My first philosophy book

Hello good everyone; Today I come to talk about an author that I am very excited about because he was the first of the philosopher authors with whom I delved into philosophy texts and I am talking about Nietzsche I and my first philosophy book that I found at home by chance turned out to be my mother's and the idea passed through my head that it would be a good idea to read this philosopher and at the moment in which I entered into the birth of tragedy and began to read Apollonian and Dionysian my The lights went out and up to this point, I continued reading but I understood absolutely nothing and years later I realized that I could have understood many things, not only the birth of the tragedy but also his entire work.

We will see how Nietzsche was actually totally opposed to all mass movements, and ultimately colonialism, which is something that really are very general features, but I do not want to give it special importance because it seems to me that what is most relevant is the failure of the enlightened project, we already realized what that enlightened project was looking for and precisely for Kant in the 17th century he sought to ensure that the human being himself did not exceed that age of majority because this meant the emancipation of the subject himself, this gave him the ability to develop the rationality of An autonomous way means thinking autonomously and not heteronomously, not that the rules imposed on us what we should and had to think.
In this context we have to say that Kant, for his part, fully supported the Enlightenment project, that is why he believed that we were capable of achieving world peace or what he called it, not that cosmopolitan society where it was precisely the people who were the legislators and established those moral maxims, those imperatives, that ethics of duty, which moved us all as ends in themselves and not as means, all this was very far from those particular interests of each one, this is precisely what he intended to be developed. or let's say that what he called perpetual peace would lead to.
They did not make us believe that technical improvement, that we improve in a scientific way, would lead us to be better people, what happens is that we realize how the atrocities that were committed during that period and above all the presence of societies, there was a very great inequality that was perpetual in those societies and that also using reason, what the Enlightenment reason proposed in this case, did not make us better people in better societies, because the reason that the Enlightenment defended was instrumental reason, this reason is the reason that is at the service of those manipulative and above all mercantilist interests, which is precisely what has taken over, we could say, all areas of our existence to make everything useful.
View or trade
LOH
tokens.@yova, You have received 1.0000 LOH for posting to Ladies of Hive.
We believe that you should be rewarded for the time and effort spent in creating articles. The goal is to encourage token holders to accumulate and hodl LOH tokens over a long period of time.