Template:Nietzsche zwei

Choose from the Philosophy Menu Bar ▼ HOME INDEX Justice 6.v.25 The Good Life 20.v.25 Hume & Testimony 3.vi.25 1H25 Reflections 17.vi.25 Nietzsche 1 24.ii.25 Nietzsche 2 11.iii.25 Universal Basic Income 25.iii.25 Hegel 22.iv.25 2024 Wrap-Up 10.x.24 Democracy 14.i.25 Civilisation? 28.i.25 Compulsory Voting? 11.ii.25 Berlin and Freedom 15.x.24 Nussbaum, Sen and Capability 29.x.24 Slavery Reparations 12.xi.24 Rawls 26.xi.24 Assisted Suicide 11.vi.24 Popper and Evolution 20.viii.24 Popper continued 17.ix.24 Berlin and Romanticism 1.x.24 Marx 19.iii.24 Kant and Knowledge 16.iv.24 Kant and Morality 30.iv.24 Education and Religion 14.v.24 Hobbes & Security 23.i.24 From Locke to Mill 6.ii.24 Rousseau: Social Contract 20.ii.24 Rousseau and Education 5.iii.24 AI and Ethics 31.x.23 Aristotle and AI 14.xi.23 Autumn 2023 Review 28.xi.23 Democracy 9.i.24 Private Education 5.ix.23 The Very Elderly 19.ix.23 Justifiable Law-breaking 3.x.23 Moral Authority 17.x.23 The Wells School of Philosophy Roll Call 11th March 2024, Hare Lane, 1000-1200 hrs: Tutors: Linda (L), Steve (S) Pupils: Alexis (A), Howard (H), Patricia (P), Ray (R), Viki (V), Scribe: Gavin (G) Apologies: Colin (C), David (D), John (J), Margie (M), The homework set As preparation for next Tuesday we would ask everyone to address, say, three of the questions raised in our first discussion which particularly interest you, to do some digging, and come ready to prompt more debate. They were: Is it evil if you steal a bun because you are hungry? The Southport killings: an act of evil? Can evil actions only be described thus when their perpetrator is evil? How should we view the Holocaust? Evil conducted by evil people. Does society determine what is good and evil? Is there such a thing as good per se? Or evil per se? Can evil only exist between humans? Does the thought of the slate being wiped clean help the perpetrator? One particularly fertile area could be the way Nietzsche conflates philosophy and psychology; is this helpful? To what extent do we need to dig into psychology to understand the nature of the human condition and what makes humans different from other animal species. (This is related to our discussion of the nature of evil, and the role of forgiveness in human relationships.) We could endeavour to wrap up our discussion by comparing the relevance of insights generated by Nietzsche with the overall philosophies of say Kant, Rousseau, Marx and Hume. Introduction(S) Nietzsche's ideas can be hard to grasp. He had insights into the human condition. Was he a nihilist? A pessimist? How did he consider evil? Could only humans perpetrate evil? What was his moral framework? How did he view suffering? Was he reckless? Why did he support the peasantry? Why did he not like capitalists? What would he think of Trump? He sought truth through art and science. He thought language was not up to the job. In a post-Christian era, did he have anything to fill the vacuum? * He could be very spirited. He was anti-meek. Addendum(L) Nietzsche set out to be a disruptor, to enable the creation of new values. Christianity’s focus on afterlife was bad for mankind, he believed. In order to overcome existing values, he believed you had to step back and askhow have you got these values? He doubted the universal validity of everything. Nietzsche's influence on the "hermeneutics of suspicion," a term coined by Paul Ricoeur, lies in his critique of traditional knowledge and morality, arguing for a persistent questioning of underlying motivations and interpretations, exposing hidden interests and "illusory truths". You must still have chaos in yourself, he thought. We should not accept situation we find Utah ourselves in. The Übermensch is a philosophical concept by Friedrich Nietzsche that translates to "superman" or "overman". Nietzsche believed that the Übermensch was a goal for humanity to strive towards. Marx's dialectic was the class struggle. Psychoanalysis considers everything except the will to find meaning to one's life. Discussion Zoroastrianism gives us good and evil and therefore the free will to make a choice. If you get get 'Beyond Good and Evil', you’re left with free will.(A) 🄽's focus seemed to be on the individual, but what about effect of his remedies on society?(V) High achievers often neglect their families.(V) In 🄽’s day, expectations often constrained your career. We are much freer today. But to some extent, society may have suffered.(V) Brian and Maggie. Tv programme? L: saw Christianity as a terrible affliction. R: unworldly view of people. Detached from reality. In his era a lot of new stuff developing in psychology. L: heuristic of suspicion: vision of the unconscious. Undermines truth. S: did he have a strong view of freewill? Do we control our instincts? R: was he influenced by Darwin? L. Much more complex type of evolution. V. Incredibly bright, and unable to understand lack of understanding of others. A: his admiration is for people who have run roughshod over people. S: how was he brilliant? V: architects or engineers? L. Wittgenstein very scornful of other people who didn’t understand. N A bit like Cassandra. L so difficult to cover everything in a message, even face to face. S. Rossiter. OXO cubes. Katie. 70s just before thatcher tapped into individualism. No not this way, say the respondents. Parents talking over the heads of children in code. Not Paris, Preston. Linda Bellingham. R. Realism. Is man realistic in the way he lives his life? H. Climate change. Man in Street doesn’t think about it. V. What is point in doing anything when third runway. S. Grim realism. V. Not the first to think of self-improvement. Working men’s clubs. L. Give children the tool of critical thinking. R. Inertia in French academies. Conservatism. S. Trump as great disruptor. S. N believed in hierarchies. But fought against Marx. L. N critical of Paul. S. Jesus as Che Guevara. Didn’t agree with utilitarians. S. Pursuit of excellence in Plato. V. He lacks deep knowledge of social structures. S. What would n say now about morality? V. He would question anything that is taught. A. Thought science is life denying. P. Parsifal. Why did it split them? Searching for holy grail. L. Wagner and he had been revolutionaries together. W had to go cap in hand to capitalists to finance Bayreuth, which n hated. S. Start the week yesterday. Neuroscience of ideologues. Why do people stick to ideas, despite evidence. Missed n’s idea of the will. V. Quite a struggle to change your mind. P. Grandchildren change your viewpoint. Power to know you knew their parents. R. Putin still thinks about the Soviet Union. R. More or less. L. 20mph. 80% want a speed limiter. V. Michael Sheen buying out debt. Tv programme last night. A. Debt is sold on. S. Moral dilemma. Universal basic income would be a good thing. Unpaid carers. Other topics touched on Alcoholic parents as a driver of ambition.(L) The working day in Norway.(S) References [1] The "Remember Preston?" ad starts at 2 mins 53 secs in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQtxKRAJz00 [2] Channel Four's 'Brian and Maggie is at https://www.channel4.com/programmes/brian-and-maggie Books Suggested: [6]: Roger Fisher and William Ury (1981). Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. Houghton Mifflin. [7]: Richard Dawkins (1976). The Selfish Gene. Oxford University Press.