Summary
Nietzsche launches his philosophical investigation by challenging the very foundation of truth-seeking. He questions whether our 'Will to Truth' is actually valuable, asking why we prefer truth over useful illusions. Through sharp critiques of famous philosophers like Kant, Plato, and the Stoics, he reveals how their supposedly objective systems were actually elaborate justifications for their personal prejudices and cultural biases. Nietzsche argues that philosophers have been fooling themselves—and everyone else—by pretending their ideas emerged from pure logic when they really started with emotional convictions and worked backward to find supporting arguments. He introduces his radical concept that false beliefs might be more essential to life than true ones, suggesting that what we call 'knowledge' is often just sophisticated self-deception. The chapter dismantles the traditional opposition between good and evil, true and false, showing how these categories might be artificial constructs rather than natural divisions. Nietzsche particularly targets the notion of free will, calling it a 'self-contradiction,' while also rejecting its opposite—determinism—as equally flawed. He proposes that instead of seeking absolute truth, we should examine how our beliefs serve life and power. This sets up his larger project: moving 'beyond good and evil' to create new values based on what enhances human flourishing rather than what claims to be eternally true. The chapter establishes Nietzsche as a philosopher of suspicion, teaching readers to look behind noble-sounding ideas to find the all-too-human motivations driving them.
Coming Up in Chapter 2
Having exposed the prejudices lurking behind traditional philosophy, Nietzsche turns to his vision of 'free spirits'—rare individuals capable of thinking beyond conventional moral categories. These philosophical rebels will challenge everything we think we know about independence, creativity, and what it means to truly think for oneself.
Share it with friends
An excerpt from the original text.(~500 words)
PREJUDICES OF PHILOSOPHERS 1. The Will to Truth, which is to tempt us to many a hazardous enterprise, the famous Truthfulness of which all philosophers have hitherto spoken with respect, what questions has this Will to Truth not laid before us! What strange, perplexing, questionable questions! It is already a long story; yet it seems as if it were hardly commenced. Is it any wonder if we at last grow distrustful, lose patience, and turn impatiently away? That this Sphinx teaches us at last to ask questions ourselves? WHO is it really that puts questions to us here? WHAT really is this "Will to Truth" in us? In fact we made a long halt at the question as to the origin of this Will--until at last we came to an absolute standstill before a yet more fundamental question. We inquired about the VALUE of this Will. Granted that we want the truth: WHY NOT RATHER untruth? And uncertainty? Even ignorance? The problem of the value of truth presented itself before us--or was it we who presented ourselves before the problem? Which of us is the Oedipus here? Which the Sphinx? It would seem to be a rendezvous of questions and notes of interrogation. And could it be believed that it at last seems to us as if the problem had never been propounded before, as if we were the first to discern it, get a sight of it, and RISK RAISING it? For there is risk in raising it, perhaps there is no greater risk. 2. "HOW COULD anything originate out of its opposite? For example, truth out of error? or the Will to Truth out of the will to deception? or the generous deed out of selfishness? or the pure sun-bright vision of the wise man out of covetousness? Such genesis is impossible; whoever dreams of it is a fool, nay, worse than a fool; things of the highest value must have a different origin, an origin of THEIR own--in this transitory, seductive, illusory, paltry world, in this turmoil of delusion and cupidity, they cannot have their source. But rather in the lap of Being, in the intransitory, in the concealed God, in the 'Thing-in-itself--THERE must be their source, and nowhere else!"--This mode of reasoning discloses the typical prejudice by which metaphysicians of all times can be recognized, this mode of valuation is at the back of all their logical procedure; through this "belief" of theirs, they exert themselves for their "knowledge," for something that is in the end solemnly christened "the Truth." The fundamental belief of metaphysicians is THE BELIEF IN ANTITHESES OF VALUES. It never occurred even to the wariest of them to doubt here on the very threshold (where doubt, however, was most necessary); though they had made a solemn vow, "DE OMNIBUS DUBITANDUM." For it may be doubted, firstly, whether antitheses exist at all; and secondly, whether the popular valuations and antitheses of value upon which metaphysicians have set their seal, are not perhaps merely...
Master this chapter. Complete your experience
Purchase the complete book to access all chapters and support classic literature
As an Amazon Associate, we earn a small commission from qualifying purchases at no additional cost to you.
Available in paperback, hardcover, and e-book formats
Intelligence Amplifier™ Analysis
The Road of Justified Beliefs - How We Fool Ourselves Into Thinking We're Right
We decide what we want to believe first, then construct logical-sounding reasons to justify our predetermined conclusions.
Why This Matters
Connect literature to life
This chapter teaches how to recognize when someone starts with their conclusion and works backward to find supporting evidence.
Practice This Today
This week, notice when someone gives you a long explanation for something they obviously already decided—then ask yourself what they need to believe and why.
Now let's explore the literary elements.
Terms to Know
Will to Truth
Nietzsche's term for humanity's drive to seek truth at all costs. He questions whether this obsession with truth is actually valuable, or if it might sometimes be harmful to human flourishing.
Modern Usage:
We see this in people who 'need to know' everything about their partner's past, even when ignorance might preserve their happiness.
Prejudices of Philosophers
Nietzsche's argument that famous thinkers like Plato and Kant didn't discover universal truths through pure reason. Instead, they started with personal biases and cultural assumptions, then built elaborate logical systems to justify what they already believed.
Modern Usage:
Like when someone decides they don't like a coworker first, then finds 'logical' reasons to support their gut feeling.
Free Will vs. Determinism
The classic philosophical debate about whether humans truly choose their actions or if everything is predetermined. Nietzsche rejects both extremes as oversimplified.
Modern Usage:
The ongoing argument about whether criminals are responsible for their crimes or if they're products of their circumstances.
Stoicism
An ancient philosophy teaching that virtue and wisdom come from accepting what you cannot control and focusing only on your responses. Nietzsche criticizes this as life-denying.
Modern Usage:
The 'everything happens for a reason' mindset that some people use to cope with hardship.
Beyond Good and Evil
Nietzsche's concept that traditional moral categories are human inventions, not eternal truths. He wants to move past these simplistic labels to create new values based on what enhances life.
Modern Usage:
Recognizing that workplace 'rules' often serve management more than fairness, and learning to navigate the real power dynamics.
Self-Contradiction
Nietzsche's criticism that many philosophical concepts contradict themselves when examined closely. He applies this especially to the idea of free will.
Modern Usage:
Like when people say 'I'm not judgmental' while clearly judging others, or 'I don't care what people think' while obviously caring deeply.
Characters in This Chapter
Plato
Philosophical target
Nietzsche criticizes Plato for creating an elaborate system of 'eternal truths' that actually just reflected his personal disgust with the messy realities of life. He sees Plato as the origin of philosophy's obsession with abstract ideals over lived experience.
Modern Equivalent:
The academic who's never worked a real job but lectures others about 'how things should be'
Kant
Philosophical target
Nietzsche attacks Kant for trying to sneak Christian morality back into philosophy through the back door of 'pure reason.' He sees Kant's categorical imperative as just Protestant guilt dressed up in fancy language.
Modern Equivalent:
The boss who claims their strict rules are 'just policy' when they're really about control
The Stoics
Philosophical targets
Nietzsche criticizes the Stoics for wanting to live 'according to nature' while actually trying to impose their rigid ideals on nature. He sees them as hypocrites who preach acceptance while demanding conformity.
Modern Equivalent:
People who say 'it is what it is' but spend all their time trying to make everything fit their expectations
Key Quotes & Analysis
"Why not rather untruth? And uncertainty? Even ignorance?"
Context: He's questioning our automatic assumption that truth is always better than illusion
This challenges the fundamental assumption of Western philosophy. Nietzsche suggests that some illusions might be necessary for psychological health and social functioning. He's not advocating for lies, but questioning whether truth is the highest value.
