From: storeyd (storeyd@bc.edu)
Date: Tue Jun 01 2004 - 19:11:11 BST
Johnny M,
Overjoyed to hear you're reading Heidegger on Nietzsche, I'm meaning to get to
that this summer. As I understand it so far, nihilism is the belief in
nothingness, that the universe is, as it were, a tale of sound and fury
signifying nothing. I think Heidegger regards Nietzsche as the prophet of
nihilism, but I think that interpretation is dead wrong. If you carefully
read Zarathustra and the Genealogy, it is quite obvious that Nietzsche regards
nihilism as the last rampart of the Western palace to be knocked down, not the
philosophy of the future. In the end, nihilism is not "deep"; in the end, it
is too simple, too shallow, to bound up with a know-it-all, adolescent rancor
for all things existing. Why? We might call nihilism the end of the
yellow-brick road of Western ideologies/religions/belief structures, in short,
the end of belief per se...belief in progress, perfection, etc. In that
respect, it's good...Nietzsche says atheism/nihilism is an illness, in the
same way pregnancy is an illness...but it is not the end. What if we could
get over the idea that our greatest triumph and happiness lies not in some
farflung future, what if our resolve was not built on castles of sand, but
here and now? What if we could stop trying to usher in the kingdom of God
through politcoreligious programs and just fucking be? Nietzsche's not an
anarchist, nor is he a nihilist, and, on my reading, it is reductive to label
him an atheist. Why? Because Nietzsche is talking about "spirit" in a
context that is altogether foriegn to mainstream western culture up to that
point. Sartre totally missed this dimension of Nietzsche. Nietzsche agrees
that organized religion and mythic-literalism is a sham, but to miss the
blazing spirituality radiating off of his prose is to read him with eyes half
open. Sartre was a nihilist, as well as a male chauvenist, and contrary to
sloppy, popular readings, Nietzsche was not.
One more point: nothingness is "bad" for the West. Nihilism is viewed as
purely negative, only because "nothingness" is percieved as lack, deprivation,
disease, death, vacancy (and femininity!). IN the East, however, nothingness
is "no-THINGness", specifically, it means no limitations, demarcations, or
separations, no borders, walls, no concrete. No-thing is everything.
Everythign is no-thing, in the sense that all we take as stable (ex, as
ontologically stable, as essence, as things), is at bottom empty. in the
language of Being and Time, everything is ready to hand...things are TAKEN as
present at hand for pragmatic purposes. it's not that the ego isn't real,
just that it is partial. as Heidgger says, the "I" is a "non-committal formal
indicator", not the seat of all certainty (Descartes); this is the great irony
of Sartre...his inconsistency reflects the incommensurability of the Cartesian
and the Hiedeggerian paradigms, and on my watch, that gulf is the same
fundamental point of disagreement between the East and the West. Finally, I
want to raise a curious thought for you: Nietzsche frequently denounces
Buddhism in the same breath that he castigates nihilism (this criticism is
likewise boudn up with his eventual rejection of Schopenhauer and
asceticism)...however, did the Buddha preach ascetism, flight from the world?
Not at all. Nor did any of the non-dual sages...so is Nietzsche a Buddhist at
heart? Perhaps. I certainly think so, and I would throw Heidegger in there
as well. Regardless, there is much to be dug up here, but i'll leave you with
that for now.
Peace, water, and shade,
-Dave S
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jun 01 2004 - 22:42:09 BST