Abstract
After presenting the general state of the field regarding Nietzsche and skepticism in specialized studies, I explain why it is essential to contextualize this topic through a comparative analysis of Human, All Too Human and Beyond Good and Evil. Both books raise the issue of skepticism in relation to the possibility of knowledge, the end of metaphysics, and the problem of values. Nietzsche seeks to overcome epistemological skepticism by means of an alliance between philosophy and history in the so-called intermediate books Daybreak and The Gay Science , and then concludes in Beyond Good and Evil that skepticism is a good instrument in the pursuit of knowledge and of that which has value, and that precisely skepticism, as an instrument, is essential for philosophy, which is nonetheless responsible for not being skeptical about what has value.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Among the relatively recent works are those of authors such as A. Sommer, “Criatividade e ceticismo en Nietzsche”, in Cadernos Nietzsche 34 (1), 2014, pp. 11–31; A. Sommer, “Nihilism and Skepticism in Nietzsche” in A Companion to Nietzsche , Pearson, K.A. (ed.), New Jersey, Wiley-Blackwell, 2006, pp. 250–269; C. Santini, “Nietzsche und der antike Skeptizismus” in Nietzsche -Studien 42, 2013, pp. 368–374; S. Busellato, Nietzsche e lo scetticismo, Macerata, Edizioni Università di Macerata, 2012; J.N. Berry, Nietzsche and the Ancient Skeptical Tradition, Oxford/New York, Oxford University Press, 2011; K. Hanza, “Escepticismo como voluntad de poder. Nietzsche, lector de Lange” in Nietzsche e as ciencias, de Barrenechea, M.Á., Feitosa, C., Pinheiro, P. and Suarez, R. (eds.), Rio de Janeiro, Viveiros de Castro Editora, 2011, pp. 46–59; P. Wotling, “‘Cette espèce nouvelle de scepticisme, plus dangereuse et plus dure’. Ephexis, bouddhisme, frédéricisme chez Nietzsche” in Révue de métaphysique et de morale 65, 2010, pp. 109–123; P. Wotling, “‘L’ultime scepticisme’. La vérité comme régime d’interprétation” in Revue Philosophique de la France et de l’Étranger 196 (4), 2006, pp. 479–496; L. Lupo, Le colombe dello scettico. Riflessioni di Nietzsche sulla coscienza negli anni 1880–1888, Pisa, ETS, 2007; D. Wilkerson, Nietzsche and the Greeks, London/New York, Continuum, 2006, especially chapter 3; J.I. Porter, Nietzsche and the Philology of the Future, Stanford, Stanford University Press, 2002, especially chapters 1 and 2; P. Poellner, Nietzsche and Metaphysics, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2000, especially chapters 2 and 3; R. Bett, “Nietzsche on the Skeptics and Nietzsche as Skeptic” in Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 82, 2000, pp. 62–86. Some pre-2000 works are those of K. Mosser, “Should the Skeptic live his Skepticism? Nietzsche and classical Skepticism” in Manuscrito – Revista Internacional de Filosofía 21, 1998, pp. 275–292; D. Conway and J. Ward, “Physicians of the Soul. Peritropé in Sextus Empiricus and Nietzsche” in Nietzsche und die antike Philosophie, Conway, D. and Rehn, R. (eds.), Hamburg, Wissenschaftlicher Verlag, 1992, pp. 193–223; G. Martin, “A Critique of Nietzsche’s Metaphysical Skepticism” in International Studies in Philosophy 19, 1987, pp. 51–59; B. Magnus, “Nietzsche’s mitigated Skepticism” in Nietzsche -Studien 9, 1980, pp. 260–267; A. Parusch, “Nietzsche on the Skeptic’s life” in Review of Metaphysics 29, 1975/1976, pp. 523–542. It is worth mentioning what is likely the first study on Nietzsche and skepticism: that of R. Richter, Der Skeptizismus in der Philosophie, Leipzig, Dürr, 1904. Although already Paul Michaelis, on a first review of Beyond Good and Evil , proposes that Nietzsche departs from a “radical skepticism”. See P. Michaelis, “Jenseits von Gut und Böse (review)” in Rezensionen und Reaktionen zu Nietzsches Werken 1872–1889, Reich, H. (ed.), Berlin, Walter de Gruyter, 2013, pp. 634–639.
- 2.
This is the position of Santini, Busellato, and Sommer, against Berry and Conway and Ward.
