Chapter 78 An Attempt to Revaluate All Values ​​The Will to Power Section 10

the will to power attempt to revaluate all values Section ten <295> We are the legacy of two centuries of vivisection of conscience and self-crucifixion.For, this is our longest exercise, and perhaps our masterpiece, and at any rate our artifice; we have made a perfect union of natural inclination and evil conscience. The opposite is also possible; by unnatural taste, I mean the taste for the other side, the absurd, the unnatural: in short, the brotherhood of the hitherto ideal, the ideal of the complete denigration of the world, with a bad heart. . <360b> Populist thoughts: good people, selfless people, saints, wise men, and justice.

what!Marc Aurel! ① Marc Aurel (121-180) has been Roman emperor since 169 AD and a believer in Stoicism. - translator Yes, since I'm looking for... <606> In the end, man will never rediscover anything in things but his own collections. — This rediscovery calls itself science.Items included in the collection include - Art, Religion, Love, Pride.There are two groups of people--even if it's child's play, one should move on--and one should have the courage to be both. ——One kind of person is responsible for rediscovery, and another kind of person—our kind—is responsible for entering Tibet!

<345> Moral trends. —No one wants theories and valuations of other people to be current except those from which he himself benefits.The basic tendency of the weak and the mediocre of all ages, therefore, is to weaken and bring down the strong, and moral judgments are the chief means.Condemned for bullying the weak, the status of the strong is notorious. The struggle of the many against the few, the struggle of the common man against the rare, the struggle of the weak against the strong—.There are subtle lulls in this struggle—so long as the superior, the noble, the thirsty appear in the world as the weaker, and refuse the more reckless means of power—

<587> As if I were avoiding the search for "certainty".The opposite is real.but As a criterion of certainty, I shall examine the so far measured What are the criteria for measuring gravity—and the search for certainty itself is already a subordinate, secondary problem. <265> There is a lack of knowledge and awareness of what turns moral judgments have taken and how "evil" in the most fundamental sense has been so established that it has been renamed "good" many times.To one of these modifications I have already described it by the word "worldly convention."Even conscience changes its quadrant.Because, herd guilt has happened in the past.

<582> Existence - We have no idea of ​​existence other than "life". That is, how can something dead "exist"? <991> On the misunderstanding of "cheerful".Temporary release from long-term tension, unrestrained, spiritual Saturnalia, mental devotion to long, terrible decisions, and preparations for them. A "dumb" in "scientific" form. <253> Try to study morality, don't be fooled by moral magic, don't trust the gentle manners and eyes.A world that we can worship, a world that conforms to our desire for admiration—proving itself all the time—through the guidance of individuals and people in general.This is the Christian point of view, and we all come from this.

More and more, for reasons of responsiveness, doubt, scientificity (and also by an instinct of truth towards a higher goal, again under the influence of Christianity), we are less and less allowed to make such an explanation. The best way out: Kant's critical philosophy.Reason neither denies a right of interpretation in that sense nor a right of veto in that sense.Man is content with a surplus of trust and belief, with abandoning all provability of his beliefs, with an "ideal" (God) that fills the void, puzzling and extraordinary. Hegel's way out, after Plato, is part of romantic and reactionary tendencies, and at the same time historical significance, the symbol of a new force.For the spirit itself is "the ideal of self-disclosure and self-realization."In the "process", in the "becoming", it shows that the ideals we believe in are constantly filling——.That is to say, for ideal self-realization, faith must adapt to the needs of the future. At that time, faith has the ability to provide what it needs. In short:

1.For us, God is unknowable and unprovable (implicit in the epistemological movement); 2.God is demonstrable, but it is something that becomes, and we are of this kind of thing, and we have precisely the desire for ideal things (historicization's implicit meaning). One sees that Criticism never touches on the ideal itself, but only on the question of how the contradiction against the ideal arises; why the ideal has not yet become a reality; . The most fundamental difference lies in: whether people deeply feel that this extraordinary state is really an extraordinary state out of passion and out of some kind of demand;

Examining religion and philosophy apart, we find the same phenomenon: utilitarianism (socialism, democracy) attacks the origin of moral valuation.But it believes in this origin, as is the case with Christians. (Childhood! As if morality could really be handed down apart from a God who exercises sanction! If there is a duty to maintain faith in morality, the "beyond" is absolutely necessary.) Fundamental question: Where does this unlimited power of faith come from?Where does the unlimited power of moral belief come from? (—Here, faith also tells people that even the basic conditions of life are misunderstood in order to protect morality. Because knowledge about the animal and vegetable kingdoms is ignored at all. "Self-preservation" shows that Darwinism ① The principles of altruism and egoism are compromised.

