Post-Nietzsche readings

[Provalone]

I’m very passionate about philosophy and psychology. Being that I’m only 16, I’m quite new to them though. Obviously, I’ve read my eyeballs off with Nietzsche given that he is such “readable” beginners philosopher.

But instead of hailing and over-quoting the syphilis-infected bastard like most other adolescents, I feel that it’s time I move on to post-Nietzsche philosophers given their relevance to his works. (After all, what pre-Nietzsche philosophers besides Kierkegaard are truly relevant anymore?)

Mind you, I’m not in college yet, so drolling, over-sentimental, Platonic philosophers that have more historical significance than philosophical, I careth for not.

I intend on reading Milan Kundera’s The Unbearable Lightness of Being and Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Notes from Underground, but I need more. Any suggestions?

[adolpho]

Michel Foucault, Bertrand Russell, Jean Baudrillard, Gilles Deleuze, De Rorty. I like all of those a lot.

Since you like art a lot, peharps Walter Benjamin and Theodor Adorno also. If you go into Adorno read the final version of “The Art Work on the Technical Reproduction Era”*, because I don’t think the other editions are any good. He used to be very bitter.

*Translated directly from the name the text has in my language, it’s probably wrong.

[altd_amp_s]

Oh yeah, you always have to start from the bottom to the top. That’s a must for all modern philosophers. Greece to Germany. The closest to the top deserves the most respect, for he is the learnt philosopher and point of the pyramid. After Nietzsche and those who came later, you’re left with nothing but your philosophy and the philosophies to ascend from yours.

I don’t have much to recommend being an adolescent Nietzsche-head myself. I can only give you advice and that’s to write all you can.

[Wobbly]

If you’ve only read Nietzsche, then I would suggest that you immerse yourself in a technical treatise, to see just how deep your love of philosophy goes. I would recommend Hume’s An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding, it is technical, but he is not one of the “over-sentimental platonic phiilosophers”.

Maybe read some stuff about Hume on the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, just to make sure you are interested enough in what he has to say to endure his treatise… Your affinity for Nietzsche suggests that you’ll be interested.

[Provalone]

Thanks, guys. I’m reading about Foucault right now. I’ll check out Hume as well. Should some of his contemporaries like Locke be noted as well?

[Wobbly]

@Provalone

Thanks, guys. I’m reading about Foucault right now. I’ll check out Hume as well. Should some of his contemporaries like Locke be noted as well?

Shouldn’t be a problem.

However, If you want to understand what came before him, and why he’s writing, you’ll probably have to do some lengthy research. He is the result of a string of “rationalist/empiricist” philosophers. Descartes to Spinoza to Leibniz to Locke to Berkeley to Hume

[Mr_Predictable]

You should grab the book of essays by Schopenhauer. He inspired Nietzsche, was funny, and quite blunt about his ideas.

[Impious]

Foucault, Deleuze and Guattari. But Nietzsche was beyond all of them.

[adolpho]

@Impious

Foucault, Deleuze and Guattari. But Nietzsche was beyond all of them.

In my opinion Foucault and Deleuze took most of what was worth in Nietzsche and expanded tremendously, while applying it to the modern (and partly post-modern) society.

Would place them above Nietzsche anyway just because neither fell for a metaphysics of ‘Will’ or an unecessary evolutionism.

[Xunzian]

I’d suggest that you read some Emerson and Zhuang Zi, both influenced Nietzsche and I think that reading their philosophy puts Nietzsche into a better perspective. Also, if you do seriously like Nietzsche, I would argue that you shouldn’t be worried about what comes next, but rather return and read some classics. Greek Tragedy and Epic poems . . . you know, what he was always blathering on about.

Foucault is also a great call. Lots of good stuff there.

[morthaur]

I’ll echo the Foucault suggestion. Almost his entire project was inspired directly by Nietzsche; much of it ends up being an attempt to systematize Nietzsche’s observations on power. It can be tough reading, given your age, but a great choice given where you started. I would jump straight to his mature period and begin with Discipline and Punish and the History of Sexuality, though the best of the essay and interview collections (Power / Knowledge and Essential Foucault) are helpful companions.

Deleuze is also highly Nietzschean, but unlike Foucault he immersed himself in questions of ontology. But you may find that his writing, whilst frequently entertaining and bizarre, is amongst the hardest of all contemporary philosophers. I would suggest getting some help, like Todd May’s lovely little book. Deleuze’s most important work (in my view) is the Anti-Oedipus and Thousand Plateaus sequence; and you may particularly appreciate his Nietzsche and Philosophy.

Kant is still highly relevant, unlike most every other Enlightenment thinker. His moral philosophy and proofs for metaphysics were destroyed (in large measure by Nietzsche!), but the limitations that he places on knowledge in the first Critique remain deeply influential. And it would satisfy the recommendation for a technical selection made by Nihilistic. The best translation of the Critique of Pure Reason is the one put out by Cambridge in their nice blue ‘collected works’ series.

