A short reflection/response to Twilight of the Idols (1889) in The Portable Nietzsche.
Enjoy -- and stay curious.
In Friedrich Nietzsche’s Twilight of the Idols, the German philosopher attempts to transcend traditional ways of thinking by performing a “revaluation of all values” and posing questions with a hammer––a symbol that indicates Nietzsche’s motives to metaphorically break down ideals of the past (465). The text begins with a series of numbered maxims that critically examine traditional standards of morality. In Maxim #5, Nietzsche states the following: “I want, once and for all, not to know many things. Wisdom sets limits to knowledge too" (467). Such truth-seeking phrases characterize knowledge as either a blessing or a curse and reflect Nietzsche’s overarching objective of challenging systems that unnecessarily overwhelm individuals with information. Given this framework, Nietzsche criticizes Socrates’s introduction of dialectics and highlights the dangers of mindlessly promoting equality in all circumstances.
“Wisdom sets limits to knowledge too” (467). Living in a society filled with diverse thoughts and connections, there will always be information––such as details of a stranger’s personal life or the precise chemical contents of Coca-Cola––that an individual deems irrelevant to their lives. In this regard, Nietzsche believed that wisdom is not about knowing everything about the world but being able to differentiate between useless and relevant information. Individuals who fail to appreciate these limits of knowledge do end up learning more but often complicate their minds by inspecting ideas that are best left unexplored. “The Problem of Socrates” section explains the consequences of extreme rationalism and intellectual investigations that facilitate dialogue. Nietzsche claims that the development of dialectics within Greek philosophy led to the “plebs [coming] to the top”––an indication that a “noble taste [has been] vanquished" (475). In other words, dialectics provided an opportunity for inferior philosophical arguments to receive greater nuanced feedback at the expense of the more logically sound positions. For Nietzsche, dialectical reasoning produces an excess amount of information and inappropriately pushes the limits of knowledge as commoners with minimal educational backgrounds could now participate in the intellectual realm. With more contributors in discussions, individuals naturally attempt to create more room for “knowledge” which means there are fewer opportunities for humans to be in touch with their instinctual drives. In fact, Nietzsche notes that the Socratic method “opposed [...] all the instincts of the earlier Greeks” and failed to acknowledge that certain phenomena exist but operate beyond what rational humans can reason (475).
The “Skirmishes of an Untimely Man” section continues to discuss the suppression of natural impulses and reveals how the concept of equality fundamentally challenges the limits of knowledge. While dissecting the nature of liberal institutions, Nietzsche asserts that society’s heavy emphasis on equality and justice “undermine the will to power [,] level mountain and valley,” and allows irrelevant information to develop at the cost of the necessary and strongly-supported arguments (541). In essence, equally absorbing any and all types of knowledge disrupts an individual’s sense of purpose and threatens the creative mind as humans will no longer feel the need to rise above the average standard. Nietzsche concludes that without the futile contributions of “shopkeepers, Christians, cows, females, Englishmen, and other democrats,” knowledge is wisely selected so that humans can learn what is absolutely necessary (542). Although modern views on women’s role in society have dramatically shifted since the late 19th century, Nietzsche’s challenges of equality also applied to conversations around women’s rights. A growing sense of agency for women within a marriage changes the “husband’s sole juridical responsibility” which supposedly disrupts the “center of gravity”––a misogynistic claim that attempts to characterize women’s contributions in general as useless information that complicates knowledge, and consequently, contradicts the notion of wisdom (544). While Maxim #5 itself does not explicitly state that information deemed unnecessary should not exist at all, Nietzsche believes that even the mere presence of inferior pieces of knowledge harms the purity of wisdom.
As a Lawrentian (Lawrenceville School student) who indulges in Harkness and is surrounded by fellow dialecticians, nuanced learning is an integral part of the curriculum that prepares community members “to inspire the best in each to seek the best for all.” Though Nietzsche strongly argues against strengthening inherently “weak” arguments, one of the strengths of engaging in Harkness is the opportunity to assess the validity of diverse arrays of knowledge and learn the techniques––such as the O-P-C-V-L (origin-purpose-context-value-limitations) evaluation model––to effectively select information that is relevant and worth knowing. Thus, there is value in learning under such educational systems that ultimately help individuals seek wisdom by finding the balance between Socrates who promotes extreme rationalism and Nietzsche who ignorantly criticizes any thoughts that are deemed unnecessary.
Works Cited:
Nietzsche, Friedrich. "Twilight of the Idols Or, How One Philosophizes with a Hammer." In The Portable Nietzsche, edited by Walter Kaufmann, 463-563. New York: Penguin Classic, 2006.
Comments