Acquaintances express surprise when they learn about my interest in philosophy, and my taste for Friedrich Nietzsche’s books.  I’ve heard, “that sounds deep,” more than once.  How many experiences, areas of life, strike us as “deep” from a distance?  I say to myself, “why not come closer and have a better look?”

Many aspects of life by chance capture our interest.  It may that a serendipitous alignment of circumstances resulted in an enduring enjoyment of tea.  One’s enjoyment grows the more one learns.  Or perchance there was a Professor whose enthusiasm for his area of expertise was contagious.  The fascination, a desire to know more was passed on, in the same way that invisible organisms will pass from biome to biome.  One “discovers” a community of interest that just “feels right.”

Is philosophy rarified, esoteric, only for the few trained in an ancient art, – not unlike alchemy?

Nietzsche had something to say about the heart of philosophy, about philosophers.

…every great philosophy so far has been: a confession of faith on the part of its author, and a type of involuntary and unself-conscious memoir…

The truth! Every philosophy, Plato, Thomas Aquinas, Jean Paul Sartre, et al, could not be further from an objective account of ideas, an explanation of reality.  Philosophers write and speak to leave a record of their own singular experience of a life, a memoir. A philosophy is a singular point of view.

…the moral (or immoral) intentions in every philosophy constitute the true living seed from which the whole plant has always grown.

A productive approach to philosophy is to keep asking of the originator as you read or listen, “What does he/she want?” “Che vuoi?” in Italian is meant as the expression, somewhat incredulous, skeptical, “exactly what do you want?”  The reader or the listener is to “bore in” until one discovers what is most valued, what the philosopher wants.  Entire philosophies are developed from that starting point.

But anyone who looks at people’s basic drives, to see how far they may have played their little game right here as inspiring geniuses (or daemons or sprites –), will find that they all practiced philosophy at some point,…

Each of us is a collection of basic drives. Those forces motivate.  How is the primary, dominating drive, or perhaps a ruling committee of drives developed?  Does the drive/desire develop into a demonic morality, or perhaps into a humane morality?  Nietzsche dares to write that everyone practices philosophy.  A few do so professionally, scholarly teaching, publishing for a paycheck.

…every single one of them would be only too pleased to present itself as the ultimate purpose of existence and as rightful master of all the other drives. Because every drive craves mastery, and this leads it to try philosophizing.

The nature of the drives/desires which come to the fore to motivate is imperious, demanding to be “top dog.”  When a philosopher opines about the meaning of life, or of the universe he/she is simplifying to a single point the drive that masters their outlook.  We write and speak to rationalize the desire(s) that masters us.  Do you suspect that conflict is at the heart of this?  You are correct.

...there is absolutely nothing impersonal about the philosopher; and in particular his morals bear decided and decisive witness to who he is – which means, in what order of rank the innermost drives of his nature stand with respect to each other.

Nietzsche sums up his assessment of philosophers, the practice of philosophy.  Of course Nietzsche himself does not stand outside of that circle.  Nor do you and I.

The quotations come from Beyond Good and Evil by Friedrich Nietzsche, trans. Judith Norman, sect. 6.