christoph cox - the subject of nietzsche s perspectivism

8/13/2019 Christoph Cox - The Subject of Nietzsche s Perspectivism

1/24

The "Subject" of Nietzsche's Perspectivism

Cox, Christoph, 1965-

Journal of the History of Philosophy, Volume 35, Number 2, April 1997,

pp. 269-291 (Article)

Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press

DOI: 10.1353/hph.1997.0023

For additional information about this article

Access provided by K.U. Leuven (18 Apr 2013 10:21 GMT)

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/hph/summary/v035/35.2cox.html
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/hph/summary/v035/35.2cox.htmlhttp://muse.jhu.edu/journals/hph/summary/v035/35.2cox.html


2/24

T h e S u b ject o f N ie tz s c h e 'sP e r s p e c t i v i s m

C H R I S T O P H C O X

FORMERLY TAKEN TO ENDORSE a p r o f o u n d sk ept ici sm a n d rel ati vi sm , N iet z-sche ' s doc t r in e of pe r spec t iv ism recent ly has been seen to f it wi th in t r ad i -t i onal c onc e p t ions o f e p i s t e mology a nd on to logy? I n t he mos t r e c e n t a n din f lue n t i a l s t udy o f t he ma t t e r , Ma ude ma r i e C la rk ma in t a in s t hat , p r o pe r lyunde r s too d , pe r spe c t iv i sm is a n obv ious a nd nonp r ob le ma t i c doc t r ine . '~ I n as imi la r ve in , Br ia n Le i te r has r ecen t ly a rgu ed tha t pe r spec t iv ism turn s ou t tobe mu ch less radica l than is usual ly supp osed , tha t , with this doct r ine , Nie tz-sc he . . , is me r e ly r e ha sh ing f a mi l i a r K a n t i a n theme s , minus t he r i go r o fKant ' s expos i t ion . ~ Accord ing to bo th Cla rk and Le i te r , pe r spec t iv ism s imply

' With occasional alterations, Nietzsche's texts will be quoted from the Kaufmann/Hollingdaletranslations and cited in the text according to standard abbreviations of their English titles fol-lowed by the section and/or paragraph number(s). The exception is On Tru th and Lies in aNonmoral Sense, which is cited by page number from Philosophy and Truth : Selections fro m N ietz-sche's Notebooks o f the Early x87 os, ed. and trans. Daniel Breazeale (New Jersey: Humanities PressInternational, 1979), 79-9 x. Abbreviations are as follows: A: The Antichris t; BGE:Beyond G ood andE v i l ; BT/SC: Bir th o f Tragedy , Attempt at a Self-Criticism ; D: Daybreak; GM: On the Genea logy o fMorals; GS: The Gay Science; TI: Twilight of the Idols; TL: On Tru th and Lies in a NonmoralSense ; UM: Untimely Medita tions; WP: The W i l l to Pow er; Z: Thus Spoke Zarathustra . Where thesetranslations have been modified, I have consulted the Werke: Kritische Studienansgabe, ed. GiorgioColli and Mazzino Montinari (New York/Berlin: de Gruyter, 1967-t988), cited as KSA, followedby the volume, page, and fragment numbers.2Maudemarie Clark, Nietzsche on Truth and Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress, 199o , 135.3Brian Leiter, Perspectivism in Nietzsche's Genealogy o f M orals , in Nietzsche, Genealogy, M oral-i ty: Essays on Nietzsche's Genealogy o f M orals , ed. Richard Schacht (Berkeley: University of CaliforniaPress, ~994), 351. Leiter borrows this second phrase from Ken Gemes, Nietzsche's Critique ofTruth, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 52 (1992): 49, who, in fact, disagrees with theclaim. Yet Leiter finds the characterization appropriate, adding that this is not a problem,particularly since Nietzsche's primary concerns lie elsewhere, namely, with philosophical theo-ries of agency and value (351-52).

[269]


3/24

270 J O U R N L O F T H E H I S T O R Y O F P H I L O S O P H Y 35:2 APRIL 1997presents an analog y between certain obvious features of hu man vision and lessimmediately obvious features of hum an knowledge.4

I will argue that Nietzsche's perspectivism is less obvious, more problem-atic, and more interesting than these recent accounts take it to be. Moreover,the perspectivism I attribute to Nietzsche undermines a central presupposi-tion of these accounts: namely, that there exists a simple, stable subject whohas perspectives. Before turning to the notion of subjectivity affirmed byNietzsche's perspectivism, a word must be said about the doctr ine ofperspectivism itself.

1. PERSPECTIVE AND AFFECTIVE INTERPRETATIONAS the nam e of a doctri ne, perspectivism is a critical construct. Th e t erm isfound only once in Nietzsche's published work5 and only twice in T h e W i l l t oP o w e r , the well-known collection of his unpub lis hed notes. 6 Moreo ver, theterm is misleading, since it suggests that a visual metaphor provides the key toNietzsche's theory of knowledge. But this is not the case. Indeed, in the pas-sage on perspectivity that both Clark an d Leiter take to be decisive,7 Nietzscheintimately associates the notion of perspective with a very differ ent, non -visual notio n: that of affective interp retati on. Nietzsche writes:[O]bjectivity [ought to be] unders tood not as contemplation without interest (whichis a nonsensical absurdity), but as the ability to have one's For and Against u n d e r c o n t r o land to engage and disengage them, so that one knows how to employ a v a r i e t y ofperspectives and affective interpretat ions [ P e r s p e c ti v e n u n d A f f e c t -l n t e r p r e ta t i o n e n ] in theservice of knowledge. Henceforth, my dear philosophers, let us be on guard against

the dangerous old conceptual fiction that posited a pure , will-less, painless, timelessknowing subject ; let us guard against the snares of such contradictory concepts aspure reason, absolute spirituality, knowledge in itself : these always demand thatwe should think of an eye that is completely unthinkable, an eye turned in no particu-lar direction, in which the active and interpreting forces [ d i e a k t i v e n u n d i n t e r p r e t i r e n d e nK r i i f t e ] , through which alone seeing becomes a seeing-something, are supposed to belacking; these always demand of the eye an absurdity and a nonsense. There is o n l y aperspective seeing [ e i n p e r s p e k t i v i s c h e s S e h e n ] , o n l y a perspective knowing [ e i np e r s p e k ti v is c h e s E r k e n n e n ] ; and the m o r e affects we allow to speak about something, the

4See Clark, Ni e t z s c h e o n Tr u t h a n d Ph i l o s o p h y , 128-35, and Leiter, Perspectivism in Nietz-sche, 344-47.5GS 354-6WP 48x and 636. In the t9o6 edition, the German editors saw fit to employ the term in asection heading (Third Book, I, d: Biologie des Erkenntn i s t r i ebes . Perspek t i v i smus [Biologyof theDrive to Knowledge: Perspectivism]). This initiated a scholarly radition that has taken this term todescribe Nietzsche's heory of knowledge n general. The term was employed by Hans Vaihinger ina9a 1 (see T h e P h il o so p h y o f A s I f , trans. C. K. Ogden [London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1935],352 ) and by almost every German, French, and Anglo-Americancommentator thereafter.7See Clark, Ni e t z s c h e o n Tr u t h a n d Ph i l o s o p h y , ~2 8 , and Leiter, Perspectivism in Nietzsche,343.


4/24


5/24

a 7 2 J O U R N A L O F T H H IST O RY O F PH IL O SO PH Y 3 5 : e A P R I L I 9 9 7N i e t z s c h e 's " p e r s p e c t i v e " l a n g u a g e w i t h in t h e b r o a d e r b o u n d s o f a g e n e r a lt h e o r y o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . U n l i k e t h e n o t i o n o f " p e r s p e c d v e " - - w h i c h , l i t e r a l lyc o n s t r u e d , g e n e r a t e s s e r i o u s e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l d i f f i c u l t i e s l s - - t h e n o t i o n o f " in -t e r p r e t a t i o n " o p e r a t e s w i t h i n a r i c h a n d i n c r e a s i n g l y i m p o r t a n t l i t e r a r y a n dp h i l o s o p h i c a l t r a d i t i o n . T a k i n g w h a t h a s b e e n c a l l e d " th e i n t e r p r e t i v e t u r n , "" C o n t i n e n t a l " a n d " a n a ly t i c " p h i l o s o p h e r s h a v e c o m e t o a r g u e t h a t o u r k n o w l -e d g e i s n o t a n e d i f i c e b u i l t u p o n a f o u n d a t i o n o f i n d u b i t a b l e b e l ie f s , b u t r a t h e ra n i n t e r p r e t i v e w e b o f m u t u a l l y s u p p o r t i n g b e l ie f s a n d d e s i r e s t h a t i s c o n -s t a n t l y b e i n g r e w o v e n ? 6 T h e s e p h i l o s o p h e r s m a i n t a i n t h a t w e a r e a l w a y s a l-r e a d y i m m e r s e d i n a w o r l d f u l l o f s i g n i f i c a n c e s t h a t w e p r e t h e o r e t i c a l l y u n d e r -s t a n d , a n d t h a t t h e r o l e o f e p i s t e m o l o g y is t o d i s c o v e r h o w p a r t i c u l a r s e n s o r ye x p e r i e n c e s , b e l i e f s , a n d d e s i r e s r e l a t e t o o u r u n d e r s t a n d i n g a s a w h o l e a n dv i c e v e r s a .

N i e t z s c h e a g r e e s w i th t h is t u r n f r o m f o u n d a t i o n a l i s m t o h o l i s m a n d w i t h t h ec o n c o m i t a n t t u r n f r o m f i r s t p h i l o s o p h y t o n a t u r a l i s m . 17 A s w e h a v e s e e n , N i e t z -

,5 Dav id Ho y a r g u es t h a t N ie t z sche ' s l an g u ag e o f " p e r sp ec t iv e" r u n s i n to a h o s t o f p r o b lem san d p a r ad o x es , an d th a t i t sh o u ld b e r e j ec t ed in f av o r o f th e l an g u ag e o f " in t e r p r e t a t i o n . " SeeHoy, "Ph i losophy as Rigorous Ph i lo logy? Nie tzsche and Posts t ruc tura l i sm," New York LiteraryForum 8 - 9 (1981): x71-85 . I ag ree tha t , nar row ly and l i te ra l ly co n s t r u ed , t h e l an g u ag e o f " p e r sp e c -t ive" i s p rob lemat ic . Yet , I d is agre e wi th Hoy tha t N ie tzsche ' s no t ion o f "perspec t ive" i s to be take nin th i s l i t e ra l sen se an d th u s t h a t t h e l an g u ag e o f " p e r sp ec tiv e" i s i n co m p a t ib l e w i th t h e l an g u ag eo f " in t e r p r e t a t i o n . " I a r g u e h e r e t h a t N ie tz sch e co n s t r u e s t h e n o t io n o f " p e r sp ec t iv e" so b r o ad lyth a t i t m e r g es w i th t h e n o t io n o f " in t e r p r e ta t i o n . ",6 O n " the in ter pre t iv e tu rn ," see Pau l Rabinow and W il l iam M. Su ll ivan , "Th e I n ter pre t i veT u r n : E m e r g e n c e o f a n A p p r o a c h , " in Interpretive So cial Science, ed . R ab in ow an d Su l l iv an (Be r k e -ley : Univers i ty o f C al i fo rn ia Press , a979) , 1- 21 , The Interpretive Turn: Philosophy, Science, Culture,ed . D avid R. Hi ley e t al . ( I thaca : Co rnel l Univers i ty Press , 199 l ) , and D avid Hoy , "H eide gge r andt h e H e r m e n e u t i c T u r n , " i n The Cambridge Companion to Heidegger, ed . Ch a r l e s Gu ig n o n ( Cam -br idg e: Cam br id ge Univers i ty Press , 1993) , ~7 o - 9 4 9Prom inen t f igures associa ted wi th th is " tu rn"in c lu d e Mar t in He id eg g e r , Han s - Geo r g Gad am er , T h o m as Ku h n , W . V . Qu io e , Do n a ld Dav id -so n , R ich a r d Ro r ty , Ch a r l e s T ay lo r , Jacq u es De r r id a , M ich el Fo u cau lt , an d Pau l R ico eu r .

