A distant friend reminded me of this re-encounter with Nietzsche a month and half ago:
A glimpse of light has sparkled across my mind in regards to the world’s sad state of affairs after re-reading the Four Great Errors in Nietzsche’s Twilight of the Idols (full text). He reminded me that I must be what I am, I must leave the upper reaches of reason to live with myself. I must forget cause and effect, forget the spirit, forget the inner “me” and simply be me. There is no “essence” to things, only essence to me. There is no final theory of basics which “explain” things, definitely not capture them. Back to the problem of Initial Conditions… Will it have a solution? Can the question ever be real?
He even took the concept of being from the concept of the ego; he interpreted “things” as “being” in accordance with his concept of the ego as a cause.
Nietzsche, here as in my imagination, speaks in red. What’s more: a clear conscience is already there. I don’t have to do anything to win it.
All that is good is instinctive — and hence easy, necessary, uninhibited. Effort is a failing: the god is typically different from the hero. (In my language: light feet are the first attribute of divinity.)
I have thought that people aren’t free doing what they do and this is why I forgave them, tolerated it. I regarded them as prisoners who can’t just go outside their courses of action but prisoners who having been imprisoned all their lives don’t even know what lies behind the walls of themselves let alone imagine the strangeness outside.
What alone can be our doctrine? That no one gives a man his qualities — neither God, nor society, nor his parents and ancestors, nor he himself. (The nonsense of the last idea was taught as “intelligible freedom” by Kant — and perhaps by Plato.) No one is responsible for a man’s being here at all, for his being such-and-such, or for his being in these circumstances or in this environment. The fatality of his existence is not to be disentangled from the fatality of all that has been and will be. Human beings are not the effect of some special purpose, or will, or end; nor are they a medium through which society can realize an “ideal of humanity” or an “ideal of happiness” or an “ideal of morality.” It is absurd to wish to devolve one’s essence on some end or other. We have invented the concept of “end”: in reality there is no end.
It is true that I have always looked for an end. I have hurt myself greatly in doing so. Why have an ideal society? To abolish pain is my answer. But is this goal worth going after with a requirement of sacrificing the honesty of the quest for truth?
Is it worth going after at all if indeed in reality there is no end? Am I simply and unknowingly trying to create a very stable system, am I thinking about bettering the system, a system which has no reason to exist in the first place? Why do I care about it? Perhaps it is because it’s all I know, perhaps because I am part of it. I seek an ideal, that’s true. Why not settle for what’s available or even possible?
Nietzsche already asked me to stop trying to answer: no one gives me my qualities, not even me. An “end” is also Physics’s goal – the problem of Initial Conditions. Maybe the solution to it is that we must abolish the problem itself: there is no beginning nor end. Furthermore, perhaps there is no basic formulas and basic constituents of matter too, only everything at once and nothing at all at once too.
I was reminded that this was too much aimed towards too little. A change of direction is what it signaled.