There are more idols than realities in the world: that is my "evil eye" for this world, which is also my "evil ear" This essay - the title betrays it - is above all a recreation, a spot of sunshine, a leap sideways into the idleness of a psychologist. Perhaps a new war? And are new idols sounded out? This little essay is a great declaration of war grosse Kriegserklarung , and regarding the sounding out of idols, it is time not just idols, but eternal idols, which are here touched with a hammer as with a tuning fork - there are altogether no older, no convincing lower, no puffed-up aufgeblaseneren idols Also, no more hollow That does not mean they are the most believed, also said to be especially the case in chief, not quite idol Written in September 3 to 30, ; but first published end of November ].
Maxims and Arrows. Idleness is the beginning of all psychology. Even the most courageous of us has the courage rarely to what he actually knows To live alone, must be a beast or a God - says Aristotle. Missing the third case: one must be both - Philosopher I want to know one and for all, not much. One recovers in his wild nature at its best unnaturalness of his spirituality Man is only a mistake of God?
Or God merely a mistake of man? From the military school Kriegsschule of life. Aus der Kriegsschule des Lebens. This maxim 8 is one of the most famous quotes from Nietzsche. See the concept Kriegsschule' in Nietzsche's notebook of Spring 18 . A slightly different versions of this section is in one of the Nietzsche's notebook and has this version of the maxim 8: "What does not kill us — that bring us to that makes us stronger. II faut le tuer Wagnerisme.
Spring 15 . Complete text in German and French for the other version: ["Was uns nicht umbringt — das bringen wir um, das macht uns starker.
II faut tuer le Wagnerisme"]. Notebook: Spring 15 . Help yourself: will you still helps everyone. Principle of charity. That one's own acts committed against cowardice! Can an ass be tragic? The case of the philosopher.
One has to be why? The man who created the woman - resulting in yet? From a rib of his God, - his "ideal" Looking for? You want to increase you a hundredfold? Posthumous people - 1 for example - are understood worse than contemporary, but heard better. Strict: we will never understand - and therefore our authority Among women. Oh you do not know the truth! Is it not an attack on all our pudeur modesty "? This is an artist, how I love artists, modest in his needs: he really wants only two things, his bread and his art, - panem et Circen Whose will not to put things in white, who puts more into it, at least one sense: that is, he believes that a will is already in it principle of "faith".
The perfect woman commits literature as it commits a small sin to attempt in passing, looking around, if someone notices, and assured someone noticed them Go in noisy situations in which one may have no apparent virtues, but where, like the tightrope walker on his rope, either stands or falls - or is it So that one looks for the beginnings, it is cancer Krebs.
The historian looks back at last, he also believes backward. Satisfaction protects itself from colds. Who ever knew to a woman who dressed well, cold? I'm suspicious of all systematizers and go out of their way. The will to system is a lack of righteousness probity, Rechtschaffenheit. Der Wille zum System ist ein Mangel an Rechtschaffenheit]. Early version from notebook , 15 . The will to a system is, at least for us thinkers, something that compromised, a form of immorality.
Der Wille zum System ist, fur uns Denker wenigstens, etwas, das compromittirt, eine Form der Unmoralitat "].
From John , New Testament, title from 24 Nietzsche's autobiography that he was soon to write in the next month, October ]. In all its manifestations you may look for gallantry, the senses, sexual competition, and "woman," and you will not look in vain. The disappointed man speaks: —I sought for great men, but all I found were the apes of their ideal. He who fights with monsters, Nietzsche once told us, should look to it that he himself does not become one, and when you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss also gazes into you. Nietzsche believes that to be oneself is "the eternal joy of becoming.
You hold the woman for deep - why? The woman is not even flat. If the woman has manly virtues, it is to run away, and if it has no male virtues, it will run it themselves. One commits a rare haste alone. In the first one always does too much haste. Precisely for this reason we usually commits a second - and now it does too little The worm, which came curves. So it is wise. It thus reduces the probability of being replaced by new.
In the language of morality: humility. There is a hatred of falsehood and deception from an irritable sense of honor, there is just such a hatred of cowardice, inasmuch as the lie that is forbidden by a divine commandment. Too cowardly to lie How little is to happiness! The sound of a bagpipe.
The German imagines even God singing songs.
On ne peut penser et ecrire qu'assis [One cannot think and write except when seated]. The staying power is precisely the sin against the Holy Spirit. Issued only thoughts have value. It gives cases where we are like horses, we fall psychologists, and anxiety: we see our own shadow in front of us down and fluctuate. The psychologist must gaze beyond himself in order to see at all.
Whether we do immoralists virtue of damage? It was only when they are wounded they are sitting firmly on her throne. Moral: you have to shoot the morale.
You're running ahead? A third case would be the runaway First question of conscience Gewissensfrage. Are you real? A representative? Second question of conscience. The disappointed speaks. Are you one who is watching? Third question of conscience. Will you go with? You have to know what you want and that you want.
Fourth question of conscience. Those were steps for me, I climbed over them, - that I had over them. But they thought I wanted to sit on them to rest What does it matter that I am right! I have too much law. Formula of my happiness: a Yes, No, a straight line, a goal The Problem of Socrates. About life in all ages the wisest have judged same: it is no good Always and everywhere one has heard from their lips the same sound - a sound full of doubt, full of melancholy, full of weariness of life, full of resistance to life.
Even Socrates said, when he died: "To live - that is a long time to be sick: I'm guilty of the savior to Asclepius, a rooster. What has it? The consensus of the sages proves the truth.
Were they all perhaps shaky on their legs more tightly? That wisdom appears on earth as a raven, inspired by a little whiff of carrion? Myself is this irreverence that the great sages are decay-type, first occurred to me, especially in a case where it is most strongly opposed by both scholarly and illiterate prejudice: I recognized Socrates and Plato as symptoms of degeneration, tools of the Greek dissolution, pseudo-Greek, anti-Greek "Birth of Tragedy" That consensus of the sages - that I understood better and better - proves at least that they were right in what they agreed on: it shows rather that they themselves, these wisest men, some agree physiological corresponded to a negative stand on the same way to life, - need to stand.
Judgments, value judgments about life, for or against it, can never finally be true: they have value only as symptoms, they come only as symptoms into consideration - in themselves such judgments are stupidities. You have to stretch out one's fingers and make an attempt to grasp this amazing finesse, that the value of life cannot be estimated. Not by the living, because such a party, even a bone of contention and not judges, not by a dead, others for a reason. Socrates was, after his origin, the lowest class: Socrates was rabble. We know you see it yourself, how ugly he was. But ugliness, in itself an objection, is among the Greeks almost a refutation.