The late Nietzsche defended a position which he sometimes to refers as ‘sensualism’ and which consists of two main theses: senses ‘do not lie’ (T1) and sense organs are ‘causes’ (T2). Two influential interpretations of this position have been proposed by Clark and Hussain, who also address the question whether Nietzsche's late sensualism is (Hussain) or not (Clark) compatible with the epistemological view which he held in his previous work and which has been dubbed the ‘falsification thesis’ (FT). In my (...) paper I will show that both readings raise substantial difficulties and propose an alternative account of Nietzsche's sensualism. In particular, I will argue: (a) that according to Nietzsche the representational content of sensory experience ‘does not lie’ since it is physically grounded in causal exchanges with the external world which are mediated by sense organs; (b) that Nietzsche believes that the claim that senses ‘do not lie’ is also true of the phenomenal, qualitative content of sensory experience; and (c) that FT, despite its prima facie tension with (a) and (b), fit well Nietzsche's sensualism. (shrink)

The contribution offers an interpretation of the last phase of Nietzsche’s production, based on the influence of some economic concepts. In 1887, Nietzsche encountered the work of the proto-marginalist economist Emmanuel Herrmann and his book “Cultur und Natur: Studien im Gebiete der Wirthschaft”. At the time, Nietzsche was working on the attempt – later abandoned – to offer a comprehensive interpretation of Western metaphysics and history. aimed at a “transvaluation of all values” and based on the idea of will to (...) power. Herrmann’s economic theory played a significant role in this project, offering a model capable of articulating all social and natural processes – and particularly life – in terms of purely immanent relations. By linking the ideas of transvaluation and will-to-power to the logic of capitalistic accumulation and of market society, we can gain an understanding of the influence of economical concepts on Nietzsche’s project, which should in turn allow a better evaluation of its historical relevance. (shrink)

Die Hauptthese dieses Buches ist es, Krankheit und Gesundheit mit Nietzsche auf zwei verschiedenen Ebenen zu denken, nämlich als Ereignisse des Willens zur Macht in einem zirkulär-relationalen Modell, in dem sie sich gegenseitig behaupten, sowie die Metaebene der Konzeptualisierung anzuerkennen. Es behandelt die Schwierigkeit des begrifflichen Denkens, diese Ereignisse einzuholen, und diskutiert kritisch Modellbildungen, die darauf hinauslaufen, dass Krankheit zu überwinden und als lineares singuläres Ereignis zu verstehen sei. In Nietzsches Spätwerk wird die Figur des "dionysischen Künstlers" als Idealisierung der (...) Gesundheit gemäß seiner interpretierenden Sichtweise der Welt dargestellt. Die Relevanz des Buches liegt darin, eine Analyse der Begriffe von Gesundheit und Krankheit (tragischer und schlechter Pessimismus) in direkter Beziehung zu leiblichen Vorgängen vorzulegen, die sich von metaphysisch-dialektischen Voraussetzungen befreit. Zu diesem Zweck widmet die Untersuchung sich einer intertextuellen Lektüre der fünf Vorreden, die Nietzsche 1886/87 zu seinen früheren Schriften verfasste, und verknüpft sie mit der Interpretation des Nachlasses und weiterer Veröffentlichungen aus seiner letzten Schaffensphase. (shrink)

The 1886/87 prefaces for the new editions of The Birth of Tragedy, the first volume of Human, All Too Human, Daybreak, and The Gay Science, as well the preface for the first edition of the second volume of Human, All Too Human, are Nietzsche’s starting point for elaborating and developing his late conception of illness and health. To arrive at a more detailed interpretation of the health process that Nietzsche describes, it is necessary to establish an intertextual reading of the (...) prefaces and the aphorism GS 370 from the perspective of a psychophysiological analysis. Nietzsche classifies his interpretation of illness under the term “romanticism,” which he sees embodied by the figures of Schopenhauer and Wagner and which he considers to be the most extreme case of illness – while his conception of health is classified under the term “tragic pessimism.” Nietzsche applies the meaning of romanticism and tragic pessimism until the end of his work, transforming both concepts into categories from which he defines the nature of the human being. (shrink)

