Sie sind auf Seite 1von 4

Zhang 1

Alan Zhang 10/13/2013 Rion Roberts: On Truth, Power, and Love A Push and A Pull: Dancing with Nietzsches Call and Response Nietzsche employs the forces of call and response to establish a strong command over the readers progressions of thought. He performs this with the use of anthypophora, a technique in which the author asks a question and immediately answers it. When Nietzsche poses the question, he provokes the reader into thought in a free and unrestrained manner. It creates a pulling force that intrigues the reader to continue down Nietzsches path of thought. Immediately after posing the question and this exerting this force of pulling, Nietzsche lays down a statement that answers the question, forcing the reader to try and qualify the statement with his/her own experiences in order to accept the statement and understand the logical process that led from the question to the answer. The necessity of qualification implemented by the statement creates a force of pushing on the reader pushing him/her to see things in the same light as Nietzsche. Through his use of anthypophora, the contrast of question and answer, Nietzsches argument not only becomes more compelling, but also skillfully manipulative of the reader, so that he/she may perceive the world of metaphor and petrified concepts that Nietzsche is convinced we are enveloped in. When presenting his idea of the world of metaphor and language, he first questions the reader, And moreover, what about these conventions of language? Are they really products of knowledge, of the sense of truth? Do the designations and the things coincide? Is language the adequate expression of all realities (114)? Upon asking the final question, the reader is inclined to give an answer in his head, which coincides with the answer Nietzsche wants the reader to conclude. He is pulling the reader towards the heart of his argument, and then proceeds to

Zhang 2

present them with the statement, Only through forgetfulness can man ever achieve the illusion of possessing a truth in the sense just designated (114). At first, the statement seems paradoxical, since it is confusing how man must forget, not remember, in order to possess an illusion of truth. In the pairing of this statement with the previous questions that Nietzsche posed, the reader can assume that man must forget the conventions of language in order to attain the illusion of petrified truth. After coming to this conclusion, the reader is then predisposed to try and qualify the statement in order to attest to its truthfulness and validity. In reflecting on the truth of this statement, the reader travels back and ponders the roots of human language, which, he/she will realize stemmed from humans themselves, illuminating Nietzsches ideas about our language being an illusion of truth. In a sense, Nietzsche is presenting a starting point, the question/call, and an ending point, the statement/response. Through the juxtaposition of a beginning and an end, he manipulates the reader to follow his path of logic in between. Following that pairing of question and answer, the use of anthypophora to dispel the illusion of petrified truths created by language, he then goes on to ask the sequential logical question, In view of this, whence in all the world comes the urge for truth (113)?. In asking this question, the pulling force of Nietzsches argument becomes doubly effective due to the dismissal of the illusion of metaphor and language as truth. Because he has already argued previously about the world of metaphor being an illusion of truth, the placement of this question following his argument against petrified concepts emphasizes Nietzsches interest in the driving force to seek truth, not its existence, furthering the readers interest and pulling him/her down the path of his trail of thought. Nietzsche responds, But because man, out of need and boredom, wants to exist socially, herd-fashion, he requires a peace pact and he endeavors to banish at least the very crudest bellum omni contra omnes [war of all against all] from his world (113).

Zhang 3

Following this stress on the importance of the driving force behind truth, Nietzsche then explains this drive through the human instinct to live together socially. In the readers analysis of this statement, although Nietzsche does not explicitly state it, he sets the reader up to look to the function of language and how it satisfies our feelings of loneliness and desire, ultimately coming to the conclusion that we create these truths and petrified concepts for survival and satisfaction of our need to exist socially. Once again, because Nietzsche juxtaposes the question and the response the starting point and the ending point he leaves the reader no choice but to follow his path of argument, thus making his arguments about the illusion of our world of metaphors more convincing. Aside from the rhetorical forces imposed by Nietzsches use of anthypophora, this technique also creates a rhythm to Nietzsches argument that leaves no room for the reader to get lost. When Nietzsche presents the next step in his logical sequence of thought, he introduces it with a question. In supplementing the idea of no leaf ever wholly equaling another, he poses the question, Why did he act so honestly today (114)?, which he immediately responds with Honesty! That is to say again: the leaf is the cause of the leaves. There is a natural feeling to the interjection of this question in the middle of his explanation of how the concept created by a word is not equal to the essence of the object, similar to the rhythm of a swimmer who comes to the surface of the water to take a breath. It is unnatural for someone to swim without breathing. In parallel, it is unnatural for someone to present an argument without engaging the reader by giving him/her room to breathe. If Nietzsche did not pose the questions, his argument would weaken considerably and possibly lose the reader in his attempt to demonstrate the flaws of the world of metaphor in which we believe so sincerely to be truth. Through the use of anthypophora, Nietzsche leads the reader to step in accordance to the rhythm of his argument.

Zhang 4

It is clever for Nietzsche to present his argument through the contrast of call and response. Because his ideas are radical, if he did not manipulate the reader with this push and pull of call and response, the reader would be more skeptical of his ideas, and his argument would be less compelling and persuasive. In fact, Nietzsche is being almost satirical with his employment of anthypophora. The statements he presents as answers to his questions are subjective truths that require qualification. Similarly, in his argument, he states that there are only contextual truths, petrified concepts based on human subjectivity, created by society over time. In other words, the responses he gives are examples of these contextual truths that we create using language. To use the rhetoric of anthypophora as a strategy to argue that there are only contextual truths in our world of human subjectivity is somewhat clever, if not ironic. Nietzsches choreography of the dance between questions and answers is a clever and compelling way to push and pull the reader to the ebb and flow of his argument.