You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
Writing as Nietzsche in a fictitious autobiographical statement, Chessick puts forward an interpretation of Nietzsche's basic philosophy. While the essay contains some elements of psychobiography, its main thrust is an attempt to clarify Nietzsche's philosophy. Chessick as Nietzsche states "the essence of my argument was that man's salvation is himself; that we must make ourselves what we can and joyfully affirm life in this world"; and further, "again and again I argued that each man is unique and should develop his own potential and account for his own existence"; and finally, "I insisted that the intellect was really subordinate to the instincts." As for the relevance of Kohut and Freud, there are scattered references by "Nietzsche" to the differences between the two men. "He" asserts that this conflict between their theories is "in the realm of discussion of the morals behind philosophy and science." In a brief and unusual discussion section an unnamed philosopher (Chessick) criticizes both Nietzsche and Chessick (as a supporter of Nietzsche) from the point of view that Nietzsche himself resisted "scientific" explanations and that this attempt to make Nietzsche "respectable" is therefore an expression of the author's narcissism. The final section of this paper is a reply to the discussant in which Chessick as himself surfaces to praise Nietzsche's philosophy as a courageous commitment to look clearly at oneself and one's dealings with others.