{"title":"Die Geburt des Philologen aus dem Geiste der Schopenhauerschen Philosophie. Nietzsches Antrittsvorlesung Über die Persönlichkeit Homers","authors":"Simona Apollonio","doi":"10.1515/nietzstu-2021-1015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The Birth of the Philologist from the Spirit of Schopenhauer’s Philosophy. Nietzsche’s Inaugural Lecture On the Personality of Homer. This essay highlights Schopenhauer’s decisive and unexplored role in Nietzsche’s Über die Persönlichkeit Homers (1869). Following Schopenhauer’s negative assessment of the study of history, Nietzsche criticizes F. A. Wolf’s organic systematization of the sciences of antiquity (inspired by Schelling and Hegel) and foregrounds the aesthetic dimension of philology. Contrary to Wolf, Nietzsche believes that historical investigation is subordinate to the essential pedagogical function of philology; and only through its aesthetic component can philology establish which literary works of antiquity are to be considered truly “classical.” The debate on the Homeric question after the publication of Wolf’s Prolegomena ad Homerum (1795) illustrates that philologists have paradoxically become opponents and “destroyers” of the ideal of antiquity. Nietzsche shows how a methodological approach inspired by Schopenhauer’s philosophy can revive the relationship between philology and art. Nietzsche’s arguments to counter Wolf’s thesis about the problem of Homer’s personality implicitly rest on Schopenhauer’s aesthetics. In particular, through Schopenhauer’s conception of genius, Nietzsche rehabilitates the individuality of the poetic author of the Iliad and Odyssey, even though this poet does not correspond to the one referred to as “Homer” in antiquity.","PeriodicalId":356515,"journal":{"name":"Nietzsche-Studien","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nietzsche-Studien","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/nietzstu-2021-1015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract The Birth of the Philologist from the Spirit of Schopenhauer’s Philosophy. Nietzsche’s Inaugural Lecture On the Personality of Homer. This essay highlights Schopenhauer’s decisive and unexplored role in Nietzsche’s Über die Persönlichkeit Homers (1869). Following Schopenhauer’s negative assessment of the study of history, Nietzsche criticizes F. A. Wolf’s organic systematization of the sciences of antiquity (inspired by Schelling and Hegel) and foregrounds the aesthetic dimension of philology. Contrary to Wolf, Nietzsche believes that historical investigation is subordinate to the essential pedagogical function of philology; and only through its aesthetic component can philology establish which literary works of antiquity are to be considered truly “classical.” The debate on the Homeric question after the publication of Wolf’s Prolegomena ad Homerum (1795) illustrates that philologists have paradoxically become opponents and “destroyers” of the ideal of antiquity. Nietzsche shows how a methodological approach inspired by Schopenhauer’s philosophy can revive the relationship between philology and art. Nietzsche’s arguments to counter Wolf’s thesis about the problem of Homer’s personality implicitly rest on Schopenhauer’s aesthetics. In particular, through Schopenhauer’s conception of genius, Nietzsche rehabilitates the individuality of the poetic author of the Iliad and Odyssey, even though this poet does not correspond to the one referred to as “Homer” in antiquity.
从叔本华哲学精神看语言学家的诞生。尼采关于荷马人格的就职演讲。这篇文章强调叔本华在尼采的Über die Persönlichkeit Homers(1869)中所扮演的决定性和未被探索的角色。继叔本华对历史研究的负面评价之后,尼采批评了F. A.沃尔夫(受谢林和黑格尔的启发)对古代科学的有机系统化,并强调了语言学的美学维度。与沃尔夫相反,尼采认为历史调查服从于语言学的基本教学功能;只有通过它的美学成分,文献学才能确定哪些古代文学作品被认为是真正的“经典”。沃尔夫的《荷马论》(Prolegomena and Homerum, 1795)出版后,关于荷马问题的争论表明,语言学家自相矛盾地成为了古代理想的反对者和“破坏者”。尼采展示了受叔本华哲学启发的方法论方法如何能够恢复语言学与艺术之间的关系。尼采反驳沃尔夫关于荷马人格问题的论点隐含地基于叔本华的美学。特别是,通过叔本华的天才概念,尼采恢复了《伊利亚特》和《奥德赛》诗歌作者的个性,尽管这位诗人与古代被称为“荷马”的诗人并不相符。