594 (1883-1888)
Science—this has been hitherto a way of putting an end to the complete confusion in which things exist, by hypotheses that “explain” everything—so it has come from the intellect’s dislike of chaos.—This same dislike seizes me when I consider myself: I should like to form an image of the inner world too, by means of some schema, and thus triumph over intellectual confusion. Morality has been a simplification of this kind: it taught that men were known, familiar.—Now we have destroyed morality—we have again become completely obscure to ourselves! I know that I know nothing of myself. Physics proves to be a boon for the heart: science (as the way to knowledge) acquires a new charm after morality has been eliminated—and because it is here alone that we find consistency, we have to construct our life so as to preserve it. This yields a sort of practical reflection on the conditions of our existence as men of knowledge.
595 (1884)
Our presuppositions: no God: no purpose: finite force. Let us guard against thinking out and prescribing the mode of thought necessary to lesser men!!
596 (1886-1887)
No “moral education” of the human race: but an enforced schooling in [scientific] errors is needed, because “truth” disgusts and makes one sick of life—unless man is already irrevocably launched upon his path and has taken his honest insight upon himself with a tragic pride.
597 (1886-1887)
The presupposition of scientific work: belief in the unity and perpetuity of scientific work, so the individual may work at any part, however small, confident that his work will not be in vain.
There is one great paralysis: to work in vain, to struggle in vain.
The accumulative epochs, in which force and means of power are discovered that the future will one day make use of; science an intermediary station, at which the more intermediary, more multifarious, more complicated natures find their most natural discharge and satisfaction—all those who should avoid action.
598 (Nov. 1887-March 1888)
A philosopher recuperates differently and with different means: he recuperates, e.g., with nihilism. Belief that there is no truth at all, the nihilistic belief, is a great relaxation for one who, as a warrior of knowledge, is ceaselessly fighting ugly truths. For truth is ugly.
599 (1885-1886)
The “meaninglessness of events”: belief in this is the consequence of an insight into the falsity of previous interpretations, a generalization of discouragement and weakness—not a necessary belief.
The immodesty of man: to deny meaning where he sees none.
600 (1885-1886)
No limit to the ways in which the world can be interpreted; every interpretation a symptom of growth or of decline.
Inertia needs unity (monism); plurality of interpretations a sign of strength. Not to desire to deprive the world of its disturbing and enigmatic character!
601 (1885-1886)
Against peaceableness and the desire for reconciliation. The attempt at monism belongs here.
602 (1884)
This perspective world, this world for the eye, tongue, and ear, is very false, even if compared for a very much more subtle sense-apparatus. But its intelligibility, comprehensibility, practicability, and beauty begin to cease if we refine our senses; just as beauty ceases when we think about historical processes; the order of purpose is already an illusion. It suffices that the more superficially and coarsely it is conceived, the more valuable, definite, beautiful, and significant the world appears. The deeper one looks, the more our valuations disappear—meaninglessness approaches! We have created the world that possesses values! Knowing this, we know, too, that reverence for truth is already the consequence of an illusion—and that one should value more than truth the force that forms, simplifies, shapes, invents.
“Everything is false! Everything is permitted!”
Only with a certain obtuseness of vision, a will to simplicity, does the beautiful, the “valuable” appear: in itself, it is I know not what.
603 (1885)
That the destruction of an illusion does not produce truth— but only one more piece of ignorance, an extension of our “empty space, an increase of our “desert"—
604 ( 1885-1886)
“Interpretation,” the introduction of meaning not “explanation” (in most cases a new interpretation over an old interpretation that has become incomprehensible, that is now itself only a sign). There are no facts, everything is in flux, incomprehensible, elusive; what is relatively most enduring is—our opinions.
605 (Spring-Fall 1887)
The ascertaining of “truth” and “untruth,” the ascertaining of facts in general, is fundamentally different from creative positing, from forming, shaping, overcoming, willing, such as is of the essence of philosophy. To introduce a meaning—this task still remains to be done, assuming there is no meaning yet. Thus it is with sounds, but also with the fate of peoples: they are capable of the most different interpretations and direction toward different goals.
On a yet higher level is to posit a goal and mold facts according to it; that is, active interpretation and not merely conceptual translation.
606 (1885-1886)
Ultimately, man finds in things nothing but what he himself has imported into them: the finding is called science, the importing —art, religion, love, pride. Even if this should be a piece of childishness, one should carry on with both and be well disposed toward both—some should find; others—we others!—should import!
607 (Spring-Fall 1886)
Science: its two sides: in regard to the individual; in regard to the cultural complex (level);
—valuations from one side or the other are mutually antagonistic.
