Philosophy, rather than some abstract ‘love of wisdom’ should be a critical practice – of never accepting ‘at face value’ a person’s statements (particularly those of a philosopher – one who lays claim to ‘reason’) but of always analysing those statements, looking for the inconsistencies, for what is really being argued, seeking to understand how it is being argued – and of developing one’s own argument in response.
This should be all the more so in the case of Nietzsche, who was a master rhetorician, and more broadly, with regard to the impact of mysticism on Western culture. Mysticism (its primary Western form Neoplatonism) and theosophy – both in disguised form – have provided the theoretical justification and tools for what many philosophers have presented as the achievements of the most rigorous thought, the most punctilious ‘reason’.
Nietzsche is exemplary of what happened in philosophy, particularly after the late eighteenth century, in response…
View original post 1,217 more words