【中英】尼采对基督教的批判-Dr·MichaelSugrue224
Friedrich Nietzsche is one of the most important philosophers in the tradition of Western thought. He's one of the most artistic and ruthless and fascinating individuals in the intellectual history of the West. He viewed himself as being the end of the Western intellectual tradition. He saw himself as the destroyer of metaphysics. He saw himself as the destroyer of Christianity.
弗里德里希·尼采是西方思想传统中最重要的哲学家之一。他是西方思想史上最具艺术性、最无情、最迷人的人物之一。他视自己为西方智识传统的终结者，视自己为形而上学的摧毁者，视自己为基督教的摧毁者。
He saw himself as a combination philosopher-artist in the tradition of Plato, and he offered a comprehensive critique of the Western intellectual tradition, not conceived merely or narrowly as a philosophical tradition, but as a cultural tradition. Nietzsche, more than anyone else, was a philosopher of culture.
他视自己为柏拉图传统中哲学家与艺术家的结合体，并对西方智识传统提出了全面的批判——这种传统不仅被狭义地理解为哲学传统，更是作为一种文化传统。尼采比任何人都更是一位文化哲学家。
He offered criticism of every element in Western culture, and his criticism is noteworthy for its refusal to compromise, for his insistence that we get to the psychological heart of things. What I'd like to talk about in this lecture is Nietzsche's treatment of Christianity and morality, two of the central questions for most philosophers in the Western tradition, and particularly important for Nietzsche because...
他对西方文化的每一个要素都提出了批判，而他的批判之所以引人注目，在于其拒绝妥协，坚持要触及事物的心理核心。在本次讲座中，我想讨论的是尼采对基督教和道德的处理，这两者是西方传统中大多数哲学家的核心问题，对尼采而言尤其重要，因为……
Although he is something of a megalomaniac, there's a certain amount of truth to the argument that he is, in fact, the Antichrist. He, in fact, called himself the Antichrist more than once, and he wrote a book called The Antichrist. And what he hoped to do was to get beyond Christianity. He quite literally thought that he was going to supplant Jesus in the Western tradition, which is quite a tall order. Not many people have that sort of ambition.
尽管他有些自大狂，但说他事实上就是敌基督者，这种说法也有一定道理。他确实不止一次自称敌基督者，还写了一本名为《敌基督者》的书。他希望做的是超越基督教。他确实认为自己将在西方传统中取代耶稣，这可不是一般的雄心壮志。没有多少人会有这样的抱负。
But Nietzsche was never a shrinking violet, and in fact, he wanted to offer a new set of values. He wished to offer a new cultural orientation to the West, or perhaps to revive an old cultural orientation in the West. And he wished to make us confront the half-truths, the lies, the evasions that are characteristic of almost everyone's life and thought.
但尼采从来不是个羞怯的人，事实上，他想提供一套新的价值体系。他希望为西方提供一种新的文化取向，或者说是复兴西方一种古老的文化取向。他希望让我们直面那些半真半假的陈述、谎言和逃避，这些几乎充斥在每个人的生活和思想中。
Now, he wrote several books that criticized morality. In some respects, the tradition of Western ethics is his main target. And perhaps the most intriguing of these books, or one of the most intriguing of these books, is called Beyond Good and Evil. Now, getting beyond good and evil is a rather unusual activity for a philosopher, particularly one concerned with morals. But Nietzsche wants to take...
他写了好几本批判道德的书。在某些方面，西方伦理学的传统是他的主要靶子。这些书中或许最引人入胜的一本叫做《善恶的彼岸》。对于一位哲学家，尤其是关注道德的哲学家来说，超越善恶是一种相当不寻常的活动。但尼采想要采取……
an extremely skeptical and extremely naturalistic approach to moral theory and moral valuation, and he wishes to offer a criticism of Christianity and the values that it represents, and in addition, to supplant that with a new code of morals. Nietzsche asks an important question.
一种极其怀疑和极其自然主义的方法来对待道德理论和道德评价，他希望批判基督教及其所代表的价值观，并在此基础上用一套新的道德规范取而代之。尼采提出了一个重要的问题。
question that everyone living in this modern age, this one world, anti-metaphysical age, has to confront, which is, where does Christianity and its moral values come from? How is it that human beings conceived of as animals, as featherless bipeds, how is it that they come to have a thing called a conscience?
这个问题是每个生活在现代、这个一元世界、反形而上学时代的人都必须面对的，那就是：基督教及其道德价值观从何而来？人类，被视为动物、被视为无羽两足动物，他们是如何拥有一种叫做良知的东西的？
How is it that they make judgments of good and evil, which is not characteristic of fish or birds or reptiles? What is it about human beings which causes them to construct moral systems, which are in some respects the antithesis of nature? Why is it that we feel the desire to conflict with nature and make judgments that nature never does? Nietzsche thinks that he finds the answer in the psyche of the human individual.
他们如何做出善恶判断，而鱼、鸟或爬行动物却没有这种特征？人类身上有什么东西导致他们构建道德体系，而这些体系在某些方面与自然背道而驰？为什么我们会感到一种与自然冲突、做出自然从不做出的判断的欲望？尼采认为他在人类个体的心灵中找到了答案。
And he thinks that we are very peculiar animals, animals with strange attributes which are natural and which are part of the human condition. But in fact, Nietzsche says that most of our elevation of ourselves beyond nature, beyond simple facticity,
他认为我们是非常奇特的动物，拥有一些奇怪的特质，这些特质是自然的，是人类境况的一部分。但事实上，尼采说，我们大多数将自己提升到自然之上、超越简单事实性的做法，
is a kind of spurious raising of ourselves outside of and above nature. The German term for this is Sonderstellung. What that means is other position, a position somehow outside of nature. Nietzsche wants us to confront the fact that we are animals, that we are part of nature, and that our moral judgments are in fact part of that natural process. In looking at Christianity, Nietzsche goes back to the actual history of Christianity and asks, what is it that Christian morals represent?
是一种虚假的自我提升，将自己置于自然之外和之上。德语术语是“Sonderstellung”，意思是“特殊位置”，即某种在自然之外的位置。尼采希望我们正视这样一个事实：我们是动物，是自然的一部分，我们的道德判断实际上是那个自然过程的一部分。在审视基督教时，尼采回溯到基督教的真实历史，并问道：基督教道德代表的是什么？
Whose interests do they serve? And why are these interests disguised? What is it about the moral judgments characteristic of Christianity that needs to be disguised? What is it that, in other words, that's a lie in Christian morals? Remarkable question. Nietzsche's answer is that there are two kinds of morality, and Christianity only represents one particular perspective on judgments of good and evil.
它们服务于谁的利益？为什么这些利益被伪装起来？基督教特有的道德判断有什么需要伪装的地方？换句话说，基督教道德中的谎言是什么？这是一个非凡的问题。尼采的回答是，有两种道德，而基督教只代表了善恶判断的某一种特定视角。
And this perspective is the perspective of the herd. Nietzsche contrasts two kinds of morals. Herd morals, morals that are characteristic of the weak, the feeble, the inferior, the enslaved, which is to say Christianity, and master morals, morals of warriors, the predatory human beings who make judgments on the basis of their strength rather than their weakness.
这种视角是群氓的视角。尼采对比了两种道德：群氓道德，即弱者、卑贱者、劣等者、被奴役者所特有的道德，也就是基督教；以及主人道德，即战士、掠夺性人类的道德，他们基于自己的力量而非软弱做出判断。
Nietzsche wishes to supplant the herd morals characteristic of Christianity, characteristic of Western culture for the previous 2,000 years, with a new morals, a morals that harkens back to the age of the Homeric hero, which harkens back to the aristocratic warrior elite, which is found all over the world, which creates values out of nothing, and which glories in the fact that their judgments can be enforced in this world, independent of any...
尼采希望用新的道德取代基督教和过去两千年西方文化所特有的群氓道德，这种新道德回溯到荷马英雄时代，回溯到世界各地的贵族战士精英，他们从无中创造价值，并荣耀于他们的判断可以在现世得到执行，而不依赖于任何……
metaphysical construct. Now Nietzsche asks, who was it that created Christianity? Well, it's an outgrowth of Judaism and Judaism is a priestly religion. Christianity is an extension of that and Christianity in its earliest historical phases appeals to the slave class in Rome. In fact, Christianity is the revolt of the oppressed masses in Rome.
形而上学的构造。现在尼采问：是谁创造了基督教？嗯，它是犹太教的产物，而犹太教是一种祭司宗教。基督教是犹太教的延伸，基督教在最早的历史阶段吸引了罗马的奴隶阶级。事实上，基督教是被压迫群众在罗马的反抗。
And Nietzsche argues that Christianity and its myths was organized so as to articulate the perspective of the slaves, of the inferior, of the feeble. And it was a way of having revenge upon masters, having revenge upon warriors, having revenge upon those who could oppress them, and turning the tables.
尼采认为，基督教及其神话被组织起来，是为了表达奴隶、卑贱者、弱者的视角。这是一种对主人复仇、对战士复仇、对那些可能压迫他们的人复仇的方式，并扭转了局面。
by offering a scale of values that was different from and independent of that of the master class. Nietzsche says that the slaves have their revenge and the triumph of Christianity in the West amounts to the triumph of the slave, of the inferior, of the weak and impoverished.
通过提供一套不同于主人阶级且独立于其价值尺度的价值体系。尼采说，奴隶们的复仇以及基督教在西方世界的胜利，等同于奴隶、劣等人、弱者和穷人的胜利。
Think about the ideas or the myths that underlie Christianity. The idea that even in this world, if there's no justice, there's another world, heaven and hell, where God's eternal justice gives everyone what they deserve. Nietzsche says that what this in fact is, is the frustration, the impotence, the anger of slaves transformed into a myth.
想想基督教背后的观念或神话。这种观念认为，即使在这个世界上没有正义，还有另一个世界，即天堂和地狱，在那里上帝的永恒正义会让每个人得到应有的报应。尼采说，这实际上是奴隶们的挫败感、无力和愤怒被转化为一个神话。
which allows them to get their revenge on those that oppress them, if not in this world, at least in an unreal world, which offers them some solace in a world of pain and misery. Nietzsche contrasts the morality of Christianity with the morality of the Romans. The Romans were fierce, independent, warlike men.
这使得他们能够向压迫他们的人复仇，即使不在现世，至少在一个虚幻的世界里，这为他们在充满痛苦和悲惨的世界中提供了一些慰藉。尼采将基督教的道德与罗马人的道德进行对比。罗马人是凶猛、独立、好战的民族。
who made their own scale of values based upon power, based upon the desire to dominate, and they showed no reluctance to inflict pain on those they viewed as inferior. And here inferior means not morally inferior in the Christian sense, but physically inferior in terms of practical strength. Nietzsche's new alternative to Christianity will be a resuscitation of the warlike values of the ancient world. And what he hopes will come out of this...
他们基于权力和统治欲望建立了自己的价值尺度，并且毫不犹豫地给那些他们认为低劣的人施加痛苦。这里所说的低劣，并非基督教意义上的道德低劣，而是指实际力量上的弱小。尼采对基督教的新替代方案将是对古代世界好战价值观的复兴。而他希望由此产生的……
will be an evaluation of Christianity which allows us to get beyond Christianity. And the one who is going to succeed Christ as the central figure in Western moral theory will be Nietzsche himself. He frequently signed himself as the Antichrist or as Dionysus, another incarnation of the Nietzschean judgment of good and evil. And in doing this,
将是对基督教的一种评价，使我们能够超越基督教。而作为西方道德理论核心人物继承基督之位的人，将是尼采本人。他经常自称敌基督者或狄俄尼索斯，这是尼采式善恶判断的另一种化身。通过这样做，
He raises very disturbing questions about the kind of moral judgments that we make that are still characteristic of this culture and the difficulty of maintaining the traditional judgments of good and evil, characteristic of the West, in an age in which religion and theology are taken less and less seriously.
他提出了非常令人不安的问题，关于我们所作出的、至今仍具有这种文化特征的道德判断，以及在宗教和神学日益不被重视的时代，维持西方传统善恶判断的困难。
Now let's think about the idea of getting beyond good and evil. Nietzsche contrasts the slave and the master moralities, and he says what's characteristic of Christianity is the distinction between good and evil. Good, in the Christian sense, means kindness, lovingness, pity, essentially. Nietzsche thinks that Christian morality is a morality of pity, which raises...
现在让我们思考超越善恶的观念。尼采对比了奴隶道德和主人道德，他说基督教的特征在于区分善与恶。在基督教意义上，善意味着仁慈、仁爱、怜悯。尼采认为基督教道德是一种怜悯的道德，它将……
to a spurious level of distinction, feeling for the weak, the inferior, and the impoverished. We might contrast this with the master morality, which doesn't distinguish between good and evil. In fact, it distinguishes between good and bad in the sense of capable or incapable, potent or impotent. That's a totally different judgment of value from that characteristic of Christianity. And in fact,
对弱者、劣者和穷人的同情提升到了一种虚假的卓越地位。我们可以将此与主人道德进行对比，后者并不区分善与恶。事实上，它区分的是好与坏，即有能力与无能力、强大与软弱。这是一种完全不同于基督教的价值判断。事实上，
This is the scale of values, this master morality, is the one which Nietzsche expects will produce the highest type of human being. Nietzsche holds the view, which at least in part is borrowed from Darwin, that human beings have no intrinsic value. If you remember that one of the great...
这就是价值尺度，这种主人道德，是尼采期望能产生最高类型人类的道德。尼采持有一种观点，至少部分借鉴自达尔文，即人类没有内在价值。如果你记得其中一个伟大的...
breakthroughs or one of the great contributions of Christianity to the West is the idea that all souls are equal in the sight of God and that all people are equally valued on some level regardless of what their particular skills or capacities are. Well Nietzsche says that's a mistake. What that is is the revenge of those that can't do anything. And Nietzsche says if we are ever going to produce anything great in this culture, if we are ever going to produce anything significant in this culture, we must get away from the idea that other people really matter. The only elements
突破或基督教对西方的一大贡献是，所有灵魂在上帝眼中都是平等的，所有人在某种层面上都被平等地重视，无论他们特定的技能或能力如何。尼采说那是个错误。那不过是无能者的报复。尼采说，如果我们想要在这个文化中产生任何伟大的东西，如果我们想要在这个文化中产生任何重要的东西，我们就必须摆脱他人真正重要的观念。人类物种中唯一重要的元素是...
in the human species which are important are the half dozen great geniuses in any culture. And he says that Christianity inhibits the development of genius. It inhibits the development of creativity.
任何文化中的少数几个伟大天才。他说基督教抑制了天才的发展，抑制了创造力的发展。
because it is envious. It is a way of mythologizing the envy of those that are incapable, of those that don't have much in the way of capacity. And Nietzsche says if we are to get beyond that, then we must get beyond this morality of pity. We must get beyond good and evil, back or forward, if you want, to the idea that good and bad are the main standards of our moral judgment. So there will be...
因为它心怀嫉妒。它是将那些无能者、那些没有多少能力者的嫉妒神话化的一种方式。尼采说，如果我们要超越这一点，我们就必须超越这种怜悯的道德。我们必须超越善恶，回到或前进（如果你愿意）到这样的观念：好与坏是我们道德判断的主要标准。因此将会有...
None of the conscientiousness characteristic of Christianity, none of the worry about heaven and hell, about God's judgment, this good and bad morality, this master morality will be strictly oriented towards this world. It will not be caught up with the problem of conscience. It will not primarily be concerned.
基督教特有的那种认真，对天堂地狱、上帝审判的担忧，都不会存在。这种好与坏的道德，这种主人道德，将严格面向此世。它不会纠缠于良心问题。它不会主要关注...
with the state of one's soul so much as it will be concerned with the state of one's achievements. Nietzsche's judgment of good and bad, this master morality, is oriented towards doing things. The masters are those that achieve. And this is not necessarily to be taken in a political sense, although it can be taken in a political sense. Master moralities can also be the moralities of the artist. Master moralities can also be the morality of the...
灵魂的状态，而更多地关注成就的状态。尼采对好与坏的判断，这种主人道德，面向的是做事。主人是那些取得成就的人。这不一定是在政治意义上理解，尽管也可以从政治意义上理解。主人道德也可以是艺术家的道德。主人道德也可以是...
thinker, but it has to be the kind of thinker or the kind of artist who despises mere mediocrity, who wants to go beyond and formulate something in this world that creates a justification for his entire society. As Nietzsche says in The Use and Abuse of History, mankind can only be judged by its highest examples. The average human being has no value whatever. Now,
思想家的道德，但它必须是那种鄙视平庸、想要超越并在此世创造出为其整个社会提供辩护之物的思想家或艺术家。正如尼采在《历史的用途与滥用》中所说，人类只能以其最高典范来评判。普通人毫无价值。现在，
Nietzsche also inquires into the differences between the warrior aristocrat who generates the master morality and the priest. And the psychology of the priest is of great concern to Nietzsche. Nietzsche believes that the priestly type and the warrior aristocrat are both, in fact, superior kinds of men. One type is the individual.
尼采还探究了产生主人道德的战士贵族与祭司之间的差异。祭司的心理学是尼采极为关注的。尼采相信祭司类型和战士贵族实际上都是优越的人。一种类型是个人。
the Nietzschean hero who's going to adopt the master morality. The most dangerous opponent to the Nietzschean hero, the man who adopts this master morality, is the priest. The priest is the opposite of the warrior type, and Nietzsche believes that the origin of this distinction lies in the human psyche, that psychological differences are what distinguish these two. Now, both the warrior
尼采式英雄，即将要采纳主人道德的人。对尼采式英雄——采纳主人道德的人——来说，最危险的对手是牧师。牧师是战士类型的对立面，尼采认为这种区分的根源在于人类心理，心理差异正是区分这两者的关键。现在，战士
and the priest have different kinds of the will to power. They just express this will to power differently. Nietzsche thinks, in fact, that all human beings can be characterized by their desire to dominate themselves, to dominate their environment, and to dominate other people. This puts Nietzsche squarely in the tradition of the sophists. If you think of Calicles and Gorgias in the...
和牧师都拥有不同种类的权力意志。他们只是以不同的方式表达这种权力意志。事实上，尼采认为，所有人类都可以通过他们支配自己、支配环境以及支配他人的欲望来刻画。这使得尼采完全置身于智者派的传统之中。如果你想到柏拉图对话中的卡利克勒斯和高尔吉亚……
Platonic dialogues, he's also in the line of Machiavelli, Sade, all of those people who adopt an atheistic perspective and who believe that human life is caught up with the desire to dominate others and to satisfy one's desires to the maximum extent. Nietzsche supports that idea.
他也与马基雅维利、萨德一脉相承，所有那些采取无神论视角、相信人类生活与支配他人和最大程度满足自身欲望的渴望纠缠在一起的人。尼采支持这一观点。
Now the warrior does it in a very straightforward way. The warrior takes what he wants without any qualms of conscience. Conscience is an afterthought invented at a much later date. The warrior just comes in and does what he does because that is his nature. The strong and the weak is the natural distinction. Good and evil is an anti-natural distinction. And if you think about it, there may be a certain grain of truth in this. Think of it this way. Think of the distinction between hawks and sparrows. Sparrows eat
现在，战士以一种非常直接的方式行事。战士毫无良心不安地攫取他所想要的东西。良心是后来才发明出来的事后的想法。战士只是进来做他所做的事，因为那是他的本性。强与弱是自然的区分。善与恶是反自然的区分。如果你仔细想想，其中或许有几分真理。这样想吧。想想鹰和麻雀的区别。麻雀吃
grains or seeds or whatever, and they're inoffensive birds and there are quite many of them.
谷物或种子之类的，它们是无害的鸟类，而且数量相当多。
But in fact, there's nothing better about eating what sparrows eat as compared to what hawks eat. We don't make moral judgments about hawks and say that they ought not to eat sparrows. We just recognize that in nature, different things feed in different ways, and predatory behavior is no worse and no better than any other behavior. Nature just is what it is. Nietzsche wants to force us back into nature. He wants us to reevaluate our disapproval of the human hawks.
但实际上，吃麻雀所吃的东西并不比吃鹰所吃的东西更好。我们不会对鹰做出道德判断，说它们不应该吃麻雀。我们只是认识到，在自然界中，不同的生物以不同的方式进食，捕食行为并不比其他任何行为更坏或更好。自然就是它本来的样子。尼采想迫使我们回归自然。他希望我们重新评估我们对人类之鹰的不认同。
In fact, Nietzsche thinks that we have no more right to judge a warrior or an aristocrat evil than we have a right to judge a hawk evil. And he, in fact, thinks it doesn't make any more sense. The world of nature, red in fang and claw, just is what it is. And as Nietzsche puts it in a beautiful passage, he says, there are no moral phenomena. There are only moral interpretations of phenomena. A very profound idea. Well...
事实上，尼采认为，我们评判战士或贵族为邪恶，并不比评判鹰为邪恶更有权利。而且，他实际上认为这同样没有意义。自然世界，血淋淋的爪牙，就是它本来的样子。正如尼采在一段优美的文字中所说，没有道德现象，只有对现象的道德解释。这是一个非常深刻的思想。那么……
whose values are built into Christianity? The values of the herd, the values of the weak, and that's why it caught on among the underclass in Rome, and the entire history of Western ethics has been extrapolations from this herd morality, which has inhibited the development of our culture. If we were to go beyond that, we would have to allow for the fact that cruelty may not be an evil, that pity may be a vice.
基督教中内置了谁的价值？畜群的价值，弱者的价值，这就是为什么它在罗马的下层阶级中流行起来，而整个西方伦理学史都是这种畜群道德的延伸，它抑制了我们文化的发展。如果我们要超越这一点，我们就必须承认残忍可能不是一种恶，怜悯可能是一种恶习。
that the desire to dominate other people may be the highest expression of human being rather than its worst example. And in that respect, Nietzsche is not only connected to Machiavelli and to Sade and to the Sophists, but if any of you are familiar with the work of Dostoevsky,
支配他人的欲望可能是人类存在的最高表达，而不是其最糟糕的例子。在这一点上，尼采不仅与马基雅维利、萨德和智者派有联系，而且如果你们中有人熟悉陀思妥耶夫斯基的作品，
particularly something like crime and punishment, the idea of the singular man, the man that's going to stand outside of good and evil. Remember, Raskolnikov commits that murder. Much the same issues are being discussed in that novel. The question of whether, in fact, moral judgment is universal or whether it's an arbitrary series of conventions designed by the weak to oppress the strong, strangely enough. Now, in a book called The Genealogy of Morals, he tries to figure out
特别是像《罪与罚》这样的作品，那个独特的人，那个将站在善恶之外的人的理念。记住，拉斯柯尔尼科夫犯下了那起谋杀。那部小说中也讨论了类似的问题。即道德判断究竟是普遍的，还是由弱者设计来压迫强者的任意一系列惯例，这很奇怪。现在，在一本名为《道德的谱系》的书中，他试图弄清楚
how it is we got into this predicament, how it is we came to the point where the inferior and the weak could start to make our moral judgments. And he says, first of all, that the initial moral judgments that human beings made came from the warrior aristocrats who imposed their will on the world. This is not only his model of the warrior aristocrat, it's also in some respects his model of the artist.
我们是如何陷入这种困境的，我们是如何到达了劣者和弱者能够开始制定我们的道德判断的地步。他说，首先，人类最初做出的道德判断来自战士贵族，他们将自己的意志强加于世界。这不仅是他关于战士贵族的模型，在某些方面也是他关于艺术家的模型。
Think about, and his arguments are very interesting. Nietzsche was a philologist and a professor of classical languages, and he derives most of his arguments from an inquiry into Latin and German words and what their origins might have been. Now, since I can't presuppose that you know Latin and German, let's try English just to see if, in fact, there's some evidence for this, and I think there is. Think about what a noble action is. What makes an action noble?
想想看，他的论证非常有趣。尼采是一位语文学家，也是古典语言教授，他的大部分论证都源于对拉丁语和德语词汇及其可能起源的探究。既然我不能假定你们懂拉丁语和德语，让我们试试英语，看看是否确实有一些证据支持这一点，我认为是有的。想想什么是高尚的行为。是什么使一个行为高尚？
Well, we know that a noble action is a good one. I mean, if you look it up in the dictionary, you'll find that it's a term of approval. Is it coincidental that nobility is also a section of the social structure in ancient societies? Consider the distinction between a noble action and a base action. Who do you think the base are?
嗯，我们知道高尚的行为是好的。我的意思是，如果你查字典，你会发现它是一个表示赞许的术语。高尚同时也是古代社会中社会结构的一个部分，这是巧合吗？考虑一下高尚行为与卑贱行为之间的区别。你认为卑贱者是谁？
The base are in fact the inferior, the weak, those that take orders rather than give them. The distinction between noble and base suggests that maybe our judgments of value at the time when these words were coined are in fact simply the judgments of important warriors contrasted with the judgments of people that have to suffer and put up with them.
卑贱者实际上是劣等的、弱小的，那些服从命令而不是发号施令的人。高尚与卑贱之间的区别表明，也许在我们创造这些词汇的时候，我们的价值判断实际上只是重要的战士的判断，与那些不得不忍受他们的人们的判断形成对比。
Consider the distinction between being mean and being noble. Well, being mean is a very bad thing nowadays to be mean, but there was a time when to be mean meant that you were essentially a villain. Villain means peasant in its origins. Give that some thought. Nietzsche has a very profound argument here. Think about something like coming from a good family and coming from a bad family.
考虑一下卑鄙与高尚之间的区别。嗯，如今卑鄙是一件非常糟糕的事情，但曾有一段时间，卑鄙意味着你本质上是一个恶棍。恶棍（villain）在起源上意味着农民。好好想想这一点。尼采在这里有一个非常深刻的论证。想想来自好家庭和来自坏家庭这样的说法。
Yes, indeed. Again, the judgments of power, characteristic of predatory warrior aristocrats, were the actual source, according to Nietzsche, of our judgments of good and evil.
是的，确实如此。再次，根据尼采的说法，权力判断，即掠夺性的战士贵族的特征，实际上是我们善恶判断的真正来源。
To be mean, to be base, to be a villain meant that you were bad. To be noble, to be high-minded as opposed to low-minded, to have high moral standards as opposed to low moral standards, ask yourself where they came from. Nietzsche was the first man to force himself to consider the possibility.
卑鄙、低贱、恶棍意味着你是坏的。高贵、高尚与低贱相对，具有高尚的道德标准与低下的道德标准相对，问问自己这些观念从何而来。尼采是第一个迫使自己考虑这种可能性的人。
that what we take to be universal moral distinctions applicable to everyone are in fact a disguised form of the will to power, a way for the weak and the impotent to get back at the superior by changing these aristocratic valuations, by moving from good and bad to good and evil. In other words, the invention of evil was a way for the oppressed to strike back at the superior.
我们所认为的适用于所有人的普遍道德区分，实际上是权力意志的一种伪装形式，是弱者与无能者通过改变这些贵族式的价值评估，从“好与坏”转向“善与恶”，从而向优越者进行报复的一种方式。换句话说，发明“恶”是被压迫者向优越者反击的一种手段。
Nietzsche wants to erase that. He says that's a mistake in Western culture. It's a hole or a gap or an inferior part of the Western tradition. And if we want to produce superior human beings, then we have to free them from the shackles of slave morality. We have to prevent them from being undermined in their achievements or undermined in their aspirations.
尼采想要抹去这一点。他说这是西方文化中的一个错误，是西方传统中的一个漏洞、缺口或低劣的部分。如果我们想要造就卓越的人，就必须将他们从奴隶道德的枷锁中解放出来。我们必须防止他们的成就或抱负被削弱。
by creating in them the conscience, a conscience which prevents them from achieving what they could. Now here's another very interesting question, and it's very hard to answer. Nietzsche offers us a very provocative conception. Where does conscience come from, and what is it? Think about that for a moment. If, in fact, human beings are animals, and I think that Darwin has conclusively shown that to be the case,
通过在他们心中制造良知，一种阻止他们实现其潜能的良知。现在这里有另一个非常有趣的问题，而且很难回答。尼采提出了一个非常具有挑衅性的概念。良知从何而来，它是什么？想一想。如果事实上人类是动物，我认为达尔文已经确凿地证明了这一点，
Why are we the only animal with a conscience, and where does it come from, and what is it? Very difficult question. Nietzsche's argument is something like this. Human beings have a natural desire to achieve power. They have the will to power. That is characteristic of what makes people go. And the usual route that the will to power takes is the desire to dominate other people. There is a natural ruthlessness in people.
为什么我们是唯一有良知的动物，它从何而来，它是什么？非常困难的问题。尼采的论证大致如下。人类有一种自然的追求权力的欲望。他们有权力意志。这是驱动人们行动的特征。权力意志通常采取的途径是支配他人的欲望。人天生具有一种冷酷无情。
a desire to take advantage of others, and it pleases people to cause pain. Hard thing for us to swallow perhaps in these days, but with the degree of pain in the world and the degree of evil that we see, to use a word that I might italicize, there may well be something to it. If in fact people do like...
一种利用他人的欲望，而且给人带来痛苦会使人感到愉悦。在当今时代，我们可能难以接受这一点，但鉴于世界上的痛苦程度和我们所见的邪恶程度（用一个我可能会加斜体的词），这很可能有些道理。如果事实上人们确实喜欢……
to create pain in others, of course, usually not themselves. What happens when you frustrate this desire? What happens when you say you can't enslave other people? You can't kill other people and take their possessions. You can't oppress other people because we will stop you. Well, Nietzsche says, and this is a fascinating possibility, although I'm not certain if it's true, he says that when people are frustrated in their desire to cause pain to others, the consequence of that is that they decide to start imposing pain on themselves.
给他人制造痛苦，当然，通常不是给自己。当你挫败这种欲望时会发生什么？当你说你不能奴役他人，不能杀人越货，不能压迫他人，因为我们会阻止你时，会发生什么？尼采说，这是一个迷人的可能性，虽然我不确定它是否真实，他说当人们在给他人造成痛苦的欲望上受挫时，其结果是他们决定开始将痛苦施加在自己身上。
And this pain that they pose on themselves is called conscience. A horrifying possibility. In German, the term for the pang of conscience is called gewissenbisse, which means the bite of conscience. And Nietzsche says essentially that people are predatory animals, and if they can't bite other people, they bite themselves. And when they begin to torture themselves, they find the last possible outlet.
而这种他们施加在自己身上的痛苦被称为良知。一个可怕的可能性。在德语中，良知的刺痛被称为“Gewissensbisse”，意思是良知的咬噬。尼采基本上说，人是捕食性动物，如果他们不能咬别人，他们就咬自己。当他们开始折磨自己时，他们找到了这种将痛苦施加于世界的欲望的最后可能出口。
for this desire to impose pain on the world. If they can't do it to other people, they'll do it to themselves. Now, this bite of conscience gets progressively worse when priests come on the scene, when the priestly type comes on the scene. It goes from inferior to even more inferior because the priests harness...
如果他们不能对他人这样做，他们就会对自己这样做。现在，当牧师登场时，当祭司类型出现时，这种良知的咬噬会变得越来越糟。它从低劣变得更低劣，因为牧师们利用……
slave morality. They harness this morality of the herd and they use it for their own purposes. The priests are the highest example of the herd animal, of the herd type. They have a special set of morals that they keep for themselves and then they rule the herd using various kinds of myths and various kinds of verbal techniques so that they can
奴隶道德。他们利用这种群氓的道德，并为其自身目的服务。牧师是群居动物、群氓类型的最高典范。他们有一套自己保留的特殊道德，然后他们利用各种神话和各种言语技巧来统治群氓，以便他们能够
have their revenge, and so they can oppose the warrior type. Nietzsche sees among the highest types of human beings an intrinsic conflict between the priest and the warrior. Nietzsche thinks that the warrior is the kind of person that knows how to forget things. Again, this is an interesting psychological profile, and there are many, incidentally, if you read the genealogy of morals and beyond good and evil, you'll find that there are many anticipations of Freud.
进行报复，并以此对抗战士类型。尼采认为，在最高类型的人类中，牧师与战士之间存在一种内在冲突。尼采认为战士是那种知道如何遗忘的人。再次，这是一个有趣的心理画像，而且顺便说一句，如果你阅读《论道德的谱系》和《善恶的彼岸》，你会发现其中有许多对弗洛伊德的预见。
especially the question of conscience and the question of resentment. Nietzsche thinks that resentment, the hatred of being oppressed, is the source of slave moralities and that the priest takes that resentment, formulates it in a mythological way, and uses that to orchestrate and control the herd so that they can be opposed to any superiority among those that would break moral rules, among the would-be warriors.
尤其是关于良知和怨恨的问题。尼采认为，怨恨，即对被压迫的仇恨，是奴隶道德的根源，而牧师利用这种怨恨，以神话的方式加以阐述，并用来操纵和控制群氓，以便他们能够反对任何可能打破道德规则的优越者，即那些潜在的战士。
What makes the priestly type so dangerous is the fact that they can dominate culture and that they have chosen the wrong path. They have chosen the slave moralities and they have absolutized that. The consequence of absolutizing that is that it seems that there is no possibility of reintroducing master morality without a complete...
祭司类型之所以如此危险，是因为他们能够主导文化，并且他们选择了错误的道路。他们选择了奴隶道德并将其绝对化。将奴隶道德绝对化的后果是，似乎不可能在不进行彻底的文化批判的情况下重新引入主人道德，而这正是尼采认为他自己所扮演的角色。这就是尼采作为敌基督者的意义。他不仅仅是在某种神话意义上的敌基督者。他确实将此视为一种卓越的标志。这恰恰显示了他是一个多么自由的思想家。尼采不仅愿意说他是敌基督者，而且他认为这是自耶稣时代以来文化中最好的发展。是时候回归一种允许卓越之人发展的道德了。
and thoroughgoing critique of the culture, and that is what Nietzsche thinks he is. That's what it means for Nietzsche to be the Antichrist. He's not just the Antichrist in some mythological sense. He literally takes that as a mark of distinction. It shows just what a free thinker he is. Nietzsche is willing to say not only is he the Antichrist, but that he thinks that that's the best development in culture since the time of Jesus. It's about time that we got back to a morality which would allow for the development
现在尼采的论证非常令人不安。它的后果令人不安。它令人不安，因为它动摇了我们的道德根基。
of superior people. Now Nietzsche's argument here is very disturbing. It's disturbing in its consequences. It's disturbing because it kind of rocks the moral boat for us.
现在尼采的论证非常令人不安。它的后果令人不安。它令人不安，因为它动摇了我们的道德根基。
But Nietzsche's critique goes even further than this. He wants to investigate not just the question of pain and people's desire to impose pain on others, and if not on others, then on themselves. He wants to look at the arguments about suffering made by the priests. Christianity, if you remember, holds the view that God is providential, that he supervises the entire world, and that, I believe the phrase is, not a sparrow falls, but God knows about it. Well, Nietzsche thinks that this was invented so that suffering,
但尼采的批判比这更进一步。他不仅要探究痛苦的问题，以及人们将痛苦施加于他人的欲望，如果不能施加于他人，就施加于自身。他还想审视祭司们关于苦难的论证。如果你记得的话，基督教认为上帝是眷顾世人的，他监督着整个世界，而且我相信有句话是这么说的，没有一只麻雀会掉下来，但上帝知道这件事。然而，尼采认为这是被发明出来的，以便苦难
could be justified and could be explained. And in some respects, there's a certain amount of truth in that, that part of what Christianity does is explain, or at least explain away, the fact of human suffering by saying that God doubtless has some plan. Although we don't know what that plan is, it surely is there because the kind of God we've decided to construct, the kind of God we believe in, is the kind of God, He's a good God, a loving God, the kind of God that would never do anything evil.
能够得到辩护和解释。在某些方面，这有一定道理，基督教所做的一部分事情就是解释，或者至少是解释掉人类苦难的事实，说上帝无疑有某种计划。尽管我们不知道那个计划是什么，但它肯定存在，因为我们决定构造的那种上帝，我们信仰的那种上帝，是那种善良的、慈爱的上帝，是那种绝不会做任何邪恶之事的上帝。
Since he would never do anything evil, the suffering that you get must have a meaning. And Nietzsche thinks the worst thing that the priestly element ever did to human culture was to sell people on the idea that suffering has meaning. Nietzsche says that the entire world is completely meaningless, that the world is moral chaos, that suffering has no meaning, and the idea that suffering has meaning just makes suffering infinitely worse. It's not hard to see why.
既然他绝不会做任何邪恶之事，你所遭受的苦难必定有其意义。尼采认为，祭司因素对人类文化所做的最糟糕的事情，就是让人们相信苦难是有意义的。尼采说整个世界完全是无意义的，世界是道德上的混乱，苦难没有意义，而认为苦难有意义的观念只会让苦难变得更加糟糕。不难看出为什么。
It was bad when weak, feeble people had to put up with the strong, had to put up with having things stolen from them, with being murdered and raped and tortured. That was bad because of simple physical pain for the reason that any natural calamity is bad.
当弱小、虚弱的人不得不忍受强者，不得不忍受被偷窃、被谋杀、被强奸、被折磨时，那已经很糟糕了。那之所以糟糕，是因为简单的身体痛苦，就像任何自然灾害之所以糟糕一样。
But the priestly idea of attaching a meaning to this suffering makes it all that much worse. Because if there is a God in heaven who is in fact supervising this entire procedure, the reason why suffering must follow us, why evil must befall us, lies in ourselves. We are somehow responsible for it. We brought it upon ourselves. What does this mean?
但祭司们将某种意义附加于这种苦难的观念，使情况变得更加糟糕。因为如果天上有一位上帝，实际上在监督着整个过程，那么苦难必须跟随我们、邪恶必须降临于我们的原因，就在于我们自己。我们以某种方式对此负有责任。是我们自己招来的。这意味着什么？
infinitely increases our suffering because not only are the weak and the feeble still being tortured and killed and raped and maimed, but in addition to that, it's their fault. What a horrible turnaround. What a dreadful addition to the suffering they already have. After you recover from a terrible encounter with warrior aristocrats, with those who are beyond good and evil, then you must live with the fact that you brought it on yourself and guilt enters the world.
这无限地增加了我们的苦难，因为不仅弱者和虚弱者仍然在被折磨、被杀害、被强奸、被致残，而且除此之外，这还是他们自己的错。多么可怕的转变。多么可怕的附加于他们已有苦难之上的东西。当你从与战士贵族、与那些超越善恶之人的可怕遭遇中恢复过来之后，你还必须接受这样一个事实：是你自己招来的，于是内疚进入了世界。
After the superior, after the strong, after the ruthless have finished with you, after they've caused their modicum of pain, you have to add to it. The bite of conscience means you're going to impose pain on yourself. This development is one of the worst turning points in the history of Western culture, according to Nietzsche. And in that respect, Nietzsche believes that he is liberating us.
在优越者、强者、无情者对你施加完他们的那点痛苦之后，你还得再加上一些。良知的咬噬意味着你将对自己施加痛苦。根据尼采的说法，这一发展是西方文化史上最糟糕的转折点之一。在这方面，尼采相信他正在将我们解放出来，
from the shackles of a self-imposed misery. And for all his madness, there is a certain degree of coherence in this argument. And it is hard to know where he's correct, how much of this we should accept, and how much of it is just speculation that we could never really have much of an idea about. So let's stop and think about it for a second.
摆脱自我强加的痛苦的枷锁。尽管他有些疯狂，但这个论证在某种程度上是连贯的。而且很难知道他在哪些方面是正确的，我们应该接受其中的多少，又有多少只是我们永远无法真正了解的猜测。所以让我们停下来想一想。
My suspicion is that Nietzsche is probably wrong in his argument that good and bad come, or that our judgments of good and bad and good and evil come from the distinction exclusively of masters and slaves. Probably the distinction between good and bad is much older than aristocratic social structures, which are relatively late in human development, maybe 2,000 or 3,000 BC for the most part.
我的怀疑是，尼采的论证很可能是错误的，即善与恶的区分，或者说我们对善与恶、好与坏的判断，完全来源于主人与奴隶的区分。很可能好与坏的区分比贵族社会结构要古老得多，而贵族社会结构在人类发展中相对较晚，大部分可能是在公元前两千年或三千年。
what it most likely is attached to is feelings of pleasure and pain. My guess is, again, just speculating a la Nietzsche, which would be very much in the Nietzschean tradition, that probably a full stomach was a good feeling, and going hungry was a bad feeling. Probably breaking your leg was a bad feeling, and being healthy was a good feeling. And these may well go before judgments of good and bad based upon aristocratic social structures.
它最可能关联的是快乐和痛苦的感觉。我猜，再次像尼采那样进行推测，这将非常符合尼采的传统，很可能吃饱肚子是一种好的感觉，而挨饿是一种坏的感觉。很可能摔断腿是一种坏的感觉，而健康是一种好的感觉。这些很可能先于基于贵族社会结构的好与坏的判断。
But the fact remains that after these initial judgments of pleasure and pain got turned into our judgments of moral value, there is a superimposed layer of aristocratic moral judgments in our culture and in our language. I think that the distinction between noble and base, between noble and mean, between high moral values and low moral values, establishes that with a good degree of plausibility. Now...
但事实仍然是，在这些最初的快乐和痛苦的判断转变为我们的道德价值判断之后，在我们的文化和语言中，有一层叠加的贵族道德判断。我认为，高贵与卑贱、高尚与低劣、高级道德价值与低级道德价值之间的区分，相当有说服力地确立了这一点。现在……
what are we to make of this judgment? What happens when we go beyond good and evil? And this is a delicate and difficult question. Nietzsche, in a book called The Antichrist, which he modestly named after himself, one would think, he describes his procedure as philosophizing with a hammer. And that's a very intriguing idea because it shows the destructiveness of his philosophy, the skepticism of it, and the gleeful malice that's in it.
我们该如何看待这个判断？当我们超越善恶时会发生什么？这是一个微妙而困难的问题。尼采在一本名为《敌基督者》的书中——他谦虚地以自己命名这本书，人们会这么想——他将自己的方法描述为用锤子进行哲学思考。这是一个非常有趣的想法，因为它显示了他哲学的破坏性、怀疑性以及其中幸灾乐祸的恶意。
And I think it's worth considering the fact that philosophizing with a hammer very easily shades over into intellectual vandalism. And it may be that not everything that can be broken ought to be broken. And it is not entirely clear.
我认为值得考虑的是，用锤子进行哲学思考很容易滑向知识上的蓄意破坏。而且可能并非所有能被打破的东西都应该被打破。这一点并不完全清楚。
that the Antichrist offers us more as a moral alternative than the Christian ethics. But his willingness to ask questions about it, I think, is what makes Nietzsche of enduring significance to our culture.
《敌基督者》是否比基督教伦理提供了更多的道德替代方案。但他愿意对此提出质疑，我认为，正是这一点使尼采对我们的文化具有持久的意义。
for all the madness, for all the evil that's built into it, it's probably the most significant moral development since, oh, I don't know, the Enlightenment anyway. And in terms of its artistic qualities, I think that Nietzsche is probably in the same league as Plato. And as a great poet philosopher, Nietzsche and Plato are the two greatest figures who combine art and philosophy. Those of you who have read Nietzsche will know that his...
尽管其中有疯狂，尽管其中蕴含着邪恶，它很可能是自启蒙运动以来最重要的道德发展。就艺术品质而言，我认为尼采可能与柏拉图处于同一水平。作为伟大的诗人哲学家，尼采和柏拉图是将艺术与哲学结合起来的两位最伟大的人物。那些读过尼采的人会知道，他的……
critical capacity is awesome and his artistic capacity is quite great. You would not find that primarily in his poems or in the songs that he writes. Most of the art that he creates directly is quite inferior, but his prose poetry is the greatest in the German language and probably the greatest in the Western tradition.
批判能力是令人敬畏的，他的艺术能力也相当伟大。你不会主要在他的诗歌或他写的歌曲中找到这一点。他直接创作的大部分艺术都相当低劣，但他的散文诗是德语中最伟大的，可能也是西方传统中最伟大的。
Now, when we finish up with the priest and we find the liabilities of the priest, when we find that perhaps the priestly type has in fact been selling us a dangerous set of myths, we wonder if we can go back to the warrior. Probably not, except in a sublimated sense. If we were to take the will to power, turn it into something perhaps not as catastrophic as, I don't know, Aryan war makers or superior
现在，当我们结束对祭司的讨论，发现祭司的局限，发现也许祭司类型实际上一直在向我们兜售一套危险的神话时，我们会想我们是否能回到武士。可能不行，除非在升华的意义上。如果我们把权力意志转化为某种也许不像，我不知道，雅利安战争制造者或优越的
brutish types, it may be that the type of the philosopher, that the type of the artist is in fact the warrior type, the individual who needs no moral code to create his own conception of good and bad.
野蛮类型那样灾难性的东西，那么哲学家类型、艺术家类型实际上可能就是武士类型，即不需要道德规范就能创造自己善恶观念的个人。
that this type is what can come out of a revaluation of all values, and that, I believe, is what is advantageous in Nietzsche. The difficulty is how we will know when we really are beyond good and evil rather than being beneath good and evil.
这种类型可能出自一切价值的重估，我相信，这就是尼采思想中的有益之处。困难在于，我们如何知道我们何时真正超越了善恶，而不是低于善恶。
many of Nietzsche's friends and his philosophical admirers have tried to shield Nietzsche from the criticism that he's a proto-Nazi. And in fact, I don't think it works. I think in fact Nietzsche is a proto-Nazi. There's a strong tinge of racism in his work. There is a strong tinge of refined cruelty in his work. And insofar as this was misused in the 20th century by the Nazis and by other...
尼采的许多朋友和哲学崇拜者试图为尼采辩护，使他免受他是原始纳粹的批评。事实上，我认为这行不通。我认为尼采确实是一个原始纳粹。他的作品中带有强烈的种族主义色彩。他的作品中带有强烈的精致残忍的意味。只要这在20世纪被纳粹和其他...
racially oriented hate groups, I think Nietzsche is at least in part to blame.
种族主义仇恨团体所滥用，我认为尼采至少应负部分责任。
Those who like Nietzsche's work, who want to shield him from this criticism, will point out with considerable justification that he would have nothing but contempt for the misuse of his work in this century, but it won't entirely absolve him of the results of his statements, because after all, Nietzsche would have had contempt for everybody, whether they adopt his position or not. So I would say that the warrior type very easily shades over into the barbarian.
那些喜欢尼采作品、想为他辩护的人会相当有道理地指出，他对本世纪对其作品的滥用只会表示轻蔑，但这并不能完全免除他言论后果的责任，因为毕竟，尼采对所有人都会轻蔑，无论他们是否采纳他的立场。所以我要说，武士类型很容易滑向野蛮人。
And Nietzsche, as he puts it beautifully, says, I write in order to be misinterpreted. And if we only have a series of misinterpretations of Nietzsche, because he thinks that there is no one canonical interpretation, well then, it seems to me that he should bear the brunt of responsibility for everything, both good and bad, that comes out of his work. And if we live in a Nietzschean age,
而尼采，正如他优美地表达的那样，说，我写作是为了被误解。如果我们只有一系列对尼采的误解，因为他认为没有唯一的权威解释，那么在我看来，他应该为其作品产生的一切好坏后果承担主要责任。如果我们生活在一个尼采式的时代，
It seems to me that we have to find some way of tempering it with whatever it is that is good from the Western intellectual tradition. And if we can't agree as to what we want to call undesirable, whether it's good, whether it's bad or evil, whether it's the master conception of what's undesirable or the slave conception, we may perhaps be able to create...
在我看来，我们必须找到某种方式，用西方思想传统中任何好的东西来调和它。如果我们无法就我们想称之为不可取的东西达成一致，无论是好、坏还是邪恶，无论是主人的不可取概念还是奴隶的概念，我们也许能够创造...
a sense of the good which goes beyond the dichotomy between the two, which allows us to create some sort of overlap between them. Perhaps it would be possible, as Nietzsche says, to create an artistic Socrates, a moral Socrates, who is able to both combine the strength of the artist...
一种超越两者二分法的善的概念，允许我们在它们之间建立某种重叠。也许有可能，正如尼采所说，创造一个艺术的苏格拉底，一个道德的苏格拉底，他能够结合艺术家的力量...
with the mythological capacities of the priest, who is willing to connect his individual judgment with the concern for what is good for the species. And I think Nietzsche himself would not have entirely disagreed with that. If one is going to create a beautiful, artistic philosophy the way Nietzsche does, we have to allow him a certain poetic license. If we are willing to allow Plato's poetry and Plato's myths a certain degree of...
与祭司的神话能力，愿意将他的个人判断与对物种福祉的关切联系起来。我认为尼采本人不会完全不同意这一点。如果一个人要像尼采那样创造一种优美、艺术化的哲学，我们必须允许他一定的诗意许可。如果我们愿意允许柏拉图的诗歌和神话有一定程度的...
consideration and a certain degree of leeway for interpretation. Perhaps if we did that with Nietzsche, we would come up with a more fertile reading.
考虑和一定的解释余地。也许如果我们对尼采也这样做，我们会得出一个更富有成果的解读。
When you get a chance to read Nietzsche, and of all the philosophers I have taught this in this series of lectures, I strongly and most strongly recommend that you do get a look at Nietzsche. When you do, keep this in mind. Nietzsche has one particular trope which is characteristic of him which runs through all his work. And it's analogous to the one trope which is central to Socrates. If Socrates is the man of inimitable irony,
当你有机会阅读尼采时，在我本系列讲座中教授的所有哲学家中，我强烈、最强烈地建议你一定要看看尼采。当你阅读时，请记住这一点。尼采有一个特别的修辞手法，这是他特有的，贯穿他所有作品。它类似于苏格拉底的核心修辞手法。如果苏格拉底是无可比拟的反讽之人，
the man who constantly says ironic statements that can be interpreted as the opposite of what he says, Nietzsche's typical trope is the oxymoron. An oxymoron is something like cold fire or hot ice. It's to use words in the opposite way that they are to be interpreted literally. Nietzschean oxymoron is what makes his poetry so moving. And perhaps the idea...
那个不断说出反讽话语、可以被解释为与他所说相反的人，那么尼采的典型修辞手法是矛盾修辞法。矛盾修辞法就像冷火或热冰。它是用与字面解释相反的方式使用词语。尼采式的矛盾修辞法正是使他的诗歌如此动人的原因。也许这个想法...
that he writes in order to be misinterpreted is that kind of oxymoron. Perhaps the idea that the distinction between good and evil and good and bad is an unbridgeable distinction can also be seen as an oxymoronic construction. Nietzsche's treatment of the warrior, Nietzsche's treatment of the priest, if it's not persuasive historically, and I think as a historian,
他写作是为了被误解，就是那种矛盾修辞法。也许善与恶、好与坏之间的区别是不可逾越的，这个想法也可以被视为一种矛盾修辞法的构造。尼采对武士的处理，尼采对祭司的处理，如果在历史上没有说服力，而我认为作为历史学家，
I think ultimately he's wrong. It is persuasive poetically. And I would ask you to consider the fact that poetic persuasiveness may itself be an oxymoron. Nietzsche believes that having undermined the Western intellectual tradition, by having abolished metaphysics, by having abolished the plausibility of Christianity, what he's done is created a new blank slate for us.
我认为他最终是错的。它在诗意上是有说服力的。我请你考虑这样一个事实：诗意的说服力本身可能就是一个矛盾修辞法。尼采相信，通过破坏西方思想传统，通过废除形而上学，通过废除基督教的合理性，他所做的是为我们创造了一块新的白板。
And if the slate isn't entirely blank, well, let's not hold Nietzsche entirely responsible for that. Let's allow for the fact that poetry, and Nietzsche's strong point is the fact that he is a great prose poet, that poetry offers us a multitude of possible interpretations, and that by offering us a liberation from dogma, a liberation from metaphysics, by offering us a kind of poetry which can...
如果这块石板并非完全空白，那么让我们不要完全归咎于尼采。让我们考虑到诗歌，而尼采的强项在于他是一位伟大的散文诗人，诗歌为我们提供了多种可能的解释，通过提供我们从教条、从形而上学中的解放，通过提供一种可以...
create new value, which can create new human superiority, which can create a new and finer culture that Nietzsche has in fact done our culture a great service. However much madness or evil or megalomania is built into the Nietzschean conception of the world, he is surely the greatest philosopher of the last hundred years, and the remainder of the 20th century philosophical tradition would be inconceivable without him. Nietzsche is one of the great forerunners of existentialism.
创造新的价值，这能创造新的人类优越性，从而创造一种新的、更精致的文化——尼采实际上为我们的文化做出了巨大的贡献。无论尼采的世界观中包含了多少疯狂、邪恶或自大狂，他无疑是过去一百年中最伟大的哲学家，没有他，20世纪余下的哲学传统将是不可想象的。尼采是存在主义的伟大先驱之一。
Nietzsche is certainly the first person to articulate the nihilism that threatened our culture as Christianity had to recede after the attack made by modern natural science in the late 19th century. Nietzsche is not in that respect the cause of the breakup of Western religion. He's not the cause of the breakup of Western metaphysics. Nietzsche just articulates it. You may think of Nietzsche...
尼采无疑是第一个明确阐述虚无主义的人，这种虚无主义威胁着我们的文化，因为基督教在19世纪末现代自然科学攻击之后不得不退却。尼采在这方面并不是西方宗教解体的原因，也不是西方形而上学解体的原因。尼采只是阐明了这一点。你可以把尼采想象成……
take a poetic figure as a kind of seismograph. He's the first and most sensitive writer who sees that the continents of our thought are shifting. And rather than causing it, he tells us about it. And in telling us about it, he forces us to confront something that sooner or later we would have to confront.
用一个诗意的形象来说，他就像一台地震仪。他是第一位也是最敏感的作家，看到了我们思想的“大陆”正在漂移。与其说他在制造这种变化，不如说他在告诉我们这一变化。而通过告诉我们，他迫使我们面对一些迟早必须面对的东西。
insofar as he does a lot of the intellectual dirty work for us, insofar as he's willing to be the Antichrist, as he's willing to take upon himself the responsibility for questioning the very foundational elements of our culture, he's one of the greatest thinkers that ever lived. So whatever his liabilities,
就他为我们做了大量思想上的“脏活”而言，就他愿意成为“反基督者”而言，就他愿意承担起质疑我们文化最根本要素的责任而言，他是有史以来最伟大的思想家之一。所以，无论他的缺陷是什么——
And I think there are many, because he's an anti-Semite, he's a racist, he's a misogynist. There are many evils in Nietzsche's work. But like it or not, he forces us to think in ways that we would not think otherwise. He forces us to consider closely ourselves and to ask ourselves, how honest are we when we are alone, much less when we are with other people? He asks us not only...
我认为他的缺陷很多，因为他是一个反犹主义者，一个种族主义者，一个厌女者。尼采的作品中有许多邪恶之处。但不管你喜不喜欢，他迫使我们以我们本不会采用的方式思考。他迫使我们仔细审视自己，并问自己：当我们独处时，我们有多诚实，更不用说与他人在一起时了。他不仅要求我们……
to have the courage of our convictions, Nietzsche asks, no, he demands that we have the courage to question our convictions, which is a much rarer human quality. Insofar as our convictions will stand up to this kind of critical scrutiny, Nietzsche can be thought of as one of the high points in Western culture. The idea of ruthless self-criticism is quintessentially Greek.
尼采要求我们拥有信念的勇气，不，他要求我们有勇气质疑我们的信念，这是一种更为罕见的人类品质。只要我们的信念能够经得起这种批判性的审视，尼采就可以被视为西方文化的高峰之一。无情的自我批判这一观念本质上是希腊式的。
Nietzsche wants to bring us back to the earlier, higher, finer conception of human beings, characteristic of the non-Socratic Greeks. If you could think of one particular figure that Nietzsche wishes to supplant in philosophy as opposed to religion, that would be Socrates. Nietzsche is the new Socrates, the Socrates of art, the Socrates of the individual, the Socrates of subjectivity.
尼采希望将我们带回更早、更高、更精致的人类观念，那是非苏格拉底式希腊人的特征。如果你能想到一个尼采希望在哲学（而非宗教）中取代的具体人物，那就是苏格拉底。尼采是新的苏格拉底，是艺术的苏格拉底，是个体的苏格拉底，是主观性的苏格拉底。
What he has in common with Socrates is the willingness to ask uncomfortable questions. What he has in common with Socrates is a willingness to ask questions about issues that no one feels very comfortable with. And what's more important about Nietzsche is that his answers are intrinsically provisional. Just like Socrates, Nietzsche says everything is always open to question and always will be.
他与苏格拉底的共同之处在于愿意提出令人不安的问题。他与苏格拉底的共同之处在于愿意就那些没有人感到自在的问题发问。而关于尼采更重要的是，他的答案本质上是暂时的。就像苏格拉底一样，尼采说一切总是可以质疑的，而且永远如此。
Nietzsche calls us not to any dogma, but to a higher and finer kind of life. And insofar as we are heeding that Socratic call, Nietzsche, who would be the anti-Socrates, is in fact part of the Socratic tradition as well. The fact that he is both a Socrates and an anti-Socrates is a perfectly Nietzschean oxymoron.
尼采不号召我们信奉任何教条，而是追求一种更高、更精致的生活。就我们听从这一苏格拉底式的召唤而言，尼采——这个本应成为反苏格拉底的人——实际上也是苏格拉底传统的一部分。他既是苏格拉底又是反苏格拉底，这一事实是一个完美的尼采式矛盾修辞。