They have little difficulty in showing that Nietzsche is largely vindicated. It retains objectivity since we can understand judgments of the objectivity of evaluative claims as themselves expressions of commitments to norms of a different sort. The puzzle, in a nutshell, is this. London: Oxford University Press, 2007 Nietzsche was surprisingly neglected by most English-language moral philosophers until recently. Hussain, Maudemarie Clark and David Dudrick jointly , Peter Poellner, Sinhababu and Simon Blackburn—represent the very best of this recent talent and scholarship. Here Wallace presents a sophisticated and plausible causal account of the slave revolt based on the resolution of psychic tension.
It presents very good historical scholarship as well as some first-rate work in moral philosophy that engages with the issues that concerned Nietzsche. But there's more opportunity in going beyond the truth-functional connectives. In assuming that Kant affirms this claim, Risse misconstrues the Kantian's position. This volume capitalizes on a growth of interest in Nietzsche's work on morality from two sides - from scholars of the history of philosophy and from contributors to current debates on ethical theory. One gets the sense that Leiter and Sinhababu 2006 represents Leiter 2002 by other means.
If, as Knobe and I argue, Nietzschean moral psychology presupposes a more credible psychology than other important philosophical theories such as Aristotle's and Kant's , what explains this fact, given that Nietzsche's primary methods of psychological investigation--namely, introspection and non-systematic observation both his own and that of other astute observers of human behavior, from Thucydides to La Rochefoucauld --are not one that would be considered epistemically robust these days. But Nietzsche demands that we somehow remain aware of the evidence against our moral beliefs, and this awareness of their falsehood seems to make it impossible to maintain these beliefs. We are entering a new era of Nietzsche studies. The textual evidence offered for this claim comes from just two passages in Human, All Too Human, so it seems to me that we would do better to retain a realist reading of Nietzsche's frequent talk of values and valuing one that still denies that anything is valuable in itself and give up Hussain's reading of these passages from Human, All Too Human. It remains, then, for the paper to demonstrate that empirical psychological research threatens the Kantian account by threatening the idea of at once consciously self-imposed and motivationally efficacious moral requirements, which it purports to do by citing research showing that action tends to be rationalized post hoc.
Written by some of the most esteemed Nietzsche interpreters, the pieces collected here serve two primary purposes: they help establish Nietzsche as one of the most creative and insightful theorists of morality in Western thought, and they help demonstrate that his theorizing is indeed relevant to contemporary debates about morality, in and out of academic study. That character view of Schopenhauer resembles Nietzsche's view of type-facts. On this view, the weak adopt the values good and evil in order to reconcile the hatred they feel toward the successful members of society with the judgment that precisely these people are good, and thus worthy of admiration. Such hypotheses stil have to be arrived at with a measure of artistic intuition, not jst a reference to information that is always coloured by what is already believed. The editors state that their aim is to present work that advances the understanding of Nietzsche's ethical views and demonstrates the relevance of those views to contemporary debates in normative ethics, metaethics, and moral psychology.
The slaves find themselves in a volatile psychological predicament, hating the nobles whose very character and behavior reflect the prevailing standards of value. It might be that he has an independent commitment to fictionalism that colors his reading of Nietzsche. These last five words speak volumes, and might have been profitably appended to a number of these essays. His current Nietzsche-related work concerns Nietzsche's theory of agency and its intersection with recent work in empirical psychology; Nietzsche's arguments for moral skepticism; and the role of naturalism in Nietzsche's philosophy. He makes an excellent case for the depth and contemporary relevance of Nietzsche's moral psychology.
Many of the essays in this book try to tie up apparent loose ends, and make him say what he should have said if he had followed his insights through. Walter Kaufmann New York: Modern Library, 1967 , p. In relation to these two ends, the collection is clearly a success. For the most part we are not rational doers: the view that we choose our actions from a standpoint of deliberative detachment seems to be a Kantian myth. If Nietzsche had this view in mind, why would he use the term 'power' ' Macht' , which commonly designates a capacity? In appealing to the notion of an adequate presentation of an entity in his account of the veridicality of some affective responses, he seems to take for granted that a strong aversion to deception is constitutive of adequate presentation 247. By contrast, the gift of reason is a late addition to those instincts, and by comparison only weakly efficacious.
Poellner maintains that while Nietzsche clearly does not think that values are metaphysically real, he also recognizes that our everyday experience is of entities that are valuable in one way or another e. The mechanism of adoption is an unconscious drive to psychic harmony that is satisfied, in this particular case, by a value schema that justifies the emotions of the slaves. Nietzsche presents us with a fractured self: each of us is a site of competing biological drives without a controller in overall charge. The collection will certainly be of interest to moral philosophers and to those interested in the history of modern philosophy, and many of the essays should be regarded as essential reading for anyone interested in Nietzsche's engagement with morality. It presents very good historical scholarship as well as some first-rate work in moral philosophy that engages with the issues that concerned Nietzsche.
This empirical evidence, they argue, demonstrates that Nietzsche's theory of different psychological types, with their characteristic moral and theoretical commitments, at the very least deserves serious attention from philosophers interested in moral psychology. One observes in these plays people who only act as they should for fear of reprisal, people who do as they wish because they have the power to do as they wish. Nietzsche's understanding of perfection is, Hurka argues, a formal one that regards a particular relation among an agent's goals as constitutive of perfection. Brian Leiter and Neil Sinhababu Introduction Normative Ethics And Moral Psychology p. Reginster's approach can explain Nietzsche's praise of creativity; the activity of overcoming resistance is common to work in Nietzsche's preferred fields of philosophy and the arts.
Indeed it is obvious to me that we are not. Isn't it always a matter of inventing a hypothesis to fit the observable behavior? The collection will certainly be of interest to moral philosophers and to those interested in the history of modern philosophy, and many of the essays should be regarded as essential reading for anyone interested in Nietzsche's engagement with morality. Thus I find the ethics of creativity that follows from this approach to the will to power to be a rather odd form of ethics. Knobe and Leiter take the unusual step of seeing to what degree recent experimental findings in psychology support either Nietzsche or Kant. This view leaves open the question of which achievements are valuable, or which first-order ends are worth pursuing. Freud — a reader and admirer of Nietzsche — similarly presents the human being as a sort of battlefield between the ego, the superego and the id.
In eleven new essays, leading philosophers aim both to advance philosophical understanding of Nietzsche's ethical views - his normative and meta-ethics, his moral psychology, his views on free will and the nature of the self - and to make Nietzsche a live participant in contemporary debatesin ethics and cognate fields. That said, however, it seems to me that, pace Williams, Nietzsche does not so much booby-trap his work against the recovery of theory per se, as booby-trap it against the recovery of any one theory. While such metaethical views clearly have their merits, I find Clark and Dudrick's attribution of such a view to Nietzsche unconvincing. What ultimately precipitates the slave revolt is not a strategic plan of revenge, but rather the need for emotional coherence. Considered together these essays make an excellent case for Nietzsche's importance for contemporary moral philosophy. In Homer one finds ambitious mothers conniving throught their children Aphrodite and Athene , men owing debts to their fathers Priam, Hector and Paris, Telemachus and Odysseus, , men who are violent because they are powerful Diomedes, Ajax - the nietzchean characters have Homeric equivalents. This volume capitalizes on a growth of interest in Nietzsche's work on morality from two sides - from scholars of the history of philosophy and from contributors to current debates on ethical theory.