"Nietzsche, Friedrich - The Antichrist" - читать интересную книгу автора (Nietzsche Friedrich Wilhelm)

by this mission, that he is himself a type of a higher order! . . . What
has a priest to do with philosophy! He stands far above it!--And
hitherto the priest has ruled!--He has determined the meaning of "true"
and "not true"!
13.
Let us not under-estimate this fact: that we ourselves, we free spirits,
are already a "transvaluation of all values," a visualized declaration
of war and victory against all the old concepts of "true" and "not
true." The most valuable intuitions are the last to be attained; the
most valuable of all are those which determine methods. All the methods,
all the principles of the scientific spirit of today, were the targets
for thousands of years of the most profound contempt; if a man inclined
to them he was excluded from the society of "decent" people--he passed
as "an enemy of God," as a scoffer at the truth, as one "possessed." As
a man of science, he belonged to the Chandala2... We have had the whole
pathetic stupidity of mankind against us--their every notion of what the
truth ought to be, of what the service of the truth ought to be--their
every "thou shalt" was launched against us. . . . Our objectives, our
methods, our quiet, cautious, distrustful manner--all appeared to them
as absolutely discreditable and contemptible.--Looking back, one may
almost ask one's self with reason if it was not actually an aesthetic
sense that kept men blind so long: what they demanded of the truth was
picturesque effectiveness, and of the learned a strong appeal to their
senses. It was our modesty that stood out longest against their
taste...How well they guessed that, these turkey-cocks of God!
14.
We have unlearned something. We have be come more modest in every way.
We no longer derive man from the "spirit," from the "god-head"; we have
dropped him back among the beasts. We regard him as the strongest of the
beasts because he is the craftiest; one of the results thereof is his
intellectuality. On the other hand, we guard ourselves against a conceit
which would assert itself even here: that man is the great second
thought in the process of organic evolution. He is, in truth, anything
but the crown of creation: beside him stand many other animals, all at
similar stages of development... And even when we say that we say a bit
too much, for man, relatively speaking, is the most botched of all the
animals and the sickliest, and he has wandered the most dangerously from
his instincts--though for all that, to be sure, he remains the most
interesting!--As regards the lower animals, it was Descartes who first
had the really admirable daring to describe them as machina; the whole
of our physiology is directed toward proving the truth of this doctrine.
Moreover, it is illogical to set man apart, as Descartes did: what we
know of man today is limited precisely by the extent to which we have
regarded him, too, as a machine. Formerly we accorded to man, as his
inheritance from some higher order of beings, what was called "free
will"; now we have taken even this will from him, for the term no longer
describes anything that we can understand. The old word "will" now
connotes only a sort of result, an individual reaction, that follows
inevitably upon a series of partly discordant and partly harmonious
stimuli--the will no longer "acts," or "moves." . . . Formerly it was