DOCSLIB.ORG

The Open Court. a HTEEKLY JOURNAL

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Open Court. a HTEEKLY JOURNAL " 2^0 The Open Court. A HTEEKLY JOURNAL DEVOTED TO THE RELIGION OF SCIENCE. No. 339. (VoL.viii.-8.) CHICAGO, FEBRUARY 22, 1894. ( Two Dollars per Year. I Single Copies, 5 Cents. Copyright by The Open Court P litted only on condition of giving full credit to Author and Publisher. SCHOPENHAUER, THE MAN AND THE PHILOSOPHER. alism was in vogue in Germany. The universal reign of G. KOERNER. BY reason was proclaimed and it was found everywhere, in Several articles on Schopenhauer have been pub- "things" as well as in living and reasoning beings, in lished in the Revue des deux Mondes, the last of which is human existence, even in politics, in nature itself, on of special interest and appeared in September, 1893. earth as well as in heaven. It was said with Hegel Considering the chauvinism which since Sedan has " that everything that exists was rational, that history shown itself not only in the masses of the French peo- was a progressive evolution, the progress of conscious ple, but also in leading, otherwise respectable, journals, liberty." in books and speeches, the Revue des deux Mondes has A philosopher who proclaimed that the world was manifested upon treating German affairs and particu- created by the fatal mistake of a blind and unconscious larly German literature an impartiality worthy of its Will, which is the origin of the All, would at that time high standing. For several years past it has devoted have been considered as a sorry jester or a melancholic many pages to German philosophy, and Schopenhauer fool. In a passage in one of her books. Madam de has been reviewed by some of its best contributors, Stael had declared, just as Schopenhauer has, "that such as Brunetiere and Bourdeau. the will which is the life, the life which is also the will, The present paper in the Revue des deux Mondes, to contains the whole secret of the universe and of our- a translation of which I desire to invite the attention selves," but she had not said that the will is the mis- of the readers of Court, is, the title The Open as con- fortune and the original sin ; she had not reproved the fesses, not quite an original one, but is based in great creative Demon, she had not, as Schopenhauer, when part on the eighth volume of the " History of Modern pointing out to the creator his works, shouted "How Philosophy," by Kuno Fischer of Heidelberg, which didst thou dare to disturb the sacred quietude of the volume goes by the title of " Arthur Schopenhauer. nonentity {rieanf), to generate a world which is nothing " Schopenhauer, the Revue states, was born on the but a vale of miseries, of tears, and of crimes? 22d of February, 1788, and after a short life of roving I may be allowed to suggest very timidly (for I do and travelling, he took up, in 1831, his permanent not pretend to be at all versed in philosophical lore) abode in the city of Frankfort where he ended his days. that M. Volbert,* the author of the essaj', has done He was yet unknown, though he had in the month of Hegel an injustice respecting the dictum, that all that December, 1818, published his system in a book which is, is reasonable. It appears to me that Hegel did not has made an epoch in the history of philosophy. That mean to say that the present state of things could not book, from which at a later day so many thinkers, be any better, but simply that it is the inevitable result writers, and artists have drawn instruction and inspira- of all events since historical times and must therefore tion, did not meet with the slightest success. Of the be accepted as a necessity ; the very next sentence eight " hundred copies printed, ten years afterwards one quoted by M. Volbert from Hegel : that history is a hundred and fifty remained on hand, and one hundred progressive evolution," seems to sustain this view. It were cut up for waste-paper : the edition was never must be admitted, however, that Hegel, inasmuch as exhausted. he advanced his system early in the century when an As no man felt more vividly what he was worth absolute or paternal despotism prevailed throughout and was less master of his imaginings, Schopenhauer the greater part of Europe, was generally considered charged his misfortune to a vast learned conspiracy of by all liberal-minded people not only as an advocate of the University professors of philosophy, who had come conservatism, but of despotism. Yet his doctrine was to an understanding to kill him off by their silence, and in truth a double-edged sword. To-day a king might who forbade Germany to pronounce his name. He rule absolutely and on the morrow a popular rising would have done better if he had said to himself that might dethrone him and send both him and his adher- he had come too soon, that he had anticipated time. * G. Volbert