① Charles Darwin (1809-1882) - British naturalist, founder of the theory of evolution. - translator <258> I try to understand moral arguments as pictographic language.It is through this language that the physiological processes of rise and fall, and awareness of the conditions of preservation and growth, are expressed. —This is an astrological way of interpreting values, an instinctive prejudice (about races, parishes, about stages from youth to decay, etc.). This is the morality of Europe dedicated to Christianity.Because our moral judgments are a sign of decline, a sign of disbelief in life, and a precursor to pessimism.

My gist: Moral phenomena do not exist, only moral explanations of such phenomena exist.And the explanation itself becomes the origin of the amoral. What does it mean to say that we force contradiction into life?This is very important.Because behind all valuations there is a moral valuation commanding.If this valuation dies, by what yardstick shall we measure it?Then what is the value of knowing, etc.? ? ? <547> A psychological history of the concept of the "subject."The body, the "whole" created by the eyes, awakens the world to distinguish the cause from the actor; the person who does something, or more precisely, the cause of the cause leaves behind the "subject".

<564> Is not all quantity a harbinger of quality?There is another consciousness and longing, another perspective applied to this greater power; growth itself is a demand for the more the better; out of pain there arises the demand for the more the better; in purely quantitative The world, everything is inanimate, dead, motionless. ——The reduction of all qualitative vectors is nonsense: because it will produce the consequences of intermingling each other, analogy——. <620> Is force always certain?No, as a result, it was translated into a completely foreign language.But we have been so spoiled by step-by-step conventions that we are no strangers to it. <410> I am deeply skeptical of the dogma of epistemology, and I used to like to peek into this window or that from time to time, lest I fall into a trap.I think these dogmas are pernicious—is it possible to ultimately think that a tool can be critical of its own applicability?On the contrary, I know that epistemological skepticism without background thought, or dogmatics, has never existed. —knowing that such skepticism, or dogmatics, is of secondary value.People do have to think hard about why this is the case. Basic insight: Whether Kant, Hegel, or Schopenhauer—whether the skeptical reservationist attitude, the historicizing attitude, or the pessimistic attitude—they all have their origins in morality.I have never met anyone who dared to relentlessly criticize the sense of moral worth.For there are very few people (such as the English and German Darwinists) who have attempted to study the history of the formation of this emotion.As soon as I saw them, I immediately turned my back on them. How to explain Spinoza's position (that is, his denial and rejection of moral value assertions)? (This is a consequence of his atheism!) <470> I hate being stuck in any kind of overview of the world all the time.The opposite way of thinking is attractive because it does not lose its mysterious charm. <555> The empty talk of knowing is the greatest empty talk.People want to find out the origin of things in themselves.But look!Nothing in itself!But if there is such an in-itself, an absolute, it is therefore also unknowable!The absolute cannot be known, otherwise it cannot be called absolute!But knowing is always "purposive and conditioned"—a knower who wishes that something he wants to know is irrelevant to him, and wishes it not to be irrelevant to anyone else.For two things are worth mentioning: first, it is said that wishing to know and demand something has nothing to do with oneself; It exists, so it cannot be recognized at all. —Knowledge is purposeful "conditional".It is what feels conditioned and even determined to relate to us—it is, after all, an assertion, a description, an awareness of conditions (rather than a study of people, things, "in-itself"). <556> The movement of "thing-in-itself" is also the same as that of "meaning-in-itself" and "meaning-in-itself". There are