The "aphoristic form causes difficulty," Nietzsche argued in 1887, for "today this form is not taken seriously enough." Nietzsche's Aphoristic Challenge addresses this continued neglect by examining the role of the aphorism in Nietzsche's writings, the generic traditions in which he writes, the motivations behind his turn to the aphorism, and the reasons for his sustained interest in the form. This literary-philosophical study argues that while the aphorism is the paradigmatic form for Nietzsche's writing, its function shifts as his thought (...) evolves. His turn to the aphorism in Human, All Too Human arises not out of necessity, but from the new freedoms of expression enabled by his critiques of language and his emerging interest in natural science. Yet the model interpretation of an aphorism Nietzsche offers years later in On the Genealogy of Morals tells a different story, revealing more about how the mature Nietzsche wants his earlier works read than how they were actually written. This study argues nevertheless that consistencies emerge in Nietzsche's understanding of the aphorism, and these, perhaps counter-intuitively, are best understood in terms of excess. Recognizing the changes and consistencies in Nietzsche's aphoristic mode helps establish a context that enables the reader to navigate the aphorism books and better answer the challenges they pose. (shrink)

Toward the conclusion of his study, Axel Pichler likens Nietzsche’s writings to the actions of a suicide bomber, for whom fulfillment of purpose necessarily entails self-destruction. Such explosive imagery is certainly not alien to Nietzsche, who notoriously claims to be dynamite, tearing a rift between philosophy’s past and future, and when we speak with Richard Rorty of “post-Nietzschean philosophy,” we breathe the fumes of this blast. Descriptions of this rupture have largely focused on Nietzsche’s attacks on the pillars of systematic (...) philosophy, which tremble at his accounts of the arbitrariness of language, the unavoidably perspectival nature of all knowledge, the irreducible contingency of truth, and the .. (shrink)

What possible allure can a Persian prophet hold for a philhellenic philosopher? "Zarathustra's Preposterous History" discusses the conspicuous heritage of Nietzche's figure, arguing that Nietzsche's turn to Zoroaster itself functions as an instance of affirmation, the difficult affirmation of even that which must be overcome. The self-overcoming that structures Also sprach Zarathustra comes to characterize the figure of Zarathustra itself, both within this book and in Nietzsche's later writings. But only through the preposterous imposition of this characterization can Nietzsche identify (...) Zarathustra with Zoroaster and portray the moralist as the necessary precursor to the immoralist. Inverting chronology, Nietzsche not only affirms that which must be overcome, but also demonstrates how one can master the past by making of the "it was" of history a "thus I willed it."Warum befasst sich ein philhellenischer Philosoph mit einem persischen Propheten? Dieser Aufsatz die augenfällige Erblast von Nietzches Figur und argumentiert, dass Nietzsches Wendung zu Zoraster selbst ein Beispiel der Bejahung abgibt, nämlich der schwierigen Bejahung dessen, was überwunden werden muss. Die Selbstüberwindung, die Also sprach Zarathustra strukturiert, charakterisiert ebenfalls die Zarathustra-Figur, sowhl in diesem Buch als auch in Nietzsches späteren Schriften. Aber nur durch die Rückübertragung dieser Charakterisierung kann Nietzsche Zarathustra mit Zoroaster identifizieren und den Moralisten als notwendigen Vorläufer des Immoralisten darstellen. Die Chronologie umkehrend, bejaht Nietzsche nicht nur das, was überwunden werden muss, sondern zeigt auch, wie man der Vergangenheit Herr werden kann, indem man aus dem "Es war" der Geschichte ein "So wollte ich es" macht. (shrink)