How Would You Compare And Contrast Lucretius And Nietzsche's
964 Words4 Pages
In this essay I will compare and contrast Lucretius’, Spinoza’s, and Nietzsche’s forms of their philosophical positions on “naturalism”. I will then briefly discuss the differences between these versions of naturalism and how each of these thinkers tries to establish their own naturalistic view. The difficulties facing naturalism, or the counterarguments that can be put against their arguments, and how they might respond to these counterarguments. Lucretius’ main goal was to provide a systematic comprehensive naturalistic explanation of terrestrial and celestial phenomena. These phenomena included all phenomena in terms of matter and void and unguided motions on infinite space. He disregards and dismisses non-natural or supernatural agents, as well as, teleology. Lucretius’ believes that they have nothing to do with the material world, which is what we should give attention and energy to. He primarily argues that the world was not created by some higher ultimate power, with some preempted purpose in mind. Instead, it was a completely natural occurrence, which resulted from a random, spontaneous occurrence. Lucretius’ argument is…show more content… Since he believes that one should adopt several approaches to one argument it makes it difficult to pin even his specific point of view on the subject. He does, however, believe that everyone is, undeniably driven by personal interest. Nietzsche also believes that there are different moral codes that apply to different sets of people. This argument is potentially the most refutable, as it several arguments can be places against it. For example, why do different moral codes have to exist for different groups? Why would the same thing not apply to the president and it would apply to a high school student. Everything that occurs in the world is either right or wrong, so would this not mean that the same moral code applies to everyone high and