I have a simple question: what did Nietzsche not like about the Chinese?
yeah… 
what…
He had to throw people off-scent from his source material.
I wasn’t aware that Nietzsche didn’t like the Chinese. I can only imagine that it has something to do with Eastern philosophy’s absolute rejection of the Ego.
That they are all the same.
EDIT: And tiny.
Haha, 11 is such a youth recreation #. Pretyt humorous, taken with his size.
He once referred to Kant as the ‘Chinaman of Konigsberg’
That says a bit.
Yes, the tallest (known) man in the world is Chinese, too. But what Nietzsche despised was their antlikeness, or their will to become antlike.
Hi! If you read carefully Nietzsche’s words in “The Antichrist”, “Human, all too Human” and “Ecce Hommo” you will find certain similarities with the Taoist Philosophy.
Now, in the book of the Antichrist, he talks of the Chinese culture more specificly the Buddhist religion and he refers to it as a nihilist religion. He also considers Buddhism to be a religion of decay. This concept is rather frequent throughout his work.
It is quite interesting to notice certain similarities between Nietzsche’s philosophy and Chinese phiilosophy, more specificly, TAOISM.
You can refer to “The Antichrist” (section XX-XXI).
Yup. Nietzsche is Zhuangzi (Chuang Tzu) with the serial numbers filed off. Indeed, he was even associates with one of the translators of that work (I forget which one, I think it was Balfour) so it is reasonable to think that he either actually had access to a pre-publication version of the text and/or became aware of it through discussions with his associate.
Liberation as Affirmation by Shang and Shang is a good resource on their similarities, albeit somewhat flawed because I disagree with the authors agendas 
"Fortunately, the world has not been designed with a view to such instincts that only good-natured herd animals could find their narrow happiness in it; to demand that all should become “good human beings,” herd animals, blue-eyed, benevolent, “beautiful souls"—or as Mr. Herbert Spencer would have it, altruistic, would deprive existence of its great character and would castrate men and reduce them to the level of desiccated Chinese stagnation [armselige Chineserei].— And this has been attempted!.. Precisely this has been called morality…”
[Ecce Homo, Why I Am a Destiny, 4.]
Likewise, in The Gay Science, section 377, he mentions “the deepest levelling and chinoiserie [Chineserei]” in one breath.
Likely, nothing that Nietzche wrote here would have offended nineteenth century sensibilitities, but the political correctness of our our times would make mince-meat out of anyone who would talk as such about 1/5 of the human race as such in our own time.
But it would be quite accurate to charaterize China in that century as stagnant. Whether or not Chinese morality had anything to do with that stagnation is debatable, but it would be a leap f lgic to take from the factual statement that Nietzche was being somehow a racist, or didn’t like the Chinese per se.
As for Confuscianist values of mainstream Chinese, the tendancy to social conformity as the highest morality is a very good anology to Kant’s own personal sense of propriety and his own pompous stiltedness. It is even a little amusing that Nietzche was able to draw that analogy out.
To the extent that Kant makes morality into an transcendant absolute value, to the extent that morality is an expression of the ‘all’ against the ‘individual’, or superego against the ego, Kant is a rather fitting caricature of a European Confuscius.
The fact that even a revolutionary such as Mao could impose a dress code on entire nation is probably a very good illustration of this Confuscian Chinese trait toward conformity at all costs. Even Chinese revolutionaries, apparently, had little respect for individualism, and human excellence as it becomes expressed in the individual who is capable of rising above and beyond the herd instincts.
Of course, it was Confucian values . . . and not the fact that China was a huge multi-ethnic empire which meant that allowing for differences was an invitation to revolt.
Ataturk likewise imposed a dress code on his country, so what does that suggest? Given that Turkey was the seat of a different multi-ethnic empire, it would seem that similar forces are at play.
There is an interesting essay on Kant and his seemingly Chinese nature, here: hkbu.edu.hk/~ppp/srp/arts/HCWK.html
But, I have to ask, if human excellent is best manifested as an individual, how many individuals are there in history that have accomplished anything as singular entities?
An individual that manifests human excellence is in principle the top of a pyramid of men.
Thanks for the replies.
I was mostly interested in the connections with Nietzsche and Taoism, or the other great Chinese traditions in general. I was wondering why he chose the Chinese in particular, if he was commenting on the tradition as a whole (i.e. the Eastern tradition), or if there was something about the Chinese in particular. I was re-reading BGE today and came across one part where he called himself Chinese (one with a “Chinese brush”), another where he condemns the Chinese for “making their hearts small”. It seems like much of what he has against the Chinese, he has against Buddhism as well. I do not know much about Confucianism, or the history of China in general 
, but it seems that he does associate the Chinese with something like Kant’s morality.
