Customer Reviews

Nietzsche: Beyond Good and Evil: Prelude to a Philosophy of the Future (Cambridge Texts in the History of Philosophy)

5 star:		(94)
4 star:		(15)
3 star:		(7)
2 star:		(5)
1 star:		(7)

 

 

N. doesn't need my sales pitch, but anyway ...

First, if you're going to buy BG&E, go ahead & get the Modern Library "Basic Writings" in paperback---not a volume of snippets, but the complete text of N.'s two best books, BG&E and On the Genealogy of Morals, & some other works, for scarcely more than BG&E alone. If you don't like one book, try the other. N. says the same thing from different angles in his last 4 or 5 books. Anything after Zarathustra, except for Ecce Homo, is a good place to start.

Second, despite reading a translation, don't forget that N. is a clever, funny, & devilishly smart writer. Freud said no one before N. ever had as much self-knowledge. Read him with a sense of ironic humor. Too often N. is treated as some heavy thundering German, when if there's one thing that drove him up the wall, it was heavy thundering Germans.

Third, forgive his attitude problems about women. N.'s dad died when he was a kid; his mom & aunts raised him, got on his last nerve, & gave him a bad attitude towards women. Which, regrettably, was not exactly uncommon in the 19th c. BG&E includes his acknowledgement that his misogyny is a bedrock level of stupidity that he can't escape.

Fourth, if you're a Christian, there's a lot of N. that won't be acceptable to you. But learn what you can. A lot of so-called "Christianity" strongly resembles the "slave morality" that he describes.

This is an amazing book that I haven't even tried to describe, the book that made philosophy come alive for me with N.'s comment that, when wondering where the hell some metaphysician's notions came from, one should ask what morality the notions are aiming at. The book is full of great insights from a brilliant man. Read this, then the Genealogy, then Twilight of the Idols.

"Beyond Good And Evil" was written immediately after Nietzsche's "Thus Spoke Zarathustra" and contains none of its elaborate metaphors and imagery. "Zarathustra" was literature compared to this book. This is mature Nietzsche, the philosopher, at his most witty, most serious, and most perpetually devastating.

All of the classic Nietzsche themes are present here; most notably and consummately the Will To Power. Chapter 4 consists of 122 razor-edged aphorisms, each only one or two sentences in length, which slice through the skin of human ulterior motive and the flesh of psychology, right down to the bones of mankind. Other chapters deal with the prejudices of philosophers, history of morals, people and nations, religion and "free-spirits" with the same healthy scepticism.

Nietzsche never entangles the reader in nets of abstract philosophical systems or lengthy and boring dissertation as most philosophers are compelled to do. "Beyond Good And Evil" is always to the point and the density of the language is far outweighed by the prolific content and profundity of thought. What at first glance may seem to be lead is revealed as pure gold with a scratch to the surface. For the uninitiated reader, all it takes is a little patience, (and perhaps, occasionally, a dictionary!) to unlock the books undeniable value for those "philosophers of the future" to whom "Beyond Good And Evil" is dedicated.

Nietzsche went on to outline his philosophy further in other truly great books, but "Beyond Good And Evil" represents a pinnacle in his work and is the best introduction to his philosophy. Nietzsche challenges his readers; he does not command but bids us to take a look through different eyes, and then to view ourselves, our wise men, and the world. And, above all, enquire.

This was required reading for a graduate course in the Humanities.
Friedrich Nietzsche's concept of a "will to power" is central to his philosophical beliefs, and a recurring theme in his book "Beyond Good and Evil." When Nietzsche was a budding philosopher, he admired and was influenced by the writings of another philosopher, Arthur Schopenhauer. However, Schopenhauer, like most scientists and philosophers of his day, attributed the "will to live" as the highest motivational life force in nature. Nietzsche observed that the "will to live" was not life affirming enough and that humankind needed a higher power. Therefore, Nietzsche theorized that living beings were not just motivated by a survival instinct to live. He understood that beings had a higher need, which he called the "will to power." One can easily interpret Nietzsche's "will to power" as a method by which people strive to grow and nurture their creative energies, and interact with the world. Nietzsche thinks that "will to power" was coupled with humankind's innate nature and passion to create. Nietzsche thinks that this "will to power" was the true driving force of humankind. "A living thing seeks above all to discharge its strength--life itself is will to power, self-preservation is only one of the indirect and most frequent results" (Nietzsche Aphorism 13). The "will to power" causes humans to dominate and impose their will on others. Thus for Nietzsche, humankind's "will to power" meant that life and will is the exploitation of others, and it has been since the beginning of time, immemorial (Nietzsche Aphorism 258). In fact, Nietzsche believed that one could take his concept of the "will to power" one-step further, and use it to explain the motivations of whole societies, and nation states, as well as the individual (Nietzsche aphorism 257, 259).

