I see quite a bit of conceptual overlap between pragmatism and N: genealogy of morals is a proto-pragmatist text, isn't it? In any case, the important thing about science is that it works. Whether or not it uncovers some neo-Platonic, immutable forms/laws is an idle philosophical question. (I think that qualifies as a pragmatic/Nietzschean point!)
Miles
^^^^ CB: OK. Then here's a pragmatic problem. The effect of Nietzche seems to be to give birth to anti-Marxists, or people who think he is a basis for disgarding or ignoring Marxism. He seems to ignore or be hostile to Marxism.
Yet Marxism had the principle of "pragmatism" before the Pragmatists and N. See 2nd Thesis on Feuerbach, _Ludwig Feuerbach_, _Materialism and Empirio-Criticism_. The philosophy of praxis precedes pragmatism and Nietzche, and as far as I can tell is not credited by them for the prior discovery. Why does N come off as an anti-Marxist ? Why didn't he declare for Marxism ?
Also, the fullest statement of your idea of no immutable universal laws is in _Anti-Duhring_ by Engels. I think it's the earliest in the period we are talking about. Seems to me you are a Marxist on this issue.