no "facts in themselves," but a meaning must always first be implanted before a fact can be made. The question "What is this?" is the meaning set from the perspective of others. "Essence" and "essence" are both visionary things, and they presuppose more.The basic question has always been "what is this to me?" (that is, to us, to everything that lives, etc.) Things are not clear until everyone has asked their "what is this" about it and got the answer.If there is only one person who lacks his own connection and perspective to everything, then the thing remains "undefined". In short, the essence of a thing is nothing but an opinion about "the thing".Or it can even be said: this so-called "it is related to" is originally "it is", this unique "is". One cannot ask: "Who is going to explain?" but rather the explanation itself.It is a form of will to power, it has life (but not so-called "existence", but a process, a kind of becoming), and life is impulse. The production of "things" is entirely the business of the imaginer, the thinker, the wisher, the feeler. The concept of "thing" itself is like all properties. —Even the "subject" is such a created thing, a "thing" like everything else.Because it is a simplification, because the description of this force itself that posits, conceives, and thinks is different from all other individual posits, conceives, and thinks themselves.That is to say, what (the subject) describes is a capacity that is different from all individual ones.For, fundamentally, (the subject) synthesizes actions (actions and the possibility of similar actions) in relation to all actions that are still to be expected. <1036> It is impossible to prove a benevolent God from the world as we know it.Because, today you have developed to this level is the result of being coerced and driven by others.But what conclusions do you draw from this?For me, God is unprovable - epistemic skepticism.You all fear "inferring from the world as we know it an entirely different and verifiable God, one that is at least unkind"—and, to put it simply, you cling to your God, and for his And imagine a world that we are not familiar with. <240> If one thinks that one cannot come up with proofs against the Christian faith, Pascal thinks it is wisest to be a Christian, because it is terrible to believe in faith.Today, as a symbol of Christianity's lost fear, another attempt to justify the faith is found.Even if the belief is a falsehood, the great benefits and blessings of this falsehood are used throughout one's life.It would seem, then, that faith should be maintained precisely for its pacifying effect—that is, not out of fear of a possible threat, but rather out of fear of a life that casts a stimulus.The shift in hedonism, the evidence from pleasure, is a sign of decay.For belief in the place of power is proof of the fear that has shaken the Christian conception.In fact, due to this transformation, Christianity has tended to fail.Because, people are satisfied with narcotic Christianity, because man is powerful, but not for the longing to explore, to fight, to be fearless, to go alone, not for Pascalism, but for this brooding self-mockery, for faith Playing tricks on people, for fear of becoming "unnecessarily condemned".But Christianity, which has a duty to appease sick nerves, simply does not need a solution as dire as a "crucifixion".This is why Buddhism in Europe is progressing everywhere. <546> To interpret a phenomenon either as an action or as a passivity (—that is, any action is a passivity).This interpretation says that any change, any other change, is premised on having an advocate, a person on whom "change" can be made. <589> "Ends and means" "Cause and Effect" "Subject and Object" "Action and Passivity" "Things and phenomena in themselves" (It's all) an exposition (not a fact), and perhaps a necessary exposition to a certain extent? (as "preservative")—all in the sense of the will to power. <643> The will to power explains (if it is to be taught to an organ, which involves interpretation): it draws boundaries, establishes laws, and makes clear the distinctions of power.I am afraid that the pure power difference itself cannot have such a sense of self.For there must be a thing that wishes to