Nietzsche tends to be very passionate and absolutist in his aphorisms. He wrote so much that one could find plenty of instances in his works where he has contradicted himself. Nietzsche's concept of "will to power" is a philosophic thought, which led to many interpretations. To assume that Nietzsche thought that the primary instincts of the human being came down to violence and little else, amounts to a gross underestimation of Nietzsche's views of humankind. However, most of his writings on the concept of a "will to power," if interpreted as being violent, have to be understood more in vain with what he saw as the constant struggle of overcoming one's individual weaknesses (Nietzsche aphorism 22, 260). Nietzsche envisioned his "will to power" more along the lines of applying one's will in self-overcoming. Nietzsche's writings about violence are usually meant as violence against giving in to the herd or slave morality. The herd, as Nietzsche names it, is the vast majority of humans who throughout history have obeyed and followed the status quo. The herd has stymied human development with their slave morality (Nietzsche aphorism 198, 199). The slave morality invented the dichotomy of good and evil. "Moral judgments and condemnations constitute the favorite revenge of the spiritually limited against those less limited" (Nietzsche aphorism 219). The herd morality causes people to sublimate their creative drive. Thus, Nietzsche is imploring the few noble humans--the few geniuses to struggle against following the herd morality. Nietzsche wants the noble people to invent their own morality and values to live their lives by, and to fulfill their own "will to power" and not indulge in an effort to attract others to their values (Nietzsche aphorism 199, 201, 260).

Recommended reading for anyone interested in philosophy, history, and psychology.

If you're new to Nietzsche, let me give you a quick overview I could have used when I started out. All philosophy aside, Nietzsche was, very long story short, basically a very smart guy who lived in Europe during the 19th century and who due to illness retired at the age of 35 from his university post as a professor (NOT of philosophy), with a cool six-year pension. He spent the next ten years of his life basically walking around in the mountains, and writing highly unorthodox and creative books that I guess you could call philosophy because that's what everyone calls them. I like the phrase "psychology of philosophy", but nothing could possibly sum it all up. And of course, after that he went nuts. Or more precisely, ten years later, in January of 1889, while his publisher was preparing the first editions of some of the four or five (marvelous, intricate, very widely studied) books he pumped out over the course of the previous year, he lost control of his mind, and a few months later, he was picked up at his mountain cottage, or whatever it was, and taken back to Germany and compassionately placed in an asylum by his family. And he died ten years later...but that's enough for an overview.

In your approach, take everybody's advice with a grain of salt. He's a very personal writer, who deserves a very personal read. You can start anywhere you want, but Nietzsche is like a christmas tree that you can just keep reaching under and pull out more presents that have your name on the tag, so don't ever walk away feeling like you've earned the I've-read-Nietzsche badge. His more literary stuff is in The Gay Science and in Thus Spoke Zarathustra. This one, Beyond Good and Evil, is incredibly good and should be read. My personal favorite is Ecce Homo because it's so odd and outrageous. It's one of the late works, the so-called "books of the collapse". You can go all over the place with Nietzsche. He was a genius, it's even possible that he was everything he claimed he was. But then again, he claimed he was the most important man in history, so, hmm.

Feel free to laugh, object, draw offense, be provoked, be awed, be terrified. The best thing about Nietzsche is that he understood that philosophy ought to be READABLE, that it should emotionally engage, in the same way as art.

Because personally, if you ask me, this [...] just ain't as serious as some people make it out to be. :-))) ----LTS

Beyond Good And Evil: Prelude to a Philosophy of the Future represented a shift in Nietzsche's basic goals as an author. "After the Yes-saying part of my task had been solved, the turn had come for the No-saying, No-doing part: the revaluation of our values so far, the great war..."

Nietzsche goes on to describe Beyond Good and Evil as a "critique of modernity." The modernity attacked includes culture broadly construed; but Nietzsche appears to be especially concerned with the direction of philosophy and its role in future history. Indeed, the subtitle is "Prelude to a Philosophy of the Future." The book opens with a Preface and first section that are often witty in criticizing traditional philosophy and its presuppositions. After the famous opening line about truth being a woman, Nietzsche asks, "Are there not grounds for the suspicion that all philosophers, insofar as they were dogmatists, have been very inexpert about women?"