- 3.
This is the interpretation of Berry, Busellato, and Wotling. Important in Berry’s interpretation is outlining what is common between ancient skepticism and that of Nietzsche in its difference with modern skepticism. To do this, he uses Alan Bailey’s characterization of post-Cartesian skepticism as “an abstract theoretical construct which lacks all psychological authenticity” (J.N. Berry, op. cit., p. viii).
- 4.
Both Busellato and Sommer deal with Nietzsche’s modern sources. Sommer’s work includes a list of the main ones (A. Sommer, “Nihilism and Skepticism in Nietzsche”, op. cit., p. 266) and correctly deals with the relationship between nihilism and skepticism. This relationship is particularly important in Beyond Good and Evil, because there, as we will see in section 5 (“Skeptics and scholars”), Nietzsche diagnoses modern skepticism as a kind of “paralysis of the will.” Probably, because of his interest in skepticism Nietzsche acquired Brochard’s book Les Sceptiques Grecs, in 1887–88; but he had confronted skepticism much earlier in the works of Lange, Spir, and Teichmüller. In History of Materialism, Lange follows the trajectory of a few modern skeptics: Montaigne, Pierre Charron, Blaise Pascal, and the French moralists. Meanwhile, Nietzsche had a copy of Hume’s Dialogues on Natural Religion . It is also pertinent to consider Gustav Gerber and Georg Christoph Lichtenberg as sources of Nietzsche’s studies, as well as Kuno Fischer’s History of New Philosophy or, on religious questions, W.E.H. Lecky’s History of the Origin and Influence of the Enlightenment in Europe, Jean-Marie Guyau’s L’irreligion de l’avenir, or Eugène de Roberty’s L’Ancienne et la nouvelle philosophie (ibid., p. 259). And, of course, we must not forget Diogenes Laertius, whose impact on Nietzsche has been very well studied by Jessica Berry (2011).
- 5.
See V. Vivarelli, “Montaigne und der ‘freie Geist’. Nietzsche im Übergang” in Nietzsche -Studien 23, 1994, pp. 79–101; D. Molner, “The influence of Montaigne on Nietzsche: A raison d’ être in the sun” in Nietzsche -Studien 22, 1993, pp. 80–93.
- 6.
Nietzsche’s epistemological theses center on his doctrine of “perspectivism.” For a good survey, see M. Navratil, “‘Einige Sprossen zurück’. Metaphysikkritik, Perspektivismus und die Gültigkeit der Perspektiven in Nietzsches Menschliches, Allzumenschliches” in Nietzsche -Studien 46, 2017, pp. 58–81, which offers an excellent review on the issue of perspectivism in the specialized bibliography (ibid., p. 76, note 22).
- 7.
See A.A. Long, “Skepsis; Skeptizismus” in Historisches Wörterbuch, vol. 9, ed. Ritter, J. and Gründer, K. (eds.), Darmstadt, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1995, vol. 9, p. 938. In modern languages, as A.A. Long points out, “skeptical” can mean several things. In addition to a philosopher who questions the foundations of knowledge, it may also be a religious agnostic or someone who refuses to give a final say on matters that have been settled in the general opinion (ibid.).
- 8.
Regarding this dispute, see H. Siemens, “Agonal Communities of Taste: Law and Community in Nietzsche’s Philosophy of Transvaluation,” op. cit.; H. Siemens, “Nietzsche’s agon with Ressentiment: Towards a therapeutic Reading of critical Transvaluation,” op. cit. For an overall interpretation of Nietzsche’s philosophy, with emphasis on value , see V. Gerhardt, Nietzsche , Munich, Beck, 1995; and also see P. Wotling, “‘Cette espèce nouvelle de scepticisme, plus dangereuse et plus dure’. Ephexis, bouddhisme, frédéricisme chez Nietzsche”, op. cit.; P. Wotling, “‘L’ultime scepticisme’. La vérité comme régime d’interprétation”, op. cit.; P. Wotling, “La culture comme problème. La redétermination nietzschéenne du questionnement philosophique”, in Nietzsche -Studien 37, 2008, pp. 1–50.
- 9.
In 1886, that is, in the same year JGB is published, MAM becomes a two-part book. The 1878 edition is reissued as Part I, preceded by a Preface and followed by Part II, containing both Assorted Opinions and Maxims (1879) and The Wanderer and His Shadow (1880), with their own, separate Preface. Regarding this subject, see the “Caveat” in the second volume of Nietzsche’s Kritische Studienausgabe. Henceforth all Nietzsche’s quotes refer to the German critical edition of his complete works, for which is used the acronym KSA, followed by volume and page numbers.
- 10.
See A. Schirmer, Friedrich Nietzsche . Chronik in Bildern und Texten, Munich, DTV, 2000, p. 640. The publication of Beyond Good and Evil has its origins in Nietzsche’s difficulties with his editor. Originally, he wanted to reformulate Human, All Too Human , buying all copies of the first edition in order to destroy them. When this plan failed, he wrote Beyond Good and Evil. In 1886, he published the latter work and managed to reprint some of his previous works with new (and now famous) prefaces.
- 11.
I hereby list very briefly the series of books published during this period: Human, All Too Human . A Book for Free Spirits was published in 1878; the “Appendix,” Assorted Opinions and Maxims, in 1879; The Wanderer and His Shadow, as a second part of Human, All Too Human , in 1880; followed by Daybreak in 1881 and The Gay Science in 1882. Between 1883 and 1885 the four books of Thus Spoke Zarathustra appear; and in 1886, Beyond Good and Evil.
- 12.
KSA 10, 231. On this, see P. Heller, “Von den ersten und letzten Dingen”. Studien und Kommentar zu einer Aphorismenreihe von Friedrich Nietzsche , Berlin/New York, Walter de Gruyter, 1972, pp. 485–488.
- 13.
On this line of work in Nietzsche’s philosophy, see M. Brusotti and H. Siemens (eds.), Nietzsche, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics , London, Bloomsbury, 2017; also see G. Stack, Lange and Nietzsche, Berlin, Walter de Gruyter, 1983.
- 14.
KSA 2, 40.
- 15.
On this particular figure of speech, see M. Navratil, op. cit.
- 16.
The first part of MAM (“Of First and Last Things”) has a total of just thirty-four aphorisms, from the six hundred and fifty of the first volume.
- 17.
Sextus Empiricus, Against the Logicians, Bett R. (ed.), New York, Cambridge University Press, 2005, pp. 408–481. On peritropé, or the charge of self-refutation, in Sextus and Nietzsche, see D. Conway and J. Ward (1992), op. cit. Conway and Ward find commonality in Sextus Empiricus and in Nietzsche following the strategy of using a non-assertive discourse to battle dogmatism.
- 18.
KSA 2, 41–42. For an interpretation of the aphorism in relation to the problem of perspectivism, see M. Navratil, op. cit.
- 19.
KSA 2, 41.
- 20.
KSA 2, 41–42. Emphasis is mine.
- 21.
KSA 2, 40.
- 22.
To the extent that all the books from MAM to JGB (Daybreak , The Gay Science, Thus Spoke Zarathustra ) can be seen as studies, routes in this broad landscape.
- 23.
KSA 2, 42–43.
- 24.
KSA 2, 42–43: “Presumed triumph of skepticism. Let us accept for the moment the skeptical starting point: assuming there were no other, metaphysical world and that we could not use any metaphysical explanations of the only world known to us, how would we then look upon men and things? One can imagine this; it is useful to do so, even if one were to reject the question of whether Kant and Schopenhauer proved anything metaphysical scientifically. For according to historical probability, it is quite likely that men at some time will become skeptical about this whole subject [im Ganzen und Allgemeinen]. So one must ask the question: how will human society take shape under the influence of such an attitude [Gesinnung]? Perhaps the scientific proof of any metaphysical world is itself so difficult that mankind can no longer keep from distrusting it. And if one is distrustful of metaphysics, then we have, generally speaking, the same consequences as if metaphysics had been directly refuted and one were no longer permitted to believe in it. The historical question about mankind’s unmetaphysical views remains the same in either case”.
- 25.
KSA 8, 384.
- 26.
KSA 10, 232.
- 27.
The arguments put forward by Nietzsche are not proof that there is no metaphysical world: “It is true that there could be a metaphysical world; the absolute possibility of it can hardly be disputed” (KSA 2, 29). The point he wishes to make is that, even if it existed, since it has nothing to do with the “only world we know,” we would be completely indifferent to its existence (KSA 2, 29).
- 28.
KSA 10, 232.
- 29.
KSA 2, 29.
- 30.
