Archive for the ‘Nietzsche’ Category
So, I’ve been chewing on some Nietzsche for the better part of the last 8 months (I mentioned a few things I was struck by here) . I think Nietzsche is very helpful for Christians and is worth reading/understanding. There are at least four reasons why this is the case:
First, Nietzsche is helpful because he presents a worldview almost completely antithetical to Christianity. From my experience, total opposites often have a lot in common and typically this is the case because opposites employ the same categories to divergent conclusions. Nietzsche takes many of orthodox Christianities’ categories and turns them on their head. He preaches the opposite of the Sermon on the Mount, encouraging master morality over slave morality. He preaches that humanity has killed God through our lack of worship of God and as a result there is no such thing as good/evil, right/wrong, or black/white because all of these depended on God for their existence. He preaches that all that humanity has is power through the assertion of one’s will.
Second, Nietzsche and Christianity have a few common assessments and aims (The Fall, Telos, and Pleasure). In my opinion, there is definitely a sense of the brokenness of things in Nietzsche’s philosophy. While not coming from a theistic framework, he sees that humanity needs to rise above its current pitiful state to something higher. While he might not refer to the ubermensch as redeemer of humanity, it is certainly Nietzsche’s telos for humanity. Nietzsche and the Christian see very eye-to-eye when it comes to a promotion of life-affirmation (given, from very different angles). Some may accuse Christianity of being prudish or oppressive but they haven’t read C.S. Lewis on joy, Jonathan Edwards on affection, or John Piper on Christian hedonism. Both Nietzsche, Lewis, Edwards, and Piper all put forth a very life-affirming, full-bodied, joy-filled, and pleasure-seeking vision of life.
Third, Nietzsche is correct in his assessment that the death of God necessitates nihilism (a rejection of all morality). For Nietzsche a large portion of his philosophy was devoted to the reevaluation of everything in light of the death of God (particularly morality). Unlike the New Atheists who want to have their cake and eat it too (atheism with some semblance of morality), Nietzsche obliterates this notion. Nietzsche rejects all transcendence in light of the death of God, for if God is the only transcendent thing/being in existence, then the death of God also destroys anything transcendent. The only meta-narrative (for Nietzsche) left is the assertion of power and pleasure in the face of the harsh world.
Fourth, Nietzsche’s worldview is horribly unlivable. The unlivability of the Nietzschean worldview is probably the greatest critique of his thinking. I won’t even delve into the fact that Nietzsche spent the last decade of his life severely mentally ill and institutionalized (as this has been abused by Nietzsche’s critics). It is no great secret that Nietzsche’s most faithful disciple was Michel Foucault. Foucault was an influential post-structuralist and post-modern thinker who sought to live Nietzsche’s worldview to its logical end. Power and pleasure were at the center for Foucault and Nietzsche and as such Foucault delved deep into the world of homosexual sadomasochism. It was not uncommon for Foucault to have 6-12 such encounters in a single night (facilitated by the bath-houses of 70s era Southern California). He was quite open and would brag about his sexual power and prowess. He was one of the first public figures to die of AIDS. He wanted to die in his native Paris and upon his triumphal entry to his city, 2 million people lined either side of the Champs-Élysées. Those celebrating his return carried posters with Foucault’s motto, “Be Cruel.”
Lecture five consisted of a series of talking points. Aside from Alvin Plantinga’s evolutionary argument against naturalism… this lecture explores what Christianity and Nietzsche have in common. The content suggests that Nietzsche’s Dionysian thinking is not entirely incompatible with Christianity. It is my contention that C.S. Lewis, Jonathan Edwards, and John Piper have carved out common ground between Christianity and Nietzschean Dionysianism.
Audio of the lecture if available here.
This lecture focuses on Christianity’s response to Nietzsche and the problem of Foucault.
I. Recapping Nietzsche’s objections to Christianity:
A. Intellectually impossible
B. It demeans humanity
C. Its morality is fatal to life
II. In Christianity’s Place are Nietzsche’s Affirmations:
- Be a free-spirit
- Be curious
- Be nomadic
III. Christian Responses
Dostoevsky – Brothers Karamazov
Blaise Pascal – Pensees
Francis Schaeffer – true/livable
IV. The Problem of Foucault
V. Talking Points
A. Is the Nietzschean worldview true?
B. Is the Nietzschean worldview livable?
C. Does Foucault present a problem for Nietzsche’s worldview?
D. Does Nietzsche really understand Christianity?
Here is the AUDIO for the first lecture.
I was struck by a few things in doing my research on the life, thought, and influence of Nietzsche. First, I am struck at how dark, bleak, and sick was Nietzsche’s early world. Second, I was struck by the damning affects of the poison that flowed from the Tubingen School, particularly in the thought of Strauss, Feuerbach, and Schopenhauer (Tubingen was the school that started all of the criticism of the Bible that eventually led to the splitting of Protestantism into its conservative and liberal branches). Third, I am struck by how different Nietzsche’s thought changed over time and how he moves beyond all of his influences. Fourth, I am struck by both the radicalness and the consistency of Nietzsche’s atheism, he is the one atheist who says that morality is contingent on the existence of God. Fifth, I am struck that Nietzsche is really a kind of Greek thinker in the vein of Dionysus and that the goal of his whole philosophy is life affirmation. Sixth, I am struck by how much I agree with Nietzsche both in what bothers him and what he affirms. Finally, I couldn’t agree more with David Hart when he says, “The only really effective antidote to the dreariness of reading the New Atheists, it seems to me, is rereading Nietzsche.”
Below is the outline and audio from the first lecture:
I. Biography and Psychology
B. Boarding School at Pforta
C. Chronic Illness
E. University of Basel
F. Franco-Prussian War Medical Orderly
II. Intellectual Influences
A. David Frederick Strauss – Das Leben Jesu
C. Friedrich Lange – History of Materialism and Critique of its Present Importance (Geschichte des Materialismus)
III. Nietzsche’s Thought
A. “The Death of God”
C. Master and Slave Morality
E. Will to Power (der Wille zur Macht)
F. Eternal Recurrence (ewige Wiederkunft)
IV. Nietzsche’s Influence
C. Albert Camus
F. Martin Buber
G. Adolf Hitler (sort of)
Earlier this spring, I taught a course with the Encore program at NC State University entitled Nietzsche vs. Christianity. In case any of you who were in the course (or who weren’t) wanted the audio or lecture outlines… I will post those here.
The outline of the course is as follows:
I. Nietzschean Thought
II. Christian Thought
III. Nietzsche’s Objections to Christianity
IV. Christianities’ Response to Nietzschean Objections
V. A Potential Synthesis… and Talking Points
VI. Collision DVD