Essay Sample on Nietzsche vs Aristotle on Logic

Introduction

The purpose of the paper is to compare Nietzsche and Aristotle's logic on the truth. Both of them had arguments on the authenticity of the truth. Generally, Nietzsche believed that human beings lacked the capability to know the truth because they only have information that only explains things within their existence. As such, they have had to live on delusions and use the untruthful information for self-preservation. On the other hand, Aristotle believed that logic of methods are important in determining the truth in every concept. He believed that one should follow a set of rules to arrive at correct reasoning. Therefore, the paper provides Nietzsche's conclusion, how he fails at simple apprehension compared to Aristotle's logic, the perception from both of them regarding how definitions are formed, and how Nietzsche makes a false judgement. The paper argues that Aristotle's argument on the use of logic methods in forming the truth is better than Nietzsche's.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Nietzsche's Conclusion

Nietzsche concludes that the truth is a based on perspective instead of fundamental reality. He believes that no one is rational enough to live and know the truth because everybody is busy living pre-established truths which are collections of errors, convictions and lies based on cowardice, fear, and need. He writes, 'all the manifestations of such a life will be accompanied by this dissimulation, this disavowal of indigence, this glitter of metaphorical intuitions, and, in general, this immediacy of deception: neither the house, nor the gait, nor the clothes, nor the clay jugs give evidence of having been invented because of a pressing need (Nietzsche, 1992)'. The statement shows that Nietzsche believes that many people do not know the truth because they believe that something that is good is inextricably connected to the truth. Such people believe that the process of discovering the truth is pleasurable. They believe that the continuous discovery of the truth can only improve humanity. However, as his conclusion shows, the concept of truth and process of its development is just adopted for reasons related to psychology and based on need.

How Nietzsche Fails at Simple Apprehension vs. Aristotle Logic Methods

Nietzsche fails at simple apprehension that the truth is a matter of separation composition and a result of the causative interaction between deliberation and action. The truth is only achieved when one can separate and join terms. However, he presents human beings as lacking the intellect capability to know the truth, humans as only interested in the surface of things instead of the truth, truth as a collection of metaphors, human beings as just using intellect to for self-preservation. In the beginning, he describes human beings as species that are remote. He says, 'In some remote corner of the universe, poured out and glittering in innumerable solar systems, there once was a star on which clever animals invented knowledge (Nietzsche, 1992)'. By this statement, he means that although the human being is nothing but an animal, he pretends that he is so clever. Similarly, he dismisses the importance human beings have connected to the knowledge they have invented because it cannot go beyond life. He says, 'But if we could communicate with the mosquito, then we would learn that he floats through the air with the same self-importance, feeling within itself the flying center of the world (Nietzsche, 1992).' He implies that humans believe the truth based on the importance they associate with the knowledge they think they have created. Additionally, he believes human beings see things as overly important just as the mosquito believes it is the center of the world. They do not know the truth because they are only interested in the surface of things instead of the truth. He says, 'That haughtiness which goes with knowledge and feeling, which shrouds the eyes and senses of man in a blinding fog, therefore deceives him about the value of existence by carrying in itself the most flattering evaluation of knowledge itself (Nietzsche, 1992)'. He believes that human beings only focus on stimuli instead of things. As such, they are comfortable living in lies. He believes that the human intellect is designed on untruth. Hence, many people live deluded into thinking that they know and possess the truth. Further, Nietzsche presents the truth as a collection of metaphors because human beings lack the capability to neither create it nor posse it. Instead, they live in lies that they inherited from their ancestors and use it to preserve and justify their existence.

Conversely, Aristotle presented a method on the logic that can be used to understand how to arrive at the truth hence can be used to dismiss Nietzsche's perception of the truth. Aristotle believed that the only way to know the truth was to use logic which is based on a set of rules that can lead to correct reasoning. For example, Aristotle provided that we should form our reasoning on something based on substance. Also, he offered that the truth must be explained based on what is already known regarding the past and present. When Nietzsche says that human beings do not see the truth because they only find their intellect on the surface of things, he dismisses the truth that people see in viewing the surface of a particular element (Nietzsche, 1992). Thus, based on this account, it shows that Nietzsche also lacks knowledge of the truth just like the people he describes in the article.

How Nietzsche Doesn’t Understand How Definitions Are Formed

According to Aristotle's logic, definitions are developed based on the apprehension of terms, singular terms, and propositions. For example, Aristotle believed that there are things which are universal while there are others which are individual. He felt that there are things whose nature have to be understood from the perspective of many subjects while there are others whose meaning are only predicted at individual levels. Similarly, Aristotle provided that propositions can be meaningful when they are either affirmative or negative. However, based on his argument, it seems Nietzsche does not understand how definitions are formed. It seems he believes that definitions of terms are matters of on radical individualism (Nietzsche, 1992). He thinks that there many errors in consciousness and science that people have to trust themselves in making an accurate definition. Also, he believes that people have to change the way they think about everything.

How Nietzsche Makes a False Judgment

Although Nietzsche gives his argument an illusion of being sound based on the examples he provides, it is incorrect and conceals the underlying problem of truth in the society. His judgment is false because he does not believe in the capability of the truth from human beings only because it does not explain human existence (Nietzsche, 1992). However, he is also human; hence, he is telling the reader not to believe in what he is showing as the truth. Also, he is wrong when he dismisses the authenticity of the knowledge people get from focussing on the surface of things because it is the standard starting concept of the general knowledge. For example, one cannot start to analyze the snow if he does not know that it is white. Also, one can only understand the importance of water when he recognizes that it is a colorless liquid. Even Nietzsche uses the name and concept of surfaces of things to make his argument (Nietzsche, 1992). The information human beings use as a form of reference cannot be rejected because it is passed to them from one generation to another.

Conclusion

Conclusively, while both Nietzsche and Aristotle provided their concept of the truth, it seems that only Aristotle's argument is convincing. His argument shows that the truth is a process that applies logic and needs to be guided by rules to make it trustworthy. Also, his argument shows that there needs to be a distinction between individual and universal things before understanding the relationship between subjects and predicaments. On the other hand, Nietzsche's dismissal of the capability of human beings to from the truth right from the beginning of the world, and affirmation that human beings only live by a collection of metaphors which they use for individual-preservation shows how he fails at simple apprehension and forms a false judgement. Therefore, the better way for human beings to know the truth is through Aristotle's logic methods.

Reference

Nietzsche, F. (1992). Truth and falsity in an extra-moral sense. ETC: A Review of General Semantics, 58-72.