is. I believe, the t -of Victor Cherbulli. During the first half of this century optimistic ration- 3984 THE OPEN COURT. " ents to the guillotine. That revolution would then ex- 'the emperor of German philosophy.' So, Monsieur ist and be as rational as the overthrown despotism. It Volbert. was not very long before the reactionary parties de- The writer of this paper, a native of Frankfort, lived nounced Hegel's philosophy as revolutionary, while it for more than a year not far from Schopenhauer's resi- was strongly advocated by the radicals. dence, after the latter had moved there in 1831, but "Times changed," M. Volbert continues, "and was not made aware of the vast ovations to the philos- doubts arose whether reason was the sole arbiter of opher which the essayist of the Revue des deux Mondes human destinies. The nations had by patient efforts so vividly describes. He probably refers to a later and in the sweat of their brows obtained a part of their period, but it is hardly probable that the ladies became liberties ; they had conquered claims, which, the mo- infatuated with his doctrines and smothered him with ment they had won them, they underrated, afterwards flowers and sent him presents and addresses, since he to wonder why they had wished for them, and to dis- has in all his works treated the fair sex almost brutally, cover that hope gives us more pleasure than fulfilment. hardly allowing them to have souls. But M. Volbert, Sciences had made marvellous progress ; they told the as far as style is concerned, is a typical Frenchman, people that history resembled fairy-tales and promised and like all Frenchmen delights in exaggeration and to transform the world. But in spite of their admirable high coloring. "The first time," continues the Re- inventions, it was found that the sum of good and bad view, "that one of his devotees thought it proper to remained nearly the same, that neither railroads nor kiss his hand he uttered an exclamation of surprise, telegraphs, nor chemistry nor physical knowledge could but soon accustomed himself to this kind of ceremony, cure heart-woes. Industry worked wonders, political and when he heard that some rich man, who had suc- economy was asked to do the same, but it declared it- ceeded in getting the philosopher's portrait, proposed self powerless. The old traditions, the old customs had to erect a chapel as a shrine for the sacred picture he ' been lost, and people became disgusted with the new merely observed : This is the first which is consecrated 2000?' " ideas as well as the old ones ; they did not know how to me; how many will there be in the year to replace them, but waited for something that did not After his death his glory continued to increase, and come. It seemed that anything was possible, and it was spread over the world ; his works were translated into as hard to be happy as before the invention of the all languages. But the Germans are a highly critical steam-engine. There was much dreaming, and in con- people, and their infatuations are often followed by rude sequence the nerves had become more irritable, the reversions. One is betrayed mostly by one's friends. imagination more excited and disturbed. Satisfied de- Mr. Gwinner, the testamentary executor of the illus- sires created new ones, at no time was the world more trious dead, thought it proper to write a minute and given up to pleasure and more sensible to privations. indiscreet biography of his master which looks much The sages who were content with little did not dare to like an indictment. What injured, however, Schopen- agree that they were content, and with a mixture of hauer still more, was the publication of his corre- vanity took glory in expressing an inexorable ennui. A spondence, wherein he paints himself as he was. The pessimistic philosophy was henceforth sure of winning man appeared unpleasant, and it was asked whether the public favor. Schopenhauer dethroned Hegel, be- his philosophy was to be taken in earnest. It was came the philosopher a la mode, and when he affirmed more closely examined and found incoherent and full that everything was fiction, lie, idle show, the proposi- of contradictions. It is easy to discover such incon- tion was easily admitted, and his dictum : sistencies in so very complex a system, where the ideal- 'Betrug ist A lies. Lug und Schein,' ism of Kant is amalgamated with the theories of Cab- was repeated by his followers.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Presidential Address
