2

If Nietzsche is writing about humans, is he really writing about men or doesn't he make the distinction?

The way I came up with the question is complicated, but specifically I was thinking about the motivations for him writing Will To Power. In the sense of "What would be the intention anyway, did he want to make people act different to change the world, make it a 'better' place. I'm not 100% sure on the publishing plan, but if he doesn't really has an audience, why write on morals? Or did he just want to sort all his ideas in his head?" Then regarding people dropping their bad ways and acting differently, how does it affect if the women also do/don't it, "the same". What was his intention?

  • This is a pretty valid question, if you mean what I think you do. Are you asking whether Nietzsche assigns all the responsibilities and higher functions of humanity to men, as opposed to women? If so, I'd recommend some clarification and general expansion in your question. It's a bit bare as it is, although I certainly see where you'd be going. Nietzsche famously had... problems... with women in his life. – commando Aug 4 '12 at 3:28
  • 3
    Do you have a particular passage in mind? – Michael Dorfman Aug 4 '12 at 11:52
  • 2
    There may be a general answer which applies to most of his works, but a specific text or passage would allow us to give a more definitive answer. – stoicfury Aug 4 '12 at 20:51
  • 2
    what is the source of your question? how did it come up? what did you read that made you think about this? I think the question would be more interesting if you provided some of your background on the problem. – Tames Aug 4 '12 at 20:59
  • There is a problem with this text. Nietzsche never wrote "Will to Power". It is a compilation from his notes done by his sister and friend Heinrich Köselitz. Therefore any passage in this book should be confronted with other texts in order to ensure that its meaning is not "altered" by the editors. – Zefiryn Oct 12 '12 at 22:38
1

i think what you're missing is Nietzsche at no point accepts the idea that notions such as duty are able to carry an absolute neccessity. his direction was not to affirm or deny duty, but arrive at why a duty is what it is through investigating its historical conditions of emergence, through 'genealogy', in order to realise it's contingency and deny its neccessity, realise it functions in service of power. At several points he says some fairly 'idiosyncratic things in relation to women, the 'don't forget the whip' line that's always cited..

another:

Stupidity in the kitchen; woman as cook; the terrible thoughtlessness with which the feeding of the family and the master of the house is managed! Woman does not understand what food means, and she insists on being cook! If woman had been a thinking creature, she should certainly, as cook for thousands of years, have discovered the most important physiological facts, and should likewise have got possession of the healing art! Through bad female cooks--through the entire lack of reason in the kitchen--the development of mankind has been longest retarded and most interfered with: even today matters are very little better. A word to High School girls.

...

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.