NIETZSCHE AND 20TH CENTURY CONTINENTAL PHILOSOPHY



NIETZSCHE AND 20TH CENTURY CONTINENTAL PHILOSOPHY

Level 2.

Convenor: Dr. RUPERT READ.

(R.READ@uea.ac.uk)

(Tel. 592079)

Lecturers: Rupert Read, Alena Dvorakova [on Nietzsche], Nadine Cipa [on Wittgenstein], Emma Bell [on recent French philosophy].

Seminar leader: Nadine Cipa

Workshop leader: Emma Bell

Let’s start with a few seemingly very disparate aphorisms for the course, for flavour. Let’s see, at the end of the course, whether the course you are about to take might possibly be described as a commentary on these aphorisms... :

Smash, smash the old law-tables! - Nietzsche’s Zarathustra.

Raskolnikov pushed the glass of water away and said softly but distinctly, pausing after each word: “It was I who killed the old woman money-lender and her sister Lisaveta with a hatchet and robbed them.”

The assistant superintendent shouted something. People came running from all directions.

Raskolnikov repeated his statement. - Dostoevsky.

In the most general sense of progressive thought, the Enlightenment has always aimed at liberating men from fear and establishing their sovereignty. Yet the fully enlightened earth radiates disaster triumphant... - Horkheimer and Adorno.

One thing in any case is certain: man is neither the oldest not the most constant problem that has been posed for human knowledge. ...[Man] was the effect of a change in the fundamental arrangements of our knowledge. As the archaeology of our recent thought easily shows, man is an invention of recent date. And one perhaps nearing its end.

If those arrangements were to change...then one can certainly wager that man would be erased, like a face drawn in sand at the edge of the sea.

- Foucault.

For a long time, the story goes, we supported a Victorian regime, and we continue to be dominated by it even today. ...[But] one can raise...serious doubts concerning what I shall term the “repressive hypothesis”. ...We need to consider the possibility that one day, perhaps, in a different economy of bodies and pleasures, people will no longer quite understand how the ruses of sexuality, and the power that sustains its organisation, were able to subject us to that austere monarchy of sex, so that we became dedicated to the endless task of forcing its secret, of exacting the truest of confessions from a shadow. The irony of this [organisation] is in having us believe that our “liberation” is in the balance. - Foucault.

Each of the sentences I write is trying to say the whole thing, i.e. the same thing over and over again; it is as though they were all simply views of one object seen from different angles. - Wittgenstein.

SUMMARY, ‘aims and objectives’:

This course unit might usefully be described in a relatively unified and straightforward manner as follows:

It aims to acquaint you reasonably thoroughly with the work of Nietzsche, and to foster an understanding of some of the major elements of the last century of philosophy which may be seen as due in some significant part to his influence. Thus we look at elements in the philosophies of key figures in 'Continental Philosophy' whose work might usefully be read as in the train of Nietzsche, as constituting a ‘Nietzschean tradition’.

Thus our main focus is on Nietzsche, with whom we begin, and some of whose work we study in some detail. We move onto Wittgenstein (for whom Nietzsche’s concept of ‘overcoming’ was of great importance, and whose early work arguably has an argument structure illuminated by nothing better than by that of ‘The genealogy of morality’). We look at Wittgenstein's background in the cultural milieu of early 20th century Vienna, and try to think Wittgenstein as a 'Continental' philosopher, an unusual and [arguably] rewarding endeavour. We then focus more briefly on ‘Post-Structuralism’. That is to say: we end the course by giving you a brief flavour of recent French philosophy. The sense in which Derrida and (especially) Foucault are Nietzscheans, would-be supra-moralists in their post-Existentialism, post-hermeneuticists in their strong wills-to-interpret, and inheritors of Nietzsche’s anti-Cartesianism, takes up the last two weeks of the course unit. We look most specifically at moments in Foucault and Derrida where the importance of Nietzsche is undeniable.

OUTLINE SYLLABUS:

[An initial note: PLEASE do the required readings. Do the readings BEFORE you come to class -- and, normally, again after class. They are not onerous in length (though they sometimes take quite a bit of time to read per page.). If you do not do them regularly, you will find yourself falling behind in the consecutive sequence of authors and ideas we will be covering. More important, you will have trouble with the work YOU have to write for this course, because this course is very much about close reading of texts. It is about being able to figure out (and evaluate) what Nietzche said about life and death and women and power etc., or what Derrida said about Nietzsche, or what Wittgenstein would have said about Derrida (say, about what Derrida said about Nietzsche) ... you get the idea. Do do the readings. If you simply can’t, for whatever reason, let me know; or at least, if you have to miss class, keep up with the reading in your own time, if at all possible. And keep up with the class also by asking others what you have missed, looking at their ‘notes’ from our discussions, etc. . This is not the kind of class where you can afford to miss more than a small number of our meetings without badly missing out / falling behind. The sequential 'conversation' of the 'lectures'/discussion classes is crucial.