    Empowering Philosophy Christia Mercer COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY Presidential Address delivered at the one hundred sixteenth Eastern Division meeting of the American Philosophical Association in Philadelphia, PA, on January 10, 2020. The main goal of my presidential address in January 2020 was to show that philosophy’s past offers a means to empower its present. I hoped to encourage colleagues to make the philosophy we teach and practice more inclusive (both textually and topically) and to adopt a more public- facing engagement with our discipline. As I add these introductory remarks to my January lecture, it is June 2020 and the need to empower philosophy has never seemed more urgent. We’ve witnessed both the tragic death of George Floyd and the popular uprising of a diverse group of Americans in response to the ongoing violence against Black lives. Many white Americans—and many philosophers—have begun to realize that their inattentiveness to matters of diversity and inclusivity must now be seen as more than mere negligence. Recent demonstrations frequently contain signs that make the point succinctly: “Silence is violence.” A central claim of my January lecture was that philosophy’s status quo is no longer tenable. Even before the pandemic slashed university budgets and staff, our employers were cutting philosophy programs, enrollments were shrinking, and jobs were increasingly hard to find. Despite energetic attempts on the part of many of our colleagues to promote a more inclusive approach to our research and teaching, the depressing truth remains:
    [Show full text]
  • Konrad Paul Liessmann / Violetta L. Waibel ZUM RAUM WIRD HIER DER LEIB
    Konrad Paul Liessmann / Violetta L. Waibel ZUM RAUM WIRD HIER DER LEIB Mythos und Wahrheit vom vergessenen Körper des Philosophen Philosophie findet statt. Philosophy on Stage provoziert durch die Andeutung, dass Philosophie an Orten stattfinden kann, die zumindest unüblich, wenn nicht ungehörig sind: auf der Bühne zu Beispiel. Aber was bedeutet es für die Philosophie, sich auf eine Bühne zu begeben, und was wären die anderen Orte der Philosophie? Man könnte, grob, tatsächlich drei Orte nennen, an denen philosophiert werden kann, ohne dass dies genuine Orte der Philosophie wären. Es sind immer besetzte oder geborgte Orte, die dennoch ihre Wirkungen auf das Denken und seine Haltungen haben. Diese drei Orte sind: Der Marktplatz, das Katheder und die Bühne. Den Marktplatz borgte sich die Philosophie von den Händlern, um überhaupt erst einmal ins Geschäft zu kommen. Da am Markt getauscht und gefeilscht wird, übernimmt die Philosophie diese Bewegungsformen: sie dialogisiert und argumentiert, sie tauscht Argumente. Ihre Körperhaltung und damit ihre Denkweise ist die von Marktteilnehmern: Gehen, sitzen, stehen, reden, gestikulieren, warten, hoffen, täuschen – alles ist möglich. Das Katheder borgt sich die Philosophie, wie die Wissenschaft überhaupt, von der Kirche. Es könnte als die säkularisierte Form der Kanzel gedeutet werden, noch leicht erhoben über die Hörer, ein Pult, das Schutz gewährt, ein Sprechen im Stehen. Nur die Arme sind noch frei, um das zu unterstreichen, was nun nicht angeboten, sondern 1 vorgetragen wird. Und die Bühne stiehlt die Philosophie vom Theater, das Denken will nun ein Drama, also eine Handlung werden. Solch eine Bühne kann weit definiert werden, vom theatrum mundi bis zum Kellertheater reichen die Spielräume der Philosophie.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Did Goethe and Schelling Endorse Species Evolution?
    Did Goethe and Schelling Endorse Species Evolution? Robert J. Richards University of Chicago Charles Darwin was quite sensitive to the charge that his theory of species transmutation was not original but had been anticipated by earlier authors, most famously by Lamarck and his own grandfather, Erasmus Darwin. The younger Darwin believed, however, his own originality lay in the device he used to explain the change of species over time and in the kind of evidence he brought to bear to demonstrate such change. He was thus ready to concede and recognize predecessors, especially those that caused only modest ripples in the intellectual stream. In the historical introduction that he included in the third edition of the Origin, he acknowledged Johann Wolfgang von Goethe as “an extreme partisan” of the transmutation view. He had been encouraged to embrace Goethe as a fellow transmutationist by Isidore Geoffroy St. Hilaire and Ernst Haeckel.1 Scholars today think that Darwin’s recognition of Goethe was a mistake. They usually deny that the Naturphilosophen, especially Friedrich Joseph Schelling, held anything like a theory of species evolution in the manner of Charles Darwin—that is, a conception of a gradual change of species in the empirical world over long periods of time. Dietrich von Engelhardt, for instance, in commenting on an enticing passage from Schelling’s Erster Entwurf eines Systems der Naturphilosophie (First sketch of a system of nature philosophy,1799), declares “Schelling is no forerunner of Darwin.” Schelling, 1 Darwin mentions in his historical introduction to the Origin that Geoffroy St. Hilaire had recognized Goethe as a transmutationist.
