Date: Wed, 15 Mar 95 10:39 GMT
From: WIDDER-AT-VAX.LSE.AC.UK
Subject: Re: Postmodernism


Simon DeDeo, responding to Guido Albertelli, writes:

"But the question of authority goes deeper than this -- since the
statement 'God is dead' has no authority *in itself*, it must derive
it from somehwhere else -- from some kind of absolute that we have
arbitrarily (or apparently not arbitrarily) set for ourselves.  If I
decide that I will take experience to be my authority, and the
statement 'God is dead' is corroborated by experience, the statement
now has authority to guide my actions.  Other possible derivations are
possible, depending on where one finds authority -- depending on how I
'come to know'.  Coming to know implies some sort of framework -- rational,
romantic, analytical, existential -- within which I understand what I know."

Things can get rather tricky here.  It is at this point that Nietzsche is
accused of 'performative contradiction' -- i.e., stating there is no truth,
but in effect making a truth statement by saying 'there is not truth'.  Usually
this argument is taken to convict Nietzsche of some horrible philosophical
crime.  'What is to be done when authority, truth, etc., are dissapated? Should
we not simply accept that Nietzsche's position is untenable?'

I don't think this is a move that needs to be made.  Nietzsche is showing how
transcendental and metaphysical frameworks such as God, rationality, self-
referentiality, etc., ultimately call themselves into question FROM WITHIN.
Statements such as 'God is dead' do not derive their 'authority' (if it can
still be called that) from some rational framework.  It is rather the failure
of such frameworks that authorizes.  It is in this sense that what remains an
authoritative force in Nietzsche is a 'groundless ground'.  It is the failure
of foundations that (paradoxically) provides the 'foundation' for Nietzsche's
affirmative claims.

It is in this sense that Nietzsche is not a skeptic (the label Habermas, for 
example, wants to pin on Nietzsche, because he feels comfortable refuting
skepticism).  He does not begin with claims like 'God is dead', 'truth is 
simply an error', etc.  These are not 'axioms' so to speak, which guide his
thought and are left unquestioned.  They are more akin to 'conclusions', drawn
from an internal critique of Christianity, epistemology, philosophies of
subjectivity, etc.

Nathan
widder-AT-vax.lse.ac.uk


	--- from list nietzsche-AT-jefferson.village.virginia.edu ---

     ------------------