,7 Nie tzsche ' s na tu ra l i sm a ccords wi th m ore recen t vers ions (e .g . , tha t o f Qu ine) in m ain ta in -in g th a t t h e r e ex i s t n o su p e r n a tu r a l en t i t i e s o r e x p lan a to r y p r in c ip l e s. On th is v iew , h u m an b e in g san d th e i r en d o w m en t s a r e , l i ke a ll o th e r n a tu r a l t h in g s , en t ir e ly co n d i t i o n a l an d co n t in g en t . T h u s ,h u m an r ea so n i s n e i th e r m o r e n o r l es s t h an " a d ev ice f o r d e t a in in g [ th e h u m an b e in g ] a m in u tewi th in ex is tence" (TL, 79 ; see a lso GS lO9) . Yet Nie tzsche does no t acc ep t the scientism ad v o ca tedby these m ore recen t ph i losop hica l na tu ra l i sms. W hi le he embraces a b ro ad ly scien t if ic wor ldv iew,he re jec ts the posi t iv ism and reduct io n ism o f the m ode rn sc ien ti fic p ro jec t ( see , e .g . , GS 373 an dGM I I I 2 4 - 9 7 ) . I t i s t h i s t h a t l e ad s h im to p r o p o se th a t , in i t s a f f i rm a t io n o f ap p ea r an ce , i n t e r p r e t a -t ion , and mul t ip l ic i ty , "ar t" n o t " science" i s the na tura l i s t ic d iscourse pa r excellence ( see , e .g . , GM I I I2 5 ). T h ese l i ne s o f t h o u g h t a r e d ev e lo p ed m o r e f u l ly i n m y " Nie tz sch e, Na tu r a l i sm , an d I n t e r p r e t a -t ion ," International Studies in Philosophy 27 , no . 3 (1995): 3 -1 8 , "Being and I t s Oth ers : Nie tzsche ' sR e v a l u a ti o n o f T r u t h , " M a n a n d W o r m 29 , no . 1 (1996): 43 -61 , and Naturalism a nd Interpretation:Nietzsche s Epistemology and Ontology ( m an u sc r ip t i n p r ep a r a t io n ) , ch ap te r 1 . Fo r a co m p ar ab ledefen se o f a ho l is t ic , aes the t ic is t na tu ra l i sm , see Ror ty , " Inqu iry as Reco ntex tua l iza t ion : An An t i -Du a l i s t Co n ce p t io n o f I n t e r p r e t a t i o n " an d " No n - Red u c t iv e Ph ys ical ism ," i n Objectivity, Relativism,and Truth: Philosophical Papers, V ol. I (Cam br idge: C am br idg e U nivers i ty Press , 1991) , 93--125 .


6/24

THE SUBJE CT OF NIETZSCHE'S PERSPECTIVISM 73s c h e c o n c e i v e s o f t h e u n d e r s t a n d i n g a s a lw a y s d i r e c t e d b y o n e o r a n o t h e r i n t e r -p r e t a t i o n , e a c h o f w h i c h o p e n s u p a p a r t i cu l a r h o r i z o n o f m e a n i n g a n d v a lu e .N i e t z s c h e g o e s o n t o a r g u e t h a t t h e w o r l d i n w h i c h w e f i n d o u r s e l v e s is a w o r l do f s t r u g g l e , a n d t h a t th i s s t r u g g l e i s a m o n g i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s , e a c h o f w h i c h s e e k st o o v e r w h e l m i i b e r w i i l t i g e n , i i b e r w i n d e n ) t h e o t h e r s b y i n c o r p o r a t i n g t h e i r t e r m si n t o its o w n a n d a r t i c u l a t i n g t h e s e t e r m s a c c o r d i n g t o i t s o w n s y s t e m . T h i s is h o w

i n t e r p r e t a t i o n is c h a r a c t e r i z e d i n a n i m p o r t a n t p a s s a g e f r o m t h e G e n e a l o g y o fM o r a l s . D i s c u s s in g t h e i d e a o f p u n i s h m e n t , N i e t z sc h e p a u s e s t o e m p h a s i z e [ a ]m a j o r p o i n t o f h i s t o r i ca l m e t h o d - - t o d i s t i n g u i sh t h e o r i g i n o f s o m e t h i n g f r o mi ts c u r r e n t p u r p o s e . H e w r i te s :I T ] h e c a u s e o f t h e o r i g i n o f a t h i n g a n d i ts e v e n t u a l u t il it y , it s a c t u a l e m p l o y m e n t i n as y s t e m o f p u r p o s e s , li e w o r l d s a p a r t : w h a t e v e r e x is ts , h a v i n g s o m e h o w c o m e i n t ob e i n g , is a g a i n a n d a g a i n r e i n t e r p r e t e d t o n e w e n d s [aufneue Ansich ten ausgeleg t] , t a k e no v e r , t r a n s f o r m e d , a n d r e d i r e c t e d b y s o m e p o w e r s u p e r i o r t o it ; a ll e v e n t s in t h eo r g a n i c w o r l d a r e a subduing , becom ing master [e in Uberw i i lt igen , Herrw erden], a n d a l ls u b d u i n g a n d b e c o m i n g m a s t e r i n v o lv e s a f re s h i n t e r p r e t a ti o n [e in Neu- ln terpre t ieren],a n a d j u s t m e n t t h r o u g h w h i c h a n y p r e v i o u s m e a n i n g a n d p u r p o s e a r e n e c es s ar il yo b s c u r e d o r e v e n o b l i t e r a te d . H o w e v e r w e l l o n e h a s u n d e r s t o o d t h e u t il it y o f a p h y s i o -l o g i c a l o r g a n ( o r o f a le g a l i n s t i tu t i o n , a s o ci a l c u s t o m , a p o l it ic a l u s a g e , a f o r m i n a r t o ri n a r e l ig i o u s c u l t) , th i s m e a n s n o t h i n g r e g a r d i n g i ts o r i g in . . . . [ P ] u r p o s e s a n d u t il it ie sa r e o n l y signs t h a t a will to p o w e r h a s b e c o m e m a s t e r o f s o m e t h i n g l e ss p o w e r f u l a n di m p o s e d u p o n i t t h e c h a r a c t e r o f a f u n c t i o n ; a n d t h e e n t ir e h i st o r y o f a t h i n g , a no r g a n , a c u s t o m c a n i n th i s w a y b e a c o n t i n u o u s s i g n - c h a i n o f e v e r n e w i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s[In terpre ta t ionen] a n d a d a p t a t i o n s w h o s e ca u s es d o n o t e v e n h a v e t o b e r e l at e d t o o n ea n o t h e r b u t , o n t h e c o n t r a r y , i n so m e c a se s s u c c e ed a n d a l te r n a te w i th o n e a n o t h e r i np u r e l y c h a n c e f a s h io n . T h e e v o l u t i o n o f a t h i n g , a c u s t o m , a n o r g a n i s t h u s b y n om e a n s i t s progressus t o w a r d a g o a l , e v e n l es s a l o g ic a l progressus b y th e s h o r t e s t r o u t e a n dw i th t h e s m a l le s t e x p e n d i t u r e o f f o r c e - - b u t t h e s u c ce s si o n o f m o r e o r l es s p r o f o u n d ,m o r e o r l es s m u t u a l l y i n d e p e n d e n t p r o c e ss e s o f s u b d u i n g [Uberwi i l t igungsprozessen],p l u s th e r e s is ta n c es t h e y e n c o u n t e r , t h e a t t e m p t s a t t r a n s f o r m a t i o n f o r t h e p u r p o s e o fd e f e n s e a n d r e a c t i o n , a n d t h e r e s u lt s o f su c c e s sf u l c o u n t e r a c t i o n s . T h e f o r m is f lu i d ,b u t t h e m e a n i n g is e v e n m o r e s o . ( G M I I 1 2 ) ~sW h a t is p a r t i c u l a r l y s t r i k in g , i n t h is p a s s a g e , is t h a t w h a t N i e t z s c h e c a ll s i n t e r -p r e t a t i o n e x t e n d s f a r b e y o n d w h a t t h e t e r m o r d i n a r i l y s ig n if ie s . H e c la i m st h a t a ll e v e n t s i n t h e o r g a n i c w o r l d a n d , i n d e e d , w h a t e v e r e x is t s e s s e n ti a l l yi n v o lv e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , a n d t h a t th i s i n v o l v e m e n t c o n c e r n s n o t o n l y t h e i r a p p r e -h e n s i o n b y s u b j e c t s b u t t h e i r v e r y c o n s t i t u t i o n a s o b j ec ts o r e v e n t s . A t t h e e n d o f th es e c t io n f r o m w h i c h t h e a b o v e p a s s a g e i s c i t ed , N i e t z s c h e g o e s s o f a r a s t oi d e n t i f y i n t e r p r e t a t i o n w i t h t h e e s s e n c e o f l if e, i ts w i l l t o p o w e r , . . , t h ee s se n t i a l p r i o r i t y o f t h e s p o n t a n e o u s , a g g r e s s iv e , e x p a n s i v e , f o r m - g i v i n g

'sC f. GS 58, WP 556, 604, 643, 616.


7/24

274 JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY 35:2 A P R I L 997f o r c e s t h a t g i v e n e w i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s a n d d i r e c t io n s . ' 9 N i e t z s c h e is a r g u i n gt h a t t h i n g h o o d , e v e n t h o o d , h i s to r y , d e v e l o p m e n t , a n d e v o l u t i o na r e , at b o t t o m , o n l y m a n i f e s t a t i o n s o f w i ll t o p o w e r , t h e i n c es s a n t d r i v e f o ri n t e r p r e t a t i o n a n d r e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , f o r m i n g a n d r e - fo r m i n g ; a n d t h a t t h ev e r y o r i g i n , h i s t o r y , a n d g r o w t h o f a ' t h in g ' ( w h e t h e r i t b e a n o b j ec t , ap r a c t ic e , o r a n i n s t i t u t io n ) s h o u l d b e s e e n a s t h e c o n s e q u e n c e o f it s r o l e in as t r u g g le a m o n g i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s , e a c h o f w h i c h is a g g re s s iv e a n d e x p a n -s iv e , s e e k i n g to i n c r e a s e p o w e r a n d c o n t r o l o v e r i ts e n v i r o n m e n t .

T h i s s a m e g e n e r a l i z a t i o n a n d e x t e n s i o n o f m e a n i n g c a n a ls o b e f o u n d i nN i e t z sc h e 's l a n g u a g e o f p e r s p e c t iv e . R a t h e r t h a n f u n c t i o n i n g s i m p ly a s a no p t i c a l a n a l o g , N i e t z s c h e c all s u p o n t h e t e r m p e r s p e c t i v e t o c h a r a c t e r i z es o m e t h i n g a b o u t l i fe i n g e n e r a l - - t h e p e r s p e c t i v e o p t i cs of life, h e p u t s i t i nBeyond G ood and E v i l (11 , m y e m p h a s i s ) . E l s e w h e r e i n t h a t t e x t, h e s p e a k s o fperspective a s t h e b a s ic c o n d i t i o n o f a ll l i fe ( P r e f a c e ) , c l a i m i n g t h a t t h e r ew o u l d b e n o l if e a t al l i f n o t o n t h e b a si s o f p e r s p e c t i v e e s t i m a t e s a n d a p p e a r -a n c e s ( 3 4) a n d t h a t t h e narrowing o f our pe rs pec t i v e . . . [ i s ] a c o n d i t i o n o f l i f ea n d g r o w t h ( 18 8 ).

W e s e e, t h e n , t h a t N i e t z sc h e ' s p e r s p e c t i v e l a n g u a g e is q u i t e p e c u l i a r a n do u g h t n o t to b e t a k e n a t f a c e v a l u e. N o t o n l y is t h e l a n g u a g e o f p e r s p e c t i v es u b s u m e d u n d e r th e b r o a d e r l a n g u a g e o f i n t e r p r e ta t i o n , b u t b o t h p e r s p ec -t iv e a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a r e g e n e r a l iz e d f a r b e y o n d t h e i r o r d i n a r y s en s es .

