Quote 1″Reason in Philosophy” §1-§2You ask me what’s idiosyncratic about philosophers? . . . There is, for instance, their lack of asense of history, their hatred for the very notion of becoming, their Egyptianism. They thinkthey’rehonoringa thing if they de-historicize it, see itsub specie aeterni[in its eternal aspect] —if they make a mummy out of it. Everything that philosophers have handled, for thousands ofyears now, has been conceptual mummies; nothing real escaped their hands alive. They kill andstuff whatever they worship, these gentlemen who idolize concepts—they endanger the life ofwhatever they worship. For them, death, change, and age, like reproduction and growth, areobjections—refutations, even. Whatever is does notbecome; whatever becomesisnot . . .Now they all believe, desperately even, in whatis. But since they can’t get it into their clutches,they look for reasons why it’s being withheld from them. “There has to be an illusion, a deceptionat work that prevents us from perceiving whatis; where’s the deceiver?”—”We’ve got thedeceiver!” they cry happily, “it’s sensation! These senses,which are so immoral anyway,deceiveus about thetrueworld. Moral: free yourself from the senses’ deceit, from becoming, fromhistory, from the lie—history is nothing but belief in the senses, belief in the lie. Moral: say no toeverything that lends credence to the senses, to all the rest of humanity; all that is just `themasses.’ Be a philosopher, be a mummy, portray monotono-theism with a gravedigger’spantomime!—And above all, away with thebody, this patheticidée fixe[obsession] of thesenses, afflicted with every logical error there is, refuted, even impossible—although it has thenerve to behave as if it were real!” . . .[… The senses] do not lie at all. What wemakeof their testimony is what first introduces the lie,for example, the lie of unity, the lie of thinghood, of substance, of duration . . . “Reason” is whatcauses us to falsify the testimony of the senses. Insofar as the senses display becoming, passingaway, and change, they do not lie . . . The “apparent” world is the only world: the “true world” isjustadded to it by a lie. . .Quote 2″Morality as Anti-Nature” §3-§6The spiritualization of sensuality is known aslove; it is a great triumph over Christianity.Another triumph is our spiritualization ofenmity. It consists in a deep grasp of the value ofhaving enemies . . . We behave no differently as regards the “inner enemy” . . . One isfruitfulonly at the price of being rich in oppositions; one remainsyoungonly under the condition thatthe soul not slacken, not yearn for peace . . . Nothing has become more alien to us than thatformer object of desire, “peace in the soul,” theChristianobject of desire; nothing makes us less
PhilosophicalThinkingTake-hometest3YoucansubmityourworkatanytimeoverthenextweekDUE:Inyourownwords,interpret,explainandanalyzeONEofthefollowingthreepassagesfromNietzsche’sTwilightoftheIdols.RememberthatwhatIamlookingforaboveallisevidenceofunderstandingthematerial,andofthoughtfulresponsetoit.Requirements:Thinkforyourself.Choosethepassageyouwilldiscusswithcare,andbesuretoaddressitasfullyasyoucan,bothwhatthequoteitselfsaysandalsoitscontextandroleinTwilightoftheIdols.Discussandanalyzetheinsights,ideasandphilosophicalpositionputforwardbyNietzsche.Youmayalsowishtocriticizehisviews,fromyourownperspective,butIrecommendyoudosoonlyafterpresentinghisideasasfaithfullyasyoucan;also,itisgoodpracticetotrytoimaginehowNietzschewouldhaverepliedtoyourcomments.Pleaseuseastandardfont,suchasTimesNewRomanorCalibri(12point),doublespaced.Writeincompletesentences,andindistinctparagraphs.Pleasesubmityouranswerbypastingthecontent(fromMSWord,please–notpdf)intothespaceprovidedonBlackboard.Iwouldaskthatyounotpostalinktoanexternaldocument..Attheconclusionofyourentry,aspertheAUCHonorCode,pleaseincludethefollowingstatement,followedbyyourname,typedoutinfull.Say what you have to say, and say it as wellas you can. Some people take more words to do that than others. Your grade will be based on what yousay, not how many (or how few) words it takes you to say it. (Let me add, though, from long experience,that unusually short answers rarely if ever earn high grades. I am expecting you to put real effort intothis.) As a guideline, let me suggest a range of 800-1400 words.This is not a research paper; the use of any outside sources is strongly discouraged (even if propercitations, required for any use of such sources, are included). The aim here is for you to work through thechosen passage yourself, on your own, drawing on your skills in close reading and analysis. Both theinterpretation of the author’s views and your responses, comments and criticisms must be your own.Plagiarism, or other forms of cheating, will not be tolerated.You do not need to include the chosen passage in your submission, nor to directly quote it atlength. You may, if you choose, include brief quotations from other parts of Nietzsche’sTwilight of theIdols. If you do, please use the page numbers from our edition. Here’s an example of what your citationshould look like, inserted after the quote: (Nietzsche,Twilight, p. 61).Please note: the selected passages, below, have been lightly edited by me, for length and clarity.