    [Show full text]
  • Kant and the Neglected Alternative
    Syracuse University SURFACE Dissertations - ALL SURFACE December 2014 Kant and the Neglected Alternative Andrew F. Specht Syracuse University Follow this and additional works at: https://surface.syr.edu/etd Part of the Arts and Humanities Commons Recommended Citation Specht, Andrew F., "Kant and the Neglected Alternative" (2014). Dissertations - ALL. 183. https://surface.syr.edu/etd/183 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the SURFACE at SURFACE. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations - ALL by an authorized administrator of SURFACE. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Abstract In this work, I conduct a reconstruction and evaluation of the Neglected Alternative objection to Immanuel Kant's philosophy. Kant famously argues in the Transcendental Aesthetic section of the Critique of Pure Reason that space and time are subjective forms of human intuition, and the Neglected Alternative maintains that this argument is a failure. According to the Neglected Alternative, Kant completely overlooks the possibility that space and time are in some way both subjective and objective, and so Kant's conclusions about the nature of space and time are not justified by his arguments. This objection was first formulated very soon after the publication of the Critique of Pure Reason but is still subject to great controversy among Kant scholars. I argue that the Neglected Alternative objection is unsuccessful. To do this, I provide a close analysis of Kant's key technical term “a priori intuition,” and I reconstruct the work of two important critics of Kant: H.A. Pistorius and F.A. Trendelenburg.
    [Show full text]
  • PHILOSOPHICAL (PRE)OCCUPATIONS and the PROBLEM of IDEALISM: from Ideology to Marx’S Critique of Mental Labor
    PHILOSOPHICAL (PRE)OCCUPATIONS AND THE PROBLEM OF IDEALISM: From Ideology to Marx’s Critique of Mental Labor by Ariane Fischer Magister, 1999, Freie Universität Berlin M.A., 2001, The Ohio State University M.Phil., 2005, The George Washington University A Dissertation submitted to The Faculty of Columbian College of Arts and Sciences of The George Washington University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy January 31, 2010 Dissertation directed by Andrew Zimmerman Associate Professor of History The Columbian College of The George Washington University certifies that Ariane Fischer has passed the Final Examination for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy as of August 25, 2009. This is the final and approved form of the dissertation. PHILOSOPHICAL (PRE)OCCUPATIONS AND THE PROBLEM OF IDEALISM: From Ideology to Marx’s Critique of Mental Labor Ariane Fischer Dissertation Research Committee: Andrew Zimmerman, Associate Professor of History, Dissertation Director Peter Caws, University Professor of Philosophy, Committee Member Gail Weiss, Professor of Philosophy, Committee Member ii © Copyright 2010 by Ariane Fischer All rights reserved iii Acknowledgments The author wishes to thank her dissertation advisor Andrew Zimmerman, who has been a continuous source of support and encouragement. His enthusiastic yet demanding guidance has been invaluable. Both his superior knowledge of history and theory as well as his diligence in reviewing drafts have been crucial in the successful completion of the research and writing process. Further, many thanks are extended to Gail Weiss and Peter Caws for joining the dissertation committee, and to Dan Moschenberg and Paul Smith for agreeing to be readers.
    [Show full text]
  • Download (1155Kb)
    Original citation: Vanzo, Alberto. (2016) Empiricism and rationalism in nineteenth-century histories of philosophy. Journal of the History of Ideas, 77 (2). pp. 253-282. Permanent WRAP URL: http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/78420 Copyright and reuse: The Warwick Research Archive Portal (WRAP) makes this work by researchers of the University of Warwick available open access under the following conditions. Copyright © and all moral rights to the version of the paper presented here belong to the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. To the extent reasonable and practicable the material made available in WRAP has been checked for eligibility before being made available. Copies of full items can be used for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge. Provided that the authors, title and full bibliographic details are credited, a hyperlink and/or URL is given for the original metadata page and the content is not changed in any way. Publisher’s statement: All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations used for purposes of scholarly citation, none of this work may be reproduced in any form by any means without written permission from the publisher. For information address the University of Pennsylvania Press, 3905 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-4112. A note on versions: The version presented in WRAP is the published version or, version of record, and may be cited as it appears here. For more information, please contact the WRAP Team at: [email protected] warwick.ac.uk/lib-publications
    [Show full text]
  • Nikolay Andreev in Germany (1900-1905): a Student and a Social Democrat
