In the previous section we saw that, according to Wagner, true art comes as an expression of life at its fullest. Accordingly, this is possible only if certain conditions are met: not just any form-of-life is capable of producing true art, insofar as we do not necessarily express existence in its full potential . In this, Wagner is influenced by Schopenhauer, expecially as he conceives art as the product of our Anschaungsvermögen. This concept designates both the human drive to create art, as well as the intuitive faculty that allows us to grasp the metaphysical Ur-eine . An existence capable of producing true art is one which cultivates and exercises this faculty. Nietzsche himself agrees with this view, although he eventually sides with …show more content…
In this respect, morality and Socratism are the expressions of a vital drive analogous to those which give birth to the figures of Apollo and Dionysus, as they are both connected to the metaphysical inquiry into the nature of things. Still, the Socratic worldview fails in seeing its dependency and connections to these drives, and thus fails to see its connection to life and its irrational kernel . According to Nietzsche, this mindset is the result of a pathology, as it gives too much merit to appearances while it excludes the Will from its view, making the former absolute and arranging them in a rational but insincere way. Socratism is then made of the same substance of the drives which inspire tragedy insofar as it is an expression of life, but, in both a literal and a metaphysical sense, it is the result of a sick form of this substance – it presents a metaphysical view of reality, just like art, but at the same time causes life to retreat within the safe walls of reasonableness, as by contrast art pushes the person to transcend them .
In some respect, we can see here one of the seeds of Nietzsche’s later intuitions, and I believe there is no harm in employing them to elucidate this point. For example, in Beyond Good and Evil (from here on BGE), morality is described as a perspective which produces a narrowing of one’s own horizon. Morality, far from telling the truth about the world, is simply an expression of good faith toward the moral view of a particular group. Therefore, all that moralists do is in fact to argue in favour of a perspective which is grounded on their own prejudice and seeks secretly to confirm them
In Genealogy of Morals, Nietzsche first opens up by claiming his dissatisfaction of previous philosopher’s attempts of describing morality. Nietzsche claims that the idea of morality of being of no value is simply wrong; as people with higher morality are often worth more than people with low morality. He also goes on the explain the people of the lowest morality are priests- as they have created the most hate in the world. He then goes to say “Priests make everything more dangerous, not just medicaments and healing arts but pride, revenge, acumen, debauchery, love, lust for power, virtue, sickness” (16). Since different religions have different Gods who have different stances and moral on life, these beliefs cause a division between humans.
Nietzsche 's famous phrase, "God is dead and we have killed him", is the result of Nietzsche realising that our values have shifted. Originally, humans wholeheartedly believed in God and, for the most part, lived their lives according to God 's values. However, due to advances in science and technology humans can no longer bear true faith in God. In the end, those who claim to believe have empty faith and only worship because of how deeply ingrained the idea of God is within people. Because of this realisation, Nietzsche concluded that all values must be revalued.
Can we ever defeat the dragon call helplessness, or do we need it to be the driving force that leads us to achieve that thing called perfection. Why does helplessness thrive within us especially when it comes to the artistic form and the creative process, “writings schriften” written by Agnes Martin details the feeling in the creative process that goes into the fear of failure and the strive for perfection, as well as the despair that goes into achieving perfection for artist and the helplessness that hunts them and keens in on their obsessions of the creative precision one will try to accomplish. Agnes discusses the fear of failure and what’s needed to overcome it, she describes the perception of the reality that come with achieving perfection
A Brief Inquiry Into Euthyphro In this short essay, I will outline Socrate’s argument in response to Euthyphro’s definition of Piety. In order to do this, I will first outline the argument using quotations from the next, and numbered premises. Then, I will go on to explain the argument and its conclusion in prose. To understand Socrates’ argument, it is important to outline our premises and conclusions in a standard format.
