Perhaps one way to differentiate the two main types of thought that have
been found in N is to look at a concept like the will to power. Here,
for example, using Heidegger and Deleuze, we see a very interesting
dichotomy in what the will to power is interepreted to be. Heidegger
sees WtP as a vestige of metaphysical heritage, coming from the German
tradition of Leibniz, Scheller, Schopenhauer. For H, it is an onto(theo)-
logical concept, one which permeates all Being, consistent with the
famous last paragraph of N's posthumously cobbled The Will to Power.
And yet, it seems that a reader like Deleuze is more true to Nietzsche's
thought when he posits WtP as not being ontological, but genealogical.
Deleuze, in his book on N, describes WtP as being the differentail element
between forces, existing within forces, and yet fleeting, vacuous. WtP
is what gives N the room to create an ethic of willing actively.
I think it is important to take into account N's own thoughts on his work
when raising the banner of metaphysics against him. In numerous passages,
he rails against knwoledge of anything other than the human, all too human,
and lambasts those who seek Being instead of affirming human life and
existence. Of course it is improbable that N's use of the term "being"
could mean what Heidegger means by this most central of his terms, but still..
it raises a doubt.
In other words, the French have probably got a better handle on N than do
any other loose group at this moment... or, so says I, a rather ignorant
American...
John Hartmann
* For a more detailed examination of N, metaphor, and metaphysics,
see my paper on "Nietzsche's Use of Metaphor" at
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/1575/nmetafor.html
--- from list nietzsche@jefferson.village.virginia.edu ---