P e r s p e c t i v e , f o r N i e t z s c h e , c o m e s to c h a r a c t e r i z e t h e d i r e c t e d n e s s o f a p a r t -i c u l a r f o r m o f l i fe ~~ t o w a r d t h e c o n d i t i o n s t h a t p r e s e r v e a n d e n h a n c e it , c o n d i -t i o n s t h a t a r e c o d i f i e d i n t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n t h a t d i r e c ts t h e p e r s p e c ti v e .

T h i s c a n s e r v e a s a r o u g h c h a r a c t e r iz a t i o n o f t h e n o t io n s o f p e r s p e c t iv ea n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a s N i e t z s c h e u s e s t h e m . Y e t m a n y q u e s t i o n s s ti l l r e m a i n .T h e o n e I w a n t t o f o c u s o n h e r e i s t h e q u e s t io n o f who o r what i t i s tha t has 'p e r s p e c t i v e s a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . W e w ill s e e t h a t t h e a n s w e r t o th i s q u e s t i o n isn o t , i n a n y s e n s e , s im p l e . B e f o r e t u r n i n g t o N i e t z s c h e ' s t e x t s, I w a n t f i r s t t oc o n s i d e r s o m e p r e v i o u s a n d , I b e l ie v e , i n a d e q u a t e a n s w e r s t o th i s q u e s t i o n .

2 . T H E S U B J E C T O F P E R S P E C T I V I S M : T W O R E C E N T A C C O U N T SO n e a c c o u n t h a s i t t h a t t h e p r o p e r s u b je c ts o f p e r s p e c t iv e s a r e b i o lo g i c als p e ci e s. ~' T h i s v i e w m a i n t a i n s t h a t , t h r o u g h t h e p r o c e s s o f e v o l u t i o n a r y n a t u -

t9Cf. BGE 259, WP 643.~oThis term is felicitous precisely because of its flexibility. It is loose enough to capture theentir e range of system s of valuation that Nietzsche considers imp ortant (e.g., active and reactive,ascending and descending, w eak and strong, m aster and slave, Dionysian and Christian, etc.),while refusing to identify perspectives with either the private points-of-viewof individuals or thefixed physico-psychological chem as of biological species.~ T he most prom inent advocate of this view is George J. Stack, wh o, in a series of articles,argues that Nietzsche's epistemological position is substantially aki n to that of th e n eo-Kan tian


8/24

T H S U B J E C T O F N I E T Z S C H E ' S P E R S P E C T I V I S M ~7r a l s e l e c t io n , e a c h s p e c i e s d e v e l o p s a p a r t i c u l a r p h y s i c o - p s y c h o l o g i c a l o r g a n i -z a ti o n t h a t m e d i a t e s its v ie w o f t h e w o r l d a n d e n s u r e s t h a t e ac h m e m b e r o ft h e sp e ci es a p p r e h e n d s a n d c o m p r e h e n d s j u s t e n o u g h o f th e w o r ld , a n d o n l yi n s u c h a w a y , a s t o s a f e g u a r d it s s u r v iv a l a n d f lo u r i sh i n g . W h i le e v e r y m e m -b e r o f t h e s p e c ie s c a n a d o p t d i f f e r e n t p e r s p e c t i v e s i n a l im i t e d s e n s e ( e. g. , b yc h a n g i n g p o s i t i o n o r e n t e r i n g i n t o d i f f e r e n t c i r c u m s t a n c e s ) , t h e s e n e v e r t h e -l es s r e m a i n w i t h i n th e g e n e r a l p e r s p e c t i v e o f t h e s p e c ie s a s a w h o l e , w h i c h isn o t in a n y m e m b e r ' s p o w e r to c h a n g e.

I t is c e r t a in l y th e c a s e t h a t N i e t zs c h e 's p e r s p e c t i v e l a n g u a g e m o s t f r e -q u e n t l y a p p e a r s i n c o n t e x t s th a t d i s c u s s t h e c o n d i t io n s n e c e s s a r y f o r p a r t ic u l a rs p e c i e s ( e s p ec i al ly h u m a n s ) t o p r e s e r v e t h e m s e l v e s a n d t o e n h a n c e t h e i rp o w e r . ~2 Y e t , t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f p e r s p e c t i v i s m g e n e r a t e d b y t hi s a c c o u n tc o m m i t s N i e t z s c h e t o a p o s i t i o n th a t , I b e l ie v e , h e d o e s n o t a c c e p t : t h e p o s i t i o nt h a t e v e r y s p e c ie s is i n p r i n c i p le u n a b l e t o a p p r e h e n d b o t h t h e w o r l d a s it is i ni ts e l f a n d t h e w o r l d a s i t is a p p r e h e n d e d b y o t h e r s p e c i es .' 3 N i e t z s c h e d o e s n o ts e e m t o b e l i e v e , f o r e x a m p l e , t h a t t h e r e i s a n y t h i n g l i k e a s p e c i f i c a l l y hum n

p e r s p e c t i v e , a u n i f i e d a n d c o h e r e n t to t a li ty r i g o r o u s l y d i f f e r e n t i a b l e f r o mt h e p e r s p e c t i v e s o f o t h e r s p e c ie s . F i r st o f a ll, N i e t z s c h e ' s n a t u r a l i s m c o m m i t sh i m t o r e g a r d a l l l i v i n g b e i n g s a s , i n f u n d a m e n t a l r e s p e c t s , s i m i l a r . 2 4 H ec l ai m s , f o r i n s ta n c e , t h a t t h e h u m a n p r o c e s s o f c o g n i t i o n i s o n l y a m o r e c o m -p l e x a n d s p e c i a li z e d f o r m o f t h e p r o c e s s o f i n g e s t io n ( i n c o r p o r a t i o n o r

a s s im i l a ti o n ) f o u n d i n t h e p r o to p l as m . ~ 5 I n d e e d , a c e n t r a l t h e m e o f N ie t z -s c h e 's l a t e r w o r k is t h e n o t i o n t h a t k n o w l e d g e i s o n l y a f o r m o f w ill t o p o w e r ,t h e d r i v e t o i n c o r p o r a t e a n d s u b d u e f o u n d i n all o r g a n i s m s a n d s p e c ie s . ~6S e c o n d l y , N i e t z s c h e a r g u e s t h a t t h e h u m a n s p e c ie s i ts e l f d o e s n o t h a v e au n i f i e d w o r l d v i e w , b u t r a t h e r is d i v i d e d i n t o a h o s t o f a n t a g o n i s ti c p e r s p e c -t iv e s o r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s : e . g ., m a s t e r a n d s l a ve , D i o n y s i a n a n d C h r i s t ia n ,H o m e r i c a n d P l at o ni c, R o m a n a n d J u d a i c , a n d v a r io u s h y b r i d s o f t h es e .' 7

philos opher, F. A. Lange, whose work Nietzsche read and praised early in his career. See Stack,Kant, Lange, and Nietzsche: Critique of Knowledge, in N ie tz sche andM odern German Though t , ed.

Keith Ansell-Pearson (London: Routledge, 1991), 3o--58, and Nietzsche's Evolutionary Episte-mology, Dialogos 59 0992): 75 - l ~

Se e, e.g., BGE Prefac e, i i 34, 188, and WP 259, 293,6 16, 678, 789, 9o4 .3The more general Kantian metaphysical realism implicit in this account is rejected byNietzsche's hars h critique of dualism and the notion of the thing in itself. See, e.g., GS 54, 354, TIII 2, TI III 6, TI IV 6, WP 552, 567 .

241 arg ue for this pos ition in Naturalism and In terpreta tion: Nietzsche s Epistemology and O ntology,chapter 2.

'sSee WP 5oo, 5Ol, 51o, 51 l, 654, 666.~6See BGE 13, 36, GM II 12, and WP 466-617.27 On mast er vs. slave, see BGE 26o and GM I. O n Dionysian vs. Christian, see EH IV 9 an d

WP 1051 and 1o52. O n Homeri c vs. Platonic, see GM I II 25. On Roman vs. Judaic, see GM I 16.On the vario us hybrids of these, see GM I 16, BGE 26o, an d 2oo. In t he oft-cit ed GM II I 12,


9/24

2 7 6 J O U R N A L O F T H E H I S T O R Y O F P H I L O S O P H Y 3 5 : 2 A P R I L 1 9 9 7S u c h d i f f e r e n c e s o f p e r s p e c t i v e , f o r N i e tz s c he , a r e n o t m e r e l y m i n o r d i f f e r-e n c e s o f o p i n i o n ; o n t h e c o n t r a r y , t h e y d e s i g n a t e s i g n if ic a n tl y d i f f e r e n t m o d e so f p e r c e p t i o n , d e s i r e , c o g n i t io n , e v a l u a ti o n , a n d a c t io n t h a t c o m p o s e d i f f e r e n tf o r m s o f l i fe .

T h u s , r a t h e r t h a n d e m a r c a t i n g i n s u r m o u n t a b l e d iv is io n s b e t w e e n s p e ci es ,p e r s p e c t i v e s m a r k b o t h e x t r a - a n d i n t ra - s p e c ie s d i f f e r e n c e s a n d s im i l ar it ie s .A c c o r d i n g t o N i e t z s c h e , t h e b i o lo g i ca l fi e ld is c r o s s e d b y a c o n t i n u u m o fp e r s p e c t i v e s , n o n e o f w h i c h i s i n p r in c i p l e d i s jo i n t f r o m a n o t h e r , b u t e a c h o fw h i c h c a n b e s h o w n t o d i f f e r f r o m o t h e r s i n i m p o r t a n t r e s p e c t s a n d t o s ig n if i-c a n t d e g r e e s . ' s T h e s u b je c t o f p er s p ec t iv i s m , t h e n , m u s t b e s o m e t h i n g o t h e rt h a n b i o l o g i c a l s p e c i e s.

C l a r k a n d L e i t e r p r e s e n t a n a c c o u n t o f p e r s p e c t iv i s m t h a t e x p l ic i t l y r e j ec t st h e s k e p t i c is m e n d o r s e d b y t h e " s p e c i es v i ew . " I n s t e a d , t h e y c o n s t r u e p e r s p e c -t iv i sm a s a d o c t r i n e l i m i t e d t o t h e d e s c r i p t i o n o f h u m a n k n o w l e d g e . C l a i m i n gt h a t t h e d o c t r i n e s i m p ly d ra w s a n a n a l o g y b e t w e e n a c o m m o n s e n s e c o n c e p -t io n o f h u m a n v is io n a n d a c o m m o n s e n s e c o n c e p t i o n o f h u m a n k n o w i n g ,C l a r k a n d L e i t e r m a i n t a i n t h a t t h e s u b j e c t o f p e r s p e c t i v is m is s i m p l y t h eo r d i n a r y , i n d i v i d u a l , h u m a n v i e w e r / k n o w e r .

L e it er ~9 b e g i n s f r o m t h e o b v i o u s p r e m i s e s t h a t " n e c e ss a r il y , w e s e e a no b j e c t f r o m a p a r t i c u l a r p e r s p e c t i v e : e .g . , f r o m a c e r t a i n a n g le , f r o m a c e r t a i nd i s ta n c e , u n d e r c e r t a in c o n d i t i o n s ," a n d " t h e m o r e p e r s pe c t iv e s w e e n j o y - -t h e m o r e a n g l e s w e s ee th e o b j ec t f r o m - - t h e b e t t e r o u r c o n c e p t i o n o f w h a t t h eo b j e c t i s a c t u a l l y l ik e w il l b e ." 3 o H e g o e s o n t o a r g u e , b y a n a l o g y , t h a t " n e c e s s a r -i ly , w e k n o w a n o b j e c t f r o m a p a r t i c u l a r p e r s p e c t i v e : i .e ., f r o m t h e s t a n d p o i n to f p a r t i c u l a r i n te r e st s a n d n e e d s , " a n d " t h e m o r e p e r s p ec t iv e s w e e n j o y - - t h em o r e i n te re s ts w e e m p l o y i n k n o w i n g t h e o b j e c t m t h e b e t t e r o u r c o n c e p t i o n o fw h a t t h e o b j e c t is l ik e w ill b e ." ~ ' H i s a r g u m e n t c o n c l u d e s t h a t , c o n t r a r y t o a no v e r z e a l o u s s k ep t ic is m , " w e d o i n d e e d h a v e k n o w l e d g e o f th e w o r l d , t h o u g h i tis n e v e r d i s i n t e r e s te d , n e v e r c o m p l e t e , a n d c a n a l w a y s b e n e f i t f r o m a d d i t i o n a ln o n - d i s t o r t i n g [ c o g n i t i v e ] p e r s p e c t i v e s . " 3 ~

Nietzsche argues that w e should learn to inhabit "a var ie ty of perspectives and affective interpreta-tions in the service of kn owledge "--evidence against the view that w e inhabit only som e one,unified, "human" perspective.28 Fo r a similar argum ent, see Alexand er N eham as, "Imm anent a nd Transcen dent Perspec-tivism in Nietzsche," N i e t z s c h e - S t u d i e n 1 9 (1983): 476 -77 .29W hile Leiter is more explicit on this issue, I take Clark's view to be substantially the same.30 Leiter, "Perspectivism in Nietzsche," 344. Cf. Clark, N i e t zs c h e o n T r u t h a n d P h i l o s o ph y x 9 9 -3~ 9

3~ L e i t e r , P e r s p e c t i v i s m i n N i e t z s c h e , 3 4 5 . C f . C l a r k : o u r b e l ie f s a r e a b o u t a n i n d e p e n -d e n t l y e x i s t i n g w o r l d [ a n d ] t h e y c a n b e t r u e o n l y i f t h e y c o r r e s p o n d t o it , t h a t i s, g e t it 't h e w a y i ti s ' Nietzsche on T ru t h a nd Phi losophy, 3 9 , a l s o s e e 1 3 5 - 3 7 ) .

