Many commentators have claimed that Nietzsche views the “sublimation” (Sublimierung) of drives as a positive achievement. Against this tradition, I argue that, on the dominant if not universal Nietzschean use of Sublimierung and its cognates, sublimation is just a broad psychological analogue of the traditional (al)chemical process: the “vaporization” of drives into a finer or lighter state, figuratively if not literally. This can yield ennobling elevation, or purity in a positive sense—the intensified “sublimate” of an unrefined original sample. But it (...) can also yield drives that are attenuated or otherworldly, in a pejorative sense. One (but only one) kind of Nietzschean sublimation is the “translation” of drives to “imaginative and spiritual” (Imaginative und Seelische) modes of expression. I con­clude that, despite certain appearances to the contrary, Nietzsche ultimately values basic drives’ powerful expression, without preferring either that this occur specifically as “higher culture” or as “savage” natural impulse. (shrink)

This essay examines the complex topic of illusion and art in Nietzsche’s philosophy. It focuses on two topics in particular: Nietzsche’s practice of self-transformation; and the question of how to differentiate through the analysis of style those practices that are deluded from those that are transformative.

El artículo investiga las distancias o cercanías entre literatura, filosofía y psicoanálisis estudiando la metáfora de la sublimación. En primer lugar, traza los vínculos de Nietzsche y Freud con la Retórica de Aristóteles, es decir, los muestra deudores de aquella tradición literaria y retórica que, según Aristóteles, se sirve de un tipo de discurso afín a las cuestiones humanas, signadas por la posibilidad y la deliberación, antes que por la necesidad y la demostración. En segundo lugar, especifica cómo para Nietzsche (...) y para Freud la literatura no puede ser entendida ya bajo el paradigma que el propio Aristóteles comparte, esto es, la idea de que la literatura enseña o place. Tanto en Nietzsche como en Freud la literatura es una forma de sublimación y no un discurso que puede ser visto a la luz de los modelos tradicionales de la enseñanza moral o de la restringida esfera del deleite estético. Ahora bien, al servirse ambos de esa metáfora para dar cuenta del proceso que la literatura pone en obra, radicalizan, de distinta manera, una experiencia moderna: la conciencia de la paulatina elaboración de las construcciones culturales. Y entienden que dichas construcciones suponen un complejo proceso de transformación de determinados elementos, más específicos y delineados en Freud, más abiertos y dúctiles en Nietzsche. En especial se destaca la concordancia con Aristóteles para tomar la literatura como un discurso afín a las acciones humanas, pero se señala el significativo giro que la experiencia moderna comporta, pues la metáfora elegida subraya comprender el ámbito de lo humano bajo el signo de la transformación. (shrink)

Resumen En este artículo me propongo revisitar de manera sucinta y sistemática los li-neamientos centrales de la teoría de la subjetividad de Sigmund Freud, persiguiendo el objetivo de mostrar la vigencia filosófica y teórico-social de la misma. Para ello, procedo en tres pasos: en primer lugar expongo el modo en que el autor construye su concepción del "sujeto del Inconsciente" a través de un enfrentamiento con la noción de "sujeto cartesiano". Luego, examino la tensión entre natura y nurtura que puede (...) rastrearse en su tratamiento del problema de la "pulsión" [ Trieb]. Y, finalmente, reseño su descripción de la estructura tripartita del aparato psíquico, poniendo especial énfasis en su noción de la subjetividad escindida y en el análisis del origen intersubjetivo del "Superyó" [Über-Ich].In this paper, I intend to systematically revisit the main lines of Sigmund Freud's theory of subjectivity, with the aim of showing its current relevance within the fields of philosophy and social theory. In order to do so, I will proceed in three steps. First, I will scrutinize the way Freud elaborates his account of the "subject of unconsciousness" arguing against the conception of the "Cartesian subject". Then, I will examine the tension between nature and nurture, which can be found in his treatment of the problem of "drives" [Triebe]. Finally, I will sketch out his description of the three-fold structure of the psychical apparatus, putting special emphasis on his conception of the "split subjectivity" and on his analysis of the intersubjective origin of the Superego [Über-Ich]. (shrink)

Nietzsche has repeatedly commented on his already published works, and thus continuously reinterpreted them, in order to shape their public reception and to foreground the communication of specific aspects of his works. As such, he followed a specific “work politics,” or Werkpolitik. The resulting retractions are not only revealing for the reconstruction of Nietzsche’s self-understanding, but also demonstrate both the development and the dynamic character of his thinking. In the present article, this is shown through a so-called “contrasting reading,” which (...) contrasts a posthumous note about The Birth of Tragedy, the Attempt at a Self-Criticism from 1886, with the book itself and with the chapter in Ecce Homo that is dedicated to BT. Starting from a close reading of note Nachlass 1888, 17[3], which also takes into account the genesis of BT, I argue that Nietzsche’s self-commentaries combine his current philosophical reflections with work-political objectives. The subsequent comparison reconstructs the philosophical differences between the note and the texts mentioned above, thus demonstrating the dynamic character of Nietzsche’s philosophizing, which is often stated but seldom reconstructed on the basis of the actual texts. (shrink)

The article unveils the intellectual indebtedness of Hans J. Morgenthau's realist theory of international power politics to Freudian meta- and group psychology. It examines an unpublished Morgenthau essay about Freudian anthropology written in 1930, placing this work within the context of Morgenthau's magna opera, the 1946 Scientific Man vs. Power Politics and the 1948 Politics among Nations. The article concludes that Morgenthau's international theory is ultimately based on the early instinct theory of Sigmund Freud. Freud is thus to be seen (...) as one of Morgenthau's intellectual fathers. A second main argument refers to the theoretical tradition that Morgenthau has founded within International Relations (IR), namely: political realism. By investigating its core principles, it is argued that realism also may be rooted in Freudian thought. Throughout, the article calls upon IR, Morgenthau scholarship, and international-political theory to take Freud seriously. (shrink)