From: "James Kennedy" <jameske3001-AT-clara.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Can we create the overman?
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 05:53:40 +0100



----- Original Message -----
From: <zatavu-AT-excite.com>
To: <nietzsche-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2000 12:31 AM
Subject: Re: Can we create the overman?


>
> On Sun, 23 Apr 2000 20:05:31 +0200, nietzsche-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> wrote:
>
> >  I wonder, is it possible for us through technology or dicipline, or
> whatnot, to
> >  create an overman?
> >
> >  Any thoughts would well be savioured.
>
> HItler tried that. He too missed the point of the overman. He cannot be
> created, only self-created. Only those who embrace becoming rather than
> being, who become Dionysian in nature can become overman. There have been
> overmen. Goethe, Mozart, Ceasar, Napoleon, just to name a few.
>

Whilst I agree that overman is self-created out of the ashes of man I do not
agree that Goethe, Mozart, Caesar and Napoleon are necessarily overmen.
Nietzsche clearly had a degree of admiration for these men. However, it is
not at all clear they were overmen or that he regarded them as such. Is
embracing becoming the quintessential sign of the overman? Again, I agree
that self-overcoming (one sense of becoming) is necessary, but I do not
agree that the verb 'to become' is quintessentially the isness of overman's
being. It is feasible that self-overcoming has an end-product in overman
such that the vestiges of man are burned away. However, the phoenix that
rises out of those ashes may not have a self to overcome and may be rather a
totality of presence which in its own way will become but such becoming will
be unmanlike and it is unclear whether such becoming will be embraced by the
overman for its own sake. Such becoming may be the deliberation of overman
to fulfil or make manifest his own virtues or to fulfil his desires,
whatever they may be.

Just because Hitler tried and 'missed the point' as you put it, does not
mean that overman cannot be artificially generated or accidentally created.
It is an open question as to whether such possibilities can be fulfilled. It
may be that race still has a part to play. Whilst at this moment in time
mass hysteria prevents rational and open minded debate on race it remains a
concept with potential. I think the problem lies in the common notion of
materialism. The failure to recognize consciousness' priority affords simple
material perspectives to pervade the concept of man. It is doubtful that
skin colour or shape of the skull will have much bearing, if any, on the
real abilities of overman, in much the same way as they have no proven
effect on the real abilities of a man. Certainly one would expect biology to
play a part. However, there is no reason to suppose those biological facts
will manifest themselves overtly as phenotypic traits, although there is
also no reason to suppose otherwise either - overmen may have neotenous
traits, for example. The question of race is an open question that has
become closed and thus made unspeakable in public discourse.



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