Class Notes (809,046)
Canada (493,505)
Philosophy (1,512)
PHL217H1 (47)


5 Pages
Unlock Document

University of Toronto St. George
Sol Goldberg

Monday, October 17, 11 Lecture 10 1. Nietzsche’s style a. Why do we prefer truth as systematically articulated without contradiction i. What drives us to want truth not untruth, consistency not contradiction b. Why he refers to what he is doing as kind of psychology, that not only invents its material, the soul – but also discovers its real motives c. Emphasis on invention – style conducive to inventiveness d. What really has moved humanity up to this point in history i. Will to truth and its drives 2. Nietzsche vs. Kierkegaard on the value of truth a. Both questioned social nature of truth b. Shifting question of truth from question about knowledge to value c. Belonging to same tradition, existentialist d. Individualist truth, what is value of truth, why do we want to even know it i. Also subjectivist, antisocial notion of truth e. Kierkegaard – religious existential truth, truth synonymous with value (existential rather than scientific) i. Religious truth fundamentally inner ii. Truth = value iii. Transcendent truth, connected with god beyond this world, struggles for existing human being which always in process of becoming to connect with this transcendent god outside world 1. Passage from book of john, jesus saying he is the truth a. Sees himself on this side of truth, bearing witness for the very turh which jesus came in the world for f. Nietzsche – artistic existential truthfulness – part of it is decidedly anti religious POV, question is about value of truth, truth isn’t synonym for value like in Kierkegaard – question presumes that in order to proceed, perhaps truth is not valuable i. Question about, depending what you think truth is, is it clearly opposite of error? Then virtues of truth different than if you think truth and error coincide – these virtues of truth are what w can call truthfulness 1. Part his argument last time is that there are no simple, straightforward truths where our thoughts and beliefs correspond to a reality which we can independently know 2. Pure truth is a lie 3. Depending how you view this lie – you can approach world as something you invented, which seems more truthful than approaching world as something that can be known in itself 4. Truthfulness and truth, and means something different from view he is attacking 5. His attitude towards contradiction itself ii. ASKS about value of truth iii. His truth in so far as valuable at all, is valuable in this world, the only world that there is 1. Book of john john passage – closer to pilot, in book of john, pilot suspicious of truth and impatiently walking away 2. Nietzsche comments on this scene in antichrist – jesus shamelessly mishandled truth 3. Asking question – what is truth, truthfulness in order to subject it to criticism but meant to destroy in some sense all that we have previously taken to be truth, its virtues and values 3. Truth as woman, philosophers as dogmatists a. “suppose that truth is a woman” i. seems that philosophers don’t understand women and are notoriously unsuccessful with them b. point is that philosophers in particular to preface to good and evil – dogmatists who don’t understand women or truth – don’t know how to approach women successfully in same way clumsily approach truth c. phlers are spurned by truth, as women, traditionally d. Nietzsche’s style – dogmatists edifices, systems (common in german philosophy – system with architecture – architect plan of what phl system should look like) – i. ‘all too human facts of personal interests– less than noble motivations in phlers criticizing one another ii. worst error not edifices themselves – for Nietzsche the idea of something like transcendent value of truth or good in itself – this error he tells us is Plato’s error which stands truth on head by disowning perspectivism which is fundamental condition to all life iii. Plato wants truth itself not this or that truth, for Nietzsche this truth Is fundamentally opposed to needs of human being – truth indifferent to the one for whom it is meant to be truth iv. Point – truth only one thing we might need in our lives, not only or supreme value of our lives – might say occasionally we need untruths to get along in our lives v. Whether we need truth or untruth is not something to be determined abstractly but always out of particular perspective on case by case basis 4. Nietzsche’s opposition to simple opposite
More Less

Related notes for PHL217H1

Log In


Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.