Friedrich Nietzsche And His Work Human, All Too Human (1878)

In his work Human, All Too Human (1878) Friedrich Nietzsche identifies a “congenital defect” from which seemingly all philosophers suffer. In his diagnosis of philosophical activity, Nietzsche claims this defect originates from a “lack of historical sense.” Many philosophers make unwarranted assertions about “man” and human behaviour. These assertions are frequently made without any historical context or basis, or awareness about the genesis of their analysis.

Although philosophers may conceive of themselves to be disinterested seekers of unquestionable truths and moral absolutes, Nietzsche elucidates that what their self-deception fails to recognise, is that human processes and moral values originate from particular historical epochs, with roots in specific religious, cultural and political systems. This impulsion to wish for certainties and fixed identities is therefore misguided, as philosophers posit themselves to be objective enquirers, rather than individuals whose faculties of knowledge are the product of thousands of years of human development.

This defect therefore results in a denial to recognise human cognition has transformed and has been shaped and moulded over the course of many years, a failure to: “understand that man has evolved.” One may easily fail to recognise this as in the last few thousand years humanity has not altered in very dramatic ways. The most drastic changes to the human faculties happened before this portion of time. Philosophers therefore frequently analyse humanity as it appears to them in the present and believe their analysis to be proof of “eternal facts,” that showcase human nature to have a permanent, constant, state of being.

Although Nietzsche is making a broad proclamation about philosophers in this second aphorism, it may be inferred that he has particular thinkers in mind. Nietzsche does not seem to be claiming that all philosophers will necessarily show this particular congenital defect, only that a large majority are inclined to. Throughout his writings, Nietzsche was critical of certain tendencies within Plato and Socrates’s philosophy. He regarded Socrates as the archetype of the “theoretical man” – who held the mistaken opinion that through the pursuit of knowledge, one could come to understand and correct existence. Human, All Too Human also marks a significant turning point in the evolution of Nietzsche’s philosophy, Nietzsche had become disillusioned with his previous “idols,” Richard Wagner and Arthur Schopenhauer. Following the Bayreuth festival of 1876, Nietzsche became increasingly dissatisfied with Wagner’s work and seemingly came to a realisation that his earlier conception of the composer, as a gifted saviour whose music would redeem existence, was incorrect. In this middle period, Nietzsche distances himself from certain elements within Schopenhauer’s thought that he regards as being misinformed. Nietzsche was not only critical of the theoretical optimism he found in Socrates but of the kind of pessimism he saw in Schopenhauer as well.

The problems of modern culture and society are a central preoccupation throughout Nietzsche’s polemics. How do we attempt to bring forth a rejuvenation of culture? What systems of values can best sustain life? He endeavours to act as a kind of diagnostician that identifies the ailments affecting contemporary culture, uncovering the psychological structures that may prove harmful and ideally, he will provide a cure to those processes which threaten to devalue life. In his earlier writings, such as The Birth of Tragedy (1872), Nietzsche is critical of modern scientific culture. He regards its optimistic tendency, to view scientific truths as an adequate way of redeeming life and alleviating suffering, to be misguided. Nietzsche claims in The Birth of Tragedy,

“The whole of our modern world […] takes as its ideal the theoretical man who is equipped with the highest powers of knowledge, works in the service of science, and whose archetype and progenitor is Socrates.”

He condemns a modern attitude that is pervasive in contemporary culture, the attitude that esteems reason to be the provider of answers, knowledge to be virtuous and ignorance to be immoral. Instead he calls for a rebirth of tragedy and proposes that art and myth may re-establish cultural unity and affirm existence. However, in Human All Too Human, Nietzsche appears to delineate from this earlier viewpoint. Nietzsche emphasises in the second aphorism, that philosophers should seek historical basis for their speculations. The “higher culture” that he claims will arise in the future, will be one that is formed from the accruement of knowledge, rather than one that is based on metaphysics and artistic creation. He claims,

“It is the sign of a higher culture to esteem more highly the little, humble truths, those discovered by a strict method, rather than the gladdening and dazzling errors that originate in metaphysical and artistic ages.”

Nietzsche appears to reject his earlier romantic notions, in which he admired the arts for its ability to offer consolation for human suffering and affirm existence. There appears to have taken place a radical shift in Nietzsche’s thought. In these first aphorisms, he appears to embrace scientific culture and praise its spirit and methodology. He praises science for its pursuit of “humble truths.” This emphasis on humbleness suggests that Nietzsche’s glorification of science may be due to its modest intentions. There is much to admire in the scientifically minded figure who remains modest with their project, and has no inclination for the theoretical optimism that was characteristic of thinkers following the Socratic turn.

A rejuvenation and unification of culture therefore will not simply arrive through a renewal of Tragedy. In order for humanity to re-establish a culture that effectively affirms existence, philosophers must recognise their “congenital defect.” They must Reject the notion that there are absolute truths, fixed essences and “eternal facts.” Instead they must comprehend that humanity has evolved and their philosophical speculations should be grounded in historical data, their reflections should be viewed in light of everything that may be understood about human nature, from the natural sciences, from history, and from the arts.