This is a book review done by Neo-Liberal Theorist Frances Fukuyama on a new Biography about Friedrich Neitzsche by Julian Young (University of Auckland), originally published in the Sunday Times 5/7/10.


Whether we acknowledge it or not, we continue to live within the intellectual shadow cast by Nietzsche. Postmodernism, deconstructionism, cultural relativism, the “free spirit” scorning bourgeois morality, even New Age festivals like Burning Man can all ultimately be traced to him. There is a line running from “Beyond Good and Evil” to Justice Anthony Kennedy’s assertion (in Planned Parenthood v. Casey) that liberty is “the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe and of the mystery of human life.”

Young appropriately underlines the notion that postmodernism, with its embrace of diversity in values, is no different from the 19th-century modernism that Nie­tzsche hated. He would not have cele­brated
alternative lifestyles, non-­Western cultures or the right of every fourth grader to be his or her own value-creator. Acknowledgment of the death of God is a bomb that blows up many things, not just oppressive
traditionalism, but also values like compassion and the equality of human dignity on which support for a tolerant liberal political order is based. This then is the Nie­tzschean dead end from which Western

philosophy has still not emerged. 

(Full article here)

Views: 476

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

ciao kelito

me back for a while
I like that idea of yanks not getting philosophy,

I am listening to Paul Bley at the moment.

kelamuni said:
"grandpa." hahaha. I had no idea things here were still interesting.

I kind of agree with Chris, though, ie., the topic is Nietzsche and not so much Fuckyamama. But Steven raises the interesting point that Philosophers (upper case "P") have a overly high opinion of themselves and what they can do. Maybe even Nietzsche fall into this mold. As Fukayama presents him, he sounds like an idealist, like the early Plato before he became jaded after Syracuse. And it's a particularly modernist form of idealism at that, which is ironic.

It all kind of reminds me of Ken's self-endorsement: "It's a new world; it's an integral world. By studying my new integral philosophy, you will be raising your consciousness and helping the world evolve." yada yada. (Sorry, I can't resist Wilber-bashing, particularly when it is frowned upon.)

Reply to Discussion


What paths lie ahead for religion and spirituality in the 21st Century? How might the insights of modernity and post-modernity impact and inform humanity's ancient wisdom traditions? How are we to enact, together, new spiritual visions – independently, or within our respective traditions – that can respond adequately to the challenges of our times?

This group is for anyone interested in exploring these questions and tracing out the horizons of an integral post-metaphysical spirituality.

Notice to Visitors

At the moment, this site is at full membership capacity and we are not admitting new members.  We are still getting new membership applications, however, so I am considering upgrading to the next level, which will allow for more members to join.  In the meantime, all discussions are open for viewing and we hope you will read and enjoy the content here.

© 2024   Created by Balder.   Powered by

Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service