Scholars
I will now proceed with my comparison of this ascent of the lover with Nietzsche’s thought by describing negatively his perception of what a philosopher looks like. By philosopher, Nietzsche does not readily want to include scholars in academia. In his “Schopenhauer as Educator,” he labels scientific scholarship among the selfishness of the elite and the selfishness of the state as hindering the formation of a culture that aims to produce the geniuses of the higher types such as the philosopher, artist and saint.
In contrast to the pure philosopher, scholars are composed of mixed metals—hunters more concerned with the pursuit of truth rather than truth itself. Scholars contain the strong, hardened element of a philosopher: “a strong and constantly intensifying curiosity, a craving for intellectual adventure, the perpetually attractive power of the new and rare as opposed to the old and boring” (SE 204). The scholar possesses a drive to create and delights in the new, his curiosity compelling him in pursuing truth. In this sense, the scholar parallels the lover in his pursuit of achieving beauty. Both the scholar and the lover drive towards learning and understanding new things and new fields of knowledge.
However, the scholar’s essence is also alloyed with softer, baser elements. One such element is “a certain bent for blood sports, the hunter’s joy in tracking the crafty fox of thought” (204). The pursuit of truth becomes a sort of intellectual game rather than a striving for authenticity and truth itself. In opposition to the scholar, the lover’s pursuit of Beauty forms an integral aspect in the formation of his character and prepares him for his ultimate encounter with the Beautiful. While a fundamental and necessary aspect, the journey towards Beauty does not trump the encounter with it.
This softer aspect within the scholar is further weakened by a hunger for fame amongst his peers: “the battle becomes a pleasure, and the aim a personal victory, the battle for truth a pretext,” (204). The scholar shows more concern for being right and insuring others know of his rightness rather than show any real care for truth. In stark contrast, the lover does not place himself in front of his encounter such that his presence distracts his peers from perceiving beauty. Rather, he strives to direct his peers’ gaze towards the Beautiful rather than towards himself.
A final weakening element to the scholar’s nature that contrasts with the lover is a desire to focus his pursuit of truth solely on aspects palatable to his current time and to those currently in power:
“the scholar also contains a strong admixture of the impulse to discover certain truths, which comes from his servility to certain [people or groups in power] since he feels that he profits by bringing ‘truth’ to their side” (204).
The scholar focuses only on particular ‘truths’ or ideas soothing to his superiors and suitable for his own profit. Diotima labels such men who see beauty in single examples as servants: “being a slave, of course, he’s low and small-minded” (Sym 210D). In contrast, the lover understands that Beauty cannot be confined according to any one particular idea—especially ideas that are simply pleasing for means of simple profit and pleasing superiors.
Another difference between the scholar and the lover is their education. As educated by a state bent towards preserving and propagating its own ends, Nietzsche describes the education of the scholar as quick and one that advances the interests of the state. He is trained to be contemporary and current, to be caught up in the trappings of his current age. His education is swift and promises to equip him to make money: “a speedy education designed to make its recipient a money-maker as speedily as possible” (SE 200).
Meanwhile the lover instructed in the ways of love must begin his education while still young: “A lover who goes about this matter correctly must begin in his youth to devote himself to beautiful bodies” (Sym 210B). His education is a long and arduous process whose end is not money or fleeting bodily pleasures but an encounter with the unchanging nature of Beauty itself. Whereas the scholar is subjugated to the state of his present age, the lover moves beyond particular cultures and customs in order to encounter a timeless Beauty.
Perhaps the most key distinction between the lover and the scholar is birth and sterility. Throughout the course of his ascent the lover continually begets increasingly beautiful and good ideas and theories. Not only does the lover passively learn, observe and appreciate all fields of knowledge, he also gives birth and actively creates new ideas.
This creativity inherent in the lover is completely alien to the scholar. Scholars pride themselves on their objectivity—their ability to completely remove themselves form their own particular selves and situation and impartially state a given stance on any issue. However, Nietzsche observes, such impartiality renders them as simple tools rather than entities that create: “The objective man is indeed a mirror; he is accustomed to submit before whatever wants to be known” (BGE 207). In the process the scholar’s identity is crushed under the ponderous weight of his objectivity. This minimization of the scholar’s identity ultimately results in his sterility. He is excellent at stating any position yet he is incapable of formulating his own. Nietzsche equates these sterile scholars with old mains incapable of conception and giving birth: “like her he is not conversant with the two most valuable functions of man” (BGE 206). Rather, his mirror like nature renders him completely subjected to the whims of others and makes him easily subjugated to the mockery of stronger natures striving for power.
Paralleling the scholar’s sterility is his inaction. Rather than understand life through experience and action, the scholar possesses merely book knowledge: “Books are his comfort, that is, he listens to other men thinking and by so doing manages to amuse himself all day long” (SE 206). In contrast the lover’s ascent inherently entails that he experience beauty in order to truly encounter Beauty. Experience is inherent to the lover’s ascent. The lover spends time with beautiful bodies, souls, laws and all sorts of knowledge before encountering Beauty itself.
Finally, scholars possess an intense hatred for the natural while the lover’s aim is for the source of all nature itself. As sterile creatures, scholars stand in opposition towards nature, which continually produces, moulds and crafts all things. It follows that scholars therefore have no respect for nature but desire to but it to the rack of intense speculation and subjugation: “Scholars want to kill nature, to dissect it and understand it” (SE 208). Like an awkward, groping hound, the scholar abuses Truth instead of wooing it. In contrast, the lover wished to encounter nature, the source from which all things derive their beauty. The lover shows reverence in its pursuit of Beauty, wishing to bask in its presents rather than objectify and subdue it.
WP3
Aegis 