structures determine whether we act

harmonizing to our natural inherent aptitudes for success and the will of power

( maestro morality ) , or if we turn off from them ( break one’s back morality ) . These

bodily inherent aptitudes are the cardinal component to our being, for they

wholly govern our personalities. By analysing the Animals of Prey

statement once more, it is clear Thursday!

at the lambs were born into their being as non-instinctive and

defensive existences due to their organic structures. The organic structures of the birds besides held

their leaning to move on their natural inherent aptitude. In this manner the organic structure

is hence the chief component of our being ; it is the

difference between feeding, and acquiring eaten. Bertram M. Laing

describes Nietzsche & # 8217 ; s & # 8220 ; organic structure & # 8221 ; when she calls it & # 8220 ; the beginning of all

inspiration ; the power that breathes or speaks through one is non an

foreign divinity, but the ego, the adult male as he truly is & # 8221 ; [ 19 ] . The organic structure,

so, is superior to the head, because it holds our natural inherent aptitudes

that to the full find who we are and how we will do in the & # 8220 ; organic

procedure & # 8221 ; of our being.

So as you can see, the organic structure is a greater component of human being

than the head. I have achieved this decision in a simple, systematic

manner. I did so by ( 1 ) stating that the thoughts of the human kernel

are the foundations for Nietzsche & # 8217 ; s and Descartes & # 8217 ; statements, ( 2 )

turn outing that Descartes & # 8217 ; thought of human kernel is non valid because it is

based largely on his ain false rules, ( 3 ) proving that Descartes & # 8217 ;

full statement for the high quality of the head can now be deemed

invalid as a consequence of this, ( 4 ) proving that Nietzsche & # 8217 ; s thought of human

kernel is more valid than Descartes & # 8217 ; because it is based on undeniable

facts, ( 5 ) and eventually turn outing that the organic structure is superior to the head

because of the legitimacy of Nietzsche & # 8217 ; s statement. It is clear that

Nietzsche has outwitted his great predecessor here.

Post Author: admin