Running head: Nietzsche Header: Philosophy Name: University: Course: Tutor: Date: Nietzsche Philosophizing with a Hammer. In philosophizing with a hammer, Friedrich Nietzsche meant that the assortment of stories that constitute the dominant representations of life and our world. This philosophy is brought forth right in his last writing, Twilight of the idols which gives a clear indication of the polemic zing feeling of Nietzsche against Wagner, who composed the opera Twilight of the Gods (Nietzsche, 1996). This is why Nietzsche brings the concern about the distinction between gods and idols.
By philosophizing with a hammer, Nietzsche is referring to “sounding out idols” with his hammer. These are the eternal idols that have the capacity to disappear in the dark. My assumption is that he had a deliberate cause of using the paradoxical expression (Nietzsche, 1996). These idols include beliefs, ideals, values and truths and Nietzsche puts criticism on them as we tent to believe that they are eternal and that seem to rule our thought and action with a kind of self justification. Through his philosophy, he has the intention of showing the historicity or the historical nature, of things that are believed to be beyond change.
When he says that he is philosophizing with hammer, Nietzsche indicates that he has confidence in whatever he is saying from his claims (Nietzsche, 1998). He tries to bring forth the validity of his claims which entails dissolution of traditional religion and metaphysics. In philosophizing with a hammer, Nietzsche indicates that he has strong points in his philosophies which need to be adopted by people due to his experience of living in time of transition as well as his thinking which is a reinterpretation that will bring a transition to a new age(Nietzsche, 1998).
As he was speaking of the prognostic part of his medical philosophy, he sometimes stressed the promise of a new day and at other times he used to put emphasis on the disappearing of the old day and the twilight into which all its distinctions fade way. In his method of Philosophizing, Nietzsche adopts a culture of maintaining cheerfulness in the midst of a gloomy affair, fraught with immeasurable responsibility, is no small feat (Nietzsche, 1998). These are key parameters needed in philosophy so as to win some trust if not all from your listeners as well as those who read your work.
This is the nature of Philosophizing with a hammer as claimed by Nietzsche. Both the idols and the gods have their history in nature (Nietzsche, 1998). The combination of eternity and historicity gives an overview of an important element of the genealogical method by which Nietzsche gives his contribution to a revaluation of all values by presenting them as historical and changeable interpretations. According to Nietzsche, he touches the idols with a hammer and in this case, this functions as a turning point.
This first meaning of philosophizing with a hammer can be referred to as a diagnostic meaning where the philosopher uses his hammer to strike the idols so as to be in a position to hear the sound they will give in response and to access whether they do or do not only whether or not they are hollow but also where there exists cracks in them, with the latter causing them to sound out of tune (Nietzsche, 1996). In the revealing of idols to be hollow statues, this means depriving them of their self-asserted meaning and importance.
There is a tendency of these idols and the people that worship them to try to resist Nietzsche’s treatment of them. The main reasons as to why the philosopher uses violence is to make the idols speak up, make them reveal their own hollowness, whereas they would remain untouched and untested its only our believe in them which makes them look like gods though they are merely forms made by humans and they lack the authority over us although they are our creations. Literally, the hammer is also an instrument of destruction.
Referring to the biblical teachings in the Old Testament: specifically in the book of Leviticus 26:30 and the book of Ezekiel 6:6, we a repeatedly told how the people succumbed to the temptation of idolatry, hence idols has to be thrown down and destroyed. Once treated like this, some of them will collapse through the simple cause of touch of the turning fork, the unmasking diagnosis. However, majority of them will be tough and will be overcome only by a strenuous fight (Nietzsche, 1996).
This is why Nietzsche calls his work a great declaration of war thus making his philosophy a war. Nietzsche fight to the idols is based on his age and according to him, they need to be fought and to be approached with violence because they are very strong and they rule with the power of obviousness. Therefore, Nietzsche has a belief in mind that those who begin to read his polemical philosophy will engage in a fight implying that the readers of his work will be the subject of his violent attacks.
His claims are a preeminent way to be the type philosopher he gives in his description in beyond “Good and Evil” “a man tomorrow and the day after tomorrow, who has always found himself, and had to find himself, in a contradiction to his today: whose enemy was ever the ideal of today”. According to Nietzsche, the great wisdom of all spirits who have become too inward is war (Hollingdale, 1973). He has a self criticism whereby he turns out to be very sensitive to the self-referenced effects of his thinking.
For individuals who intent to make a re-evaluation of all values, they will have to ensure that they are not just making a mere imposition of their over prejudices on others but must instead acknowledge the working of the old values through them in their attempt to re-evaluate all values. In addition, Nietzsche uses the word hammer in reference to its sculpturing purposes. This gives recognition of the therapeutical or healing aspect of the work of the physician of culture.
There is a challenge in understanding Nietzsche’s critical work of unmasking idols as resulting in the presentation of an unmasked nature, an unveiled truth which would then be laid open. He precisely criticizes this idea of a more real reality, of a reality or substratum which has its existence in under all interpretations (Hollingdale, 1973). In his certainty, he is not a romantic dreamer of a true and good nature which only would have to be acknowledged. His discussion is out of a possibility of a return to the truth or to real values.
He also speaks of revaluation of values which is foreseen as a basic parameter in establishing of values after the former ones have been criticized and overcome. In doing so, Nietzsche tries to make a new statue or in other words a new form of a man or human being. Nietzsche has undertaken a productive and creative work which presupposes that old forms will be destroyed. However, the work creates some form of contradiction as it is itself a very violent procedure. Therefore his theory is to some extent negative.
The violent procedures of the philosophy raise the question of the ideal by which it is guided and especially how this ideal can stand up to the critique of all former ideals. There is also the question of how to justify the3 violence of this new interpretation (Nietzsche, 1996). In addition, there is also the question of level at which Nietzsche presents the new and higher truth than ever before which is not being undetermined by his own critique. Another negative parameter of Nietzsche work is that it was seen as a symptomatic of increasing mental illness.
Other than turning out to be eye openers to some individuals, the theory created a lot of confusion to many people as they were relating what he was asserting to them with what they were used to in their daily lives. This was a sort of psychological torture or illness. In addition, Nietzsche’s radicalization of the enlightment is not fully expressive of, but it is certainly a product of his solitude. Thus, in many occasions most of his former friends did not understand what he was writing. This also affected his wider audience.
However, though his critiques of culture seemed to be unfashionable, it was at least more familiar to the public than his thoughts in human, all too human and the other books in of his work. This caused a serious problem to Nietzsche in selling his books. In addition, the Twilight of the idols in which Nietzsche claims to philosophy with hammer, the statements given are provocative and controversial. The opinions he gives are vehemently radical, and in most cases they depict him as being extremist.
Nietzsche attacks democracy, socialism, women, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, rationalism, and altruism (Nietzsche, 1996). This behavior of opposing to any concept of moral fact is a result of his opposition to any universal principle of morality. In conclusion, no one is responsible for a mans being on earth , for his being in any way regardless of the circumstances and the surrounding environment in which he is. Human beings are not the effect of some special purpose, or will, or end, nor are they medium through which society can realize an ideal of community or an ideal happiness or an ideal morality.
Though Nietzsche’s theory of philosophizing with hammer has some facts in it door some positivity in it also has its negativity part. Nietzsche philosophy and theory is positive in its part as gives the perception of human life in terms of strength and weakness hence giving the importance characteristic of his thinking. From his works, we can relate his thi9nking to that of a doctor which is always normative. He acts as a physician of culture and he is more interested in what produces a healthy life than in what life really is.
This implies that Nietzsche really knows that life is a striving for health, growth, and self enhancement or self overcoming. His theory gives human beings the real picture of life whereby the every one of his philosophies is viewed as a remedy and an aid in the service of growing and struggling life. This is made possible because he knows what life is and as a physician of culture, he is interested in how to make it even healthier (Nietzsche, 1996). In Twilight of the idols or hilosophizing with a hammer, Nietzsche criticizes the works of several authors thus turning out to be provocative. This acts as a positive challenge to the authors and encourages them to do extra research on their work. The theory gives a definition of freedom as the will to affirm and to be responsible for one-self. It encourages people to fight hard for their freedom as freedom requires struggle against hardship. It ascertains that freedom is measured by the resistance that has to be overcome, and the effort it takes in making choices and be responsible for these choices.
This theory gives also the required environments for ideal life situations in which human beings should aspires to live in. therefore, for any aesthetic activity to exist, there has to be an inspired condition on the part of the artist or the observer. According to Nietzsche, this inspired condition is referred to as Apollonian or Dionysian. These two are identified as the antithetical concepts in Nietzsche’s aesthetic philosophy. 1. Hollingdale, R. J. (1973). Nietzsche. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. 2. Nietzsche, F.
W. , Colli, G. , & Montinari, M. (1967). Werke (Kritische Gesamtausg. / ed. ). Berlin: De Gruyter. 3. Nietzsche, F. W. , & Faber, M. (1998). Beyond good and evil prelude to a philosophy of the future. New York: Oxford University Press. 4. Nietzsche, F. W. , & Kaufmann, W. (1954). The portable Nietzsche . New York: Viking Press. 5. Nietzsche, F. W. , & Smith, D. (1996). On the genealogy of morals a polemic: by way of clarification and supplement to my last book, beyond good and evil. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