Nietzsche attacks particularly the dogmatism of philosophers. Philosophers have typically regarded themselves as seekers of truth--but from the book's beginning, Nietzsche casts suspicion on their motives. Philosophers, he argues, have simply assumed that truth is valuable, without inquiring as to whether this is so. They have posed their conclusions as objective, while in fact "every great philosophy so far has been...the personal confession of its author and a kind of involuntary and unconscious memoir." Unwittingly, philosophers have sought to impose their own moral outlook on nature itself, and read into it what they have wanted to find.

Nietzsche proposes a reassessment of the way philosophy has been practiced in physiological and psychological terms, recognizing how much against the grain his approach will seem.

Nietzsche proposes a new direction for philosophy, and a different kind of person as philosopher. Philosophers, according to this view, should be free spirits and great experimentalists, as opposed to the mere "philosophical laborers" that are often thought to be the true philosophers. The philosopher has "the most comprehensive responsibility" and "the conscience for the over-all development of man," and should utilize religion, education and political suggestions, although it is more concerned to propose a type of political arrangement (like Plato advocating philosopher-kings) than to argue for specific policies.

Central to the agenda of Nietzsche's future philosophers is a reconsideration of the value of conventional morality from a physio-psychological perspective. For the first time, in Beyond Good and Evil, Nietzsche proposes to develop "a natural history of morals." He implies with this formulation that morality can be naturalistically described, that it is not a revelation from another, divine level of reality.

Nietzsche goes so far in employing naturalistic terms in his analysis that he describes the morality of his tradition as a "herd morality." In other words, people follow the same direction as others for the same reason that cows and sheep follow other cows and sheep. Nietzsche surely recognizes that many readers will find comparison between their moral beliefs and animal behavior offensive.

Nietzsche also suggests that multiple moralities have existed at the same time, and that they reveal their adherent's psychological perspective, which can be either healthy or not healthy. In particular, he suggests that master morality and slave morality are radically different in outlook. Master morality, typified by those in positions of power, involves a primary judgment of oneself as good, and a judgment of others in reference to one's own traits. Slave morality, by contrast, as the moral outlook of those who are oppressed, is primarily concerned with the reactions those in power might have to any contemplated act. Although slaves hate the master and everything the master represents, they still refer their behavior primarily to their master. Judging the master with hostility, they come to see him as evil, and only then come to judge themselves as relatively good. Nietzsche develops this account of master and slave morality much more thoroughly in Toward the Genealogy of Morals.

The concept of will to power appears prominently in Beyond Good and Evil. Again, Nietzsche takes issue with Schopenhauer's emphasis on will to life: "A living thing seeks above all to discharge its strength--life itself is will to power; self preservation is only one of the direct and frequent results." Although emphatic in stressing will, Nietzsche is equally emphatic in denying freedom of the will. In fact, he considers the defense of freedom of will to be simply a manifestation of the asserters desire for power.

Will to power is also enlisted as a potential basis for explaining physiology and physiologically grounded behavior. Significantly, however, as in many other instances Nietzsche poses this "reduction" as a thought experiment.

Nietzsche's perspectivism, however, is discussed in more psychological terms elsewhere in Beyond Good and Evil. Nietzsche suggests that the perspective different individuals have of human reality depends on their relative stature as human beings. Nietzsche frequently adopts the image of height, describing those who see others from a higher vantage as having a more comprehensive view that is incommensurable with the perspective of those below them. Nietzsche emphasizes the importance of this order of rank, and he often claims that the human species consists of a proliferation of types, some of which are more valuable (or higher) than others. Of greatest importance for Nietzsche is the individual genius, upon whom culture most depends. Nietzsche's view on this matter is unrepentantly elitist: "For every high world one must be born; or to speak more clearly, one must be cultivated for it: a right to philosophy--taking that word in its great sense--one has by only virtue of one's origins; one's ancestors, one's 'blood' decide here, too."

I'm a newbie to Nietzsche's works, though I'd come to Beyond Good and Evil through the proverbial back door. After having read prominent 20th century texts from Camus to Derrida, I figured it was time to read something by Nietzsche, perhaps the most famous first figure to doubt what was "knowable." Nietzsche, anticipating the cynicism and angst that would become the hallmark of existential texts, was equally scornful of religion AND science (both, which he argued, were reductionist and misleading). The ultimate skeptic, Nietzsche warned readers about believing to deeply in "certain truths" often framed within the dichotomy of binary opposites (good vs. evil, black vs. white, heaven vs. hell; in short, everything the Western world bases its moral framework on).