32 L e i t e r , P e r s p e c t i v i s m i n N i e t z s c h e , 3 4 6 . C f . C l a r k , Nietzsche on Tru th and Phi losophy, 13 4- 35 .


10/24

THE SUBJ ECT OF NIETZSCHE'S PERSPECTIVISM 77T h i s a c c o u n t t h u s m a i n t a i n s t h a t, j u s t a s t h e r e is n o v i s ua l p e r s p e c t i v e t h a t

i n p r i n c i p l e is u n a v a i l a b l e t o us , so to o t h e r e is n o k n o w l e d g e t h a t i n p r i n c i p l ee s c a p e s o u r g r a s p . U n l i k e t h e s k e p t i c a l a c c o u n t , t h is r e a l is t a c c o u n t h a s t h eb e n e f i t o f a c k n o w l e d g i n g N i e t z s c h e 's c l a i m t h a t w e h a v e a c ce s s t o o t h e r p e r -s p e c t iv e s . I t s u g g e s t s t h a t , j u s t a s w e c a n g a i n a n e w v i s u a l p e r s p e c t i v e o n t h eo b j e c t o f v is i o n b y c h a n g i n g o u r p o s i t i o n r e l a t i v e t o it, so t o o c a n w e g a i nd i f f e r e n t c o g n i t i v e p e r s p e c t i v e s o n t h e o b j e c t o f k n o w l e d g e b y b r i n g i n g d i f f e r -e n t s e t s o f c o g n i t i v e in t e r e s t s t o b e a r u p o n it. M o r e o v e r , i n s o f a r a s i t g r a n t s t h ei n t e r e s t - l a d e n n e s s o f a l l i n q u i ry , i t s u g g e st s t h a t w e m i g h t c o m e t o a p p r e c i a t ea n d a c k n o w l e d g e t h e l e g it i m a c y o f p e r s p e c t i v a l i n t er e s ts o t h e r t h a n o u r o w n ,e v e n i f w e o u r s e l v e s d o n o t s h a r e t h e m . 33

Y e t t h i s c o n s t r u a l o f t h e s u b j e c t o f p e r s p e c t i v i s m a l s o r u n s i n t o d if f ic u l ti e s .F o r e m o s t a m o n g t h e s e , I t h in k , i s its a s s u m p t i o n o f a p r e - g i v e n s u b j e c t w h o h a sp e r s p e c t i v e s o r i n t e r p re t a t io n s . A c c o r d i n g t o t h e c o m m o n s e n s e a c c o u n t o fv i si o n c a l l e d u p o n b y th e r e a l i s t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , w h e n I m o v e a r o u n d a n o b j ec t ,t h e r e is a c h a n g e o f p e r s p e c t i v e b u t n o c h a n g e o f s u b j e ct ; t h a t is , i t is t h e s a m e It h a t t a k e s u p d i f f e r e n t p e r s p e c t i v e s . P e r s p e c t i v e s a r e c u m u l a t i v e a n d t h u s , t o o , isk n o w l e d g e . W h i l e o n e c a n n o t s i m u l t a n e o u s l y in h a b i t d i f f e r e n t p e r s p e c t i v e s ,o n e c a n n o n e t h e l e s s c o n s e c u t i v e ly ta k e u p a n u m b e r o f d i f f e r e n t p e r s p e c t i v e so n t h e s a m e o b j e c t a n d t h u s g a i n a r i c h e r v i s ua l s e n s e o f it . T h e s i t u a t i o n i sa n a l o g o u s i n t h e c o g n i t i v e ca s e, a c c o r d i n g t o t h e r e a l is t a c c o u n t . I t a r g u e s t h a t ,a l t h o u g h o u r k n o w l e d g e is a l w a y s i n t e r e st e d , w e c a n b r i n g a v a r i e ty o f

c o g n i t iv e in t e r e st s t o b e a r u p o n a n o b j e c t a n d t h u s c o m e t o k n o w i t b e t t e r .O n c e a g a i n , a c r o s s t h e s e d i f f e r e n t s et s o f c o g n i t i v e i n t e r e s ts , t h e r e i s a c e n -t r al , s t a b l e su b j e c t w h o c o n s e c u t i v e l y o c c u p i e s t h e s e d i f f e r e n t s e t s o f i n t e r e s tsa n d t h u s a c c u m u l a t e s a m o r e c o m p l e t e k n o w l e d g e o f th e o b je c t o n w h i c ht h e s e i n t e r es t s a r e b r o u g h t t o b e a r . L e i t e r w r i te s : T h e m o r e p e r s p e c t i v e s w ee n j o y - - f o r e x a m p l e , t h e m o r e i n t e re s ts w e e m p l o y in k n o w i n g t h e o b j e c t - - t h eb e t t e r o u r c o n c e p t i o n o f w h a t t h e o b j e c t is l ik e w ill b e. 3 4

T h i s v i e w d o e s , o f c o u r s e , r e c e iv e s o m e s u p p o r t f r o m t h e p a s s a g e p r iv i -l e g e d b y b o t h C l a r k a n d L e i t e r . A f t e r a ll , i n t h a t p a s s a g e , N i e t z s c h e c l a im st h a t: T h e r e is o n l y a p e r s p e c t i v e s e e i n g , o n l y a p e r s p e c t i v e ' k n o w i n g ' ; a n d t h em o r e a f f e c t s w e a ll o w t o s p e a k a b o u t a t h i n g , t h e m o r e e y e s , d i f f e r e n t e y e s , w ec a n u s e t o o b s e r v e t h e t h i n g , t h e m o r e c o m p l e t e w i ll o u r ' c o n c e p t ' o f t h i s th i n g ,o u r ' o b j e c t i v it y ' , b e ( G M I I I x 2 ). T h i s c e r t a i n l y le n d s s o m e c r e d e n c e t o t h e

ss Leiter claims that there are an infinity of interpretive interests that could be bro ugh t tobear on the object of knowledge ( Perspectivism in Nietzsche, 345-46). Similarly, Clark writes:We are, afte r all, finite creatures with a limited am oun t of time to discover truths, whereas thereare surely an infinite number of truths to discover. We should therefore expect people withdiffere nt interests to discover differen t truths Nietzsche on Truth and P hilosophy, x35 ).s4 Leiter, Perspectivism in Nietzsche, 345-


11/24


12/24

THE SUBJE CT OF NIETZSCHE'S PERSPECTIVISM 2 7 9r al , b u t a l so f ai ls to a c c o u n t s a t is f ac t or i ly f o r i m p o r t a n t f e a t u r e s o f h u m a np s yc h ol o gy ,~ 9 w h i c h r e v e al s t h e s u b j ec t to b e a n a m a l g a m a t i o n o f c o m p e t i n gi m p u l s e s a n d d r i v e s r a t h e r t h a n a n a t o m i c un i ty .

A s N i e t z s c h e h i m s e l f a c k n o w l e d g e s , t h is c ri t iq u e o f m e n t a l s u b s t a n c e s t e m sf r o m t h e c r i t i q u e o f t h a t n o t io n b y H u m e a n d K an t.4 o F o l l o w in g H u m e , K a n ta r g u e s t h a t , s i n c e t h e s u b j e c t o r s e l f is n o t d i s c o v e r a b l e a m o n g t h e c o n t e n t s o fe x p e r i e n c e , s o m e o t h e r j u s t i f ic a t io n m u s t b e s o u g h t f o r its p o s t u l a t i o n . N i e t z-s c h e t a k e s u p t h is l in e o f t h o u g h t i n B eyo n d Go od a n d E v i l w F o r N i e t z s c h e , a sf o r K a n t a n d H u m e , w e o n ly e v e r e x p e r i e n c e i m p r e s s i o n s , a c t i on s , a n d e f -f ec ts , b u t n e v e r t h e s u b j ec t t h a t is s u p p o s e d t o h a v e th o s e i m p r e s s i o n s o ri n it ia t e t h o s e a c t io n s a n d e f fe c t s. 4 ' Y e t , w h e r e a s K a n t c a m e t o r e g a r d t h en o t i o n o f th e s e l f a s a f o r m a l r e q u i r e m e n t o f r e a s o n a n d t o p o s i t t h e a n t i n a t u -r al is ti c n o t i o n s o f n o u m e n a l s e l f a n d n o u m e n a l c a u s a li ty , N i e t z sc h e c o m e s t or e g a r d t h e s e l f a s m e r e l y a g r a m m a t i c a l h a b i t t h a t s u p p o r t s a m o r a l f i c t io n .F o r th e r a d ic a l e m p i r i c i s t N i e t z s c h e - - w h o m a i n t a i n e d n e i t h e r K a n t ' s d i st in c -t io n s b e t w e e n i n t u i t i o n , u n d e r s t a n d i n g , a n d r e a s o n , n o r K a n t ' s c o n v i c t io n t h a tp r ac t ic a l r e a so n m u s t b e t a k e n f o r g r a n t e d a n d i ts p o s t u l a te s d e d u c e d - - w eh a v e j u s t i f i c a t i o n o n l y f o r b e l i e f i n a c t io n s , e f fe c t s , d o i n g s , b e c o m i n g s , a n da p p e a r a n c e s ; a n d i t is m e r e l y a s e d u c t i o n o f l a n g u a g e t h a t l e a ds u s t o p o s i t a

' b e i n g ' b e h i n d d o i n g , e f f e c ti n g , b e c o m i n g ; ' t h e d o e r ' is m e r e l y a f ic t io na d d e d t o t h e d e e d - - t h e d e e d is e v e r y t h i n g ( G M I 13 ).4 2 F u r t h e r m o r e , t h isl in g u is ti c h a b i t s e r v e s t h e C h r i s t i a n , m o r a l p u r p o s e o f m a k i n g s o m e i s ol a bl et h i n g , i . e ., a s p e c i f i c s u b j e c t , responsible a n d accountable f o r t h e s e a c t io n s a n dd e e ds . T h e s e p a r a t i o n o f d o e r f r o m d e e d , t h e s u b s e q u e n t r e m o v a l o f t hi s d o e rf r o m t h e c o n d i t io n e d a n d c o n t i n g e n t w o r ld o f e f fe c ts a n d h a p p e n i n g s , a n d ,f i n al l y , t h e a s c r i p t i o n o f a f r e e w i ll t o t h i s s u b j e c t , N i e t z s c h e a r g u e s , s e r v e toi so l at e s o m e b e i n g a s re s p o n s i b l e f o r e v e r y e v e n t u a l i t y a n d t o c l a im t h a t t h isb e i n g w a s f r e e t o d o o t h er w i se . 43

O f c o u r s e N i e t z s c h e a l so c r i ti c i ze s d e t e r m i n i s m , t h e n o t i o n o f u n f r e e w i llsoT rue to his naturalism, N ietzsche regards psycho logy as the queen o f the sciences, thepath to the fun dam ental problems (BG E 23), against the K antian view that claimed this role forepistemology an d metaphysics.40 On Kant, see BGE 54. H um e is certainly the precu rsor to Nietzsche's critique o f metaphysi-cal conceptions of causality and the self, a fact th at Nietzsche seems to briefly acknowledge in W P55o. Fo r m ore com parison between H um e's and Nietzsche's critiques of the self, see NicholasDavey, Nietzsche and H um e on Self and Identity, Jou rna l of the British Society o r Phenomenology18, no. I (1987): 14 -29. Fo r a comp arison b etween N ietzsche's and Kant's critiques of the self, seeRichard Schacht, Nietzsche(London : Routledge, 1983), 138-4o.4~ For K ant on the phenomenality o f inner sense, see the Critique of Pure Reason B67-69 ,

152-59. For Nietzsche on the phenomenality of the inner world, see WP 477, 479-4, Fo r mo re on ou r me taphysical seduction b y the subject-predicate form, see BG E 16, 17, 19,34, 54, T I I I I 5 W P 4 8 ~ 4844 s S e e B G E 2 1 2 1 9 G M I 1 3 T I I I I 5 T I V 6 T I V I 3 7 - 8 .


