Materialist metaphysics, as practiced by Spinoza, Nietzsche, or Deleuze and Guattari, has proven incapable of accounting for fundamental moral convictions. Nietzsche is at least radical enough to acknowledge this incommensurability and draw the corresponding conclusions. If one is unwilling to accept this, the only remaining path is to adopt the "view from eternity" alongside metaphysics: from that vantage point, one can only unconditionally affirm a groundless reality. Perhaps, however, the more promising answer is that of Emmanuel Levinas: his materialism allows morality to emerge from the encounter with the Other, and in doing so, he almost incidentally shatters the unity of metaphysics that even such radical thinkers as Deleuze and Guattari still took for granted.

‍

Read the the first part.

In the fourth part of our “The Forest as a Living Foundation” series, the distinguished American Nietzsche scholar Gary Shapiro investigates new angles on Nietzsche’s bonds to the woods: the philosopher’s personal enthusiasm for what is increasingly called “forest bathing,” the science behind how this practice benefits body, mind, and spirit, and the sheer pleasure of breathing fresh air, in woodland and wherever else we can find it. Shapiro’s essay showcases why this particular Lebensraum matters, not just for our individual well-being, but for the health of the entire planet.

Exactly 250 years ago, on the 4^th of July 1776, thirteen North American British colonies declared their independence from the mother country, soon thereafter forming one of the first modern democratic republics of the world, the United States of America. We took this anniversary as an occasion to speak with the Canadian Nietzsche scholar Willow Verkerk about the different approaches to Nietzsche in Europe and North America. To what extent is this thinker, so deeply embedded in European culture, read differently “here” to “there”? What does this tell about general cultural differences between Europe and its erstwhile colonies on the other side of the ocean? And what did Nietzsche himself think about the “New World”?

‍

Nietzsche questions truth as an adequate understanding of the world. This implies there is no longer a true world, as modern sciences assume. Radical constructivism, emerging in biology, which posits that living beings perceive their environment only as their internal structures allow, confirms Nietzsche's analyses and, consequently, postmodern philosophy, where truth is also considered merely a construction and not an objective grasp of something. From this, it follows not only that the world can be interpreted in various ways, but also that there is no single, uniquely correct truth and, therefore, no single correct way of life.

If you prefer to watch or listen to this article, read by the author himself in German, you can also find it on YouTube and Soundcloud.

On April 15, 1980, one of the most important philosophers of the 20th century, Jean-Paul Sartre, died at the age of 74. Paul Stephan spoke with Jens Bonnemann, chairman of the German-speaking Sartre-Gesellschaft, about his basic ideas, his relationship with Nietzsche and his significance for our time. What does it mean to live in freedom after the “death of God”? What are the limits of individual freedom? What are the differences and similarities between Sartre and Nietzsche?

You can also view the unedited version of the conversation, in German, on YouTube and listen to it on Soundcloud.

‍

From October 7 to 11, 2024, the event organized by the Klassik Stiftung Weimar took place in Weimar Nietzsche's futures. Global Conference on the Futures of Nietzsche instead of. Our regular author Paul Stephan was on site on the first day and gives an insight into the current state of academic discussions about Nietzsche. His question: What is the future of Nietzsche academic research when viewed from the perspective of Nietzsche's own radical understanding of the future?

‍