I. Research project
By and large, Nietzsche's philosophy is considered to assign no significant meaning to happiness, or even to criticise the pursuit of it as anti-philosophical and Descartes is generally viewed as a thinker whose conception of human happiness is closely related to his metaphysics. In my research, I wish to discuss both these topoi: Nietzsche's supposed contempt for happiness and Descartes' alleged systematic view on happiness. What seems to be also widely accepted is that the idea of happiness in Descartes' thought is construed around the existence of God, while in Nietzsche's case, happiness is intrinsically linked to the Death of God. I argue that both these common views ought to be revised and that the following questions are worth being raised: 1) how Nietzsche understands and elaborates the idea of happiness in the context of his thesis of the Death of God. (Part 1 of the project) 2) the reasons for the puzzling prominence of the (traditionally metaphysical/theological) idea of contemplation in Nietzsche's “atheist” philosophy as well as its close connection with happiness therein. (Part Two). 3) Why both Nietzsche and the question of happiness have moved back into the centre of interest in continental philosophy through the past decades: why happiness, conceived not as a definite and ultimate goal, but as a practice in relation to the formation and transformation of the self, has become central to contemporary continental philosophy. This way of conceiving happiness bears significant similarities not only to Nietzsche's thought, but also to Descartes' late ethical works (Part Three). An interesting question will be whether Modernity's incomplete, inconsistent understanding of Nietzsche's conception of the Death of God is not also connected with the extreme difficulty to come to terms with the idea that happiness is not a state supposed to correct the misery of life, nor something which we desire, nor a right which we think we are entitled to, but, to say it roughly, a spiritual activity and strength.
The thesis I would like to develop is on the one hand that Nietzsche's account of the Death of God allows for a fundamental reflection on the preoccupation with happiness in contemporary philosophy. On the other hand, Descartes' contribution to the idea of happiness in contemporary philosophy is doubtlessly very useful, for he poses an important question to Nietzsche and to us, namely the relation between ethics and metaphysics as well as the relation between reason and the passions.
II. Why Descartes and Nietzsche?
In the history of modern philosophy, the relation between Nietzsche and Descartes has in general not been sufficiently explored, and in the best cases, interpretations have only highlighted their radical differences. Four main points can be brought forward to justify the pertinence of the comparison:
1 Descartes discredits the traditional Aristotelian method to found indubitable truths. Like the Descartes of the Discourse, Nietzsche establishes a new method to refute the superficiality and falseness of the previous philosophical accounts on truth and more precisely on morals.
2 The ideal of happiness in Descartes' thought is not homogeneous as it is generally stated. It undergoes significant changes and raises many questions e.g. on the relation between ethics and metaphysics, on the role of God in natural beatitude. Happiness is not for him the epiphenomenon of his metaphysics, but its ultimate aim. One can also trace back from the very first published work (Discourse on Method) that Descartes' ultimate goal is not so clear and evident: is it the « morale parfaite », or the « béatitude surnaturelle », or the ideal of generosity? Two important points must be raised in connection with the Nietzschean view. First, Descartes construes happiness neither as dependant upon others' (utilitarianism) nor opposed to universal moral duties (Kantian deontologism). Second, the characteristics of these above mentioned different morals of Descartes might indicate the notion of plurality of perspectives.
3 When Descartes speaks of human happiness (beatitudo), he does not refer to the res cogitans, but to what he calls the « veri homines », that is the union of body and mind (or soul). Descartes goes far beyond or beneath the Cogito, and engages himself in a more problematic and far-reaching discussion when he considers the res extensa. This is the body or more precisely the movements of the body and their effects on the soul and vice versa that constitutes the core of Descartes' morals. Indeed, Descartes develops his morals with much less systematicity than his metaphysics, and his late writings on happiness - for instance in his fascinating correspondence with Elisabeth or his last work, The Passions of the Soul - are not only independent of, but in competition or contradiction with his metaphysics. So here too, the traditional opposition between the two thinkers ought to be revised.
4 Nietzsche and Descartes both think of happiness in terms of a by-product of the activity of the soul and also in terms of contemplation. What is of great interest seems to be that both thinkers underline the contemplative character of happiness in its highest meaning, the object of contemplation being though different. The idea of contemplation occupies a significant place in Nietzsche's “atheistic” philosophy. In Descartes' Méditations métaphysiques, the “contemplation de la majesté divine” (3rd Meditation) is as intrinsic to the existence of God as Lebensbejahung and Lebensfreude is for Nietzsche to the idea of the Death of God. Nietzsche asserts that happiness is less a state than an action of will. It is further less a desire for what could or should be but is not, than an affirmation of what is, or in Nietzsche's terms, Amor Fati. For Descartes, contemplation is an intellectual joy, an “adoration”, an affirmation of the divine perfection, and thus a self-affirmation. For Nietzsche, contemplation is the expression of gratefulness, thanksgiving towards existence yet bereft of any divine guarantee.
III. Descartes and Nietzsche in the contemporary debate
Descartes' ethical approach to happiness might not be as foreign to Nietzsche's ideal of self-knowledge and self-transformation as we think at first sight. Both thinkers raise questions which occupy the centre of the current debate and both bring challenging propositions. Descartes' account of the passions brings to the foreground that happiness concerns the whole of the human being, that is to say, that he does disregard, nor deny the body. Nietzsche's account of the Death of God not only informs his understanding of happiness, but also offers a fundamental framework for reflecting on the shift of interest in contemporary philosophy and for reconsidering the aesthetic and ethical dimensions of happiness.
The links between happiness and contemplation help put Nietzsche's thought into a post-theological perspective such that traditional theological concepts and questions still remain active for him even after the so-called Death of God. While Nietzsche continuously undermines and denies the belief in God as an ultimate and encompassing meaning of the world and as a fatal hindrance to understanding and experiencing happiness, he nevertheless does not give up the ideal of blessedness, nor the idea of faith, but reconfigures them in a constellation around the crucial yet complex idea of affirmation of Fatum.
List of publications and further information about dr. I. Wienand