    Working Papers WP 2019-06 Centre for German and European Studies (CGES) Mikhail Sinyutin Nikolay Andreev in Germany (1900-1905): A Student and a Social Democrat WP 2019-06 2019 Bielefeld / St. Petersburg № 6 Working Papers WP 2019-06 Centre for German and European Studies Bielefeld University St. Petersburg University Centre for German and European Studies (CGES) CGES Working Papers series includes publication of materials prepared within different activities of the Centre for German and European Studies both in St. Petersburg and in Germany. The CGES supports educational programmes, research and scientific dialogues. In accordance with the CGES mission, the Working Papers are dedicated to the interdisciplinary studies of different aspects of German and European societies. This paper focuses on the short period in an early life of the Russian sociologist Nikolay Andreev (1874- 1956). The paper has been written on the basis of a research stay conducted at several archives in Germany, France, and the Netherlands. The research trip was supported by the Centre for German and European Studies, St. Petersburg. Mikhail Sinyutin, Doctor of Sociology, Professor of Economic Sociology Department, Faculty of Sociology, St. Petersburg University. Contact: [email protected] ISSN 1860-5680 © Centre for German and European Studies, 2019 2 Working Papers WP 2019-06 Centre for German and European Studies Table of Contents Abstract. ................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Paul Schrecker Papers Ms
    Paul Schrecker papers Ms. Coll. 987 Finding aid prepared by Megan Evans and Chase Markee (2014) and Alexandra M. Wilder (2017). Last updated on May 30, 2017. University of Pennsylvania, Kislak Center for Special Collections, Rare Books and Manuscripts 2014 May 14 and 2017 May 4 Paul Schrecker papers Table of Contents Summary Information....................................................................................................................................3 Biography/History..........................................................................................................................................4 Scope and Contents....................................................................................................................................... 4 Administrative Information........................................................................................................................... 6 Related Materials........................................................................................................................................... 7 Controlled Access Headings..........................................................................................................................7 Collection Inventory...................................................................................................................................... 9 I. Teaching and lectures.......................................................................................................................... 9 II. Writings
    [Show full text]
  • Alberto Vanzo
    Empiricism and Rationalism in Nineteenth-Century Histories of Philosophy Alberto Vanzo This paper traces the ancestry of a familiar narrative of early modern phi- losophy, one that dominated the English-speaking world throughout the twentieth century.1 According to this narrative, which I will call the stan- dard narrative, the early modern period was marked by the development of two rival schools: the rationalism of Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibniz (DSL) and the empiricism of Locke, Berkeley, and Hume (LBH). Rationalists are said to claim that we have substantive a priori knowledge of the world and, typically, that we have non-empirical concepts. Empiricists claim that all our substantive knowledge of the world and all our concepts are grounded on experience.2 The early modern period came to a close once Immanuel I would like to thank Peter Anstey, Timmy de Goeij, Tom Sorell, and audiences at the University of Otago for valuable comments on earlier versions of this article. This research was supported by a Marie Curie International Incoming Fellowship within the 7th European Community Framework Programme. 1 See, e.g., Robert Adamson, The Development of Modern Philosophy, ed. W. R. Sorley (Edinburgh: Blackwood, 1903); Bertrand Russell, A History of Western Philosophy (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1945); Frederick C. Copleston, A History of Philosophy (Lon- don: Burns, Oates and Washbourne, 1946–75), vols. 4–6; the thematic organization of the Routledge History of Philosophy, general eds. G. H. R. Parkinson and S. G. Shanker (London: Routledge, 1993–99), vols. 4–6; Roger Scruton, A Short History of Modern Philosophy, 2nd ed.
    [Show full text]
  • Title: the Debate on the Method of Philosophy at the Turn of the 19Th and the 20Th Centuries
    Title: The debate on the method of philosophy at the turn of the 19th and the 20th centuries Author: Andrzej J. Noras Citation style: Noras Andrzej J. (2013). The debate on the method of philosophy at the turn of the 19th and the 20th centuries. "Folia Philosophica" (T. ENG 29 (2013), s. 15- 61). Access via CEEOL NL Germany Andrzej J. Noras The debate on the method of philosophy at the turn of the 19th and the 20th centuries Edmund Husserl writes, when analysing the understanding of cogni- tion by Hans Cornelius (1863—1947), which is included in the psycho- logical trend of Neo-Kantianism — “To show that a scientific move- ment has gone astray, nothing is more instructive than to study its consequences as worked out by its adherents, and so to convince oneself that the final theory they think they have gained, has rather involved them in self-evident contradictions.”1 This surprising and precious remark by Husserl is applicable in analyses devoted to the question of method. It is surprising because Husserl talks about his- tory of philosophy very rarely. However, it is also precious because it shows the necessity of consideration of a philosophical question until its end in order to show its absurdity. Would it be possible to talk here about Husserl’s relating to all those who — following positivism — talk about the necessity of verifying cognition. The first to do so was physiologist Claude Bernard (1813—1878) who in his book, which was an introduction to experimental medicine, formulated rules of scientific proceedings, among them the rule of “counter-proof,” which was the prototype of the falsification method.2 1 E.