You already mentioned Kierkegaard, which is also a nice choice: aside from Nietzsche he may be the most entertaining philosopher to read. Instead of endlessly dry passages (as in the above recommendation), you’ll end up getting everything from love poems to shopping lists to break the monotony! Good texts are Either/Or, Concluding Unscientific Postscript, and Fear and Trembling. (Or you could cheat and go for Bretall’s decent Anthology.)

I have a great deal of affection for Albert Camus, and in addition to his great fiction work (such as The Stranger and The Plague), his long essay The Myth of Sisyphus should be required reading in contemporary philosophy. The Rebel is also great, and has an homage to Nietzsche. I think Camus is unfairly dismissed these days, on account of the continuing fad for post-(post-)structuralism.

If you enjoyed Nietzsche’s style, you may also dig on Wittgenstein. He is a very pithy thinker, packing incredible wallops into very tight sections. His posthumous master-work, Philosophical Investigations, is often listed as one of [or simply the] most influential books of philosophy in the 20th century. For his other work, save time and get Anthony Kenny’s Wittgenstein Reader.

At some point you’ll need to tackle the Greeks, but given the expose to Nietzsche I would suggest reading well beyond the obvious Plato & Aristotle. Since you’re more interested in reading forward, I would recommend getting at least a good secondary treatment of the period, like Anthony Gottlieb’s The Dream of Reason. And I would not be a very good Pyrrhonist if I did not point out Benson Mates’s excellent The Skeptic Way, which includes a new translation of Sextus Empiricus.

Edit to add: I think the Nietzsche-had-syphilis hypothesis was overturned long ago…

[Joker]

I would suggest John Gray’s Book; Straw Dogs.

It is a good representation of modern nihilism and pessimism of course he describes himself as a realist more than anything.

[Provalone]

@morthaur

I’ll echo the Foucault suggestion. Almost his entire project was inspired directly by Nietzsche; much of it ends up being an attempt to systematize Nietzsche’s observations on power. It can be tough reading, given your age, but a great choice given where you started. I would jump straight to his mature period and begin with Discipline and Punish and the History of Sexuality, though the best of the essay and interview collections (Power / Knowledge and Essential Foucault) are helpful companions.

Deleuze is also highly Nietzschean, but unlike Foucault he immersed himself in questions of ontology. But you may find that his writing, whilst frequently entertaining and bizarre, is amongst the hardest of all contemporary philosophers. I would suggest getting some help, like Todd May’s lovely little book. Deleuze’s most important work (in my view) is the Anti-Oedipus and Thousand Plateaus sequence; and you may particularly appreciate his Nietzsche and Philosophy.

Kant is still highly relevant, unlike most every other Enlightenment thinker. His moral philosophy and proofs for metaphysics were destroyed (in large measure by Nietzsche!), but the limitations that he places on knowledge in the first Critique remain deeply influential. And it would satisfy the recommendation for a technical selection made by Nihilistic. The best translation of the Critique of Pure Reason is the one put out by Cambridge in their nice blue ‘collected works’ series.

You already mentioned Kierkegaard, which is also a nice choice: aside from Nietzsche he may be the most entertaining philosopher to read. Instead of endlessly dry passages (as in the above recommendation), you’ll end up getting everything from love poems to shopping lists to break the monotony! Good texts are Either/Or, Concluding Unscientific Postscript, and Fear and Trembling. (Or you could cheat and go for Bretall’s decent Anthology.)

I have a great deal of affection for Albert Camus, and in addition to his great fiction work (such as The Stranger and The Plague), his long essay The Myth of Sisyphus should be required reading in contemporary philosophy. The Rebel is also great, and has an homage to Nietzsche. I think Camus is unfairly dismissed these days, on account of the continuing fad for post-(post-)structuralism.

If you enjoyed Nietzsche’s style, you may also dig on Wittgenstein. He is a very pithy thinker, packing incredible wallops into very tight sections. His posthumous master-work, Philosophical Investigations, is often listed as one of [or simply the] most influential books of philosophy in the 20th century. For his other work, save time and get Anthony Kenny’s Wittgenstein Reader.

At some point you’ll need to tackle the Greeks, but given the expose to Nietzsche I would suggest reading well beyond the obvious Plato & Aristotle. Since you’re more interested in reading forward, I would recommend getting at least a good secondary treatment of the period, like Anthony Gottlieb’s The Dream of Reason. And I would not be a very good Pyrrhonist if I did not point out Benson Mates’s excellent The Skeptic Way, which includes a new translation of Sextus Empiricus.

Edit to add: I think the Nietzsche-had-syphilis hypothesis was overturned long ago…

Yeah, I have read Camus’ The Myth of Sisyphus. I absolutely loved it. I want to read The Stranger.

There’s just so much to read and so little time!