In Today's Words:
Maybe sometimes it's better not to know everything - ignorance might actually be bliss.
"Which of us is the Oedipus here? Which the Sphinx?"
Context: He's comparing philosophers to the mythical encounter between Oedipus and the Sphinx
Nietzsche uses this myth to show how the relationship between questioner and questioned is unclear. Are we solving life's riddles, or are we the riddle that needs solving? This reversal shows his method of turning philosophy on its head.
In Today's Words:
Are we solving the mystery, or are we the mystery that needs solving?
"The falseness of a judgment is not necessarily an objection to a judgment"
Context: He's arguing that false beliefs might be more essential to life than true ones
This radical statement overturns traditional philosophy's obsession with truth. Nietzsche suggests we should judge beliefs by whether they enhance life, not by whether they correspond to reality. This opens space for useful fictions and life-affirming myths.
In Today's Words:
Just because something isn't technically true doesn't mean it's not worth believing.
"There is master morality and slave morality"
Context: He's introducing his famous distinction between different types of moral systems
Nietzsche argues that what we call 'good' and 'evil' actually reflects the values of different social classes. Master morality celebrates strength and achievement, while slave morality makes virtues of weakness and suffering. This isn't about supporting oppression, but understanding how power shapes values.
In Today's Words:
The rich and poor have completely different ideas about what makes someone a good person.
Thematic Threads
Self-Deception
In This Chapter
Philosophers claiming pure logic while actually justifying personal prejudices
Development
Introduced here
In Your Life:
You might catch yourself finding 'rational' reasons for decisions you've already made emotionally.
Authority
In This Chapter
Traditional philosophers presented as wise truth-seekers are revealed as biased humans
Development
Introduced here
In Your Life:
You might question whether experts and leaders are as objective as they claim to be.
Truth vs. Usefulness
In This Chapter
Nietzsche suggests false beliefs might be more valuable for life than true ones
Development
Introduced here
In Your Life:
You might realize some of your 'wrong' beliefs actually help you function better than harsh truths would.
Social Expectations
In This Chapter
Philosophers conform to cultural expectations while pretending to think independently
Development
Introduced here
In Your Life:
You might notice how your own 'independent' thoughts often match what your social group expects.
Personal Growth
In This Chapter
Moving beyond traditional categories requires questioning fundamental assumptions
Development
Introduced here
In Your Life:
You might need to challenge beliefs you've never questioned to grow into who you're becoming.
You now have the context. Time to form your own thoughts.
Discussion Questions
- 1
According to Nietzsche, what's the difference between how philosophers claim to develop their ideas versus how they actually do it?
analysis • surface - 2
Why does Nietzsche think our 'Will to Truth' might actually be harmful to us?
analysis • medium - 3
Think of a recent argument you had or witnessed. Can you identify someone working backward from their desired conclusion to find supporting reasons?
application • medium - 4
If you had to choose between a comforting lie and a painful truth in your own life, which would you pick and why?
application • deep - 5
What does this chapter suggest about the difference between being smart and being wise?
reflection • deep
Critical Thinking Exercise
Catch Yourself in Reverse Logic
Think of a strong opinion you hold about work, relationships, or politics. Write down your three best reasons for this belief. Now try to identify what you wanted to be true BEFORE you found those reasons. What emotional need or personal interest might have come first?
Consider:
- •Notice any resistance to questioning your own reasoning - that's normal
- •Look for patterns: Do your 'logical' reasons happen to support what's convenient for you?
- •Consider whether admitting your bias makes your position weaker or actually more honest
Journaling Prompt
Write about a time when you changed your mind about something important. What made you willing to question beliefs you had defended strongly?
Coming Up Next...
Chapter 2: The Free Spirit's Journey
The coming pages reveal to recognize the difference between genuine independence and conformist rebellion, and teach us maintaining intellectual masks and privacy protects your authentic self. These discoveries help us navigate similar situations in our own lives.