Slovenčina
Heidegger – Nietzsche (problém interpretácie)
E-book
The stimulus for this monograph was my two studies on Heidegger’s interpretation of Nietzsche’s ideas of the will to power and eternal return of the same, published in Heidegger and Modern Metaphysics (supported by the Slovak Research and Development Agency, APVV-14-0706, under the leadership of V. Leška and M. Sobotka). In the submitted monograph, I present both studies in expanded (particularly “Will to Power as Art”) and refined versions (“Eternal Return of the Same”) and add a third chapter addressing the question of the meaning of interpreting philosophical texts, which themselves are interpretations of other texts.
In seeking an appropriate approach to the meaning of interpretation, I conclude that—generally—the purpose of interpretation is to uncover the productive dimension of the interpreted text, which can only be revealed if the interpreter enters the text openly and as neutrally as possible. If the interpreter does not open themselves to the text, allowing it to interpret them in turn, interpretation remains trapped. I believe that without mutual openness between interpreter and interpreted, interpretation has no meaning and typically becomes either rejection or misinterpretation—a form of violence.
In the third chapter, which I consider foundational, I attempt to “balance” the interpretive context of “Heidegger–Nietzsche” from the first two chapters through a reversible context of “Nietzsche–Heidegger,” albeit with the risk that my interpretation of Nietzsche’s thought—specifically his ideas of eternal return and will to power—may remain subjective, even if unintended as misinterpretation. Ultimately, the ambition of the third chapter is to explore intersections between the two philosophers, one of which—a rudimentary yet significant overlap—I identify as Heidegger’s concept of being-in-the-world, reinterpreted through Nietzsche’s lens. It is Nietzsche who challenges us to adopt a self-defined stance toward the world, to confront what it means to be in the world.
The challenge for me—and perhaps the reader—is to remain faithful to oneself, which is only possible by persisting in the context of mutual interpretation between interpreter and interpreted, regardless of who/what is interpreting or being interpreted. For the context of being-in-the-world is always co-created by both sides.
