This was excerpted from Norman Geisler’s The History of Western Philosophy, Volume II, (Bastion Books, 2017) for normangeisler.com with permission from bastionbooks.com.

Introduction

By the middle of the nineteenth century, the problem of human existence was focused on him being a stranger to himself to the point that he must discover or rediscover who he is and what his meaning in life was going to be. Kierkegaard suggested that he return to Christianity as it was with the first disciples (as compared to the organized Christendom). Nietzsche, however, suggested an even more ancient return—a replication to the archaic past of the Greeks. He will consider the characteristics and livelihood of the god Dionysus in order to bridge his inner warring divide that plagued his being. He thought that if the Dionysus was revived, this savior-god might rescue the whole of mankind which seemed to him to be in fatigue and decline. However, this god was also known as the “the horned one” or “the bull” to the Greeks, and according to mythology, was torn to pieces by the Titans. The fate of Dionysus overwhelmed Nietzsche who himself was also ravaged by the dark forces leaving him at the age of twenty-five in psychosis—perishing with the god, a solutions of his own devices.

It has been said that Kierkegaard painted Christianity is such stringent terms that it drives some people to atheism, and that Nietzsche painted such a sorrowful view of atheism (a person without God) that it drove some people to Christianity.  Yet both came from similar backgrounds, namely, 19^th century European Lutheranism. Both experienced an early loss of their father, and both learned to detest the Lutheran Christianity in which they were reared.

The Life and Works of Nietzsche

Friedrich Nietzsche was born 1844 in a little town of Rocken, in Prussian Saxony. His father was a Lutheran pastor in Saxony and later died of insanity (softening of the brain) when Friedrich was young. He was his mother, sister, two aunts, and grandmother dominating his life. They had moved to Naumburg where he attended the gymnasium. He was given a strict religious training, and he lost his faith in college. These women hoped the boy would grow up to be a brilliant preacher like his father and grandfather before him. From age fourteen until twenty, he attended the famous school of Pforta which provided a firm foundation in German literature and the Greek and Latin classics. He later studied under the famous liberal thinker, Friederich Ritschl and focused on philology. In Leipzig, he became acquainted with Schopenhauer’s philosophy, enjoyed music, and made inquiries about Erwin Rohde’s conception of the psyche. He observed the naïve faith of his mother and grandmother and, after reading Schopenhauer, he became an atheist. He served in Prussian medical corps where he contracted dysentery. He recovered but always had a headache and indigestion. Though he was a mild, kind, and gentle man, yet nervous and irritable at times. He idealized his friends until he became acquainted with their faults. He kept the course of that which he believed was right—the overthrow of modern Christian culture and democratic morality. In its place, he attempted to bring a revival of the ancient Greek aristocratic ideal of life. He increased loneliness and alienation from friends led to final his madness. Living in isolation, he wrote book after book until his mind was gone.

The Works of Nietzsche

Nietzsche wrote The Birth of Tragedy from the Spirit of Music (1872) where he spoke of his humanistic ideal as a combination of Dionysus (the Greek god of music) and Apollo (the Greek god of the plastic arts). His obsession against Christianity shows up in several works: The Wagner Case: The Twilight of the Idols, Nietzsche contra Wagner, The Ant-Christ, Ecce Homo (“Behold the Man”). His ethical position can be identified in Beyond Good and Evil (1886) and Toward a Genealogy of Morals (1887). His Untimely Considerations (1873—1876) was against the materialism of the post 1870 Germany. His works The Dawn and The Gay Science, appearing between 1878 and 1882, discussed the issues regarding Christian morality as life-denying. Ecce Homo, an autobiography written near the end of his life (1900). It was published 1908. Thus Spoke Zarathustra is his greatest work whose message is “the death of God” Vol. I-II (1883); III (1884); IV (1885). Beyond Good and Evil (1886), The Genealogy of Morals (1887), Anti-Christ (1895).

