This category needs an editor. We encourage you to help if you are qualified.
Volunteer, or read more about what this involves.
Related categories
Siblings:
8 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Order:
  1. Ernst Behler (1991). Confrontations: Derrida/Heidegger/Nietzsche. Stanford University Press.
    Introduction Undoubtedly it would be useful to interpret the "new Nietzsche," as he is often called, within the larger contexts of "Nietzsche and the ...
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  2. Chad Engelland (2010). Teleology, Purpose, and Power in Nietzsche. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 84 (2):413-426.
    Nietzsche subjects traditional philosophical causality to a skeptical critique. With the moderns, he rejects form as superficial. Against the moderns, he findsphysical laws and their ground in a free consciousness equally superficial, and he thinks that the principle of utility is ultimately life denying. However, Nietzscheis not a skeptic, and he has his own doctrine of causality centered on the noble power of the philosopher. The philosopher has the ability to impose new purposes, and this power is the culmination of (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3. Patrick Forber (2007). Nietzsche Was No Darwinian. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 75 (2):369–382.
    John Richardson (2002, 2004) argues that Nietzsche’s use of teleological notions, such as the “will to power” and psychological “drives,” can be naturalized within the Darwinian framework of natural selection. Although this ambitious project has merit, the Darwinian framework does not provide the strong teleology necessary to interpret Nietzsche’s explanatory project. Examining the logic of selection, the conceptual limitations on biological functions, and the evidential demands that must be met to deploy evolutionary theory show that Nietzsche’s explanatory project does not (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  4. Javier Ibáñez-Noé (1997). Nietzsche and the Problem of Teleology. International Studies in Philosophy 29 (3):37-48.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5. Erman Kaplama (2016). Kantian and Nietzschean Aesthetics of Human Nature: A Comparison Between the Beautiful/Sublime and Apollonian/Dionysian Dualities. Cosmos and History: The Journal of Natural and Social Philosophy 12 (1):166-217.
    Both for Kant and for Nietzsche, aesthetics must not be considered as a systematic science based merely on logical premises but rather as a set of intuitively attained artistic ideas that constitute or reconstitute the sensible perceptions and supersensible representations into a new whole. Kantian and Nietzschean aesthetics are both aiming to see beyond the forms of objects to provide explanations for the nobility and sublimity of human art and life. We can safely say that Kant and Nietzsche used the (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6. Erman Kaplama (2016). The Cosmological Aesthetic Worldview in Van Gogh’s Late Landscape Paintings. Cosmos and History: The Journal of Natural and Social Philosophy 12 (1):218-237.
    Some artworks are called sublime because of their capacity to move human imagination in a different way than the experience of beauty. The following discussion explores how Van Gogh’s The Starry Night along with some of his other late landscape paintings accomplish this peculiar movement of imagination thus qualifying as sublime artworks. These artworks constitute examples of the higher aesthetic principles and must be judged according to the cosmological-aesthetic criteria for they manage to generate a transition between ethos and phusis (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7. Wolfgang Müller-Lauter (1978). Der organismus AlS innerer Kampf der einfluss Von Wilhelm Roux auf Friedrich Nietzsche. Nietzsche-Studien 7 (1):189.
  8. Charles H. Pence (2011). Nietzsche’s Aesthetic Critique of Darwin. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 33 (2):165-190.
    Despite his position as one of the first philosophers to write in the “post- Darwinian” world, the critique of Darwin by Friedrich Nietzsche is often ignored for a host of unsatisfactory reasons. I argue that Nietzsche’s critique of Darwin is important to the study of both Nietzsche’s and Darwin’s impact on philosophy. Further, I show that the central claims of Nietzsche’s critique have been broadly misunderstood. I then present a new reading of Nietzsche’s core criticism of Darwin. An important part (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography