Philosophy

Nietzsche's "Will to Power": A Psychological Interpretation and its Ethical Implications

MUHAMMADHOSSEIN امامی; ahmad Fazeli; Hossein Mesbahian

Volume 22, Issue 1 , October 2024, , Pages 127-161

Abstract

Friedrich Nietzsche's concept of "will to power" stands as a cornerstone of his philosophy, yet its interpretation remains a contentious issue. Among the various proposed interpretations, ... Read More Friedrich Nietzsche's concept of "will to power" stands as a cornerstone of his philosophy, yet its interpretation remains a contentious issue. Among the various proposed interpretations, the ontological, metaphorical, and psychological perspectives each offer distinct understandings of this complex concept. While definitively establishing the "correct" interpretation is challenging due to the complexities of Nietzsche's writing and expression, this essay argues that the psychological interpretation aligns more effectively with the core tenets of his thought. The essay begins by providing a concise overview of the metaphysical, metaphorical, and psychological interpretations of "will to power." Acknowledging the inherent uncertainty in interpreting Nietzsche's ideas, it argues that the psychological interpretation, emphasizing the "will to power" as an intrinsic human drive for self-overcoming and growth, resonates more strongly with the broader themes of Nietzsche's philosophy, particularly perspectivism. Furthermore, the essay delves into the ethical implications of the psychological interpretation. It addresses concerns that this interpretation might endorse oppression and autocracy as necessary outcomes of the "will to power." Through careful analysis, the essay demonstrates how the psychological interpretation, when understood accurately, does not inherently support such harmful practices. In contrast, it highlights how this interpretation, emphasizing self-mastery and individual responsibility, can potentially contribute to moral development and a pursuit of excellence. Finally, the essay emphasizes the importance of understanding the foundational concepts of his philosophy, such as perspectivism, for accurately interpreting his ideas. By prioritizing evidence-based analysis and nuanced understanding, we can navigate the complexities of Nietzsche's thought and appreciate its enduring relevance in contemporary discussions about ethics, individual responsibility, and the pursuit of a meaningful life.

Ideology as the Science of Ideas: A Ricouerian Encounter with “Destutt de Tracy and his Epistemological Project for a New Science”

Hossein Mesbahian

Volume 21, Issue 1 , September 2023, , Pages 203-223

Abstract

This article asks: can there be a scientific concept of ideology? This question—which is also the title of an article by Paul Ricoeur—is framed in such a way as to challenge ... Read More This article asks: can there be a scientific concept of ideology? This question—which is also the title of an article by Paul Ricoeur—is framed in such a way as to challenge prevailing conceptions of ideology in favor of a phenomenological approach. Employing the popular but difficult idiom of phenomenology—return to things themselves—and deconstructing the extant logic of ideology established and coined by Destutt de Tracy, this paper argues that a scientific conception of ideology becomes possible. In light of such a possibility, this paper further argues that this scientific conception paves the path for stepping beyond the dichotomy of interpretation and change, or theoretical and practical research. At the very least, a scientific concept of ideology will allow for the development of a kind of science—which, despite not claiming any superiority to other sciences (thus contrary to De Tracy’s contention)—will nevertheless reflect fundamental differences from other sciences in subject matter, methodology and logic. After an exegesis of de Tracy’s thought on the sources, methodology and logic of ideology, this paper examines the claim of the superiority of ideology to other sciences and his Baconian project of reconstructing human understanding and nature. It is clear that the epistemological foundations of ideology are not defendable today and face critical questions. Questions such as, if ideology were to examine sources of human consciousness (knowledge, understanding, intellect), why and how could intellect itself and its foundations, which are supposed to carry out such a process, be excluded from the arbitration process? Of what nature are those intellectual foundations and why is there not adequate discussion about them? Why should that particular way of reasoning be immune to its rulings on the material foundations of thought? Perhaps the whole concept of ideology is merely a biological reflection of intellect in the mind of a French philosopher called Destutt de Tracy, and has no more objective validity than that. If the claim of ideology is that reason can grasp the whole of reality, the question that arises is whether reason can have a grasp on itself and its mechanisms, or should such grasp be excluded from the scope of reason’s analysis? The science of ideas seems to have assumed a transcendental position; But it is precisely this assumption and claim that in return violates the methodological foundations of ideology. These questions lead us to the main question of this article, which is, in the words of Paul Ricoeur: “Do we have no choice but to accede to the opposition between science and ideology?” And to say that ideology is not a science? The answer to this question is that there are possibilities in ideology which can be used to postulate the notion of "ideology as a science" and that this concept also faces limitations which resist developing into a science. What is important, however, is to address the tension between science and ideology, for, as Ricoeur puts it, “we have more to lose by not dealing with this tension” (Ricoeur, 1978, p. 57). This paper concludes that if ideology signifies as an analysis of dominant ideas , it can be merged and united with critical phenomenology (an approach that appeared some two centuries after the concept of ideology) and thereby be employed to dismantle the dichotomy of interpretation and change. In this concluding section, it will be noted that ideology has three main underpinnings: a) its contemporaneity with the philosophical-scientific tradition of knowledge; b) a critique of established ideas; and c) the emergence of relative alternatives. In conjunction with one another, these three create an ideology as science that is different in essence from other sciences; its modus operandi is the simultaneous task of interpretation and change: a quality unique to ideology— and later, critical phenomenology—present in no other science or knowledge.

Axel Honneth and the Struggle for Recognition in the Sphere of Family: Challenges and Limitations

Yasamin Makui; Hossein Mesbahian

Volume 20, Issue 1 , July 2022, , Pages 205-224

Abstract

The ethical and political thinking of Axel Honneth—German philosopher and leading scholar in the third generation of Frankfurt School Critical Theorists—is considered an ... Read More

Habermas and the Other of Occidental Rationality: The Dichotomous Logic of Exclusive Inclusion

Hossein Mesbahian

Volume 17, Issue 2 , March 2020, , Pages 145-165

Abstract

This paper seeks to demonstrate how Habermas’ idea of the universality of modernity is driven by the unsubstantiated assumption that takes this notion to be founded on occidental ... Read More

Articles in Press

Current Issue

Volume 22 (2024)

Volume 21 (2023)

Volume 20 (2022)

Volume 19 (2021)

Volume 18 (2020)

Volume 17 (2019)

Volume 16 (2018)

Volume 15 (2017)

Volume 14 (2017)

Volume 13 (2016)

Volume 12 (2014)

Volume 11 (2013)

Volume 10 (2012)

Volume 9 (2011)

Volume 8 (2010)

Volume 7 (2009)

Volume 6 (2008)

Volume 5 (2007)

Volume 4 (2006)

Volume 3 (2005)

Volume 2 (2004)

Volume 1 (2002)

Author = Hossein Mesbahian

Nietzsche's "Will to Power": A Psychological Interpretation and its Ethical Implications

Abstract

Ideology as the Science of Ideas: A Ricouerian Encounter with “Destutt de Tracy and his Epistemological Project for a New Science”

Abstract

Axel Honneth and the Struggle for Recognition in the Sphere of Family: Challenges and Limitations

Abstract

Habermas and the Other of Occidental Rationality: The Dichotomous Logic of Exclusive Inclusion

Abstract