Philosophical Influences on Nietzsche

Like most others in the modern world, Nietzsche was influenced by Immanuel Kant’s agnosticism. He was also affected by Schopenhauer’s atheism, particularly his stress on the will. F. A. Lange’s History of Materialism was also an important factor in forming his thought. From the ancient world, Heraclitus’s philosophy of becoming was important. And from the modern world Voltaire’s anti-Christian, anti-supernatural views contributed to Nietzsche’s thinking.

Nietzsche’s position on morality and modern culture is a variation Kierkegaard and Schopenhauer, However, Nietzsche deplored the idea of society determining personal conduct, the ‘rule of the flock’ mentality. This went against his idea that man was still and unfixed animal. He leveled severe criticism against Christianity and states that it is an enemy of life and betrays mankind. His viewpoint is quite atheistic and deterministic where the elite, based upon their physical, intellectual, and social prowess, are the only ones who are able to further man’s existence. All men have the power to develop their own norms based on the exclusion of God and any standards associated with good and evil.

Influence of Nietzsche on Others

Like other great thinkers, Nietzsche had a significant influence on many of his successors. Sigmund Freud’s profound introspective psychology is an example. The existentialist Martin Buber acknowledges being impressed by Thus Spoke Zarathustra as a teen ager. Jean Paul Sartre’s atheistic existentialism was also affected by Nietzsche. Wittgenstein linguistical mysticism owes a debt to him as well: “One should speak only where one may not remain silent, and speak only of that which one has overcome – everything else is chatter” (Nietzsche –Human , All Too Human). Jacque Derrida and Post-modernism find roots in Nietzsche as well.

Nietzsche denied God. The fire for this negation was Schopenhauer’s philosophy. Nietzsche resembles Marx by his refusing to put forward arguments for God’s existence based on rational review, and in its stead, basing it on broad cultural judgments undermining any belief in God.

An Overview of Nietzsche‘s Philosophy

Nietzsche’s view involves a critique of 19th century culture. He said Europe is sick and cannot be healed by prosperity or technology. Culture has no unity of outlook, is too eclectic. Man has lost his dignity since he lost faith in God and now has lost faith in himself. Christianity has lost its authority and is merely humanistic. We have lost our stability, and evolution has proven that all is flux. He criticized anti-culturalism of the State which encourages conformism. He opposed democracy and socialism. His view was used by some Nazis to support Nazism, though Nietzsche did not support it. He praised individual heroes. We can improve human nature to become a superman.  He opposed Hegel’s view of history as a necessary unfolding of the Divine. We must get superhistoric view of man by “Know thyself” and organizing the chaos within. The decline of dogmatic faith at the time it was needed most led to paralysis of culture. So, God is dead, and must be replaced by a voluntaristic metaphysics of becoming.

It is Nietzsche’s pathological path that makes his philosophical meaning of atheism understandable as he tried to live it out. Up to this time in history, man was living under the childhood shelter of God (or the gods). Now that the gods were dead, could mankind likewise meet this challenge and too become godless? Nietzsche thought the answer to this timely question was yes; man, as a courageous animal was able to survive even the death of God. Man is to live with no religious or metaphysical safety nets. If mankind was to become godless, Nietzsche was to be its prophet.

Three Central Themes is Nietzsche

The Will to Power

In Zarathustra it is man’s basic nature and is found in all living things (conatus, elan vital).  This is probably not a metaphysical doctrine of unusual significance (as Heidegger interpreted it).  Nor is it protofascist as Heidegger agreed. It was a psychological theory that involves: 1) the power of self-control in art and philosophy not so much subjugation of others; 2) The power of the slave to live free of resentment of his master. It is rooted found in Greek contest (agon), viz., triumph over others, power over audience, language, and self. In the pinnacle of power one is perfectly self-possessed, self-sufficient man, (Socrates in prison is better than Nero on the roof); but Goethe is better than Socrates– self-mastery. It is a man of intelligence and passion who passionately mastered his passions and employed them creatively. It is the illuminator of most (if not all) behavior but is not the only motive for human action.