13/24

2 8 J OURN AL OF THE HI STORY OF PHI LO SOPHY 3 5 :2 APRI L 1 9 9 7( B G E 2 1 ). B u t t h is is n o t t h e p l a c e t o d e l v e i n t o w h a t w o u l d b e a l e n g t h yd i s c u s s i o n o f N i e t z sc h e ' s p h i l o s o p h y o f m i n d o r m o r a l t h e o r y . I s i m p l y w a n t t oi n d i c a t e t h a t a c r i t i q u e o f t h e n o t i o n o f a p r e - g i v e n s u b j e c t - s u b s t r a t u m is b a s i ct o N i e t z s c h e ' s n a t u r a l i s m . T h e p o i n t is t h a t, f o r N i e t z s c h e , t h e a s s u m p t i o n o fs u c h a f r e e w i l l b e h i n d e v e r y a c t io n s ee k s t h e s o u r c e o f t h e c o n t i n g e n t a n dt h e c o n d i t i o n a l in s o m e t h i n g g i v e n a n d u n c o n d i t i o n e d , i n s h o r t , s o m e t h i n gu n w o r l d l y . A c c o r d i n g t o N i e t z s c h e , t hi s s c e n a r io d e p r i v e s b e c o m i n g o f i t si n n o c e n c e - - a n d i t is t h e p r i m a r y g o a l o f N i e tz s c h e 's p r o j e c t to r e s t o r e t h e

i n n o c e n c e o f b e c o m i n g . '4 4

4 N I E T Z S C H E ' S C O N C E P T I O N O F S U B J E C T I V I T Y : T H E S U B J E C T A SM U L T I P L I C I T Y 4 5T h i s d o e s n o t m e a n , h o w e v e r , t h a t w e s h o u l d a l te r t h e s u b j e c t - p re d i c a t e s t r u c -t u r e o f o u r g r a m m a r o r t h a t w e s h o u l d c o m p l e t e l y d o a w a y w i th t h e n o t i o n o f' s u b j e c t ' ( o r ' s o u l ' o r ' e g o ' o r 'w i11 ').46 B e t w e e n o u r s e l v e s , N i e t z s c h e w r i te s ,it is n o t a t a ll n e c e s s ar y to g e t r i d o f t h e s o u l . . , a n d t h u s to r e n o u n c e o n e o f th e m o s ta n c i e n t a n d v e n e r a b l e h y p o t h e s e s . . . . B u t t h e w a y is o p e n f o r n e w v e rs i o ns a n dr e f i n e m e n t s o f t h e s o u l - h y p o t h e s i s ; a n d s u c h c o n c e p t i o n s a s m o r t a l s o u l, s o u l a ss u b j e c t i v e m u l t i p l ic i t y , a n d s o u l a s s o c ia l s t r u c t u r e o f t h e d r i v e s a n d a f f e c ts , w a n th e n c e f o r t h t o h a v e c i t i z en s ' r i g h t s i n s c i e n c e ( B G E 1 ~ ).T h u s , N i e t z s c h e ' s r e j e c t io n o f t h e n o t i o n o f s u b j e c t as c a u s a s u i , c a u s a p r i m a , o rs o u l a t o m l e a d s h i m t o c o n s t r u c t a n a l t e r n a t iv e c o n c e p t i o n o f s u b je c t i v i t y .F o l l o w i n g a r e c u r r e n t s t ra t e g y , h e b eg i n s b y r e v e r s i n g o u r c o m m o n l in g u i s t i ca n d p h i l o s o p h i c a l h a b i ts , a r g u i n g t h a t w h a t is p r i m a r y a r e a c t io n s , d e e d s ,a c c i d e n t s , a n d b e c o m i n g s , r a t h e r t h a n s u b j e ct s , d o e r s , s u b s t a n c e s , o r b e i n g s . An a t u ra l is t ic t h e o r y , N i e t z s c h e c o n t e n d s , m u s t s ta r t f r o m t h e se f o r m e r a n dc o n s t r u c t t h e l a t te r o u t o f t h e m , r a t h e r t h a n v i ce v e r sa . H e n c e , j u s t a s N ie t z -s c h e c o m e s to c o n c e i v e o f a t h i n g a s t h e s u m o f i ts e f f e c ts ( W P 5 5 1 ) , s o , t o o ,d o e s h e c o m e t o c o n c e i v e o f th e s u b j e c t a s t h e s u m o f its a c t io n s a n d p a s s io n s .N i e t z s c h e ' s i n it ia l p r e m i s e is t h a t t h e n a t u r a l w o r l d i n w h i c h w e a r e s i t u a t e d

44 See TI VI 7-8 .4s Th is discussion has benefi ted fro m several fine analyses of Nietzsche's theor y o f the self:Tr acy Stron g, Tex ts an d Pretexts: Reflect ions on Perspectivism in Nietzsche, Political Theory 13,no. 2 (1985): 16 4-89 , Nehamas, Nietzsche: Life as Literature (Cambridge: H arv ard Universi ty Press,a985), chap. 6, and Davey, Nie tzsche and H um e, and Nie tzsche , the Se l f , and H erme neut icTh eo ry , Jo ur na l o f the Br i ti sh Soc ie ty o r Phenomeno logy 18, no. 3 09 87 ) : 272 -84.46 Th ese terms a re used m or e or less interchangeably by Nietzsche. He al ternately speaks ofthe soul -a tom (BGE 12) , the subjec t-a tom (GM I 13, W P 488, 636) , and the ego-a tom (BGE 17,W P 635), the soul as subject ive mult ipl ici ty (BGE 12) and the subject as mult iplicity (WP 49o,cf. 492). In various passages, he identifies soul an d subject (W P 485), the ' T ' and the wi ll(BGE 19) doe r, wil l, an d ego (TI II I 5), subject , ego, a nd doe r (WP 488), It sho uld beno ted that wh at is ofte n translated as the ego is, in Ge rm an, simply das Ich, the I.


14/24

T H E S U B J E C T O F N I E T Z S C H E ' S P E R S P E C T I V I S M 2 81a n d t h a t w c o b s e r v e i s, f i r s t a n d f o r e m o s t , a w o r l d o f b e c o m i n g , i . e ., a w o r l d o fm y r i a d a c t io n s , h a p p e n i n g s , e f fe c ts , a n d a p p e a r a n c e s . Y e t w e c a n a n d d oi n d i v i d u a t e t h is b e c o m i n g i n t o p a r t i c u l a r s e t s o r a s se m b l a g e s . T h e s u b j ec t ,N i e t z s c h e a r g u e s , is j u s t s u c h a n a s s e m b l a g e . S u b j e c ti v i t y i n g e n e r a l is c h a r a c -t e r i z e d b y a s p ec i fi c s e t o f a c t iv i t ie s a n d a p p e a r a n c e s ; a n d e a c h p a r t i c u l a rs u b j e c t is i n d i v i d u a t c d b y a p e c u l i a r s u b s e t o f t h o s e a c ti v it ie s , b y a d i s p o s i t i o nt o a c t i n a p a r t i c u l a r m a n n e r a n d d i re c ti o n .4 7

Y e t , f o r N i e t z s c h c , t h is u n i t y i s o n l y a r e l a t i v e u n i t y . T h e u n i t y o f t h e s u b j e c tis t h e u n i t y o f a d i s p o s i t i o n , m e r e l y a p ro b a b i l i ty t h a t g r o u p s t o g e t h e r a r a n g e o fm o r e o r l es s s i m i l a r a n d m o r e o r l e ss c o n n e c t e d a c t i vi t ie s f o r t h e p u r p o s e o fs i m p l i f i c a t i o n a n d c a l c u la t io n . a 8 S u b j e c t s , N i e t z s c h e t e ll s u s , a r c i r r e d u c i b l em u l t i p li ci ti es .a 9 T h e d i s p o s i t i o n t h a t c o m p o s e s t h e m is i ts e lf m a d e u p o fm i c r o d i s p o s i t i o n s - - w h a t N i c t z s c h e v a r i o u s l y c al l s d r i v e s ( T r i e b e ) , d e s i r e s( B e g i e r d e n ) , i n s t i n c t s ( I n s t i n k t e ) , p o w e r s ( M t i c h t e ) , f o r c e s ( K r i~ f t e ) , i m -p u l s e s ( R e i z e , I m p u l s e ) , p a s s i o n s ( L e i d e n s c h a f l e n ) , f e e l i n g s ( G e f ~ h l e n ) , a f -f e c t s ( A f f e k t e ) , p a t h o s ( P a t h o s ) , e tc . S t a r t i n g f r o m t h e p r e m i s e t h a t t h e r e a r e ,f i r s t a n d f o r e m o s t , a c ti o n s , b c c o m i n g s , a n d a p p e a r a n c e s , N i e t z s c h c p o si ts a f -f ec ts 5 o a s t h e i n t e r i o r s t a te s t h a t h e l p t o e x p l a i n a n d p r e d i c t t h e s e a c t i o n s ,b e c o m i n g s , a n d a p p e a r a n c e s . 5 1

T h e s e a f f e c ts a r e a s c l o se a s o n e c o m e s to a b o t t o m f l o o r i n N i c t z s c h e ' sm u l t i le v e l e d t h e o r y o f s u b je c t i v it y . W i t h t h is h y p o t h e s i s , N i e t z s c h e w o u l ds e e m t o b c a r g u i n g t h a t t h e s u b j e c t is n o t a n a t o m i c u n i t y s i m p l y b e c a u s e i t c a ni ts e l f b c f u r t h e r b r o k e n d o w n i n t o c o m p o n e n t p a r t s . T h a t is , h c w o u l d s e e m t ob e r e p l a c i n g o n e s o r t o f s u b j e c t a t o m i s m w i th a n o t h e r , t a k i n g c o n s i d e r a b l e

47 Nie tzsche writes : ' the subjec t' i s . . . a c rea ted ent i ty . . . a ca pa ci t y. . , fun damen ta l ly,act ion collect ively con sidere d w ith resp ect to al l ant icipated actions (act ion an d the probabil ity o fsimilar actions) (WP 556). Cf. W P 485 .4sSee W P 561: All unity is unity only as organization and co-operation: no di fferent ly than ahu m an com mu ni ty is a un i ty-- as op posed to an a tomistic anarchy; i t i s a pat te rn o f dominat ion tha tsignifies a uni ty bu t / s not a uni ty.49See BG E 12, 19, W P 488 -0 2, 636, 660. This Nietzschean con ception of subject ivi ty hasm ore rece ntly been ad voc ated by Gil les Deleuze and Michel Foucault. See Fou cault and D eleuze,Intellectuals an d Pow er, in Lan gua ge, C ounter-Memory, Practice: Selected Essays and Interviews byMichel Foucault , ed . Do nald F. Bouchard , trans . Don ald F. Bou chard and Sherry Simon (I thaca :Cornell University Press, 197 7), ~o 6, an d Foucault, Th e Confession o f the Flesh, in P ow e r /Knowledge: Se lec ted In terv iews and Other W ri tings , ed. Colin Gord on (New York: Pantheon, 198o),~o8.501 wil l use 'af fect ' as a gene ral term to encompass the h ost of oth er associated terms, since theterm seems to com bine the ac tive senses of 'dr ive ' and 'des i re ' wi th the mo re pass ive senses of'pass ion ' and ' fee ling ' . Moreover , the te rm in i ts var ious form s (affectus/affectio, der Affek t, l affect/l affection) has a lo ng an d r ich his tory in phi losophy (from the Scholast ics to Spinoza, Kant toDeleuze), rhetoric, and musical aesthetics.5, See BGE 36, WP 619, 635. Note that, in W P 619, the translat ion sho uld read an inn erwo rld [no t: will] m ust be ascribed to i t .