For more on these matters, see the very important discussion of lectures / discussion classes and seminars, below. From that especially, you will see how important it is for you to decide pretty much NOW whether you are taking this course unit or not. For you need to start working NOW on the various responsibilities that you have as a class and seminar member.]

IMPORTANT: The below is an OUTLINE syllabus. It is open to revision throughout. (But it may help you structure your work, particularly if you have to miss class sometime. Please refer back to it regularly, whether you miss any classes or not.) In particular, we may well shuffle the later parts (French and Wittgensteinian philosophy) around.

PLEASE DO THE READING FOR EACH WEEK BEFORE COMING TO CLASS (AND AGAIN, AFTERWARD).

Week 1: Intro. READING: [Relevant parts of] 'Beyond Good and Evil'.

Nietzsche and 18th and 19th century Continental philosophy. Nietzsche on the prejudices of philosophers and the free mind.

READING: [Relevant parts of] 'Beyond Good and Evil'

Week 2: Nietzsche on the religious way of being.

READING: Parts 1 and 2 of ‘Thus spoke Zarathustra’.

Week 3: Nietzsche’s antireligion and antinihilism. What is the meaning of Zarathustra? What is the meaning of asceticism? Of overcoming?

READING: Part 3 of 'Thus spoke Zarathustra' (plus [recommended though not compulsory] the close of Part 4.

Week 4: How does Nietzsche affect morality? Philosophy? Does Zarathustra still speak to us today?

READING: Read and Parts 2 & 3 of ‘The Genealogy of Morality.’ (Optional: Part 1).

Wk 5: Is Nietzsche up to the same thing in GM as in BGE? What is the contemporary relevance of Part 2 of GM? Once more: What is the meaning of asceticism? And what is the form of Nietzsche’s argument against (‘against’?) it? (We will consider it as, among other things, a self-consciously self-implicating reductio ad absurdum).

READING: Re-read Part 3 of the Genealogy.

Wk.6: As above.

Week 7: READING WEEK.

READING: Reading: Derrida on Nietzsche, “The question of style”.

Optional: ‘Spurs: Nietzsche’s styles’, which exemplifies deconstructive ‘method’. “Structure, sign and play in the discourse of the human sciences”; ‘The ear of the other’; French Feminist Luce Irigaray’s ‘Marine Lover of Friedrich Nietzsche’.

Wk 8: Derrida on/as Nietzsche. Derrida, boa-deconstructor, affirmative (?) self-deconstructor. Derrida, Nietzsche, the question of women in philosophy, the relation of feminism to philosophy.

READING: Re-read Essay 2 of ‘The genealogy of morality’; Read the opening chapter of ‘Discipline and Punish’ [in brown 'ADVANCED READER']. [Optional further readings for this week: Chapter on Panopticism in Louis Sass’s ‘Madness and Modernism’. Foucault's “Nietzsche, genealogy, history” (in ‘The Foucault Reader’); Ian Hacking’s “Making up people” [in blue ‘Nietzsche...’ Reader], and his essay “Self-improvement”] (Plus an intro in the lecture to Wittgenstein as twentieth century Continental philosopher]

Week 9: The French Nietzsche: Michel Foucault.

Easter Break.

READING: Read selected parts of Wittgenstein’s ‘Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus’, TBA.

Wk.10: The intellectual background and peculiar nature of the ‘Tractatus’: Schopenhauer and Nietzsche and Mauthner and Kraus -- and Frege -- on language.

READING: As above. [Plus, highly recommended: Photocopied handout: Cora Diamond’s essay, “Throwing away the ladder”, from her book, ‘The Realistic Spirit’. Also recommended: Wittgenstein's 'Lecture on ethics']

Wk.11: Is the ‘Tractatus’ nonsense? (An exploration of Wittgenstein and ‘ethics’, and of the Tractatus as ... a self-consciously self-implicating reductio.)

READING: Re-read (selected parts of) the ‘Tractatus’, including the end (from section 5 to section 7), and any other texts from the semester that you need to refresh your memory of, prior to completing your 2nd essay.

Wk.12: Summarising and reflecting on (early) Wittgenstein as Nietzschean. This week’s lectures consist primarily of a ‘revision session’ on Wittgenstein, Derrida, Foucault – and Nietzsche.

>The focus as you can see is heavily on Nietzschean aspects -- on ‘the Nietzschean tradition’ -- in Continental thought: i.e. principally looking at Nietzsche himself, and, in particular connection therewith, certain aspects of the work of the greatest philosopher of the last century, Wittgenstein (a figure ambiguously on the cusp of ‘Analytic’ and ‘Continental’ philosophy) and more briefly on the greatest contemporary French philosophers, Foucault and Derrida. But there will be plenty of consideration (e.g.) of issues to do with language, among other things, along the way, and plenty of options for us to explore in different directions.