“Older than Language Is the Mimicking of Gestures”: The Body as the Origin of Language. Nietzsche’s early philosophical ideas about language and its origin occupy a central place in scholarly discussions of his work. In order to examine Nietzsche’s interpretation of the constitution of human language, this article focuses not only on his early writings, but also on the first volume of Human, All Too Human as well as on his later period, in particular his work in 1887 and 1888. (...) The central claim of this article is that Nietzsche begins to view the body, with its gestures and movements, as the site of origin for instinctive unconscious language and the subsequent emergence of conceptual language. Already in 1872, and with the influence of contemporary scientific ideas, he begins to conceive the movement and gesture of the human body as the foundation for the origin of language. Strengthened in Human, All Too Human, this idea appears again in his later writings in 1887, when Nietzsche connects it to Charles Féré’s theories of “psychomotor induction” and “mental suggestion.” Finally, it is the Dionysian artist of 1888 who enjoys par excellence the capacity for suggestion, affect and immediate representation, and who thus becomes the master of communication. (shrink)

I argue that Nietzsche puts forward a pandispositionalist view that can be seen as the conjunction of two basic claims: that powers are the basic constituents of reality, on the one hand, and that the only properties things possess are relational qua dispositional, on the other hand. As I believe that such a view is, at least in part, motivated by his rejection of Kant’s notion of things in themselves, I start by sketching the metaphysics of Kant’s transcendental idealism and (...) by presenting Nietzsche’s critical reaction to it. After that, I start to work out Nietzsche’s pandispositionalist view by considering first the case of physical reality and second that of psychological reality. I then argue that in both cases that view does not conflict with Nietzsche’s naturalism. In the last part of the paper I explore how his notion of will to power fits into such a pandispositionalist picture. Here, I shall argue, some serious tension does arise, for the claim that Nietzsche sometimes makes to the effect that the will to power is a fundamental physical force seems to clash with central aspects of his mature thought. However, whereas he repeatedly entertains that claim in his unpublished notes, it is far from clear that he ever meant to endorse it in his published work. Thus, I conclude that the available textual evidence only justifies attributing to Nietzsche the kind of pandispositionalist view spelled out in the first sections of the present paper, and not also the further claim that the will to power is a fundamental physical force. (shrink)

Based on a review of the literature and historical evidence, I argue that the use of the methodological principle known as the priority principle in Anglo-American Nietzsche scholarship is inconsistent and irreconcilable with historical evidence. It attempts to demarcate between the published works and the Nachlass. However, there are no agreed upon necessary and sufficient conditions of a particular textual object being considered “Nachlass.” This absence leads to implicit and often tacit value demarcation criteria that can be broadly grouped into (...) four types of consideration: publication, authorization, publicness, and audience. Each of these criteria pick out a different set of texts as “Nachlass.” Thus, despite the veneer of agreement, the most broadly accepted methodological approach in the Anglo-American tradition of Nietzsche scholarship is applied inconsistently. I argue that we must either offer necessary and sufficient conditions for a piece of text being Nachlass, or we ought to abandon such abstract criteria altogether and embrace a contextual and historical approach. I then argue that the first option is impossible given historical evidence. I conclude this article by explicating several recent German approaches to the Nachlass which I think can offer a new possible approach. (shrink)

The article traces Nietzsche’s references to insects in his published and unpublished writings against the backdrop of his study of the entomological research of his time (esp. through his reading of Alfred Espinas’s Die thierischen Gesellschaften). The first part of the article explores how Nietzsche’s entomology allows us to add a posthumanist perspective to the more familiar poststructuralist readings of Nietzsche, as the entomological research he consulted offered him a model for understanding how rudimentary processes can lead to the formation (...) of structures and higher organizations with emergent properties. The second part of the article revisits Nietzsche’s conceptions of the will and the will to power against the backdrop of his references to insect sociality and the influence of Wilhelm Wundt. It shows that Nietzsche’s deconstruction of the will as an umbrella concept and his will to power are attempts to model the emergence of complex edifices from simple operations under which physical, psychological, and social phenomena must be thought to arise. The article concludes with a reflection of the social and political relevance of what Nietzsche identifies as modernity’s “disgregation of the will.”. (shrink)

Nietzsche’s translation of phycisist Roger Joseph Boscovich’s theory of matter to the language of a sensorial atomism evokes the emergence of several moral prejudices. For Boscovich, material points are the symptoms of an action that itself does not belong to those points, but is produced from a distance by other points, as the result of an operation from point A to point B and vice versa. By appropriating aspects of Boscovich’s physics, Nietzsche equates this dynamism to a theory of sensation. (...) In this sense, sensorial points receive actions from afar and every action is a sensory action from a distance, as the result of the points acting one on another. To neglect this sensorial diversity would be to mistake the physical constitution of organisms. Is not this lack of recognition at the origin of our moral prejudices? (shrink)