Superman (Overman, Ubermeunsch).

Lucian (2nd century) used the word, as did Goethe in Faust. Nietzsche never applied to an individual, except in one ironic self-critical passage (“on poets” in Zarathustra). It is always intended as a this-worldly antithesis of God. “A human being (Mensch) who has organized the chaos of his passions, has given style to his character, and became creative.” Mankind involves mixed types. Nietzsche does not claim to be a superman. One who renounces God and supernatural dignity of man and recognized. There is no meaning in life except the meaning man gives his life…. One who rises above flux of creatures and becomes a creator and ceases being human, all too human. A superman is one who can willingly accept suffering and misery and prove their worth by overcoming them. He is not the one who thinks of himself as superior but who demands more of himself.

Eternal Recurrence

Since there is no God or objective meaning in life, man must will his own meaning. This Nietzsche does in willing the eternal recurrence of the same state of affairs. He presupposes absoluteness of time and flux and finite space. Upon destruction, our universe will be reconstructed and repeat previous patterns and events identically (so Nietzsche will be born 1844, etc.). What has been will be innumerable times at immense intervals. This is Greek in origin but struck Nietzsche like a revelation in 1882. He recognized it was a gruesome doctrine unless one can joyfully affirm one’s existence and say: “Abide, moment – but if you cannot abide, at least return eternally!” Eternal Recurrence is set against Christian linear doctrine that history is progressive, ending in an eternal Goal. Nietzsche believed that Eternal Recurrence is the most scientific of all hypotheses because finite power quanta in finite space in infinite time will produce only a finite number of configurations that will repeat over and over. However, George Simmel, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche (1907, pp. 250) rejected this, claiming that three wheels rotating at different speeds never line up again if one is one-half the speed of the first and another twice the first. Nietzsche did not attempt to prove the doctrine but stressed its ethical and psychological impact, namely a) horror of all-too-human life without it and joy felt by the exceptional person who believes it. Eternal Recurrence is not superior to God, but belief in other world cheapens this world. Eternal Recurrence is the “Religion of religions” (Jaspers, Nietzsche, 363-365).

A Comparison of Nietzsche and Kierkegaard

Both Nietzsche and Kierkegaard had Lutheran backgrounds.  Both were trained in post-Hegelian Germany. Each manifested an introspective psychological methodology with literary genius (poetic philosophy). They both demonstrate the meaninglessness and nothingness of human life apart from God. Both stressed death of God and vital Christianity in Western Society. They also accepted Kantian disjunction of appearance and reality and inability of man to know reality by reason. Further, they acknowledged the need to suffer in the overcoming life. They admitted that all absolute and eternal values must be rooted in a transcendent God.  And both men had an implicit Post-Hegelian dialectic in their thinking. They also stressed individual, passionate, and volitional nature of man. They believed truth to be a matter of life not of philosophical thought. Both men held critical view of Christian evidence. Both believed ultimate responsibility goes beyond good and evil. In addition, both stressed the significance of human solitude.

There were, of course, some other important differences. Nietzsche denied God and Kierkegaard affirmed Him. Nietzsche believed that reason is man’s only hope and Kierkegaard held that revelation is. While Nietzsche held that the overcomer wills eternal recurrence, Kierkegaard affirmed the eternal God. Nietzsche held that Man is self-sufficient and must deny God, but Kierkegaard insisted that Man is insufficient and must submit to God. For the former, the movement of history is circular, but for Kierkegaard the movement of history is circular. Nietzsche believed the Bible is full of myths, lies, and errors, but Kierkegaard held that it is a record of truth and revelation from God. For Nietzsche, self-denial is a sign of weakness, but Kierkegaard believed it was a sign of spiritual strength. Nietzsche believed man is only finite and fallible, but Kierkegaard affirmed that he is finite and sinful. Nietzsche was not to bring peace to the world, but instead, carried and used the sword to divide, shock, and perplex his audience. His fate though is one of the many lessons that can be learned in man’s striving to ‘know thyself.’ Man cannot be understood from the zoological perspective, but it is Nietzsche who illustrates that man does indeed have a problem in determining his nature. Hence the contrast between these two influences—Kierkegaard loving his native Copenhagen while Nietzsche was in a state of utter homelessness cut off from his community thus festering in a land of loneliness.