15/24

2 8 2 J O U R N L O F T H E H I S T O R Y O F P H I L O S O P H Y 3 5 : 2 A P R I L 1 9 9 7f o r c e a w a y f r o m h is c r i t i q u e o f e g o - s u b s t a n c e . 5 ~ I n d e e d , i n T h e W i l l to P o w e r ,N i e t z s c h e s e e m s t o s a y t h a t t h e s u b j e c ts o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s a n d p e r s p e c t i v e sa r e a f f e c t s :[ M ] o r a l e v a l u a t i o n is a n interpretation, a w a y o f i n t e r p r e t i n g . T h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i ts e lf isa symptom o f c e r t a i n p h y s i o l o g i c a l c o n d i t i o n s , l i k ew i s e o f a c e r t a i n s p i r i tu a l l e v e l o fr u l in g j u d g m e n t s : W h o i n t e r p r e t s ? - - O u r a f f e c t s ( W P ~ 5 4 ) . 5 3I t is o u r n e e d s that interpret the worM: o u r d r i v e s a n d t h e i r F o r a n d A g a i n s t. E v e r y d r i v eis a k i n d o f l u s t t o r u l e ; e a c h 6 n e h a s i ts p e r s p e c t i v e t h a t i t w o u l d l ik e t o c o m p e l a ll t h eo t h e r d r i v e s t o a c c e p t a s a n o r m ( W P 4 81 ).5 4H e r e , N i e t z s c h e s e e m s t o a r g u e t h a t e v e r y a ff e c t is o r h a s a p a r t i c u l a r F o r a n dA g a in s t 5 5 t h a t m a k e s i t a k i n d o f i n s ti n c ti v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , a p a r t i c u l a r m a n -n e r o f c o n s t r u i n g a n d r e s p o n d i n g t o i ts e n v i r o n i n g c o n d i t i o n s . O n t h e ba si s o ft h e s e t e x ts , o n e m i g h t r e a s o n a b l y a r g u e t h a t t h e r e is a s i m p l e a n s w e r t o t h eq u e s t i o n W h o o r w h a t is t h e s u b j ec t o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s a n d p e r s p e c t iv e s ? a n dt h a t th i s a n s w e r is s i m p l y : o u r af fe c ts . 5 6

Y e t , w h i l e a f f e c ts a r e i n s o m e s e n s e p r i m i t i v e , f o r N i e t z s c h e , h e r e f u s e s t oc o n c e i v e t h e m a s e n t i t i es , m u c h le ss t h e a t o m i c , s i n g u l a r , a n d u n i f i e d e n t i t ie st h a t c o u l d b e t h e p r o p e r b e a r e r s o f p e r s p e c t i v e s a n d i n t e rp r e t a ti o n s . 5 7 F i r st o fa ll , o n a m i c r o l ev e l , N i e t z s c h e t h i n k s o f a f f e c t s as a n o r g a n i c f o r m o f t h e b a s ic

f o r c e - p o i n t s p o s i t e d b y R o g e r B o s c o v i c h t o r e p l a c e th e m a t e r ia l i s t a to m . 5 8B o s c o v i c h m a i n t a i n s t h a t t h e s e b a s ic i t e m s a r e n o t . . . p a r t ic l e s o f m a t t e r inw h i c h p o w e r s s o m e h o w i n he r e 5 9 b u t d y n a m i c , d i f fe r e n t ia l c e n t e r s w i t h in af o r c e -f i e ld . 6~ T h e y a r e , a s i t w e r e , t e m p o r a r y d a m s o r a c c u m u l a t i o n s o f f o r c e ,r a t h e r t h a n s u b s i s t in g e n t i ti es . S e c o n d , o n a m o r e m a c r o l e v e l , a f fe c t s a r et e n d e n c i e s a n d p r o c e s s e s ( b e c o m i n g s ) r a t h e r t h a n d e f i n i t e e n t i t i e s ( b e -

5~ Th is charg e is m ade by Davey, Nietzsche and H um e, 23, 26.5sCf. D 119, BG E 187.54 Cf. W P 567 .5.~Cf. BGE 284.56Sara h Ko fm an takes Nietzsche to be claiming this. See Nietzsche and Metapho r, t rans . DuncanLa rge (Stan ford : Stan ford University Press, t993), 93ff. and 135ff.5~ WP 67o warn s ag ainst th e reificat ion and hypostatization o f affects.58 See BG E 12, 36. O n Boscovich and Nietzsche's relationship to Boscovich, see K auf m ann 'sno te to BGE 12, G eorg e J. Stack, Nietzsche and Boscovich's Na tural Philosophy, Pacific Philo-sophical Quarterly 62 ( ~981): 69-87, Claudia Crawford, The Beginnings of Nietzsche Theory of Lan-guage (Berl in: de Gru yter , 1988) , 87 -89 , 29 8-9 9 , and Al is ta ir M oles , Nietzsche s Philosophy o fNature and Cosmology(Berlin: P eter Lan g, 199o ), chap. 5.59 Ch arles C. Gillispie, The Edge of Objectivity (Princeton: Prin ceto n University Press, 196o ),

455 , quot ed i n Kaufm ann ' s no t e t o BGE 1~.60 Cf. Gilles Deleu ze, Nietzsche and Philosophy, t rans . Hugh Toml inson (New York: ColumbiaUniversity Press, 1983), 6: Eve ry forc e is thus essentially related to an oth er force. Th e bein g o fforce is plural, i t wo uld.b e absolutely ab surd to think of force in the singular. Th is notion o fbeing as an irreducib le plurali ty is at the h eart o f Deleuze's rea ding of Nietzsche.


16/24

THE SUBJECT OF NIETZSCHE'S PERSPECTIVISM 283i n g s ) . 61 F e a r , l o v e , e x u b e r a n c e , ressentiment, a n d e n v y , f o r e x a m p l e ,a r c n o t a d e q u a t e l y d e s c r i b e d a s t h i n g s ; r a t h e r , t h e y a r e w h a t N i e t z s ch c ca ll s

d y n a m i c q u a n t a o f f o r c e o r d r i v e t h a t h a v e t h e i r s p ec i fi c e x p r e s s i o n a n dd i r e c t i o n . T h i r d , a f f e c t s a r c , b y d e f i n i t i o n , r e l a t io n a l : t h e y r e l a t e o n e s t a t e o fa f f a ir s t o a n o t h e r . A s t h e n o t i o n s o f d r i v e a n d i m p u l s e s u g g e s t, a f f e c ts a r ca p u l l i n g o r p u s h i n g o f t h e o r g a n i s m i n o n e d i r e c t i o n o r a n o t h e r . 6~ F i na l ly ,N i c t z s c h c a r g u e s t h a t i t m a k e s n o s e n s e t o s p e a k o f a n a f f c c t i n is o l a t io n f r o mo t h e r a f f ec t s . W e h a v e s c c n t h a t h c c o n s i d e r s a f f e c t s t o b e , in a r u d i m e n t a r ys e n se , i n t e r p r e t i v e . L i k e t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s d e s c r i b e d i n Genealogy I I I 1 2, e a c ha f f e c t is o r h a s a F o r a n d A g a i n s t (F iZ z u n d Wid er ) t h a t i t w o u l d l ik e t oc o m p e l a ll t h e o t h e r d r i v e s t o a c c e p t as a n o r m ( W P 4 8 1 ). Y e t, j u s t a s i n t e r p r e -t a t i o n s a r c a lw a y s es s e n t ia l l y e n g a g e d i n a s t r u g g l e w i t h o t h e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s ,j u s t a s e a c h i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a lw a y s b e g in s f r o m a n d t e n d s t o w a r d o t h e r i n t e r p r e -t a t i o n s t h a t i t r e i n t e r p r e t s o r b y w h i c h i t is r e i n t e r p r e t e d , s o t o o c a c h a f f e c t isa l w a y s e n g a g e d i n a s t r u g g l e w i t h o t h e r a f f e c ts , e a c h o f w h i c h w o u l d l i ke t oc o m p e l t h e o t h e r [ s ] t o a c c e p t [ it] a s a n o r m . A f f e c t s , N i e t z s c h e t el ls u s , a r c

d y n a m i c q u a n t a i n a r e l a t io n o f t e n s i o n t o a ll o t h e r d y n a m i c q u a n t a : theiressence lies in their relation to all other quanta , i n t h e i r ' e f fe c t ' u p o n t h e s a m e ( W P6 3 5 , m y ita lic s).6 3 I n d e e d , t h e w o r l d is a b e c o m i n g , f o r N i e t z sc h e , p r e c i s e l yb e c a u s e i t is e s s e n t ia l l y c o m p o s e d o f t h e s e v o la t il e r e l a ti o n s . M y i d e a , N i c t z -s c h e w r i t e s ( s p e a k i n g h e r e o f b o d i e s , t h o u g h t h e s a m e h o ld s f o r a f f e ct s a n di n t e r p r e t a t i o n s ) , is t h a t e v e r y s p ec if ic b o d y s t ri v es to b e c o m c m a s t e r o v e r a l ls p a c e a n d t o e x t e n d i ts f o r c e ( - - i t s w i ll t o p o w e r : ) a n d t o t h r u s t b a c k al l t h a tr e s is t s i ts e x t e n s i o n . B u t i t c o n t i n u a l l y e n c o u n t e r s s i m i l a r e f f o r t s o n t h e p a r t o fo t h e r b o d i e s a n d e n d s b y c o m i n g t o a n a r r a n g e m e n t ( 'u n i o n ' ) w i th t h o s e o ft h e m t h a t a r e s u f f i c i e n tl y r e l a t e d t o it : thus they conspire together fo r pow er. A n dt h e p r o c e s s g o e s o n - - ( W P 6 36 ).6 4

I n s t e a d o f i n d i v i d u a l a f f e c t s e a c h w i t h its o w n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o r p e r s p e c -t iv e , t h e n , w h a t w e e n c o u n t e r a r c a lw a y s u n i o n s o f a f fe c ts . T h i s d e s c r i p t i o nc o m e s c l o s e r t o c a p t u r i n g N i c t z sc h c ' s i d e a o f p e r s p e c t i v e o r i n t e r p r e t a -t i on . W h i l e e a c h a f f e c t is o r h a s a n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n a r u d i m e n t a r y s e n se ,

6, See WP 556: On e may not ask: who hen interprets?' fo r the interpretation itself, as a formof will to power, has existence (but n ot as a 'being, ' but rath er as a process, a becoming)as an affect.6, See BG E 19: in willing the re is, first, a plurality of sensations, namely, the sensation o f thestate away rom which , the sensation of the state towards which , the sensation o f this ~rom' andtowards themselves, and then also an accom panying muscular sensation, which even without ou rput ting into m otion 'a rm s and legs', begins its action by force of habit as soon as we 'will' anything.6s Again, the language of dyn am ic quanta is the language of affec t extended to encompassall efficient force (BG E 36). What holds for the m ore general language of dynamic quanta,therefo re, also holds for the subcategory of affect.64 Cf. GS 33 3, where Nietzsche describes knowledge and understanding as a contract tha ttemporarily settles accounts between struggling drives and relates them to one another in anonantagonistic way. Cf. also WP 567 .