608 (1886-1887)
The development of science resolves the “familiar” more and more into the unfamiliar:—it desires, however, the reverse, and proceeds from the instinct to trace the unfamiliar back to the familiar.
In summa, science is preparing a sovereign ignorance, a feeling that there is no such thing as “knowing,” that it was a kind of arrogance to dream of it, more, that we no longer have the least notion that warrants our considering “knowledge” even a possibility—that “knowing” itself is a contradictory idea. We translate a primeval mythology and vanity of mankind into the hard fact: “knowledge-in-itself” is as impermissible a concept as is “thing-initself.” Seduction by “number and logic,” seduction by “laws.”
“Wisdom” as the attempt to get beyond perspective valuations (i.e., beyond the “will to power"): a principle hostile to life and decadent, a symptom as among the Indians, etc., of the weakening of the power of appropriation.
609 (1884)
It is not enough that you understand in what ignorance man and beast live; you must also have and acquire the will to ignorance. You need to grasp that without this kind of ignorance life itself would be impossible, that it is a condition under which alone the living thing can preserve itself and prosper: a great, firm dome of ignorance must encompass you.
610 (1884)
Science—the transformation of nature into concepts for the purpose of mastering nature—belongs under the rubric “means.”
But the purpose and will of man must grow in the same way, the intention in regard to the whole.
611 (1883-1888)
We find that the strongest and most constantly employed faculty at all stages of life is thought—even in every act of perceiving and apparent passivity! Evidently, it thus becomes most powerful and demanding, and in the long run it tyrannizes over all other forces. Finally it becomes “passion-in-itself.”
612 (Spring-Fall 1887)
To win back for the man of knowledge the right to great affects! after self-effacement and the cult of “objectivity” have created a false order of rank in this sphere, too. Error reached its peak when Schopenhauer taught: the only way to the “true,” to knowledge, lies precisely in getting free from affects, from will; the intellect liberated from will cannot but see the true, real essence of things.
The same error in arte as if everything were beautiful as soon as it is viewed without will.
613 (Fall 1888)
Competition between affects and the dominion of one of the affects over the intellect.
614 (1884)
To “humanize” the world, i.e., to feel ourselves more and more masters within it—
615 (1884)
Among a higher kind of creatures, knowledge, too, will acquire new forms that are not yet needed.
616 (1885-1886)
That the value of the world lies in our interpretation (—that other interpretations than merely human ones are perhaps somewhere possible—); that previous interpretations have been perspective valuations by virtue of which we can survive in life, i.e., in the will to power, for the growth of power; that every elevation of man brings with it the overcoming of narrower interpretations; that every strengthening and increase of power opens up new perspectives and means believing in new horizons—this idea permeates my writings. The world with which we are concerned is false, i.e., is not a fact but a fable and approximation on the basis of a meager sum of observations; it is “in flux,” as something in a state of becoming, as a falsehood always changing but never getting near the truth: for—there is no “truth.”
617 (1883-1885)
To impose upon becoming the character of being—that is the supreme will to power.
Twofold falsification, on the part of the senses and of the spirit, to preserve a world of that which is, which abides, which is equivalent, etc.
That everything recurs is the closest approximation of a world of becoming to a world of being:—high point of the meditation.
From the values attributed to being proceed the condemnation of and discontent with becoming, after such a world of being had first been invented.
The metamorphoses of what has being (body, God, ideas, laws of nature, formulas, etc.)
“Beings” as appearance; reversal of values; appearance was that which conferred value—.
Knowledge-in-itself in a world of becoming is impossible; so how is knowledge possible? As error concerning oneself, as will to power, as will to deception.
Becoming as invention, willing, self-denial, overcoming of oneself: no subject but an action, a positing, creative, no “causes and effects.”
Art as the will to overcome becoming, as “eternalization,” but shortsighted, depending on the perspective: repeating in miniature, as it were, the tendency of the whole.
Regarding that which all life reveals as a diminutive formula for the total tendency; hence a new definition of the concept “life” as will to power.
Instead of “cause and effect” the mutual struggle of that which becomes, often with the absorption of one’s opponent; the number of becoming elements not constant.
Uselessness of old ideals for the interpretation of the totality of events, once one knows the animal origin and utility of these ideals; all, moreover, contradictory to life.
Uselessness of the mechanistic theory—it gives the impression of meaninglessness.
The entire idealism of mankind hitherto is on the point of changing suddenly into nihilism—into the belief in absolute worthlessness, i.e., meaninglessness.
The destruction of ideals, the new desert; new arts by means of which we can endure it, we amphibians.
- Presupposition: bravery, patience, no “turning back,” no haste to go forward. (N.B. Zarathustra adopts a parodistic attitude toward all former values as a consequence of his abundance.)