In MAM, Nietzsche says that discovering the origin of metaphysical errors is eo ipso to refute them (KSA 2, 29). This idea is consistent with the program of “historical philosophy”: to unravel the origins of centuries-old ingrained errors (KSA 2, 22). To do so, it is useful to employ various methods that Nietzsche will gradually refine. On this, see C. Denat, “‘Les découvertes les plus précieuses, ce sont les méthodes’: Nietzsche, ou la recherche d’une méthode sans méthodologie” in Nietzsche-Studien 39, 2010, pp. 283–308.
- 31.
KSA 2, 29.
- 32.
KSA 10, 232.
- 33.
KSA 10, 232.
- 34.
KSA 9, 287: “Skepticismus! Ja, aber ein Scepticismus der Experimente! Nicht die Trägheit der Verzweiflung”.
- 35.
See especially W. Stegmaier, Nietzsches “Genealogie der Moral ”, Darmstadt, WBG, 2010.
- 36.
On this subject, see P. Wotling, “‘Der Weg zu den Grundproblemen’. Statut et structure de la psychologie dans la pensée de Nietzsche” in Nietzsche-Studien 26, 1997, pp. 1–33.
- 37.
KSA 2, 391.
- 38.
KSA 2, 645.
- 39.
KSA 2, 391.
- 40.
Later, Nietzsche’s judgment of Pyrrho will be more drastic: he is a nihilist or a Buddhist. See KSA 13, 264–265, 276, 324, 347, 378, 446.
- 41.
KSA 3, 527.
- 42.
KSA 3, 469.
- 43.
KSA 3, 469.
- 44.
KSA 11, 249. For the question of the body as a “main theme,” see E. Blondel, Nietzsche le corps et la culture, Paris, PUF, 1986.
- 45.
KSA 3, 472. On this question, see J.N. Berry, op. cit., pp. 30–31. Notice that the beginning of the aphorism eludes the performative contradiction that exists when speaking of “in and of itself,” when it is supported by “degrees.”
- 46.
Nietzsche gives as examples of such errors: “that there are lasting things, that there are things that are the same, that there are things, matters, bodies, that a thing is as it appears, that we have free will, that what is good for me is also good in and of itself” (KSA 3, 469).
- 47.
KSA 3, 470. “Probity” and “skepticism” develop and become more subtle, specifically “where two opposing propositions seemed applicable to life because both were compatible with fundamental errors” (KSA 3, 470).
- 48.
KSA 3, 518.
- 49.
For a more detailed analysis, see the comments on JGB by D. Burnham, Reading Nietzsche. An Analysis of Beyond Good and Evil, Stocksfield, Acumen, 2007, and L. Lampert, Nietzsche’s Task. An Interpretation of Beyond Good and Evil, New Haven, Yale University Press, 2001.
- 50.
KSA 5, 23–24.
- 51.
KSA 5, 20.
- 52.
KSA 5, 20.
- 53.
KSA 5, 23–24.
- 54.
KSA 5, 66–67. Here Nietzsche deals with skepticism in the historical context of the Christian faith and the “Enlightenment .” The faith of the early Christians, “in the midst of a world of southern skeptics and freethinkers,” is “sacrifice.” Modern “obtuse” men are incapable of feeling the “terribly superlative conception which was implied to an antique taste by the paradox of the formula, ‘God on the cross.’” It was “freedom from the faith, the half-stoical and smiling indifference to the seriousness of the faith, which made the slaves indignant at their masters and revolt against them. ‘Enlightenment’ causes revolt (…) his many hidden sufferings make him revolt against the noble taste which seems to deny suffering. The skepticism with regard to suffering, fundamentally only an attitude of aristocratic morality, was not the least of the causes, also, of the last great slave-insurrection which began with the French Revolution” (KSA 5, 67).
- 55.
KSA 5, 69. This appear in the section dedicated to “being religious.”
- 56.
KSA 5, 137. The following quotations are also from JGB part VI, section 208.
- 57.
KSA 5, 137.
- 58.
KSA 5, 138.
- 59.
KSA 5, 139.
- 60.
KSA 5, 145.
- 61.
KSA 5, 145.
- 62.
KSA 6, 236. Also see section 3 of the chapter “Why I am so intelligent” from Ecce Homo, where Nietzsche refers to skeptics as “the only respectable type of people among philosophers” and the book by Víctor Brochard (KSA 6, 284). It should be noted that Nietzsche appreciates the skeptical weapons that, particularly, German historians from Wolff onwards have developed.
- 63.
