Exsangus reviewed Beyond good and evil by Friedrich Nietzsche (Penguin classics)
Review of 'Beyond good and evil' on 'Goodreads'
2 stars
Nietzsche’s work is an example of the downside of political satire. His work is in some ways reminiscent of Stephen Colbert when he was doing his Colbert report. In 100 years, if all that’s left of Stephen is the Colbert Report, how much of it would the average person be able to understand?
I am aware that much of his style was hyperbole intended to spark a reaction, to spark deep discussion; however, it’s hard for someone like me, coming in as a lay person to separate what is hyperbolic, and what is reflective of his actually beliefs.
Even experts seem fairly certain that his anti-feminism was really how he felt. In my opinion, a philosophy that dismisses about half of the entire world’s population is inherently flawed to begin with.
His style is very much like the stoned ramblings of teenagers who feel that smoking dope enhances the mind’s …
Nietzsche’s work is an example of the downside of political satire. His work is in some ways reminiscent of Stephen Colbert when he was doing his Colbert report. In 100 years, if all that’s left of Stephen is the Colbert Report, how much of it would the average person be able to understand?
I am aware that much of his style was hyperbole intended to spark a reaction, to spark deep discussion; however, it’s hard for someone like me, coming in as a lay person to separate what is hyperbolic, and what is reflective of his actually beliefs.
Even experts seem fairly certain that his anti-feminism was really how he felt. In my opinion, a philosophy that dismisses about half of the entire world’s population is inherently flawed to begin with.
His style is very much like the stoned ramblings of teenagers who feel that smoking dope enhances the mind’s ability to philosophize. It’s often nonsense that must be heavily parsed to get anything out of. From a simple literary standpoint, this book is drivel. Good writing is clear, and a good writer provides clarity in their work. If you need to take a college class to have professors, and other authors to teach you what his words mean, then, in my opinion, he has failed as a writer.
His work may have been revolutionary at the time he wrote it, but just because something was game changing a hundred years ago, doesn’t mean it should become a thing of unchanged worship today. In fact, I think Nietzsche himself would be disappointed that his work tends to be held as near scripture, rather than people today arguing against his philosophies as a way to further develop and refine our modern philosophy. This may be exactly what happens in PDH Philosophy circles, but the image that is projected to us non-philosophers is that if you trash on Nietzsche, you must be an idiot.
I don’t regret reading this, I just didn’t enjoy reading it.
