Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

2 results

  • Chapter 1 - Metaphilosophy and “Natural History”

  • from Part I - Evolving Metaphilosophies
  • Edited by Paul S. Loeb, University of Puget Sound, Washington, Matthew Meyer
  • Book:
    Nietzsche's Metaphilosophy
    Published online:
    24 October 2019
    Print publication:
    07 November 2019, pp 9-21

  • Summary

    One way of dealing with the question “what is philosophy?” is to ask what a philosopher is – or should be. For Nietzsche, this is a fundamental issue. He often frames the question in genetic terms: How does one become a philosopher? Giving an answer to this question is the task of the “natural history” (Naturgeschichte) of the free spirit. It is not an impersonal question: Nietzsche himself functions as the model for the “free spirit” (or “superior man”) whose “natural history” he intends to write (§ 1). Focusing on the writing process that led to Beyond Good and Evil, the present chapter reconstructs this project and its metaphilosophical implications (§ 2), asking whether this “natural history” can be qualified as naturalistic (§ 3). In the writings of 1888, questions about Nietzsche himself and his personal role in history come to take the place of general issues concerning the philosopher and his task. The conclusion of the chapter will briefly address this shift.