I've given Beyond Good and Evil five stars, but there are some problems with the book that the unintiated may want to know. First, although this is the most straight-forward and accessible of Nietzsche's works, it's still a difficult read. Second, although Nietzsche's writing style is full of verve and gusto (or, to use N's own word, "brio") and although this style makes for delightful anti-philosophic reading, his points do become burdensome after a while. After reading the introduction and the first 30 pages or so, I found myself saying, "Okay, okay, I got it." Nietzsche's misogyny, his failure to provide concrete examples (occassionally) and his belief in a human two-level caste system ("...life itself in its essence means appropriating, injuring, overpowering those who are foreign and weaker" (152-153)) may challenge (or turn off) some readers. Neverhtheless, at 180 slim pages, Beyond Good and Evil accomplishes its task before it becomes tiresome.

This book was good and very helpful to me. If you are looking to free your mind especially from organized religion it is very helpful. Nietzche to me was a prophet; he told the truth as it is with no fear. Dont beleive what they say about him; he is a good man; and seeks to help you empower yourself. He has long passed away now, but his works still apply to today; and his works are truely artistic. Be very patient reading this book, the truth of it sort of comes not the way you want it to. The truths in this book are scattered, so read it all the way through. I highly recommend this book for free spirited individuals.

While Beyond Good and Evil is probably the quintessial Nitzschean piece, I would have to say Zimmern's translation lags behind Kaufmann's. Although her use of quaint Elizabethan English is charming, and her edition has a beautifully personal touch to it (Zimmern was Nietzsche's dinner companion and erstwhile friend), the mistakes in her translation, while subtle, detract from it, especially when precision of language is so important for reading this book. Go with Kaufmann.

I am not providing a review of the book itself, as Beyond Good and Evil is simply beyond the need for critical input. Nietzsche, right or wrong, is simply brilliant, positively enjoyable to read, and easily misunderstood by those who do not read deeply. This, rather, will be a review of the translation.

Marion Faber's translation is, for the most part, well done. She keeps alive much of Nietzsche's wit and rhetorical spirit, but there are some major flaws in this translation. The first is positively unacceptable: the paragraphing in this text is not Nietzsche's own. Walter Kaufmann is guilty of the same sin; I guess they are trying to make Nietzsche more "accessible". Nietzsche has quite a unique style, and usually indicates where a different subject is being pursued by having a dash before the sentence. Faber and Kaufmann both opt to break up Nietzsche's paragraphs along these dashes, which really does Nietzsche a disservice. If Nietzsche wanted his work to be broken up into those paragraphs, he would've done it himself. This further does a disservice to the reader, because he is missing a key anomaly of punctuation and style. If you don't want to spend the time figuring Nietzsche out, then don't bother reading his works at all.

The second major problem I had with this translation was the laughable attempts to make Nietzsche's language sound more politically correct. This is simply a ludicrous endeavor. If you want a book that is inoffensive, go read something else. Nietzsche is not a writer meant to be understood and appreciated by everyone. The German word for 'man' ought to be translated as 'man', not 'human'. The most ridiculous instances are when Faber translates 'overman' as 'overhuman', a clunker of a word that really unnecessarily bogs down the text. Words like 'man' and 'human' are not interchangeable, and it really is necessary to have continuity in the terms. But, thanks to the translator, anyone will surely miss key aspects in Nietzsche's application of the term 'man' and when he uses 'human' (and he does distinguish between them).

Between the translation by Kaufmann and that of Faber's, I would probably recommend Faber, as her work is livelier than Kaufmann's. But it isn't without it's major problems that really should've been avoided, because she had to work to put them in. Mistranslations of terms are much more forgivable (that's the difficult part, and she has errors here too), but tampering with the style and structure simply did not and should not have been done.

This is as good a place as any to start your exploration of Nietzsche. The problem is, even though it is supposed to be a more straightforward approach at communicating the message found in Zarathustra, this is still written very pithily. The prose is very joyful, poetic, and requires thought. Then again, if you weren't willing to commit some thought to Nietzsche, then it's not worth picking up Nietzsche.

However, it is worth mentioning that you shouldn't pick up this book. Now that Kaufmann's Basic Writings of Nietzsche, which contains this book along with four others (Birth of Tragedy, On the Genealogy of Morals, The Case of Wagner, and Ecce Homo) is in paperback for only slightly more money, it's best to buy that instead.