increase, which explains every something that wishes to increase in terms of its own value.This is consistent—in fact, interpretation is a means used to dominate something. (Organic processes always presuppose interpretation). <632> Continuous, this "regularity" is just a way of expressing images, as if there are really rules to follow.Because there are neither facts nor "regularities".In order to express the repeated sequence, we found the formula to represent this sequence.In this way, we do not discover "laws", let alone the forces that are responsible for the repetition of the sequence.As for things always happening so and so, the explanation here is this: A man always acts so and so as if by some law, or legislator.At the same time, he seems to have the freedom to carry out other activities besides "law".But perhaps it is the so-and-so (and nothing else) that originates in the man himself, the man of the so-and-so nature who behaves so-and-so without first considering the law.This simply means that something cannot be something else at the same time;The error is hidden in the painstaking fabrication of the subject. <638> If the world possesses a definite number of forces, it is evident that any transition of power in a certain position determines the whole system—that is to say, besides the succession of causality, there would originally be a Connection dependencies. <554> Obviously, as far as causation is concerned, there can be no connection between things in themselves, and there is no connection between phenomena.As a result, within the philosophy of belief in things-in-itself and phenomena, the concept of "cause and effect" becomes useless.Kant was wrong—in fact, after psychological verification, the concept of "cause and effect" only comes from the way of thinking that the will affects the will anytime and anywhere. ——This method only believes in living things, and in the final analysis only believes in "soul" (not in things).In the mechanistic view of the world (which is logic and its application to space and time), that concept would be reduced to a mathematical fraction—with which, as has been repeatedly pointed out, one would never understand What, but what may be prescribed, what is distorted. <631> The unchanging sequence of certain phenomena does not prove "laws" but a ratio of power between two or more forces.To say "but it is this proportion that must be kept equal!" is nothing more than to say: "One and the same force cannot be another force at the same time". — This does not mean successive, — but dependent succession.Refers to a process in which individual successive moments do not condition each other as a causal relationship. … "Action" is separated from "doer", event from perpetrator, process is to be separated from something which is not process but always substance, thing, body, soul, etc. - the attempt to understand phenomena It is the transition and positional alternation of "existence" and "stagnation".For, this ancient myth affirms the belief in "cause and effect," which has found its exact form in the function of language and grammar. <391> Standards used to determine ethical valuation. Neglected basic fact: there is a tension between being more moral and enhancing and strengthening the human kind. man of nature. "The will to power". <856> will to power. —presumably like the characteristic of those who make it their business to revalue.Hierarchy is power because the danger of war is still a precondition for a hierarchy to uphold its terms.Brilliant example: Man of Nature—the weakest and wisest make themselves masters, and the stupider powers their own slaves. <1054> The Greatest Struggle: New weapons are needed for this. Hammer: conjures the dire decision to bring Europe to the conclusion whether to "hope" for a will to fall in Europe. Prevent mediocrity; (or) rather sink! <471> This premise says that the moralization of the depths of things has gone to such an extent that human reason is always justified—it is the premise of the faithful and orderly man, the result of belief in the reality of the divine—that God is the Creator. ——The concept is the pre-existence from the other side—— <575> "Knowing" is a reflexive act: by its very nature a feedback phenomenon; what