Thomas H. Brobjer

Nietzsche's Affirmative Morality: An Ethics of Virtue

In this article I shall attempt to give a birds-eye view of Nietzsches ethics, with special emphasis on its affirmative aspect. I will also attempt to show that there exists one relatively simple aspect of Nietzsches ethics that has not been realized, but that makes it much more consistent and comprehensi ble. In summary: Nietzsches ethics, unlike almost all thinking about ethics in the nineteenth century and the first half of the twentieth was not act-ori ented but characteror person-oriented. This kinship of Nietzsches affirma tive ethics with ethics of virtue has not been realized, but the interest in ethics of virtue during the last twenty years now also makes it easier to grasp Nietzsches ethics.

The Absence of Political Ideals in Nietzsche's Writings

The Absence of Political Ideals in Nietzsche´s Writings: The Case of the Laws of Manu and the Associated Caste-Society

The Origin and Early Context of the Revaluation Theme in Nietzsche's Thinking

Most commentators have assumed that the revaluation theme belongs exclusively to the late Nietzsche (from Thus Spoke Zarathustra and onward); often its origin is dated to 1886 or 1884. After examining Nietzsches notes, I argue that its origin occurred in 1880-81. I discuss its rather complex context at this time, with no single obvious thematic textual context outweighing all the others, and consider some of the consequences of this early dating. I furthermore examine the end of the literary revaluation project, concluding that Nietzsche regarded it as an unfinished four-volume project at least until shortly before his mental collapse.

Nietzsche's magnum opus

Nietzsche did not write a completed magnum opus, a ‘Hauptwerk’, but he planned to do so during at least the last 5 years of his active life. I will show that during and after the writing of Also sprach Zarathustra this was his main aim and ambition. The projected work passed through a number of related phases, of which the much discussed and controversial ‘Will to Power’ was merely one. This intention to write a magnum opus has been denied or almost completely ignored by almost all commentators (and even the many writers of Nietzsche biographies). I will bring attention to this intention, discuss why it has been ignored and show that an awareness of it is important for our understanding of the late Nietzsches thinking and for determining the value and originality of his late notes. It has been a failure of historians of philosophy, intellectual historians and Nietzsche scholars not to have taken this into consideration and account.

Notes and Discussions: Nietzscheis Knowledge of Kierkegaard

TWO OF THE MOST INTERESTING and influential of nineteenth-century thinkers are Nietzsche and Kierkegaard. There exist many striking similarities between the two: they were both critics of rationality, of idealism, and of the building of philosophical systems. Instead, their approach was more existential and psychological and they both strongly emphasized the central position of the individual, personality, and subjectivity. There also exist important differences and oppositions between their thinking—of which the most important is the fact that Kierkegaard was a profoundly Christian-religious thinker, while Nietzsche regarded Christianity and religion as his main object of attack. Kierkegaard (1813–55) certainly could have had no knowledge of Nietzsche (1844–1900), and it is generally assumed that Nietzsche, apart from the name, had no knowledge of Kierkegaard’s thinking. What makes it particularly tempting to discuss Nietzsche’s relation to Kierkegaard, apart from their inherent similarities and differences and the fact that they are often discussed together, is that Nietzsche, in a letter to Georg Brandes from February 19, 1888, claims that he intended to study Kierkegaard: