The Apollonian and Dionysian Forces
Frederick Nietzsche was a genius who postulated the innovative theory in his classic work The Birth of Tragedy that the Greek classical works do more than represent drama: they exemplify the contradictory consistency in the merging of Apollonian and Dionysian forces. Apart from that, it will make us better understand the two forces that are an integral part of explaining the main message in the dramas. The main characteristics of Apollonian’s world were balance, common sense, and a sense of self-control. According to Apollonia, beauty is form and harmony. At times, they resemble a sculptor carving out reality itself, the culmination of a beautiful yet measurable work of art. Apollonian aesthetics is often associated with idyllic dreams as it provides individuals with a means of finding peace in a chaotic world through art.
The Apollonian and Dionysian contrast in representing a world filled with madness, ecstasy, and union with nature through mysticism. Here, individual boundaries collapse, and humans are connected to uncontrollable primal forces. Music and dance are how the Dionysian spirit is expressed chiefly thereby causing the individual to transcend himself into the community. Nietzsche stated that the combination of the Apollonian and Dionysian gave rise to ancient Greek tragedy. In the tragic narrative, the suffering and death experienced by the Greek heroes represent the Dionysian side of tragedy, while the Apollonian elements are characterized by planned dramatic arrangements, in-depth dialogue, and the use of choruses.
The conventional belief system of the Greek people emerged from the difficult times they suffered and the experiences they went through which resulted in a gloomy worldview. Positive existential values are questioned because of the pain and cruelty they see. Greek tragedy is built on Nietzschean pessimism where heroes can defy luck and the purpose behind their existence even though they are destined to die. The point of view quote revolves around the themes of knowledge, death, and student involvement taken from the story of King Midas with Silenus, the god of dance and wine. Nietzsche’s existentialism and criticism of traditional morality had a habit of using Greek mythology as a source of inspiration and allegory for his complex thoughts.
The Question of Happiness
Famous for his greed for gold, King Midas found Silenus drunk in the forest. It allowed Midas to ask the gods for advice about what was good for human life. Silenus didn’t want to, mainly because of his drunken state, but Midas insisted. To Midas’ surprise, it was Silenus who finally said that the best thing would be for no one to be born and the second best thing would be to die immediately after birth, raising questions regarding life and happiness. Silenus’s answer was seen by Nietzsche in the form of criticism of traditional values as well as individual efforts to find comfort in material possessions. The philosopher believed that pursuing riches like King Midas guaranteed sadness, not joy. Instead, he argued that true wisdom involves recognizing the transitory nature of man and at the same time appreciating its fullness despite the many misfortunes that accompany it.
We can interpret Silenus’ writings as self-reflection and analysis of the meaning of life, even though it is negative. Nietzsche invites his readers on a different but more difficult and more satisfying path that will question one’s assumptions about happiness and existence. According to Nietzsche, Greek art is not just beauty and aesthetics but is a complex and profound cultural manifestation; it is because Greek art is so intertwined between various theories and practices, as Greek art is a constructive answer to various existential dilemmas faced by humans according to Nietzsche.
The gods and goddesses of Mount Olympus are a good illustration of the combination. According to Nietzsche in The Birth of Tragedy, the gods are not just figures in myth; they represent various aspects of human life symbolically. Rationality and wisdom versus chaos and madness are one of the diverse aspects of human life, embodied in the gods; an example is Apollo (reason, wisdom) versus Dionysus (chaos, madness). Nietzsche implied that the gods were the solution to the existential questions detailed in the wisdom of Silenus. In Greek mythology, Silenus was a wise satyr who is credited with saying, “It would be more fitting if humans died before or soon after birth.” The statement reflects an existence marked by pain and death that humans cannot fully understand or accept.
Form, Beauty, and the Disordered Reality
According to Nietzsche, there is a solution suggested by Greek art with the gods plus beauty to transcend the complexity of life. Nietzsche considered Apollo to be the best example of that. The same god represents beauty, propriety, order, and harmony; thus serving as a “strong bulwark” against disorderly, painful, and capricious creatures. The beauty and order contained in Greek art, in the form of idealistic statues and meaningful epic poetry, rendered humanity silent in times of despair. In an aesthetic and meaningful approach, people began to treat Greek art as a means of escape from fear and despair.
Nietzsche explained how Apollonian art was about order, harmony, and intelligence or rationality, which is why Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey are considered excellent representative examples of the art form. Epic characters imbibe perfect beauty, follow strict rules, and behavior that display great self-control. For example, despite being filled with intense anger, Achilles is always loyal to his standards and fate. In addition, the figures of Apollo and Athena, among other things, signify respect for wisdom, system, and equality.
Apollonian art affirms the value of life even in the face of unhappiness and death, which are part of the real world we live in. Homer’s epics are not blind to the harsh realities of war and failure; however, they also represent the bravery, dignity, and spirit of heroes. It means that life is valuable and worth fighting for even if something goes wrong. Additionally, the individuality of the characters is emphasized by the Apollonian artwork in Homer’s epics. Each hero has special abilities and personal faults that differentiate them from each other. It corresponds to the principle of individuation which is an essential element of Apollonian works of art, each object being defined by itself.
Although Homer’s epics demonstrate the beauty and order of Apollonian art, his art also emphasizes control and coordination. Heroes are supposed to operate based on human laws as well as divine laws, ensuring that certain goals are achieved in the end. It reflects the reality of human life which cannot be separated from social norms and regulations. The emphasis on the point cannot be overemphasized: it must be emphasized that the gods and goddesses of Olympus and their artistic representations were not simply a way of escaping reality to protect oneself from its violent and turbulent nature. In contrast, Apollo’s artistic presentation is embedded in society and aims to bring harmony to the world: life has the greatest meaning in the world thanks to Apollo’s art.
Rather than being an escape from the world to a higher reality requiring enlightenment or spiritual elevation, Olympian religion and Homeric poetry (a mixture of polytheism with twelve gods; Zeus, Hera, Poseidon, Aphrodity, Athena, Artemis, Apollo, Hephaestus, Hermes, Demeter, Ares and Hestia) are interested in building a fortress in the (real) world to protect it from Acheron who interferes and causes chaos that makes life painful. In Ancient Greek thought, the concept of beauty could be refined not only by nature but also by human techniques and procedures. It shows that art is an innate feature of reality that can be cultivated or triggered by humanity.
What is meant by “form” in the context is the form, arrangement, and structure that is created or created by arranging things in a certain order. Beauty is not just in the parts, but in how the parts relate to each other to form a harmonious and pleasing whole. Because the basic factual reality behind everything requires a beautiful form so that it can emerge and emphasize itself without self-destruction.
The control of ordered rationality is so-called because the disturbances of indifference are evident in it during events, activity-behavior patterns, and regular functioning. Such art expresses itself through dreams, visions, and ideals that influence reality through the lens of naturalness, and order in a logically arranged structure. Compared to the Apollonian, the Dionysian was inspired by the Greek god Dionysus and represents chaos, intoxication, and unbridled ecstasy. Here lies the area where feelings fly out of control, confusing the distinctions made between oneself and others and even between the individual himself and the universe at large. Dionysian art honors the primordial, the wild, and the irrational while attempting to dissolve one into infinite unity with everything that exists.
Tragedy as an Artistic and Intellectual Response to Crisis
According to Nietzsche, the heart of Greek tragedy is subject to the clash of Apollonian and Dionysian opposites. He saw structure imposed on the chaotic Dionysian exuberance by the Apollonian, with its emphasis on measure and order. In general, we are faced with a dichotomy between the individual and the collective and between the rational and the irrational which makes tragedy cathartic. Of all the forces that have shaped human society, the Apollonian drive for harmony and order was undoubtedly the most powerful. It is this impulse that gives rise to legal systems, political institutions, and artistic styles that attempt to channel the discord that characterizes life. In its dedication to pattern, scale, and personal commentary, Apolonia’s artistic output reflects man’s attempt to understand his environment.
For example, the Dionysian acts as a call to return to the beginning when humans lived in their pure natural form without distinction between them; they have more similarities than differences between them. The reality lies in the feeling of uncivilization that immerses one in the rest of humanity by negating their thought processes as well as directing one’s behavior through driving forces within oneself and not through external control. The art of Dionysus pursued freedom from the shackles of reason, transcending to reach a world of the raw and unmediated, and was known for its delirium, drunkenness, and ecstasy. The true power in art does not lie in the predominance of Apollonian or Dionysian characteristics. Rather, it is a balanced interaction between the two. The interplay is illustrated in Ancient Greek tragic drama with the conflict arising from the tragic heroes’ desire to rationally control their fate; the immense power of luck leads them to inevitable death. The impact of tragedy lies in the balance between order and chaos; reason and emotion enable it to confront us with the complexities associated with human existence and the contradictions in human nature.
Drinking is not the only meaning of drinking here. It also means reaching a very special level of consciousness regardless of being normal or ordinary. When people are in this condition, they can change their view of the reality around them. Therefore, they are free from everyday ways of thinking and social classifications that tend to restrain them. Disturbingly, several things can be distressing during the experience. It’s because it goes against mainstream beliefs and assumptions about the world. An encounter with the deceptive reality of life can give rise to an internal crisis that makes people ask themselves what their role is in the world and why they should try to stay active any longer.
The Greeks especially needed to face a situation where everything reasonable and just was plunged into this dark abyss. It is very important to them because their society is largely based on order, reasonableness, and attractiveness. Drunkenness creates uncertainty and chaos that reveals how fragile social concepts are, prompting them to re-evaluate what civilization means. Silenus symbolizes the negativity that arises after realizing that life is just an illusion. His words show how people may become discouraged when they realize that there may be no true meaning behind things.
According to this view, death is considered as the end of mere existence and also as a release from suffering and the senselessness and meaninglessness of life. The desire not to be born or to die young indicates a total rejection of the human situation, doesn’t it? Many artists, writers, and philosophers created works that dealt with issues such as fate, death, and impotence thereby influencing Greek culture through their existential pessimism.
Nietzsche considered tragedy as an artistic yet intellectual approach to crises. The way tragedy depicts a hero’s suffering and death provides an outlet for people to experience their terror and uncertainty. Tragedy does not provide simple answers to life’s dilemmas. Rather, it delves into the intricacies of human existence and finds solace in pain. In accepting the tragic reality of life, individuals are better off accepting or even praising it.
However, increasing awareness of the illusion of existence often gives rise to nihilistic pessimism; tragedy acts as an escape from such pessimism. Therefore, it is said that “tragedy is a reflection of life.” Tragedy allows individuals to face and acknowledge the harsh realities of life; it allows them to see meaning and direction in it even when things don’t make sense. Tragedy is not just something that makes us afraid or sad. However, that is the way we view it in our culture. For Nietzsche, tragedy has intrinsic greatness because it allows the representation of primordial human impulses that are dangerous but become art or play if they are included in a tragic scheme.
Nietzsche uses the metaphor of a “little child at play” to describe the change. Just as young children enjoy playing with objects and discovering their surroundings, tragedies allow people to face the worst parts of their lives in a safe frame. The greatness of sadness is that it moves one to feel awe and joy even when one experiences pain which allows one to understand and tolerate other aspects of life without falling into gloom or fear.
The Highest Form of Philosophical Insight
Tragic art has the uncanny ability to reconcile the Apollonian with the Dionysian—the former representing existence, essence, order, knowledge, and individuation; the latter means freedom, madness, chaos, life force, and mystical unity. The union is far from peaceful and lasting. On the other hand, tragic art represents the two forces in a fierce struggle in which Dionysiac may have triumphed over Apollonian wisdom. The point here is that in the context, it is quite clear that Apollo’s argument about differentiation is the cause of suffering.
As often happens in such cases, a person experiences defeat even though victory awaits him, or surrendering to tragedy will guarantee victory in turn. However, he sees his setback as a success. It proves how unpredictable a man’s emotions are: he may be offended today but happy tomorrow. When we lose individuality, we can feel victorious. We lost. It illustrates the possible lack of objectivity in our perceptions and interpretations and shows how experiences can have different meanings for different people.
Nietzsche also contains a concept that the artist’s metaphysics contrasts with other forms such as scientific metaphysics. He views them as having different perceptions of reality, each with advantages and disadvantages. Nietzsche’s intellectual view states that the object of conceptual metaphysics and science focuses on rational explanations of the universe. The approach tries to classify, measure, and analyze reality logically and empirically. It produces objective and universal knowledge.
In contrast, the artist’s metaphysics is based on experience and intuition while his strength lies in his capacity to communicate emotional truths and personal meaning that reach the core of reality through artistic forms such as art, music, and poetry. According to Nietzsche, tragic art is the highest form of philosophical insight for artists. In that way, ancient Greek tragedy is characterized by its ability to articulate human existence in all its complexities and contradictions that go beyond what can be achieved through scientific or abstract metaphysical means.
Euripides and the Move from Tragedy to Socratic Aesthetics
In Greece, tragic art was short-lived according to Nietzsche. He illustrates that it was caused by two main reasons: Euripides and Socrates. The playwright Euripides through his emphasis on realism and rationalism weakens the emotional and spiritual depth of tragedy. On the other hand, Socrates’ emphasis on the search for objective truth diverts attention from the phenomena of individual personal experience and existential significance, which is the basis of tragedy. Nietzsche saw it as the pinnacle of artistic and philosophical achievement. He criticized Euripides for underestimating the importance of the indispensable participation of the tragic chorus in tragedy.
Tragic choirs before Euripides mainly acted in the field of tragedy. It consisted of between twelve and fifteen people who would comment on events on stage as well as represent the public during emotional periods when the audience’s emotions were projected back outside. When the events of the play unfold in the past, the audience not only gets to see them acted out with the chorus inserted. However, they also share the same suffering and confusion that characterize the player’s life. Specifically, the group provokes understanding, encourages moral contemplation, and engages society with questions such as what is destiny, what is justice, and what it means to be human.
There was a major change in Greek tragedy with its innovative drama, as Euripides was able to reduce the role played by the chorus to that of mere narrators who would describe the events that were taking place. He also decided to remove some of the emotional appeal that engages both audiences. members and actors in the storyline into specific roles. Euripides was more likely to work for the betterment of society than a group that resolved internal struggles and had special interests and strong arguments. However, Nietzsche claimed that the emotional intensity and moral seriousness of classical tragedy were lost.
Nietzsche argued that tragedy should not be understood intellectually but rather felt deeply. The inclusion of an emotional tragic chorus that shares the way of feeling was an important factor in its production. At its core, a truly tragic drama encourages its audience to feel pity and terror. Therefore, it leads them to reflect on human suffering and the helplessness of individuals struggling against the forces of fate. Nietzsche says that by minimizing the presence of the tragic chorus, Euripides changes the meaning of tragedy from intense emotional catharsis to detached intellectual analysis.
Tragic drama does not only function as an outlet for emotions (catharsis). However, it also plays as a counter-active measure as well as a therapeutic drug that helps people activate feelings of compassion and express various deep emotions without having to delve into how the world operates. Rather than being concerned with intellectual dissection, tragic dramas concentrate more on the strong emotions that form between those who watch them; the drama does not refer to an intellectual understanding of the way the world functions. Even though tragedy dramas don’t present a logical and rational understanding of the world, that doesn’t mean we can’t learn anything from them. What is learned from dramas is closely related to the emotional side of humans compared to the cognitive part. We can develop an understanding and appreciation of various types of complex emotions such as sadness, anger, and fear leading to increased emotional intelligence and compassion.
Euripides He is often seen as the Socrates in terms of tragic art. There were mixed reactions to the matter with Nietzsche saying that it was Euripides who brought the tragedy to an end. According to Nietzsche, what is at stake is the movement from unreasonable reality into a Socratic aesthetic that seeks order through logic and the all-encompassing search for truth. Although before Euripides Greek tragedy presented convoluted and often confusing truths, the tragic hero faced the relentless force of fate. They make the viewer think about the enigmatic aspects of life and do not provide simple solutions that might be taken as an invitation to think and test oneself.
Euripides made a radical innovation in the tragic tradition and engaged deeply with the emotional world of the characters. Nietzsche viewed Socratic aesthetics as a threat rather than a support to tragedy because he believed that to inspire awe and fear in the audience, mystery, and irrationality were necessary for the art form by recognizing it as a source of inspiration for excellence. According to him, the most important thing in a tragedy is to give the audience a shocking and terrifying impression. Overall, he does not provide a clear opinion about the concept of pity in his writing. He goes on to say that through his rationality and analysis, Euripides extinguishes the features that cause death in tragedy.
Even though Nietzsche’s arguments are inaccurate, Euripides did not completely abandon mystery and irrationality and there are still ideas about fate or death in his works while introducing different perspectives in terms of psychology and character identification. Additionally, there was a new layer of commentary on society itself that had not been explored in depth by him in Nietzsche’s time: Euripides greatly influenced the development of drama, his work pointing the way to more sophisticated explorations of morality, psychology, and human life that gave rise to the tastes of a group of writers follows to revolutionize existing norms through experimentation with fresh ideas.
The Awakening of Emotions
Unlike modern drama, ancient Greek tragedy was not limited by the obligation to connect events logically and completely. The storyline does not always have a clear cause-and-effect relationship. In contrast to intellectual understanding which is related to thought processes, the tragic impact lies in the awakening of emotions. Aeschylus and Sophocles are some of the most famous tragedians who ever lived; they can use their games so that people will be completely hooked. When they write this type of drama, they work with elements found in drama such as plot development or dialogue that take control of a person’s feelings thereby making them affected in different ways. Philosophy involves thinking deeply about why things happen, but the artists simply want us to reflect on how humans respond when filled with deep feelings of sadness or joy.
On the other hand, Euripides took a different approach. His work is often described as an extension of Socrates’ critique of humanity. Euripides used tragedy to explore human weakness and criticize existing social norms. He challenges traditional beliefs and encourages audiences to think critically about the world around them. Acting on instinct without trying to understand what one is doing is certainly contrary to everything that philosophers seek, namely the clarity of scientific knowledge. Tragic and artistic knowledge connects the spectator with the primordial, with the will, without the need for a clear and conscious understanding of metaphysical mechanisms and Euripides is the spokesperson of the philosopher among the tragic poets. Socrates’ philosophy, including modern science, is a search for a detailed understanding of nature. He tries to penetrate nature and reveal the essence of the world behind its existence. Although the Mayan veil covers human eyes, philosophy uncovers the world and reveals the truth behind the illusions.
Arthur Schopenhauer put forward an argument regarding what he considered to be the basis of all phenomena in the world; he called it “will” (a blind force that moves everything that exists without any purpose or design behind it). The will never seeks any rational goal. However, it continues to look for different ways to express itself. Individuation emanates from power; it is how one entity becomes many entities. Although Schopenhauer’s ideas about the will were accepted by Nietzsche, he also gave him a better understanding of things. He believes that the power of will represents life itself and everything that revolves around it. According to Nietzsche, the force is not irrational. However, it has several aspects that can be equated with beauty and significance.
According to Nietzsche, tragedy arises because of a conflict of basic drives rooted in the will. It was the Dionysian impulse seeking unity and orderly Apollonian thought that gave rise to this form of human articulation. The wild exuberant aspect of the will finds expression through the Dionysian impulse; on the contrary, its rational structured side is realized by the Apollonian impulse. Nietzsche stated that tragedy does not mean defeat or loss, but recognition and affirmation of the contradictory character of will. It is through tragedy that people can have a direct experience of will, and achieve catharsis.
Art as the Transformation of Suffering
Will is known to be considered the main factor that drives this reality. It is disorderly, and unruly and brings nothing but pain and discomfort to all living things according to Schopenhauer. In agreement with Schopenhauer, it will repeatedly externalize itself by transforming into new expressions of certain creatures caught in incessant pain. Amid all the negativity, Schopenhauer offers art as a form of temporary escape from the grasp of the Will. According to him, it is a way for people to experience beauty and perfection that surpasses anything we experience in everyday life. Although it cannot completely free humans from will, art provides a reprieve.
In contrast, Nietzsche argued that the will is more diverse. In his view, willpower is self-destructive but at the same time creative and empowering. More than simply evoking pain, Nietzsche believed in the power to awaken art, culture, or civilization and inflame it. His thinking contains the essential idea of the will to power. In his view, the will is not solely intended to command others. However, it is to transcend oneself and generate new meanings. The will to power for him represents the creative force that motivates man to advance beyond himself to fulfill and exceed his potential.
Apollonian art attributed to the Greek god Apollo focused on order, harmony, and beauty, while Dionysian art attributed to the Greek god Dionysus expressed madness, disorder, and the power of nature. The two arts are essential to the redemption of human existence according to Nietzsche. The Apollonian type of art provided beauty and order as an antidote to the chaos in nature, while the Dionysiac was intended to bring humans closer to their true power, allowing them to feel how powerful the power that moved them was.
Nietzsche’s Positive Philosophy and Embracing Challenges
However, Nietzsche took it a step further by stating that art is ultimately the redemption of the will. Art involves the process by which the will objectifies itself in a beautiful, meaningful, and permanent way. Therefore, art can be said to transform the chaos and suffering that characterize the will into something good and positive. In The World as Will and Representation, Schopenhauer puts forward the very interesting idea that the will which can be metaphorized as blind thirst in living creatures is the most fundamental reality. Since it is the cause of eternal suffering without rest and dissatisfaction, the will is essentially unethical. Therefore, he said, renunciation of worldliness and withdrawal from the desire for peace and freedom are necessary.
Rejecting Schopenhauer’s solution, Nietzsche thought we should face reality honestly. Even though it is full of pain and sadness, to do otherwise is a sign of cowardice. He found his inspiration in Greek tragedies whose characters always defied fate heroically without caring about success or failure. In The Birth of Tragedy and Thus Spoke Zarathustra, he introduced Dionysian pessimism. Nietzsche drew on two influences: Schopenhauerian pessimism regarding human destiny and the Dionysian energy evoked by Wagnerian music. Death and suffering pervade existence, according to Dionysian pessimism. However, instead of running away from the bitter reality, Nietzsche urged us to accept this reality and even rejoice in it.
According to Nietzsche, Dionysian pessimism allows one to see the light of meaning in life even in pain; only when we have accepted the worst reality do we surrender through pretense and deception to live a life filled with joy and innovation․ It is with this point that we can say that Nietzsche’s positive philosophy rests on Dionysian pessimism in which the most significant emphasis is placed on creative activity aimed at generating new values as well as giving approval to existence. In addition, Schopenhauer argued that reality is a blind and uncontrolled will (das Ding an sich) which appears as a full representation of misery in the phenomenal world. For him, living forever is an insatiable quest that always ends in disappointment because the only salvation from suffering is the disappearance of the desire to live.
Despite Schopenhauer’s pessimism, Nietzsche rejected it completely and came up with another, more positive philosophy about life. Nietzsche believes that life is full of challenges that make humans strong and not meaningless. He advised everyone to accept all the difficulties inherent in life and adopt their standards. Schopenhauer also paints a gloomy picture of human life because he believes that it is impossible to avoid or overcome the pain of this world while on earth. Even if we have a pleasant experience, it is just a false experience that only produces more pain in the long run.
Schopenhauer argued that the reason behind all suffering is our desire to stay alive. We never have enough, which is why we always want more pleasure and happiness in life. Unfortunately, our efforts are in vain because we cannot be satisfied with what we get and end up unhappy. Furthermore, Schopenhauer stated that the only way to be free from suffering is to give up the desire to live. It can occur if a person practices self-denial combined with ascesis, that is, a person avoids worldly pleasures to concentrate on matters relating to his soul.
At times, Schopenhauer formulated his understanding of life as a difficult and exhausting ascent to certain realities about the nature of existence. During his travels, he studied many different topics in philosophy such as metaphysics, epistemology, morality, and beauty. After all, it all aims to find out the true truth of the world and human existence in it. According to Schopenhauer, the highest point is knowing that life is inherently unhappy. Although somewhat unpleasant, it is a liberating idea that can free us from false ideas about happiness so that we can start living truly.
Cioran’s Challenge to Nietzsche’s Pessimism
Indeed, Schopenhauer could not rejoin Nietzsche in Dionysian pessimism because his time was in the 19th century. However, Emil Cioran was there in the 20th century to provide a different assessment of Nietzsche. Cioran questions the metaphysical statements made by Nietzsche that provide us with information about pain and the essence of life. His philosophy affirmed that life and existence were unacceptable while at the same time, consciousness seemed suspicious to him. As far as he believed, consciousness could not be separated from pain. For him, starting from birth is suffering, while existing means pain. Cioran believes that humanity is cursed with an awareness of a curse that ensures they remain trapped in abject misery.
In essence, Cioran’s pessimism is different from Nietzsche’s pessimism. Nietzsche believed that although pain was real, humanity could conquer it with determination, but instead, Cionaran observed endless misery; man is condemned as a creature with no way to escape the pain that results from the absurdity of his existence. Cioran’s views on pain and consciousness conflict with basic assumptions about the purpose of existence. The philosopher shows that not everything is great about Nietzsche’s continuity and provides what he thinks are the worst aspects of the human process. It leaves us with whatever explanation there is based on its assumptions.
Bibliography
- Botez, A. (2011). Emil Cioran–A Deconstructive Philosophy. Cogito-Multidisciplinary research Journal, (04), 7-14.
- Coolidge, M. L. (1941). Ethics–Apollonian and Dionysian. The Journal of Philosophy, 38(17), 449-465.
- Dowden, K. (2007). Olympian gods, Olympian pantheon. A companion to Greek religion, 39-55.
- Han-Pile, B. (2006). Nietzsche’s Metaphysics in the Birth of Tragedy. European Journal of Philosophy, 14(3), 373-403.
- Henrichs, A. (2005). Nietzsche on Greek tragedy and the tragic. A companion to Greek tragedy, 444-458.
- Meineck, P. (2012). Combat trauma and the tragic stage: “restoration” by cultural catharsis. Intertexts, 16(1), 7-24.
- Nietzsche, F. (2017). The birth of tragedy. In Aesthetics (pp. 330-334). Routledge.
- Nietzsche, F. W. (1974). The twilight of the idols (pp. 543-44). Allen & Unwin.
- Nietzsche, F., & Hollingdale, R. J. (2020). Thus spoke zarathustra. In The Routledge Circus Studies Reader (pp. 461-466). Routledge.
- Schopenhauer, A. (2012). The world as will and representation, vol. 1 (Vol. 1). Courier Corporation.