comes to a standstill (at the so-called first cause, at the absolute, etc.) Turned into slack, fatigue—— <601> Against the desire for reconciliation, against the rapprochement.So does any attempt at monism. <69> Characteristics of Nihilism: a) In the natural sciences ("absurdity"—); causality, mechanism. "Law" is a cutscene, a residue. b) It is the same in politics: people lack faith in their own rights, lack faith in innocence; c) The same goes for the national economy; the abolition of slavery.Because, there is a lack of a savior rank, a defender. — Anarchism on the rise.Is this the responsibility of "education"? d) So is history: fatalism, Darwinism.Attempts to delve into reason and divinity have failed.The past is hurtful; any biographical form is unbearable! — (There is also phenomenalism here: the character of the mask; the fact is none.) e) The same in art: Romanticism and its reaction (dislike of Romantic ideals and lies).The latter has a larger real meaning from a moral point of view, but is pessimistic.Pure "acrobat" (indifferent to content). (The psychology of the confessor and the psychology of the Puritans, these are two forms of psychological romanticism. But also, with its counterproductive, attempt at a purely acrobatic attitude to "man."—Even so, it is No one dares to make an estimate to reverse the case!) <797> The "artist" phenomenon is still the easiest to see through. —From there, look towards the basic instinct of power, towards the basic instinct of nature, and so on!That is, toward the instinct of religion and morality! "Playing, doing nothing"—is the ideal of full force, it is "innocent".God's "innocent" and behaves like a child. <846> Romanticism and its antithesis. —For all aesthetic value, I now use this basic test.On every individual occasion I ask: "Does starvation or excess become creative here?" It seems more appropriate to introduce another distinction from the outset—and, besides, this one is more obvious. Understand--.That is to say, is it the cause of creation to be stagnant, eternal, and "existent", or is it the cause of creation to be destroyed, to be flexible, and to be developed.But, looking a little further, both types of claims still suggest a double meaning, and are articulate in that preferred, and I think justifiably preferred, mode. The demand for destruction, transfiguration, development can be a manifestation of a full, future-bearing force (as you know, the term I use for this expression is "Dionysian"); but it can also be It is the hatred of the scum, of the needy, of the misguided, and hatred is about to destroy, it should destroy, because what exists, yes, everything that exists, all existence itself provokes hatred, provokes hatred . On the other hand, "eternalization" may one day also spring from gratitude and love-this art of origin must always be a divine art, perhaps with Rubens' praise of Dionysus, with Hafe The faint drunkenness of Goethe, with the radiance and good-nature of Goethe, and spreading Homer's aura over everything;--but it can also be the brutal will of the suffering man, which wants to give the most individual man, the solitary, the narrow-minded man, imprints binding law and coercion on his true sensitivity to suffering, and to a certain extent this will avenges all things by , to engrave, impose, and sear his own image, that is, the image of suffering, in the hearts of all things.This image is romantic pessimism at its most expressive, whether it is Schopenhauer's philosophy of the will or Wagner's music. ①Peter Paul Rubens (1577-1640) - representative painter of Belgian Baroque style. - translator ② Homer - the famous ancient Greek poet, according to legend, is the author of "Homer's Epic", born in the 9th century BC. - translator <1> Nihilism is the result of the interpretation of the value of life so far. <134> Now is the great noon, the most terrible broad daylight.It is a great starting point for pessimism of my kind. Ⅰ. There is a fundamental contradiction between civilization and human improvement. II. Moral valuation is the history of lies and slander at the service of the will to power (the history of the will of the herd, which rebels against the strong). Ⅲ. All conditions for the improvement of civilization (in order to make a certain choice possible, it must be at the expense of the masses) are all conditions for growth. Ⅳ. The ambiguity of the world is caused by the problem of force, and force believes that the prospect of force growth is everything.The moral and Christian value proposition is slave rebellion and the deceitfulness of slavery (compared to the aristocratic values ​​of the ancient Greek world). <537> What is truth? - inertia.Hypothesis: Formed under comfortable conditions, i.e. with the least expenditure of mental energy, etc. <78> Pretentious The eccentricity and allure of modern people.In essence, dodge and boredom. writer. Politicians (in the midst of "state intrigues"). Artistic affectation; Lack of examination of rehearsal and training (Fromentin); Romantics (lack of philosophy and science, excess of literature); ① Eugene Fromentin (1820-1876) - French painter and writer. - translator The novelists (Walter Scott, but also Nibelungen monsters with the most neurotic music); ①Walter Scott (1771-1838) - British Scottish poet, founder and master of European romantic historical novels. - translator Lyric poets. "scientific". Big writers (Jews). It is a populist ideal that has been overcome, but it has not yet been put in front of the people: Saints, philosophers, prophets. <59> On the history of modern gloom. A nomadic country (officials, etc.) living by water and grass: because there is no "homeland"—— The decline of the family. A "good man" is a sign of decline. The will to power is righteous (domesticated). Sensuality and mental disturbance. Black music: - where does the refreshing music go? anarchist. contempt and hatred of man. The Deepest Discrimination: Can Hunger or Glut Be Become Creative?The former produced romantic ideals. —— The unnaturalness of the Northland. The demand for schnapps: the "poverty" of workers. Philosophical nihilism. <600> The interpretation of the world is infinite.Because, any elaboration is a symbol of growth and decline. Unity (monism) is a need for inertia; polysemy is a signal of force.Do not deny the disturbing and mysterious qualities of the world! <796> Works of art, works that appear without an artist, such as flesh, organization (Prussian officer corps, Jesuit order), etc.An artist is just a first step. The world is a self-reproducing work of art— <845> Is art the result of dissatisfaction with reality?Or, is it an expression of gratitude for the happiness already enjoyed?The former refers to Romanticism, the latter to Emmanuel and Dithyramb (in short, the art of worship): Raphael also belongs to this category, but he sinned against the Christianity of the world. Errors explaining the sanctification of appearance.He once had gratitude for life, but life was not exclusively expressed in Christianity for him. The world becomes intolerable with moral explanations.With this Christianity tries to "overcome" the world, that is, to deny it.In fact, the end of this crazy murder—that is, the crazy suicide of man in front of the world—is the gloomy, small, and impoverished man.For the most banal and harmless species of man, the herd-like species of man, alone finds its premises and is promoted in this process, if one wills it. Homer was the godlike artist, and so was Rubens.There haven't been any god-like artists in the music industry yet. It is Greek to idealize the great blasphemer (in the sense of greatness of the word blasphemer); it is Judeo-Christian to insult, slander, and despise sinners. <1029b> Even resignation to fate is not a theory of tragedy, but a misunderstanding of tragedy!Desiring nothingness is the negation of tragic wisdom, the antithesis of this wisdom! <844> It is by never being complacent that the Romantic becomes the creative artist -- he looks away from himself and the world around him, and looks back again. <416> The meaning of German philosophy (Hegel); it has conceived pantheism, which does not consider evil, error, and suffering to be arguments against the divine.This great initiative has been abused by existing powers (states, etc.), as if in so doing it was tantamount to acknowledging the legitimacy of the rulers who are in power. On the contrary, Schopenhauer appears as a stubborn moralist. In order to insist on his own