NIETZSCHE ON TRUTH AND KNOWLEDGE BETWEEN MODERN AND POSTMODERN: NIETZSCHE ON TRUTH AND KNOWLEDGE By KARL W. L. LADEROUTE, B.A. (HONS.), M.A. A Thesis Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy © Copyright by Karl W. L. Laderoute, August 2013 McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (2013) (Philosophy) TITLE: Between Modern and Postmodern: Nietzsche on Truth and Knowledge AUTHOR: Karl W. L. Laderoute, B.A.(Hons.), M.A. (Wilfrid Laurier University) SUPERVISOR: Professor Barry Allen NUMBER OF PAGES: viii, 178 ii ABSTRACT This thesis examines Nietzsche’s epistemology. Its main interlocutors are two previously existing attempts to explain Nietzsche’s views on truth and knowledge. One of these interpretations I dub the ‘postmodern’ reading, held most notably by Sarah Kofman, Jacques Derrida, and Paul de Man. The other is the ‘modern’ reading of Walter Kaufmann, John T. Wilcox, and most prominently Maudemarie Clark and Brian Leiter. Each of these readings emphasizes one aspect of Nietzsche’s thought. The postmodern reading focuses on Nietzsche’s more radical pronouncements, and promotes a type of scepticism and subjectivism. The modern reading, by contrast, emphasizes Nietzsche’s more traditional claims, and argues that he lauds science and preserves our ability to attain truth. However, neither reading is entirely satisfactory. In what follows, I first critically examine both of these readings in detail. The first chapter highlights the major points of these two readings, as well as some issues in each. After detailing these positions, I then turn to a largely chronological reading of Nietzsche’s works to establish an alternative account of his epistemology. Chapters two through four provide readings of Nietzsche’s epistemological claims in his major works from Human, All Too Human (1878) until Twilight of the Idols (1888). I combine this chronological reading with other informative aspects of Nietzsche’s thought. These other aspects include Nietzsche’s reading of Roger Boscovich (1711-1787) and his adoption of force-point ontology, his ontological commitment to nominalism, his views on evolution and its role in epistemology, and his similarities with Ernst Mach (1838-1916). Finally, I also connect Nietzsche’s epistemology with his critiques of morality and religion. I show that my reading is buttressed by the deep congruity between Nietzsche’s epistemology and his critiques, while the modern and postmodern readings are both unable to account for this congruity in a satisfactory manner. iii To Ruthann iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS There are a great many people whose love and support have contributed to the writing of this thesis. I would like to extend my hearty thanks to my supervisor, Dr. Barry Allen. His rigorous and penetrating comments and questions pushed me to rethink my position on a number of occasions, as well as clarify my thoughts. This thesis would not be what it is without him. I would also like to thank the other members of my committee. Dr. Stefan Sciaraffa asked some excellent questions which helped me further clarify issues, as well as gave support along the way. Dr. Brigitte Sassen also provided helpful comments, and a wonderful year teaching together. Dr. Sam Ajzenstat also deserves special mention. Although he was unable to finish this thesis officially, his probing questions and brilliant style have deeply impacted my own thinking. Over the course of many lunches he helped shape this project into what it has become. I would also like to extend my thanks to all the members of McMaster’s philosophy department. They have all been friendly, welcoming, and a wonderful influence. Special thanks also go to Kim Squissato, Daphne Kilgour, and Rabia Awan, whose assistance in navigating the university administration has been invaluable. I would also like to thank the many students at McMaster who have contributed to my thinking and personal life, particularly Josh Zaslow. Thanks also go to the Ontario Graduate Scholarship for funding this project. A great many people outside of McMaster have been instrumental as well. First and foremost I would like to thank my wife Ruthann. Her love and support kept my spirits high throughout the writing of this thesis. She also provided excellent editorial suggestions and was a great sounding board for ideas. I would also like to acknowledge a deep gratitude to my parents, Carrol and Joan. They have long encouraged me to pursue my dreams and are a continuing source of comfort and support. Thanks also go to my second family, Michael and Andrea in particular. I also thank a great many friends whose company and intelligence have been most welcome over the years. Finally, I thank Yoda for being a constant source of entertainment and for keeping things in perspective. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 Chapter One: Setting the Scene: Secondary Readings 6 of Nietzsche’s Epistemology Chapter Two: Nietzsche’s Developing Epistemology 36 Chapter Three: Evolution, Force Points, and 75 Perspectivism: Nietzsche’s Gay Science and Alternative Epistemology Chapter Four: Nietzsche’s Mature Epistemology 121 Chapter Five: The Compatibility of Nietzsche’s 145 Epistemological Views with his Moral and Religious Critiques Conclusion 165 Bibliography 172 vi Abbreviations Nietzsche’s collected works (in German): KSA – Sämtliche Werke: Kritische Studienausgabe KGW – Nietzsche Werke: Kritische Gesamtausgabe KGB – Nietzsche Briefwechsel: Kritische Gesamtausgabe Nietzsche’s works (in English translation): A – The Antichrist AOM – Assorted Opinions and Maxims BGE – Beyond Good and Evil BT – The Birth of Tragedy out of the Spirit of Music CW – The Case of Wagner D – Daybreak, Thoughts on the Prejudices of Morality EH – Ecce Homo GS – The Gay Science GM – On the Genealogy of Morals HH – Human, All Too Human NCW – Nietzsche contra Wagner TI – Twilight of the Idols TL – “On Truth and Lies in a Non-Moral Sense” (referenced by page number) UH – On the Uses and Disadvantages of History for Life WP – The Will to Power Z – Thus Spoke Zarathustra Nietzsche’s works are referenced by section number, unless otherwise noted. Certain works (TI, EH, NCW) first give an abbreviated section title followed by the relevant section number (e.g. EH, ‘Books’ BT 1). On the Genealogy of Morals first provides the essay number, followed by the relevant section number (e.g. GM, I, 12) vii DECLARATION OF ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT This thesis first provides a critical overview of two different interpretations of Nietzsche’s epistemology. It then develops an alternative reading which utilizes the best aspects of both of these interpretations. The reading of Nietzsche’s epistemology developed in this thesis is also connected to his critiques of morality and religion. Connecting these two aspects of Nietzsche’s thought brings both into clearer focus. The two alternative accounts of Nietzsche’s epistemology surveyed cannot adequately explain this connection, while my account is buttressed by it. viii Ph.D. Thesis – Karl W. L. Laderoute; McMaster University – Philosophy Introduction: Nietzsche on Truth and Knowledge The philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche has been a long-standing source of interpretive controversy. Due to his aphoristic writing style, and the wide range of topics his works engage with, it has proved difficult to precisely determine Nietzsche’s stance on many issues. His thought touches upon topics as varied as the ancient Greeks, figures in the history of philosophy, art, music, medicine, evolution, morality, religion, language, the nature of thought, and epistemology. Arguably his views on truth and knowledge are the most important of these topics. After all, if it turns out that Nietzsche is a sceptic, who rejects any notion of truth, and holds that no claim is more justified than any other, then the rest of his views will be mere subjective preferences, which should elicit no evaluative scrutiny from his readers. On such a sceptical view, Nietzsche’s works should be relegated to the field of literature rather than philosophy, and his claims viewed as rhetorical attempts to elicit responses in his readers rather than as a series of truth- apt propositions. Such a view may be not entirely inappropriate for Nietzsche. His major fictional enterprise, Thus Spoke Zarathustra (1883-1885), is amenable to this view. However, we are forced to consider whether all of Nietzsche’s works fit such a paradigm. Throughout his works, Nietzsche consistently engages in a practice of making assertions and attempting to convey information to his readers. In particular, his critiques of morality and religion appear to take the form of arguments. As Nietzsche claims in Daybreak (1881), “I deny morality as I deny alchemy, that is, I deny their premises.”1 Passages such as these surely sound argumentative, and so it is tempting to take Nietzsche’s claims seriously. But when we attempt to interpret Nietzsche as a traditional philosopher providing arguments for his readers, we are again faced with passages which lend themselves to the sceptical reading, such as his claim that “all of our consciousness refers to errors!”2 This thesis is an attempt to make sense of Nietzsche’s epistemological views. It provides a more satisfactory reading of his views on truth and knowledge than have been provided by two alternative groups. The first is what I label the ‘postmodern’ reading of Nietzsche. This reading embraces the sceptical side of Nietzsche’s thought, and as a result largely ignores any claims that appear factual in his texts. In response to this sceptical reading, a largely Anglo- American ‘modern’ reading has arisen. This reading embraces the evaluative side of Nietzsche’s thought and attempts to make sense of the sceptical passages in a way that allows him to make the factual claims that he does. A prominent, but by no means undisputed, modern reading has come from Maudemarie Clark. She has provided a developmental reading of Nietzsche that sees his scepticism rooted in a form of Kantianism, which she holds permeates his early and middle works.