KSA 6, 178.
- 64.
KSA 5, 145. On this particular problem, see the excellent article by Y. Constantinidès, “Nietzsche législateur. Grande politique et réforme du monde”, in Lectures de Nietzsche, Balaudé, J.F. and Wotling, P. (eds.), Paris, Le Livre de Poche, 2000, pp. 208–282.
Bibliographical References
Bailey, Alan. 2002a. Sextus Empiricus and Pyrrhonian Scepticism. New York: Oxford University Press.
———, ed. 2002b. Sextus Empiricus: Outlines of Scepticism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Barnes, Jonathan. 1986. Nietzsche and Diogenes Laertius. Nietzsche-Studien 15: 16–40.
Berry, Jessica N. 2011. Nietzsche and the Ancient Skeptical Tradition. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
Bett, Richard. 2000. Nietzsche on the Skeptics and Nietzsche as Skeptic. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 82: 62–86.
Blondel, Eric. 1986. Nietzsche le corps et la culture. Paris: PUF.
Brochard, Víctor. 1945. Los escépticos griegos. Buenos Aires: Losada.
Brusotti, Marco, and Herman Siemens, eds. 2017. Nietzsche, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics. London: Bloomsbury.
Burnham, Douglas. 2007. Reading Nietzsche. An Analysis ofBeyond Good and Evil. Stocksfield: Acumen.
Busellato, Stefano. 2012. Nietzsche e lo scetticismo. Macerata: Edizioni Università di Macerata.
Campioni, Giuliano. 2005. Nietzsche y el espíritu latino. Buenos Aires: El Cuenco de Plata.
Constantinidès, Yannis. 2000. Nietzsche législateur. Grande politique et réforme du monde. In Lectures de Nietzsche, ed. J.F. Balaudé and P. Wotling, 208–282. Paris: Le Livre de Poche.
Conway, Daniel, and Julie Ward. 1992. Physicians of the Soul. Peritropé in Sextus Empiricus and Nietzsche. In Nietzsche und die antike Philosophie, ed. D. Conway and R. Rehn, 193–223. Hamburg: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag.
Danto, Arthur C. 1980. Nietzsche as Philosopher. New York: Columbia University Press.
Denat, Céline. 2010. “Les découvertes les plus précieuses, ce sont les méthodes”: Nietzsche, ou la recherche d’une méthode sans méthodologie. Nietzsche-Studien 39: 283–308.
Gerhardt, Volker. 1995. Nietzsche. Munich: Beck.
Hanza, Kathia. 2011. Escepticismo como voluntad de poder. Nietzsche, lector de Lange. In Nietzsche e as ciencias, ed. M.Á. de Barrenechea, C. Feitosa, P. Pinheiro, and R. Suarez, 46–59. Rio de Janeiro: Viveiros de Castro Editora.
Heller, Peter. 1972. “Von den ersten und letzten Dingen”. Studien und Kommentar zu einer Aphorismenreihe von Friedrich Nietzsche. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter.
Hiley, David R. 1992. The Politics of Skepticism: A Reading of Montaigne. History of Philosophy Quarterly 9: 379–399.
Himmelmann, Beatrix. 2011. Jessica N. Berry. Nietzsche and the Ancient Skeptical Tradition. https://ndpr.nd.edu/news/nietzsche-and-the-ancient-skeptical-tradition/. Accessed 10th Feb 2018.
Lachtermann, David R. 1992. Die ewige Wiederkehr des Griechen: Nietzsche and the Homeric Question. In Nietzsche und die antike Philosophie, ed. D. Conway and R. Rehn, 13–35. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag.
Lampert, Laurence. 2001. Nietzsche’s Task. An Interpretation ofBeyond Good and Evil. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Lange, Friedrich Albert. 1950. The History of Materialism and Criticism of Its Present Importance. New York: The Humanities Press.
Long, A.A. 1995. Skepsis; Skeptizismus. In Historisches Wörterbuch, ed. J. Ritter and K. Gründer, vol. 9. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
Lupo, Luca. 2007. Le colombe dello scettico. In Riflessioni di Nietzsche sulla coscienza negli anni 1880–1888. Pisa: ETS.
Magnus, Bernd. 1980. Nietzsche’s Mitigated Skepticism. Nietzsche-Studien 9: 260–267.
Martin, Glen. 1987. A Critique of Nietzsche’s Metaphysical Skepticism. International Studies in Philosophy 19: 51–59.