moral valuation, he ends up becoming a denier of the world.Eventually became a "mystic". I tried to defend aesthetics: can the world be ugly?I believe that the will to beauty, the will to uniform form, is a temporary means of preservation and panacea.For, it seems to me, the fundamental problem is the eternal creation, inseparable from pain, as the necessity of eternal destruction. Ugliness is the form of observation of things governed by the will which renders a meaning, a newness meaningless: for the accumulated force compels the creator to regard the past as unreliable, failed, negable, and ugly. of! —— <431b> In Plato, in a man of senses and fanatics who can be overstimulated, concepts possess such magical powers that he adores them as ideal forms at will.Dialectical intoxication: the consciousness used to exercise dominion over itself—the instrument of the will to power. <622> Extrusion and collision are recent things, derivative things, and non-primitive things.It presupposes something kneaded and something that can be pressed and bumped!But what is it made of? <151> Religion will perish through belief in morality.Christian morality, God is unreliable.Hence "atheism" as if other kinds of gods were impossible. In the same way, culture will perish through belief in morality.Because, if the necessary conditions for the production of culture are once discovered, then people will no longer want any culture (Buddhism). <599> "Phenomena are absurd"; this belief is the result of hitherto erroneous interpretations, a generalization of courage and cowardice. — This belief is unnecessary. Man's immodestness -: (Occurs when) he does not see the meaning of denying himself! <616> I think that the value of the world lies in our interpretations (--where perhaps there may be interpretations other than mere human--); , that is, to preserve itself by the will to power, that is, the will to increase in power; I think that any ascension of man leads to the overcoming of narrower interpretations, and I think that any elevation achieved and expansion of power opens up new vistas and is called Believe in new horizons—my book is all about that.The world we relate to is unreal, i.e. not a fact, but an expansion and contraction based on a few observations; the world is "fluid", is generated, is constantly deduced, and never reaches the truth False, because - there is no such thing as "truth". <1049> Apollo deceived: Eternal good form; aristocratic legislation— "That's how it should always be!". Dionysus: Sensuality and cruelty, perishability can be interpreted as the enjoyment of the power of life and death, and as the eternal creation. <491> Belief in the body is more fundamental than belief in the spirit, since the latter is the result of unscientific observations of the dying state of the body (something that leaves the body. It is the same as believing that dreams are real—). <905> hammer.What qualities must a person who makes a reverse valuation have? —Man, who has all the qualities of the modern spirit, but does he have the power to make the modern spirit fully robust? ——This is the means by which he wants to accomplish his mission. <223> Poverty, humiliation, and chastity—these are dangerous and detractor ideals.But poison was also good medicine for some ailments, for example, in the time of the Roman emperors. All ideals are dangerous: because they demean and oppose the real; all (ideals) are drugs, but as a first aid they are indispensable. <691> What is the attitude of the whole organic process towards the rest of nature? —there the fundamental will of the organic process takes its true form. <436> Dialectics and rational beliefs are still based on moral prejudices.In Plato we appropriate the vestiges of that age as former inhabitants of the world of the intelligible good.The dialectic of divinity is the dialectic from the good, which leads to all good (--hence a kind of "regression"--).Even Descartes came up with the concept that only when people use the basic way of thinking that they believe that a good God is the creator of Christian morality, the authenticity of God can provide guarantees for our sensory judgments.However, apart from the recognition and guarantee provided by religion for our sensibility and rationality, where can we get the right to believe in life?To think that thinking is the criterion of actual things—to think that what cannot be thought of does not exist—is a real folly of moral indiscretion (credulity in a principle of truth which is substantive and deep in things).