{"title":"Embarkation for Abdera: Historicization in Nietzsche’s Second Untimely Meditation","authors":"Henning Trüper","doi":"10.7203/qfia.9.1.21841","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": This article develops a novel reading of the threefold division of modes of historicization in Nietzsche’s Uses and Disadvantages of History for Life . It argues that Nietzsche’s stance is closely matched, and indirectly responds, to specific features of the argument for progress in human history that Kant presents in Conflict of the Faculties . Kant had hit upon interest, boredom, publicity, and forgetting as systematic problems for the philosophy of history, and Nietzsche’s thought on history takes up these concerns. I argue that Nietzsche’s reaction to these Kantian problems prompted him to subtly dissociate historicization and historicity. This manoeuver allowed him to counter the conceptual challenges Kant had established and to align his notions on history with those on ethical normativity in lived life, embracing what he elsewhere rejected as a “moral ontology.” Resumen: humana que Kant presenta en el Conflicto de las Facultades respondiendo indi-rectamente a ese escrito. Kant había señalado el interés, el aburrimiento, la publi-cidad y el olvido como problemas sistemáticos para la filosofía de la historia, y el pensamiento de Nietzsche sobre la historia retoma estas preocupaciones. Se sos-tiene que la reacción de Nietzsche a estos problemas kantianos le llevó a disociar sutilmente la historización de la historicidad. Esta maniobra le permitió replicar a los desafíos conceptuales que Kant había establecido y alinear sus nociones sobre la historia con las de la normatividad ética en la vida vivida, abrazando lo que en otros lugares rechazaba como una “ontología moral”.","PeriodicalId":31627,"journal":{"name":"Quaderns de Filosofia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quaderns de Filosofia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7203/qfia.9.1.21841","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
: This article develops a novel reading of the threefold division of modes of historicization in Nietzsche’s Uses and Disadvantages of History for Life . It argues that Nietzsche’s stance is closely matched, and indirectly responds, to specific features of the argument for progress in human history that Kant presents in Conflict of the Faculties . Kant had hit upon interest, boredom, publicity, and forgetting as systematic problems for the philosophy of history, and Nietzsche’s thought on history takes up these concerns. I argue that Nietzsche’s reaction to these Kantian problems prompted him to subtly dissociate historicization and historicity. This manoeuver allowed him to counter the conceptual challenges Kant had established and to align his notions on history with those on ethical normativity in lived life, embracing what he elsewhere rejected as a “moral ontology.” Resumen: humana que Kant presenta en el Conflicto de las Facultades respondiendo indi-rectamente a ese escrito. Kant había señalado el interés, el aburrimiento, la publi-cidad y el olvido como problemas sistemáticos para la filosofía de la historia, y el pensamiento de Nietzsche sobre la historia retoma estas preocupaciones. Se sos-tiene que la reacción de Nietzsche a estos problemas kantianos le llevó a disociar sutilmente la historización de la historicidad. Esta maniobra le permitió replicar a los desafíos conceptuales que Kant había establecido y alinear sus nociones sobre la historia con las de la normatividad ética en la vida vivida, abrazando lo que en otros lugares rechazaba como una “ontología moral”.