17/24

8 4 J O U R N A L O F T H E H I S T O R Y O F P H I L O S O P H Y 3 5 : 2 A P R I L 1 9 9 7N i e t z s c h e t e n d s t o th i n k o f in t e r p r e t a t i o n s a n d p e r s p e c t i v e s a s h i e r a r c h i c a la g g r e g a t e s o f a ff e c t s i n w h i c h s o m e d o m i n a t e a n d o t h e r s a r e s u b o r d i n a t e . 65I n s t e a d o f b e i n g t h e p r o p e r s u b j ec t s o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s a n d p e r s p e c t iv e s , t h e n ,a f f e c t s t u r n o u t to b e s u b j e c t s o n l y i n a p o l it ic a l s e n s e : n a m e l y , m e m b e r s o ft h e h i e r a r c h i c a l s t r u c t u r e o f a n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n .

T h i s d e s c r i p t i o n r e ca l ls o u r e a r l i e r c h a r a c t e r i z a ti o n o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s a ss y s t e m s o f e v a l u a t i o n d i r e c t e d b y p a r t i c u l a r n e e d s . B u t w h a t i s i t t h a t u n i f i e s ap a r t i c u l a r s y s t e m a n d w h a t m a k e s a p a r t i c u l a r s et o f n e e d s d o m i n a n t ? N i e t z-s c h e te ll s u s t h a t e v e r y i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a n d p e r s p e c t i v e is o r i e n t e d t o w a r d t h ep r e s e r v a t i o n a n d e n h a n c e m e n t o f a s p ec if ic l ev e l o f o r g a n i z a t i o n i n l if e, f r o mt h e i n d i v i d u a l t o t h e g r o u p , t h e s p e c i e s , o r l i f e a s a w h o l e . 66 A r e t h e s u b j e c t so f p e r s p e c t i v i s m , t h e n , p e r h a p s j u s t t h e s e p a r t i c u l a r l e ve l s o f li fe ? I n a s e n s e,t h e a n s w e r i s y e s; f o r a p a r t i c u l a r p e r s p e c t i v e d o e s r e p r e s e n t t h e p o i n t o fv i e w o f a p a r t i c u l a r t y p e , g r o u p , c u l t u r e , p e o p l e , e t c. Y e t , o n c e a g a i n , t h e s ep e r s p e c t i v e s a r e n e v e r e n c o u n t e r e d i n i so la t i on . T h a t is , w e n e v e r c o m e a c r o sst h e se p e r s p e c t i v e s i n d e p e n d e n t o f th e i n d i v id u a l h u m a n b e in g s to w h o m t h e ya r e a t t r i b u t e d . A n d e a c h i n d i v i d u a l c u t s a c r o ss al l t h e v a r i o u s l e ve l s o f l if e:h u m a n b e i n g s a r e i n d i v id u a l s a s w e ll a s m e m b e r s o f c o m m u n i t i e s , c u l t u r e s ,s u b c u l t u r e s , r a c e s , c l a s se s , g e n d e r s , n a t i o n a l i t i e s , r e l i g i o n s , p o l i ti c a l p a r t i e s ,e tc . T h u s , o n t h e o n e h a n d , w e a lw a y s e n c o u n t e r p e r s p e c t i v e s w i t h in i n d i v id -u a l su b j e c t s, w h i le , o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , i n d i v i d u a l s u b j e c t s a r e a g g r e g a t e s o ft h e s e p e r s p e c t i v e s a n d t h e i r f o r m s o f l if e.

F o r N i e t z s ch e , t h e i n d i v i d u a l s u b j e c t is a n a g g r e g a t e o n t w o l e v e l s - - w h a ta r e u s u a l l y c a l l e d t h e p h y s i c a l a n d t h e s p i r i tu a l , b o d y a n d s o u l . A c c o r d -i n g t o N i e tz s c h e , h o w e v e r , t h e s e d o n o t f o r m t h e t w o s id e s o f a n o p p o s i t i o nb e t w e e n d i f f e r e n t k i n d s o f en t it y , b u t o n ly a d i f f e r e n c e o f d e g r e e a l o n g ac o n t i n u u m f r o m t h e m o r e o r l es s u n c h a n g e a b l e to th e m o r e o r l es s c h a n g e -a b l e . F i r s t , a s u b j e c t h a s a q u a n t i t a t i v e i d e n t i t y i n s o f a r a s it is b o r n w i t h a b a s i cp h y s i c a l u n i ty : a n i n t e g r a l b o d y . Y e t e v e n t h i s b a s ic u n i t y a n d i d e n t i t y a r e o n l yr e l a ti v e , s in c e , a c c o r d i n g t o N i e t z s c h e , t h e b o d y i t s e lf is a p o li t ic a l s t r u c t u r e ,

a n a r i s t o c ra c y ( W P 6 6 0) 67 o r o l i g a r ch y ( G M I I 1 ) - - a h i e r a r c h y o f o r g a n s ,65 Th is view of interpretation has recently been su ggested by Alan Schrift and M ark Fow ler.Fow ler writes: As I see it, a Nietzschean perspective can be correctly characterized as being acerta in configuration of affe cts-- or perhaps bet ter , a cer ta in 'commonwealth o f affe ct s ' . . , whichare related in such a way that som e of these affects are dominant and so responsible for im posingord er on what would otherwise be a chaos of motives and emotions . . . A perspective is just astructure of affects governed by a basic dom inant affect (or small cluster of them) ( H aving aPerspective, 115-16). Also see Schrift, Nietzzche and the Question of nterpretation: Between Hermeneu

tics and Deconstruction (New York: Routledge), chap. 6.66 Insight: all estimation o f value involves a certain p erspective: that o f the maintenance of theindividual, a com mun ity, a race, a state, a church, a faith, a culture (WP 259).67 In B GE ~59, Nietzsche also notes that the body is an aristocracy.


18/24

T H E S U B J E C T O F N I E T Z S C H E ' S P E R S P E C T I V IS M 2 8 5t is s u es , a n d c el ls , e a c h o f w h i c h h a s a p a r t i c u l a r r o l e a n d f u n c t i o n . I n a h e a l t h yb o d y , t h e s e v a r i o u s p a r t s f u l fi ll t h e i r f u n c t i o n s i n se r v i c e o f t h e w h o l e ; w h i l e ina s ic k o r d y i n g b o d y , t h i s r e l a t i o n o f p a r t s t o w h o l e ( a n d t h u s t h e i n t e g r i t y o ft h e b o d y ) is t h r e a t e n e d o r d i s s o lv i n g . 68 F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e r e la t iv e l y p r e - g i v e nu n i t y o f t h e b o d y is n o t a n e t e r n a l v e r i t y b u t t h e p r o d u c t o r r e s u l t o f i n t e r p r e -t a t i o n ( in N i e t z s c h e ' s b r o a d s e n s e o f t h e w o r d ) , i .e ., o f m i l l e n n i a o f e v o l u t i o n -a r y s t r u g g l e .

S e c o n d , a n d m o r e i m p o r t a n t f o r t h e p r e s e n t d i s c us s io n , a s u b j ec t h a s aq u a l i t a t i v e i d e n t i t y i n s o f a r as i t is o r h a s a m o r e o r le s s s t a b le c h a r a c t e r o r

s e l f. B u t t h is u n i ty , t o o . is a n a g g r e g a t e , a n d , m o r e o v e r , o n e t h a t is i n ti -m a t e l y r e l a t e d t o t h e p h y s ic a l , b o d i l y a g g r e g a t e . I n d e e d , N i e t z s c h e a r g u e s t h a tt h e o r g a n i z a t i o n a l u n i t y o f th e b o d y p r o v i d e s t h e p r o p e r m o d e l f o r t h e o r iz i n ga b o u t t h e s o u l , s e l f, o r s u b j e c t :T h e b o d y a n d p h y s i o l o g y a s t h e s t a r t in g p o i n t : w h y ? - - W e g a i n th e c o r r e c t id e a o f t h en a t u r e o f o u r s u b j e c t- u n it y , n a m e l y as re g e n t s a t t h e h e a d o f a c o m m u n a l i t y . . . . a ls oo f th e d e p e n d e n c e o f th e s e r e g e n ts u p o n t h e r ul e d a n d o f an o r d e r o f r a n k a n dd i v i si o n o f l a b o r a s t h e c o n d i t i o n s t h a t m a k e p o s s ib l e t h e w h o l e a n d i ts p a r t s. I n t h es a m e w a y , h o w l i v in g u n i t i es c o n t i n u a l l y a ri s e a n d d i e a n d h o w t h e s u b j e c t i s n o te t e r n a l ; i n t h e s a m e w a y , th a t t h e s t r u g g l e e x p r e s s e s it s el f i n o b e y i n g a n d c o m m a n d i n g ,a n d t h a t a f l u c t u a t i n g a s s e s s m e n t o f t h e l i m i t s o f p o w e r i s p a r t o f l i f e . Th e r e l a t i v ei g n o r a n c e i n w h i c h t h e r e g e n t i s k e p t c o n c e r n i n g i n d i v i d u a l a c ti v it ie s a n d e v e n d i s t u r -b a n c e s w i t h i n t h e c o m m u n a l i t y i s a m o n g t h e c o n d i t i o n s u n d e r w h i c h r u l e c a n b ee x e r c is e d . . . . T h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t t h in g , h o w e v e r , is : t h a t w e u n d e r s t a n d t h a t t h er u l e r a n d h i s s u b j e c ts a r e o f t h e s a m e k i n d , a l l f ee l ing , wi l ling , an d th ink ing . (WP 49 2 )T h i s l a s t r e m a r k is i m p o r t a n t ; f o r it s u g g e s ts t h a t t h e b o d y n o t o n l y p r e s e n t s t h ea p p r o p r i a t e f r a m e w o r k f o r a c o n c e p t i o n o f th e s e l f, b u t a ls o t h a t t h e l a t te r isa c t ua l ly r o o t e d i n t h e f o r m e r - - i n t h e a f fe c ts , w h i c h a r e a t o n c e p h y s i ca l a n d

s p i r i t u a l , i .e ., i n t e rp r e t iv e . 6 9 T h e a f f e c ts , t h e n , a r e t h e p o i n t o f c o n t a c t b e -t w e e n b o d y a n d s o u l . I n m i r r o r i n g f o r m u l a s , N i e t z s c h e t el ls u s t h a t t h es o u l is a s o c ia l s t r u c t u r e o f t h e d r iv e s a n d a f f e c t s ( B G E 1 2 ), w h i l e t h e b o d y isb u t a s oc ia l s t r u c t u r e c o m p o s e d o f m a n y s o ul s ( B G E 1 9) . W e c o u l d s u m m a r i z et h is b y s a y i n g t h a t t h e s e l f ( t h e p h y s i c a l - s p i r i tu a l s u b j e c t - u n i t y ) is a c o m p o s i t eo f m a n y s o u ls , e a c h o f w h i c h h a s i ts o w n p e r s p e c t i v e , i ts o w n a r r a n g e m e n t o fd r i v e s a n d a f fe c t s, F o r s a n d A g a i n s ts . T h e s e l f is t h u s a n a g g r e g a t e o f m a n y

6SOn this process of growth and decay, wee WP 678 . Also see GM II 19 and WP 64 3, onphysiological organs as interpretive constructions.69See BG E 19: ' w e are at the same time the commanding aru/the obeying parties ; Z I 4:'Body am I , and sou l ' - - thus speaks the child . . . But the aw akened and knowing say: body am Ientirely, an d nothin g else; and soul is only a word for something abou t the body ; and Z II 17:Since I have come to know the b ody be tt e r. . , the spirit is to me only quasi-spirit; and all that is'per m ane nt' is also a m ere parable.