>The pattern of class meetings is the usual pattern with me: on odd-numbered weeks, we have 2 lectures, on even-numbered weeks, one lecture and one seminar. However, on odd-numbered weeks we also have a workshop available, as an option, for those of you who find one seminar every two weeks not enough, and for those of you who are having problems, and for those of you who wish to explore issues raised in the unit further (The workshops will also periodically function as aids toward workshopping your essays.).

>Plus there are office hours to discuss anything further, including any private matters -- I will announce these shortly. (Please do come; ‘don’t feel intimidated’.) I will add additional informal ‘office hours’ if necessary/desired. Emma and Nadine and Alena will also announce office hours in due course. We hope you will take advantage of the diversity of views and experience of and around Nietzsche that between us the four of us offer you!

>Shortly, I will give out essay questions and a more exhaustive reading list which will assist you in working on the topic(s) that interest you.

( But before I forget, here are a few extremely basic but crucial guidelines in the production of your essay:

..Double-space your essay, and use a reasonably large font.

..Try to write a ‘proper’ bibliography -- consult almost any academic book for a model.

..PROOFREAD your essay thoroughly before handing it in. I do not want to spend my time correcting your spelling etc. etc!

..Obviously, don’t plagiarize. If in doubt, always err on the side of citing your sources. )

> Toward the end of the unit especially, copies of the ‘basic [blue] Reader’ and of the ‘Advanced [brown] Reader’ will be of use. The vast majority of the readings for the unit however are available either in books in Waterstones (or in the Library).

>Many of the relevant texts are also already on sale in Waterstone’s. I particularly receommend you to buy Nietzche’s 'Beyond Good and Evil', ‘Genealogy of Morality’ and 'Thus spoke Zarathustra'. Reading ahead in these books will be very useful to you. I would also recommend you to buy Tractatus, though you will not need that for a few weeks yet.

> There will be (non-identical, much as we try!) dossiers of supplementary readings for this unit in various locations: on the shelf on the left inside Mavis’s office, outside Emma’s, my, Alena's and Nadine's office door. Please treat these with respect. Do not nick stuff from them. Return things you borrow within 2 hours if possible, or failing that within 4 hours, or for certain within 24 hours. Thank you.

Teaching Method:

‘Discussion classes’. My name for ‘lectures’. As the name suggests, I tend to use a roughly ‘Socratic’ method, even in these full class meetings. So please be ready to contribute verbally, and to give each other as well as me your full attention.

In early classes, please say your name when you speak.

Seminars. These are general trouble-shooting and discussion sessions, along the lines of your regular seminars in other classes, and are intended to deal with whatever needs dealing with from the portion of the semester that we are in at any given time. They are therefore very important to attend and make an effort in, especially given that they only occur on six occasions, as opposed to the usual twelve. Please make the most, therefore, of seminars. They are not, in my units, a regular chore, they are a [less regular] necessity. They are also of course compulsory. Please come to every seminar with one question or point to ask or state. Please write this down, if AT ALL possible. [Run by Nadine Cipa]

Workshops. As explained above, in those (odd-numbered) weeks with no seminar, there will be a workshop. Do take advantage of this opportunity! [Run by Emma Bell]

Attendance: As you can -- hopefully -- tell, attendance and real participation in the meetings of this class is, again, more crucial than usual.

Your work -- your effort -- in and on the unit is required. No-one will be penalised for having difficulty understanding the material we are looking at -- on the contrary, everyone is encouraged at any time to bring any problems they are having or questions they need answering either to class, to seminar, or to my or the seminar leader’s office (hours) or to workshops. Just try.

If you are having trouble, ask. I don’t want to see people writing in their student evaluations that they lost track in the lectures and never caught up. If you don’t understand something, then say so. DO make the effort to make the class work.

As always in philosophy -- only more so, if anything -- quality of attention is more important than quantity of reading matter ‘consumed’.

Assessment: I recommend strongly that you consult with Emma or Nadine, on your planned essays. Some time will be set aside in seminars for this.

Essay titles and deadline will be issued to you in due course.

The first essay will be due in on Th. 15 March (Wk. 9). The second essay will be due in on Tues. May 8.

>>>I hope you will enjoy this class. It will probably involve you -- and me! -- in a lot of work (I mean, of effort, not necessarily of quantity of reading) -- but I think it’s worth it. I think this stuff is really pretty amazing. For example, some of it is actually among the rare relatively recent philosophical writing which actually permits one to ask questions as to ‘the meaning of life’ with a straight face...

Rupert Read, along with Alena Dvorakova, Emma Bell, and Nadine Cipa

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download