In the society in which Socrates lives in, the people’s moral values and thinking is dominated by the predisposition of the existence of the Greek gods. Greek gods have strong personalities and are each driven by different interest, so it is extremely difficult to please all
Another thing Socrates is famous for is his twisting of nature in a paradoxical way to serve his own desire to persuade: to Socrates, virtue, wisdom, and eudaemonia are directly linked, a recurring idea in many of his dialogues. His definition of happiness and morality is far different from anyone else’s, especially from Callicles’ and Nietzsche who believes that the law of nature takes over (also perceived this way by Nietzsche). E.R. Dodds mentions the idea that Nietzsche finds a reflexion of himself in Callicles, ascetic Socrates’ most interesting interlocutor in the “Gorgias”. Interesting in the fact that Callicles appears to be a purely hedonistic personage, whose definition of a good life is one where all pleasures of the body are maximised,
This quote articulates the condition of one’s mental faculties, where they can see into the complex elements of art and do it with a level of preciseness. Henceforth, a standard of taste is necessary for tidying up the various views of art that people
The large scale destruction and oppression of art has in some sense allowed for artistic creation to blossom. Pieces such as Messaien’s Quartet for the End of Time and Strauss’ Metamorphosen were created and inspired by great tragedy and frustration caused by Hitler’s Third Reich. In spite of this there is no denying the fact that many artists were silenced during this period, a numerous amount were killed along with the other 11 million victims during the Holocaust. Others despondently lived in fear, intimidated into not disobeying strict regimes. Regardless of their unavoidable life changing fate, each musician made a choice which shaped
Friedrich Nietzsche was German philosopher who was born in Röcken, Germany. His father, Carl Ludwig Nietzsche was a Lutheran pastor which is quite interesting given his stance on religion throughout his philosophical works. In his early education, Nietzsche was heavily influenced by the Greeks and this influence can be traced throughout his writings. He is regarded as one of the most controversial thinkers in Western Philosophy because of his extremely provocative ideas. In Genealogy of Morals, Nietzsche attempts to find the origins of good and evil.
For example, Protagoras said “Man is the measure of all things.” By creating exceptionally fine art, artists and philosophers found a way to detail the feature of human beings themselves. For instance, Michelangelo’s sculpture, David, was a mastepiece difficult to imitate even today, showing surprising details of a sturdy man. Da Vinci’s The Last Supper, still leaving mysteries, today, particularly highlights the characteristics of people of different emotions.
Nietzsche was a German Philosopher who wrote a book called Twilight of the Idols. I will be taking some of his main points from his story and giving my standpoint on them. In my paper I will be explaining Nietzsche's morality as an anti-nature and his four great errors of human nature. The four great errors include confusing cause and consequence, false causality, imaginary causes, and free will. Nietzsche believed that philosophy should be about jumping from one extreme to another extreme and that it should make you angry and ask questions.
For him the modernist practice of art is more than the production of artworks; it also involves the artist’s disciplined effort to observe, engage, and interpret the processes of living, which are themselves meaningful as most art, and certainly more grounded in common experience. In “The Education of the Un-Artist, Part III” (1974) Kaprow was concerned about how and what we communicate in modern society, what happens to us in the process and how it may connect people with natural processes beyond society. For Kaprow the contents of everyday life – eating strawberries, sweating, shaking hands when meeting someone new – are more than merely the subject of art. They are the meaning of life.
Richard Taylor, an ethicist said, “Contemporary writers in ethics, who blithely discourse upon moral right and wrong and moral obligation without any reference to religion, are truly just weaving intellectual webs from thin air; which amounts to saying that they discourse without meaning (Ethics, Faith, and Reason 7).” Does this effect that religion is the only way to explain morality? Friedrich Nietzsche would argue that morality itself wasn’t necessary. Mere Cardus said, “Envy is – Nietzsche recognized – an essential part of life. Yet the lingering effects of Christianity generally teach to feel ashamed of our envious feelings.
The unifying fatal mistake made by most theories, Weitz suggests, is that they fail to recognize art as an open concept—open in the sense of being “perennially flexible”—without any necessary or sufficient conditions surrounding it. Art and its subconcepts cannot be accurately or wholly defined because their criteria must allow for the incorporation of new principles into their folds, and such newly developed principles would make the act of attempting to define their conditions betrayals of the concepts they serve as criteria for in the first place. Weitz further elucidates that although art and its subconcepts are employed for the description and evaluation of works, and those descriptions and evaluations themselves depend upon sets of criteria, that does not make such criteria necessary or sufficient. That these concepts may be used to describe and evaluate works is contingent to their integration of new cases with new properties, thus expanding the concepts
Richard Taylor, an ethicist said, “Contemporary writers in ethics, who blithely discourse upon moral right and wrong and moral obligation without any reference to religion, are truly just weaving intellectual webs from thin air; which amounts to saying that they discourse without meaning (Ethics, Faith, and Reason 7).” Does this effect that religion is the only way to explain morality? Friedrich Nietzsche would argue that morality itself wasn’t necessary. Merce Cardus said, “Envy is – Nietzsche recognised – an essential part of life. Yet the lingering effects of Christianity generally teaches to feel ashamed of our envious feelings.