Nietzsche claims that the existence of God and Christianity either stands or falls on the present social order. Nietzsche rejects Christianity because as a total system it must rest on the standards set by Christianity delegating standards of culture and morality to the public—if the culture does not prove it out, then reject it and the existence of God. However, Kierkegaard saw that the problem lay in the confusion between the eternal God and the traditions of men. He also saw a breakdown in the structures that watered-down Christian requirements. Kierkegaard warned that Christianity could not endure unless it detaches itself from “Christendom.”

Nietzsche and Kierkegaard differed in their notions about being and becoming. Nietzsche believes that it is self-evident that the transcendent and immutable being is incompatible with the world of becoming and that any notions of piety associated with this being must be discarded. Kierkegaard on the other hand suggests that man should forget the idea of themselves as gods. Kierkegaard posits that man does not look for a lasting city here on earth because he is a pilgrim to the Absolute. Neitzsche counters by declaring that the entire world is the lasting city thus denying the existence of the transcendent being.

Nietzsche understood God as well as Kierkegaard. For one who rejects the absolutely binding obligation of God on his life understands God as well as the one who accepts it. Ironically, Kierkegaard drove men to atheism; Nietzsche drove them to theism.

Nietzsche, Kierkegaard and Hegel Compared

HEGEL	NIETZSCHE	KIERKEGAARD
Opaque	Clear	Paradoxical
Objective	Subjective
Optimistic	Pessimistic	Optimistic
Only a Philosopher	Philosopher and Poet	Philosopher and Writer
Said God is Dead	Believed God Dead	Believed God is Alive
Reinterpreted Christianity	Rejected Christianity	Reaffirmed Christianity
Eternal found through time	Eternal recurrence of time	Eternal is in time

An Evaluation of Nietzsche

Nietzsche was misunderstood by many philosophers. Though he was unsystematic in his approach, he did deal with his subject matter, albeit, in a more indirect and dramatic aphoristic prose. He approached his philosophy through the vein of art, never denying the artist within. However, there were those like Heidegger who did think he was a systematic thinker considering him the last metaphysician of the West.

Although he was an atheist, even a theist can agree with some of what he said.  For example, when God dies, all value dies too. He provided a profound analysis of post-Christian European culture. He stressed the meaninglessness of life without God. However, Nietzsche basis for rejecting God was volitional not rational (see Paul Vitz, Faith of the Fatherless). His substitution of the eternal recurrence of the same state of affairs for God demonstrates that even atheists cannot avoid the Transcendence (i.e., God). Of course, he provided no evidence for eternal recurrence. Further, the negation of all value (called Nihilism) is self-defeating. For it implicitly affirms the value of negating all values. Nietzsche showed the need for God in his poem to the “unknown God” in which he bemoaned his need for God.

As noted, Nietzsche accepted Schopenhauer’s pessimistic notion of Christianity—a world denying, asceticism promoting emphasis on a narrow and restricted life. The Christianity that appeals to most twentieth century folks is not this kind. Today, it is seen as manly, self-reliant, and world affirming seeking to have each individual experience a richer and fuller life for himself and others as well. However, the Christian church should take into consideration Nietzsche’s severe criticisms and allow it to foster honest self-examination. Even though most would conclude that the church has been mostly right and Nietzsche mostly wrong, the church can learn something even from its most severe critics.