    [Show full text]
  • Arthur Schopenhauer 1 Arthur Schopenhauer
    Arthur Schopenhauer 1 Arthur Schopenhauer Arthur Schopenhauer Born 22 February 1788 Danzig (Gdańsk) Died 21 September 1860 (aged 72) Frankfurt Residence Germany Nationality German Era 19th century philosophy Region Western philosophy School Post-Kantian philosophy [1] German Idealism Main interests Metaphysics, aesthetics, ethics, phenomenology, morality, psychology Notable ideas Will, Fourfold root of reason, philosophical pessimism Signature Arthur Schopenhauer 2 Arthur Schopenhauer (22 February 1788 – 21 September 1860) was a German philosopher best known for his book, The World as Will and Representation, in which he claimed that our world is driven by a continually dissatisfied will, continually seeking satisfaction. Influenced by Eastern thought, he maintained that the "truth was recognized by the sages of India";[2] consequently, his solutions to suffering were similar to those of Vedantic and Buddhist thinkers (i.e. asceticism); his faith in "transcendental ideality"[3] led him to accept atheism and learn from Christian philosophy.[4][5][6] At age 25, he published his doctoral dissertation, On the Fourfold Root of the Principle of Sufficient Reason, which examined the four distinct aspects[7] of experience in the phenomenal world; consequently, he has been influential in the history of phenomenology. He has influenced a long list of thinkers, including Friedrich Nietzsche,[8] Richard Wagner, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Erwin Schrödinger, Albert Einstein,[9] Sigmund Schopenhauer's birthplace — house Freud, Otto Rank, Carl Jung, Joseph Campbell, Leo Tolstoy, Thomas in, Gdańsk (Danzig), ul. Św. Ducha Mann, and Jorge Luis Borges. (formerly Heiligegeistgasse) Life Arthur Schopenhauer was born in the city of Danzig (Gdańsk), on Heiligegeistgasse (known in the present day as Św.
    [Show full text]
  • Kuno Fischer Entre Spinoza Y Nietzsche1
    La voluntad como deseo consciente: Kuno Fischer entre Spinoza y Nietzsche1 The Will as Conscious Desire: Kuno Fischer between Spinoza and Nietzsche Raúl DE PAbLOS ESCALANTE Universidad de Puerto Rico, Recinto de Río Piedras Recibido: 19-02-2015 Aceptado: 28-07-2015 Resumen Es muy defendible afirmar que el volumen dedicado a Spinoza de la obra Historia de la filosofía moderna de Kuno Fischer es la mediación más importante –si bien no la única– para comprender la relación Spinoza-Nietzsche. A partir de la lectura de esta obra en 1881, Nietzsche reconoce a Spinoza como precursor e iden- tifica una tendencia en común entre ambos: «hacer del conocimiento el afecto más potente». Los principales objetivos de este trabajo son destacar la exposición que Fischer lleva a cabo de algunos de los contenidos de la filosofía spinociana para poder valorar mejor su influencia en Nietzsche y resaltar la importancia que tiene este clásico olvidado de la historia de la filosofía. En particular, se estudiará el capí- 1 Este artículo es parte de un proyecto de investigación titulado Hacia un pensar afectivo. Para su rea- lización he contado con la ayuda del Decanato de Estudios Graduados e Investigación de la Universidad de Puerto Rico, Recinto de Río Piedras, gracias a la cual pude investigar en la Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin durante el verano de 2014. Una versión más breve de este trabajo titulada «De la voluntad y los afectos. Entre Spinoza y Nietzsche» fue presentada en el XI Coloquio Internacional Spinoza, celebrado en Rio de Janeiro los días 16 al 21 de noviembre de 2014.
    [Show full text]