2007-02-24 The detailed origins of Nietzsche's rejection of the modern world

Professor Nietzsche's earliest book, or rather, collection of pamphlets, is his first attempt at clarifying his views on modern Germany on the brink of re-birth. It seems that Nietzsche's extreme suspicion of the depth and validity of this `re-birth' was the very thing that prompted him to become a philosopher.

`David Strauss: the Confessor and the Writer' is a vitriolic attack on Strauss, who had began his career arguing for the rationalised, Germanised "Christianity" recommended by Kant and Hegel, to later preaching for a cult based purely on Darwinism, positivism and materialism - both of which are the inevitable results of the Anglo-French "Enlightenment", id est unrestrained rationalism and liberalism, the cycle leading to the dissolution of all tradition. Nietzsche's objection, when it isn't purely personal or "psychological", is that David Strauss levelled Christianity and the "Spirit" only in a superficial way, and in the dark subconscious, the psychology of the Christian is very much alive and well. This is obviously a great step towards Nietzsche's latter philosophy. Nietzsche has been criticised for the unprovoked venom of his attack, but this ignores the fact that aggressive polemics were very much vogue in German post-Kantian philosophy, the young Hegel authored several essays of this kind against his contemporaries and criticised Christianity in very harsh terms.

`On the Use and Abuse of History for Life' is a critique of the linear, progressivist historiography instigated by Hegel. Instead, Nietzsche argues that we should look for inspiration in history only by viewing it has a collection of independent moments of greatness. If German culture is to be great again, it will make itself so alone, and not because of a dialectic leading through the Greeks, the Jews, and the Medieval Christians. This is again an important step in Nietzsche's philosophy, anticipating both his theory of the `superman' and his criticism of Darwin, it is also reminiscent of how the mystic Emanuel Swedenborg viewed human progress.

`Schopenhauer as Educator' is a description of the ideal type of philosopher. It ignores Schopenhauer's philosophy as such, preferring to look to him as an example on how to live, claiming that a thinker must practice what he preaches - in the words of Goethe, "In the beginning was the Deed". Nietzsche developed this view extensively and never changed it, however the ideal man here is still very much grounded in Schopenhauer's pessimism and asceticism and not "Dionysianism".

It is in `Richard Wagner in Bayreuth' that we get our first glimpse of this Dionysian culture. This essay is written with much youthful enthusiasm, and compared to Nietzsche's later work seems incredibly naïve. However, his scathing contempt for the decadence and hypocrisy of German culture, which runs through all four Meditations, is something Nietzsche continued to hone.

To conclude, `Untimely Meditations' should be avoided by those new to Nietzsche, as his most important ideas and brilliant, biting prose style have not yet developed. For those who have read some of Nietzsche's better known works, it is essential for understanding the origins of his contempt for Germany and the modern world in general. `Birth of Tragedy' is more widely read but contains less of importance than this work. In these Meditations, Nietzsche is still very much involved with the problems of German culture from within, as a German, it was only later that he totally abandoned his Fatherland, both literally and philosophically - calling himself at different times a Frenchman, a Basque, a Greek, a Pole - anything but a German!