Meijers, Anthonie, and Martin Stingelin. 1988. Konkordanz Nietzsche-Gerber. Nietzsche-Studien 17: 350–368.
Michaelis, Paul. 2013. Jenseits von Gut und Böse (review). In Rezensionen und Reaktionen zu Nietzsches Werken 1872–1889, ed. H. Reich, 634–639. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Molner, David. 1993. The influence of Montaigne on Nietzsche: A raison d’ être in the sun. Nietzsche-Studien 22: 80–93.
Mosser, Kurt. 1998. Should the Skeptic Live His Skepticism? Nietzsche and Classical Skepticism. Manuscrito—Revista Internacional de Filosofía 21: 275–292.
Navratil, Michael. 2017. “Einige Sprossen zurück”. Metaphysikkritik, Perspektivismus und die Gültigkeit der Perspektiven in Nietzsches Menschliches, Allzumenschliches. Nietzsche-Studien 46: 58–81.
Nietzsche, Friedrich. 1980. Sämtliche Werke. Kritische Studienausgabe, ed. G. Colli and M. Montinari, 15. Munich: DTV and Walter de Gruyter.
———. 1995–2020. The Complete Works, ed. E. Behler and B. Magnus. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Parusch, Adi. 1975/1976. Nietzsche on the Skeptic’s Life. Review of Metaphysics 29: 523–542.
Poellner, Peter. 2000. Nietzsche and Metaphysics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Porter, James. 2002. Nietzsche and the Philology of the Future. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Richter, Raoul. 1904. Der Skeptizismus in der Philosophie. Leipzig: Dürr.
———. 1908. Der Skeptizismus in der Philosophie und seine Überwindung. Leipzig: Dürr.
Ritchie, E. 1909. Der Skeptizismus in der Philosophie und seine Überwindung by Raoul Richter. The Philosophical Review 18 (5): 557–558.
Santini, Carlotta. 2013. Nietzsche und der antike Skeptizismus. Nietzsche-Studien 42: 368–374.
Schirmer, Andreas. 2000. Friedrich Nietzsche. Chronik in Bildern und Texten. Munich: DTV.
Sextus Empiricus. 2005. Against the Logicians, ed. R. Bett. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Siemens, Herman. 2001. Nietzsche’s Agon with Ressentiment: Towards a Therapeutic Reading of Critical Transvaluation. Continental Philosophy Review 34: 69–93.
———. 2002. Agonal Communities of Taste: Law and Community in Nietzsche’s Philosophy of Transvaluation. The Journal of Nietzsche Studies 24: 83–112.
Sommer, Andreas. 2006. Nihilism and Skepticism in Nietzsche. In A Companion to Nietzsche, ed. K.A. Pearson, 250–269. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.
———. 2014. Criatividade e ceticismo en Nietzsche. Cadernos Nietzsche 34 (1): 11–31.
Stack, George. 1983. Lange and Nietzsche. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Stegmaier, Werner. 2010. Nietzsches “Genealogie der Moral”. Darmstadt: WBG.
Vivarelli, Vivetta. 1994. Montaigne und der ‘freie Geist’. Nietzsche im Übergang. Nietzsche-Studien 23: 79–101.
Wilkerson, Dale. 2006. Nietzsche and the Greeks. London/New York: Continuum.
Wotling, Patrick. 1997. “Der Weg zu den Grundproblemen”. Statut et structure de la psychologie dans la pensée de Nietzsche. Nietzsche-Studien 26: 1–33.
———. 2006. “L’ultime scepticisme”. La vérité comme régime d’interprétation. Revue Philosophique de la France et de l’Étranger 196 (4): 479–496.
———. 2008. La culture comme problème. La redétermination nietzschéenne du questionnement philosophique. Nietzsche-Studien 37: 1–50.
———. 2010. “Cette espèce nouvelle de scepticisme, plus dangereuse et plus dure”. Ephexis, bouddhisme, frédéricisme chez Nietzsche. Révue de métaphysique et de morale 65: 109–123.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hanza, K. (2021). Nietzsche: Experimental Skepticism and the Question of Values. In: Rosaleny, V.R., Smith, P.J. (eds) Sceptical Doubt and Disbelief in Modern European Thought. International Archives of the History of Ideas Archives internationales d'histoire des idées, vol 233. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55362-3_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55362-3_16
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-55361-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-55362-3
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)