It also struck me that Tao is described as “feminine” or “soft” (which are not Nietzschean values). But it is very interesting that one of his influences was Zhuangzhi (I thought so), and that his own philosophy bears resemblance with Taoism. I like them, and cannot see how he would be against something so similar to his own philosophy. Needless to say, I don’t understand Nietzsche, and I don’t understand Taoism 
.
By the way, to Xunzian, I’m still working on that list, but went back to Taoism for a while since there’s no university library here. I just bought the Confucian Analects though (Ames version) and “Cold Mountain” for later!
Ames?
You mean the “Thinking Through Confucius”?
I love that freakin’ book. Great stuff.
It is, of course, too bad that it chose a verse from the Analects that is almost certainly not from the historical Confucius for its basis.
On the plus side, that verse remains amongst my favorites from the entire cannon:
Only Zeng Zi does a better job of encapsulating the wisdom of Confucius (unsurprising, since the earlier quote is almost certainly from Zeng Zi’s school of thought):
If there is a universal root of morality, that be it.
Be careful with Ames and Hall (RIP). They are Whteheadians and are going to try and suck you in. I much prefer D.C. Lau for authentic understanding. That said, given their biases, they make Confucianism appealing to the modern mind and with that I can find no fault.
Besides, if nothing else it provides a nice counterpoint to Daoist thought!
BTW, have you checked out my Daily Daodejing threads? I think you’d find them interesting.
It also struck me that Tao is described as “feminine” or “soft” (which are not Nietzschean values). But it is very interesting that one of his influences was Zhuangzhi (I thought so), and that his own philosophy bears resemblance with Taoism. I like them, and cannot see how he would be against something so similar to his own philosophy. Needless to say, I don’t understand Nietzsche, and I don’t understand Taoism .
In the words of Lao Tze, (Tao te Ching, section 28 ).
“Know the male
Yet keep to the female:
recieve the world in your arms
If you recieve the world,
the Tao will never leave you
and you will be like a little child”
There are here two main concepts. First the relationship between male and female; it is important to remember that Taoist philosophy is closely related to the Ying-Yang. This concept is way too big, deep and complex to discuss it right now, but in this case we consider Ying as beeing female and passive and Yang related to male and active (As you know this state is not fixed, is a continuous flow between ying turning into yang and vice versa).
Considering also that an important concept of chinese philosophy is “Wu Wei” which can be translated in many different ways and may be interpreted here as “doing nothing, yet nothing is left undone”, basically “wu wei” is acting without imposing our will or acting according to “the way things are”.
So, with these two things in mind: “knowing the male” (might be) knowing how to act, being able to perform actions and “keeping to the female” is remaining passive as in not imposing our will and having a peacefull spirit in the most troubling situations. This concepts are also present throughout Nietzsche’s work but I can’t remember exactly the quote.
Last but not least
“If you recieve the world
the Tao will not leave you
and you will be like a little child.”
“A person’s maturity consists in having found again the seriousness one had as a child at playâ€- Nietzsche
I hope I was able to express myself clearly since English is not my first language. Talking about Taoist philosophy is way too vague and complex that can’t be talked or writtern. As Nietzsche stated, there are certain truths that can’t be achieved through the means of reasons and arguments, they are certain experienced and such is the Tao.
Shih Huang-ti seems more akin to the kind of a man that Nietzche would have in mind as an example of human excellence and achievement. Here is an overreaching of the social norms of the day in order to achieve something much greater.
I personally do not see so much Zhuangzi or Tao so much as a percursor or brother of any Nietzchean ideal.
Creativity, certainly, as it is an important facet of human excellence, is also a very important facet of willing one’s vitality onto the world. It is a definite Nietachean value.
But whatever Nietzsche had to say about the feminine is not where his value lies. There is a Dionysian cruelty, and a dominance and a hardness, and an profusive Will to worldly achievemnt in his philosophy. His is a thorougly masculine ideal, and it finds a home in the land of warriors and their gods, such as Yaweh and the Hebrews in the violent times that gave birth to that culture.
Even if there is a counter-cultural aspect of a man rising above the values of the herd that an a-Confuscian a-social, innerly-oriented Taoist may share with a Nietzche, Nietzsche is angular and raw, with a definite ‘Yes !’ or a definite ‘No !’, an ‘either’ and an ‘or’.
His is simply not akin to the neither-nor that is so much a part of the ephemerial, transcendant way of the Tao.
Check out the book I recommended then, and I’ll see if I can’t dig up some cites for some other essays that establish what I said.
But I would agree that Nietzsche would have loved Huangdi . . . he did have a soft-spot for Fascists, now didn’t he?
Edit: Have you read Zhuangzi? I mean, come on. Anyone who doesn’t see the parallels there is either reading a terrible translation of one-or-the other or just plain ain’t payin’ attention.