19/24

286 JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY 35 2 APRIL I99dif fer ent perspect ives a nd in ter preta t ions , each of which is affect ive, rooted inthe various drives, impulses, desires, and passions of the body.7o

This idea r uns thr oug hou t Nietzsche 's d iscuss ions of subject iv i ty, sel f l lood,and character . For ins tance, in two s imi lar notes fro m 1884 , he wri tes:[A]II sorts of contradictory estimations and therefore contradictory drives swarm withinone man. This is the expression of the diseased condition in man kind, in contrast to theanimals, in which all existing instincts satisfy very specific tasks--this contradictorycreat ure has however in its natu re a great meth od o f knowledge: he feels many Fors andAgain sts- -he raises himself to just ice --t o a comprehension beyond the estimation of goodand evil. The wisest man would be the rich est in contradictions, who has feelers for allkinds of men and, in the midst, his great mome nts of grandiose harmony--a rareoccurrence even in u sl -- a sort of planetary move men t-- . (WP 259)7 ~In contrast to the animals, man has cultivated an abundance of contrary drives andimpulses within himself: thanks to this synthesis he is master of the ea rth. --Mor aliti esare the expression of locally limited orders of ran k in this multifar ious world of drives: sothat man should not perish through their contradictions. Thus a drive as master, itsopposite weakened, refined, as the impulse that p rovides the st imulus for the activity ofthe chie f drive. T he highest ma n would have the greatest multiplicity of drives, in therelatively greatest stren gth that can be end ure d. Inde ed, where the plant man showsitself strongest, one finds driving instincts that powerfully conflict with one an-other . . . . but are controlled. (WP 966)7 ~Here , as elsewhere, Nietzsche argu es that the h uma n subject is a mul tip l ici ty .In co ntras t wi th animals , who are com pose d of only a few, very specif ic ,ins t inc t ive perspec t ives , huma n be ings a re fa r more comple x- -co l l ec t ions o fa vast arra y of co mpe t in g ins t incts , affects, dr ives , des i res , bel iefs, an d capaci-t ies , and thus of a vas t array of perspect ives and in terpretat ions . Hence, hu-man beings are at once very r ichly endowed and very fragi le creatures .73

Nie tzsche con t ends tha t , fo r the mos t par t , huma n be ings have been un-70 See GS Preface 2.7~ Cf. GS 297 and KSA 11, 188 26 [149]: Justice, as the function of a broad panoramic powerthat looks beyond the narrow perspectives of good and evil and thus has a broader horizon ofadvantage--the intention to preserve something that is more than this or that person, cited inHeidegger, Nietzsche,Vol III, 147, Krell's translation modified.7, Cf. BGE 284, WP 933, 88 t.73 Cf. WP 684: The richest and most complex forms--for the expression 'higher type' meansno more than this --perish more easily: only the lowest preserve an apparent indestructibility . . . .Among men, too, the higher types, the lucky strokes of evolution, perish most easily as fortuneschange. They are exposed to every kind of decadence: they are extreme, and that almost meansdecadents . . . This is not due to any special fatality or malevolence of nature, but simply to theconcept 'higher type': the higher type represents an incomparably greater complexity--a greatersum of co-ordinated elements: so its disintegration is also incomparably more likely. The 'genius'

is the sublimest machine there is--consequently the most fragile. Cf. also A 14: relativelyspeaking, man is the most bungled of all the animals, the sickliest, and not one has strayed moredangerously from his instincts. But for all that, he is, of course, the most interesting. Cf. GS 3ol -3o2, ZI5, GMI 16, III 13.


20/24

T H E S U B J E C T O F N I E T Z S C H E ' S P E R S P E C T I V I S M 2 8 7a b l e to c o n t r o l t h e c o n f l ic t o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s a n d p e r s p e c t i v e s t h a t c o m p o s et h e m . P u s h e d a n d p u l l e d i n m u l t i p l e d i r ec t io n s , th e m a j o r i t y o f h u m a n b e i n g sh a v e s h o w n t h e m s e l v e s to b e in c o n t i n e n t , u n a b l e n o t t o r e s p o n d t o t h e m y r i a ds t i m u l i t o w h i c h t h e y a r e c o n t i n u a l l y s u b j e c te d .7 4 A s a d e f e n s e a g a i n s t t h i sw a n t o n a n d p a i n f u l c o n d i t i o n , h u m a n b e i ng s h a v e re s o r t e d t o a d r a s t ic m e a n so f a c h i e v i n g o r d e r , c o n t r o l , a n d p o w e r : t h e y h av e d e c l a r e d t h e e n t i r e r a n g e o fa f f e c t s e v il a n d r e s o l v e d t o e x t i r p a t e t h em . 7 5 T h o u g h it w o u l d a p p e a r t o b e ar a t h e r r a r e a n d e x t r e m e m a n i f e s t a t io n , N i e t z s ch e a rg u e s t h a t it is o n e o f t h em o s t w i d e s p r e a d a n d e n d u r i n g o f a ll p h e n o m e n a ( G M I I I 1 0 .7 6 H e d i s c e rn st h is k i n d o f e v a l u a t i o n n o t o n l y i n t h e p r a c ti c e s o f t h e r e l i g i o u s a sc e ti c b u t a ls oi n t h o s e o f t h e r a t io n a l i s t p h i l o s o p h e r ( w h o d i s ti n g u i s h e s m i n d a n d b o d y a n ds e t s t h e f o r m e r a b o v e t h e l a t t e r ) , a n d t h e s c h o l a r - s c i e n t i s t ( w h o s t r i v e s f o ro b j e c ti v it y c o n c e i v e d a s c o n t e m p l a t i o n w i t h o u t i nt er es t ) .7 7 I n d e e d , [ a ] p a r tf r o m t h e a s c et ic i d e a l , N i e t z s c h e m a i n t a i n s , m a n , t h e h u m a n a n i m a l h a d n om e a n i n g so f a r ( G M I II 28 ) . 78

T h e a s c et ic s o l u t i o n is n o t o n l y e x t r e m e , b u t s e l f - d e f e a ti n g . F o r , i n t h eg u i s e o f e x t i r p a t i n g t h e a f f e c ts a n d d e n y i n g t h e m u l t ip l i ci t y o f p e r s p e c t i v e s , its i m p l y e n d o r s e s o n e a f f e c t i v e p e r s p e c t i v e a n d r e je c t s a ll t h e o t h e r s . I t, t o o ,m a n i f e s ts a w ill t o p o w e r a n d t h u s a p r iv i l eg e d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a n d d o m i n a n ts e t o f a f fe c t s. D i s g u s t e d w i t h s e n s u o u s e x i s t en c e , it p l o ts r e v e n g e t h r o u g h t h es e p a r a t i o n o f m i n d a n d b o d y , a n d t h e e l e v at io n o f t h e s p i ri tu a l a n d a n -t i n a t u r a l o v e r t h e b o d i ly a n d n a t u r a l . T h i s s it u a t io n is c e r t a i n ly p a r a d o x i c a l - -f o r i t s e ts a p a r t i c u l a r w i ll o f l i f e a g a i n s t l i f e it se lf ,7 9 a n a f f e c t a g a i n s t a l la f f e c ts , 8~ n a t u r e a g a i n s t s o m e t h i n g t h a t is a ls o n a t u r e ( W P ~ 8 ) - - b u t i t isn o n e t h e l e s s p r e v a l e n t .

T h i s s t r a n g e p h e n o m e n o n , N i e t zs c h e a r g u e s , is t h e express ion o f t he d i seasedc o n d i t i o n i n m a n , a s ig n o f n ih i li s m , d e c a d e n c e , a n d t h e d e g e n e r a t i o n o f li fe . 8 'I n th i s c o n d i t i o n , h u m a n b e i n g s a r e p r im a r i l y r e a c t iv e a n d n e g a t i v e . T h e yd e c l a r e t h e i r c o n t r a d i c t o r y n a t u r e e vi l a n d s u r m i s e t h a t t h e r e m u s t b e a b e t t e rc o n d i t i o n - - a g o o d , n o n c o n t r a d i c t o r y , e x t r a n a t u r a l c o n d i t io n a n d w o r l d . 8~T h u s , t h e y c o m e t o e x e m p l i f y th a t u n n u a n c e d , b i n a r y m o r a li ty o f ressen t imen t

74See T I II 9, T I V 2, A 3o, WP 778.75See BT/SC l, T I V, WP 228, 383-88.76See GM III 13 and A 8 - 9.77On both o f these, see GM III 12, 23-28. Also see T I II .78Cf. Thu s Spoke Zarathustra wh ere Nietzsche contends that this ascetic idea l is such a pe rva-sive fea ture th at it can be said to characterize hum anity as a who le; hence, Zarathustra's condem -nation of man and call for the overman.~9See TI V.a~ BGE 117.s~ This them e runs th roug hou t GM III, T I, and WP.s, See W P 579-


21/24


22/24

THE SUBJE CT OF NIETZ SCHE'S PERSPECTIVISM z 9p e r s o n ra i s e s h i m o r h e r s e l f t o k n o w l e d g e , '~ }u stic e, a n d a n e s t i m a t i o nb e y o n d g o o d a n d e vi l .

Y e t t h is n e c e s s i t a t e s a r e d e s c r i p t i o n o f k n o w l e d g e a n d ' ~ u st i ce . K n o w l -e d g e c a n n o l o n g e r m e a n o b j e c t i v i t y . . . u n d e r s t o o d a s ' c o n t e m p l a t i o n w i th -o u t i n t e r e s t ' , f o r th i s is a n o n s e n s i c a l a b s u r d i t y ( G M I I I 1 ~ ) t h a t d e n i e s t h ea f f e c t i v e c h a r a c t e r o f a ll li fe a n d t h e a f f ec t i ve p e r s p e c t i v e s a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n st h a t a r e t h e v e r y c o n d i t i o n s f o r a n y k n o w l e d g e w h a t s o e v e r . S i m i l ar ly , '~ u s ti c ec ar l n o l o n g e r m e a n t h e e q u a l i z at i o n o f p o w e r , t h e p r e v e n t i o n o f s t r u g g l e , a n dt h e i n s u r a n c e o f p e a ce , fo r th i s r e p r e s e n t s a p r i n c i p l e h o s t i l e t o l i f e ( G M 1 11 1), s i nc e i t d e n i e s t h e r e l a t i o n s o f s u p r e m a c y u n d e r w h i c h th e p h e n o m e n o no f ' l if e ' c o m e s t o b e ( B G E 1 9 ). s6 R a t h e r , f o r t h e s e h i g h e r t y p e s , k n o w l -e d g e a n d '~ ju st ic e s i g n i f y t h e a f f i r m a t i o n o f a f f e c t i v e l if e a n d o f t h e o r g a n i z -i n g f o r c e t h a t c o n t r o l s i t i n t h e s e r v i c e o f t h e s u b j e c t a s a w h o l e .

T h e r e is n o b e t t e r f o r m u l a t i o n o f th e s e a im s t h a n t h e p a s s a g e o n p e r s p e c -t iv i ty c i t e d a t t h e o u t s e t . F o r t h e h i g h e r t y p e s , k n o w l e d g e a n d '~ ju st ic e a r ep r e c i s e ly t h e a b il it y t o h a v e o n e ' s F o r a n d A g a i n s t u n d e r c o n t r o l a n d t o e n g a g ea n d d i s e n g a g e t h e m , s o t ha t o n e k n o w s h o w t o e m p l o y a v a r i e t y o f p e r s p e c t i v e sa n d a f f e c t i v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s i n t h e s e r v i c e o f k n o w l e d g e . ''sT S u c h a n u a n c e d ,m u l t i f a c e t e d e s t i m a t i o n i s i n d e e d s o m e t h i n g o t h e r t h a n t h e b i n a r y , s la v is hm o r a l i t y o f g o o d a n d e v il . I t p o i n t s t o w a r d a d i f f e r e n t e t h i cs : a m o d e l o fp r a c t ic e f i r m l y r o o t e d i n th e e t h o s , o n e t h a t e x t o l s s e l f -c o n t r o l a n d f i n e d is -c r i m i n a t i o n i n t h e e s t i m a t i o n o f t h e p a r t i c u l a r p a s s io n s a n d a c t i o ns a p p r o p r i -a t e f o r e v e r y g i v e n s i t u a ti o n , ss I n d e e d , p e r s p e c t i v i s m m i g h t b e s e e n a s e n c a p -s u l a t i n g N i e t z s c h e ' s c o n c e p t i o n o f p r a c t i c a l w i s d o m : i t a d v o c a t e s t h e c u l ti v a -t i o n o f a v a r i e t y o f a f f e c t i v e c e n t e r s w i t h i n a n o v e r a l l o r g a n i z a t i o n ( t h e s u b je c t )t h a t i s f i n e ly a t t u n e d t o i ts c a p a c i t i es a n d e n v i r o n m e n t , a w a r e o

christoph cox - the subject of nietzsche s perspectivism

Documents