Lately people have been asking me about Nietzsche. Here are a couple of brief points about some of his philosophy.
1. Nietzsche calls humanity to be the animal that he or she is, while the church calls humanity to be more than just the animal that he or she is; yet, I do not see how humanity can be come a superman (as is what Nietzsche wants) when humanity, according to Nietzsche, is nothing more than an animal. To be super means to be more than or above its root word – in this case, it is to be above man. So how can the animal-man be super if it is natural for humanity to be nothing more than an animal? It also appears to be true that in order to become greater then what one actually is one needs help. For instance, for a pile of wood to become better then being just a pile of wood needs help from a carpenter. I cannot elevate myself in the business world unless there is first someone there to elevate me to manager, CEO, then to President.
2. Nietzsche's telos of humanity, if it can be called that, is that humanity is to be super: a superman. But he gives no suggestion on how to get there. He might as well have said humanity is to be a circus of clows -- that at least is achievable. Really, Nietzsche gives no end, no goal at which humanity is to aim. If there is no end of humanity then there is no target at which to aim. There is only man shooting blindly in the wildnight.
3. Freeing one's self of morality, as Nietzsche advocates, is much like freeing one's self of clothes at a cocktail party: it's not recomended.
4. What good is a watch that cannot keep time accurately? Likewise, what good is a person who cannot make judgements accurately (specifically, what good is a person who cannot live morally?). That is, what good is he/she/it if he/she/it does not do what he/she/it ought to do? (I think I got this from a book by Aldisar McIntyre, I don't recall if it is a direct quote)
Two Posts I did for the LSU-Parousians on Nietzsche:
Freeing Morality: A Brief Case for Moral Humanity