Jeffrey Fisher i don't buy nietzsche as petit bourgeouis rebel. certainly it's a reductive position, even if there's some truth in it.
^^^^^ CB: Actually, that's an old thought of mine, related to Sidney Finkelstein's analysis of N. , existentialism , and other irrationalisms as sort of petit bourgeoisie and others freaking out in the crises of imperialism. Sort of like what T.S. Eliot was reflecting in _The Wasteland_. And , yes, it is just one-side of N. . By itself it would be "onesided".
But with the other I'm tending toward now - the representative of decadent German aristocracy of the period - the analysis is fuller. He sort of gathers the ethos of lots of ruling classes from history, and formulates a persona for ex-aristocrats to enter in the new bourgeois era. But a philosophy for aristocrats is attractive the petit bourgeoisie dealing with the alienation of capitalism.
It important to do class analysis though, and your "reductive" would seem a symptom of slipping into bad idealism perhaps. ^^^^^^
the guy was hegelian through and through. his critiques of christian and jewish morality, much like marx's critique of capitalism, was a mixture of respect and disgust (or something like that), all in the context of an understanding that progress is always from something to something, and that there are various steps along the way, and what now looks like progress will eventually have to be got beyond.
^^^^^ CB: I don't know. From a previous thread, I think of him as more like that other contemporary of Hegel, who was focussed on power like N. The other guy hated Hegel.
^^^^^^
we might disagree with his analysis (although, frankly, i think _beyond good and evil_ is one of the most brilliant philosophical pieces in history, even, or maybe especially, when i think he is probably wrong), but i get really tired of the way we like to apply easy labels to him. even when we ourselves might come to the label through years of dedicaation and hard work trying to figure out what's going on, the label already betrays that work, as if it were unnecessary (see hegel's "preface" on formalism. unless you think hegel is a petit bourgeouis rebel ;-).
J
^^^^^^ CB: It's not just a "label". It is word of analysis after many, many years of thinking about N.
I think it's best to discuss specific concepts, like the thread had on ressentiment. What specifically is "beyond good and evil" about _beyond good and evil_ ?