总而言之，这是彻底背离我们经验的狂言，我们根本无法想像它为什么存在…… 〈５００〉 向外投射感官知觉："内"和"外"——是肉体在那里发号施令吗——？ 在细胞原生质中起主导平衡调整作用的这个力，也统摄着对外部世界的同化。因为，我们的感官知觉就是我们同化脑中一切既往的结果了。知觉不会立即尾随"印象"出现—— 〈２１９〉 那些相信被现代自然科学超越了的、基督教的人受到了讽刺，因为（现代自然科学）并没有完全战胜基督教的价值判断。 "受难的基督"仍是庄严崇高的象征——始终如此。 —— 〈５０５〉 我们对自己知觉的认识：即一切知觉的总和，这个总和的意识化对我们和呈现于我们面前的整个有机过程来说是有益的和基本的。这就是说，不是指所有的知觉（譬如，不是电的）； 也就是说：我。 〈１１１〉 １９世纪的问题。本世纪强的一面和弱的一面彼此有联系吗？它是由一块木头雕成的吗？它的种种理想和矛盾是受一个更高等的目的制约吗？是一种更高等的东西吗？——因为它也许是以这种标准剧烈生长的伟大天意呢。不满、虚无主义，这说不定也是好的征兆。 〈１２３〉 我重新提出这个没有了结的问题：文明的问题，即１７６０年前后，卢梭同伏尔泰之争。人，将变得更深沉、更多疑、更不道德、更强、更自信——而且在这种意义上说，也就是变得"更自然"。因为，这就是"进步"。——同时，由于分工的原因，变恶的阶层和变温顺驯服的阶层会产生分化，以致全部事实不会直接跃入眼帘……下述情形属于强力，属于强力的自制和诱惑力，即这种强有力的阶层占有使人对他们的变恶产生高尚之感的艺术。强化的因素改头换面成了向"善"，任何"进步"都是如此。 〈１００〉 卢梭：规范的基础是感情；正义的来源是自然；人在接近自然的同时完善自身（——用伏尔泰的话来说，在远离自然的同时）。同样的时代，对前者就是人道和进步的时代，对后者就是非正义和不平等的时代。 伏尔泰对人类的看法还停留在文艺复兴时期，对美德的理解也是如此（认为是"高等文化"），他为"高等贵人"和"高等市民社会"的事业奋斗不息，这是审美的事业，科学的事业，艺术的事业，进步本身的事业和文明的事业。 １７６０年前后爆发了斗争：这位日内瓦公民和伏尔泰的斗争。从那时起，伏尔泰才成了他那个世纪的伟人、哲学家、宽容和无信仰的代表（那以前不过是个美丽的灵魂而已）。对卢梭成就的嫉恨，驱使他前行，向上"登攀"。 为了"庸众"，一个恩赐和复仇的上帝①——伏尔泰。 ①原文为法文。 - translator 批判两种与文明价值有关的观点。社会的构想，这对伏尔泰来说是最美好的构想。因为，除了维护它、完善它，别无更高的目的；这正是尊重社会习俗的奴仆；美德为了维护"社会"、文化传教士、贵族、功绩卓著的统治阶层及其估价的需要而屈服于强加的偏见。但是，卢梭始终是个无教养的人，也是文学家，这是闻所未闻的；他厚颜无耻，他蔑视一切他未经手的事物。 卢梭身上的病态却使绝大多数人为之倾倒，争相效法。（拜伦同他一脉相承；也苦心孤诣地追求不同凡响的谈吐和举止，追求复仇和怨恨；这是"卑鄙行径"的标志；后来，是威尼斯恢复了他的平衡，他知道了更为轻松愉快的是什么……那就是无忧无虑）。 卢梭，不顾自己的出身，却为自己的我行我素感到骄傲。 但是，假如有人当面指出这一点，他却激动非常…… 无疑，卢梭患的是精神障碍症，伏尔泰却异常健康而轻捷。那是病人的怨怒；卢梭神经错乱的年代，也就是他蔑视人的时代，是他多疑的时代。 卢梭替谨言慎行辩解（反对伏尔泰的悲观主义）。因为，要能诅咒社会和文明，他需要上帝；万物都应安分守己，因为都是上帝造的；唯有人败坏了人。作为自然人的"善良的人"原来纯属子虚；但是，用上帝这个有作家资格的教条来看，这种人就是可能的和有根据的了。 卢梭的浪漫主义：激情（"受难的自主权利"）；"自然性"；疯狂的迷惑力（指望飞黄腾达的妄想）；弱者荒唐的虚荣；庸众的仇怨成了法官（"几百年来，人们一直把病人当成政坛的元首"）。 〈８３〉 "假如没有基督教信仰"，巴斯噶说，"你们就会自行发展，就像自然界和历史那样，一个是庞然大物，一个是混沌世界"。我们完成了这一预言：在体弱多病乐观主义的１８世纪把人美化和理性化之后。 叔本华和巴斯噶。——在一定意义上说，叔本华是再现巴斯噶运动的第一人，一个是庞然大物，一个是混沌世界，因此，应该加以否定的就成了……历史、自然界和人自身！ "我们无认识真理的能力，这乃是我们堕落的结果，我们道德沦丧的结果"，巴斯噶这样说。这样，叔本华就有了立足点。"理性堕落愈严重，则济世良方就愈显得必要"——或者，用叔本华的话来说，否定。 〈８８４〉 亨德尔、莱布尼茨、歌德、俾斯麦——他们是德意志这个强大种类的典型代表。他们生于对抗而不犹豫，充满了抵御信念和教义的强力，利用一个去反对另一个，但却给自己保留自由活动的余地。 〈９７〉 １７世纪使人感到苦恼，就像为一大堆矛盾感到苦恼一样（我们是"一堆矛盾"）；这个世纪试图发现人、整顿人、发掘人；而１８世纪却试图忘掉对人的天性的认识，以便使人适应自己的空想。"肤浅、软绵绵、人情味"——热衷于这样的"人"—— １７世纪试图抹去个体的痕迹，以便使作品尽可能表现生命。１８世纪则试图通过作品而对作者发生兴趣。１７世纪在艺术中寻求艺术，即文化的一斑；１８世纪利用艺术为社会和政治天性的改革鼓噪。 "空想"，"理想的人"，自然的神性化，想使自身登场的虚荣，关于社会目的乃是从属性的宣传，大言欺人——这就是我们对１８世纪的印象。 １７世纪的风格：独特、精确、自由。 强人，自满自足的；或是热心求助于上帝的人，——那些现代作者追求的目标——就是对立。"生产自身"——试与波尔特-鲁雅①的学者们相比较。 ①凡尔赛寺院名，始建于１２０４年，属天主教参孙派，巴黎也有同名教堂，在该教派失势后被毁。 - translator 阿尔弗利②对伟大的风格有贡献。 ②贝纳德托·伊斯诺森特·阿尔弗利（１７００-１７６７）——意大利巴罗克建筑师，代表作是都灵王家大剧院。——译者痛恨滑稽剧（无尊严的人们），缺乏自然意义，这是１７世纪的特性之一。 〈９５〉 三个世纪 它们各不相同的敏感充分表现在以下方面： 贵族政体：笛卡儿，理性的天下，意志主权的证明。女奴主义：卢梭，情感的天下，感官主权的证明，不真实； 兽道主义：叔本华，渴求的天下，兽性主权的证明，更诚实，但也更阴沉。 １７世纪是贵族政体，井井有条，兽性十足、严峻无情、"冷若冰霜"、铁面、"非德意志、讨厌滑稽剧和自然物、普遍化、独立于既往。因为它相信自身，归根结底，要永当主人就要多些猛兽性，多些禁欲主义的习俗。它是意志坚强的世纪，也是激情洋溢的世纪。 １８世纪是女人治下的世纪，耽于幻想、诙谐机智、平淡无奇，但怀有为合意性和心灵服务的精神，享有最精神性事物的自由，暗中破坏一切权威；醉意的、乐天的、明朗的、人情味的、自欺的，一句话，社会性的…… １９世纪是更加兽性的世纪，更诡谲、更丑陋、更现实、庸众性的，因而"更善良"、"更正直"，屈服于任何"现实"，因而更真实；但意志薄弱，同时也是悲哀和渴望黑暗的世纪，然而是宿命论的。既不害怕"理性"，也不崇尚心灵；顽固相信渴求的统治（叔本华论述过"意志"；可是，他的哲学最典型的特点就是缺少意愿）。连道德也降格成一种本能（即"同情"）了。 奥古斯特·孔德乃是１８世纪的续篇（心灵统治头脑，认识论感觉论，博爱狂）。这时的科学已经独立，这表明了１９世纪摆脱理想统治的途径。唯有不需要愿望，才能实现我们的科学的好奇和严谨——这种我们样式的美德…… 浪漫主义是１８世纪的装饰音符，是对该世纪热衷于伟大风格的奢求（——实际上则是装腔作势和自我欺骗，因为人们本想描述的是强大的天性，伟大的激情）。 １９世纪本能地寻求这样的理论，它以这种理论对自己宿命论式地屈从于实际事物感到心安理得。黑格尔在驳斥"伤感"的浪漫主义理想主义方面取得了成就，其思维方式的宿命论观点表现在他相信胜者一方具有更伟大的理性，表现在他为现实的"国家"（取代了"人类"等字眼）的辩护。——叔本华：我们是愚蠢的，往好里说，就是自我否定。决定论的成就表现在血缘学派生出以前被认为是绝对的约束力亦即环境论和适应论，把意志贬低为反射运动，否认意志乃是"产生结果的原因"；最后——成了实际的改名：因为，人们看到的意志很少，以致为了描述他物，这个词就变成无约束力的了。其他的理论：客观性学说，"无意志"观，它们成了唯一通往真理之路的学说；也通往美（——也是对"天才"的信仰，为了取得臣服的权利）；机械论，机械过程呆板的计算；所谓"自然主义"则赶走了可选择的，可裁决的、可解释的、作为原则的主体——康德以他的"实践理性"和道德狂热贯穿了整个１８世纪；他完全处在历史性之外；对他上时代的现实不屑一顾，譬如革命；未受到希腊哲学的触动；他是义务概念的幻想家；感觉论者，带着教条主义恶习的神秘嗜好——。 我们世纪出现了向康德的回潮，也就是向１８世纪的回潮。因为，人们想为自己重新谋求信奉旧的理想和旧的热衷的权利。——也就是说，"设定界限"的认识论，准许任意设定理性的彼岸…… 黑格尔的思维方式同歌德的差不多。因为，人们听到歌德谈过斯宾诺莎。他主张要求宇宙和生命神性化的意志，以便通过自己的观察和论证求得平静和幸福；黑格尔则到处寻求理性。——人们不该向理性屈服，不该满足于理性。在歌德那里有一种几乎是欢乐的和令人信服的宿命论，它不谋反，它不枯竭，它试图由自身形成总体性，它相信唯有总体性才能拯救一切，才会表现为善良和合理。 〈３２３〉 美德的护身。——贪财、权欲、懒惰、头脑简单、胆小怕事：这一切都对美德感兴趣：因此，美德稳坐钓台。