In response to Nietzsche Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

In response to Nietzsche - Essay ExampleNietzsche further asserts that honor is a social construct that completely depends on world language for its existence. Since language comprises of the signifiers to objects and experiences in human beings life, legality cannot exist as a separate entity outside human experience. Necessarily a fairness is colored by a mans experiences and perceptions of the loyalty itself. When the true dwells in a metaphysical level, its perception is embodied trough human-induced language constructs like metaphors or metonymies, as Nietzsche says in this regard What is truth then? A mobile army of metaphors, metonymies, anthropomorphisms, in short a sum of human transaction that are elevated, transmitted, beautified in a poetic or rhetoric manner, and that appear to the people after a long usage as fixed, canonical and binding (Nietzsche 45) Indeed perspectivism is a crucial term in understanding the validity of Nietzsches concept of truth. Nietzsche c laims that truths are illusions of which one has forgotten they are illusions, metaphors that are faint out and literally became powerless (Nietzsche 45). But the puzzle that arises here is whether Nietzsche is true. While in that location is no truth according to Nietzsche, the question is how the truthfulness of Nietzsches claim can be validated. Obviously Nietzsche himself is aware of the puzzle that his concept of truth may develop. In response to this question, Nietzsche assumes that truths are socially established collective perspectives well-nigh something which are collaborative with other human experiences. Subsequently there may be another truth claimed by a philosopher. But according to this different truth about something is the said philosophers knowledge perspective which has been induced and modulated by different context and experience with which he or she happens to be familiar with. Therefore when a philosopher claims any idea or anything as true, he or she is disfavour and ignorant of different contexts which might lead him to a different conclusion. In his book, Beyond Good and abuse Nietzsche discusses this very postulation of perspectivism and its relation with the philosophers prejudices about truth. In the beginning chapter called On the Prejudices of Philosophers, he comments that though a traditional philosopher may claim any of his idea as the product of pure reasons and, therefore, as something true, there can be a different truth, about the kindred thing, which is the product of different think. Indeed reasons and reasoning can be different from single to individual, since reasons themselves, in some ways or others, are the products of individual experiences and perspectives. Therefore, a cluster of experiences which is same for a group of people may give birth to a cluster of perspectives which itself may lead to a conclusion assumed as a truth. In the same manner, a different cluster of experiences about the same may le ad to a different truth. The problem of traditional philosophers is that they attempt to prove their perspectives (according to Nietzsche, their prejudices) as the universal truth. Referring to this problem, Nietzsche comments They pose as having discovered and attained their actually opinions through the self-evolution of a cold, pure, divinely unperturbed dialectic while what happens at bottom is that a prejudice, a notion, an inspiration, generally a desire of the heart sifted and made abstract, is defended by them with reasons sought after the event