The thoughts of Zhuangzi and Nietzsche (a comparison between Zhuangzi and friedrich nietzsche) say that what is the value of life, the ideal of liberation and whether life is possible have always made people manic and depressed. Nietzsche and Zhuangzi became the most important nourishment for China people to think about these problems in the process of modernization. But I am not satisfied with reading Zhuangzi according to the traditional understanding, because the China tradition always reads Zhuang with an enlightening and selective attitude, instead of really accepting Zhuangzi's philosophy as the ultimate goal of life. As for Nietzsche, I am not satisfied with the explanations given by most modern scholars in China, because Nietzsche's real concern is not the same as that of China people in the process of modernization, and what he said cannot be simply confined to China's national conditions. People in China often accept Nietzsche with their own foresight and traditional prejudice. When they saw two lonely geniuses, they quickly confused Zhuangzi's thoughts with Nietzsche's. Zhuangzi and Nietzsche have similarities, but they are completely different in essence. This makes me curious. Why do essentially different ideas give China similar feelings? I'm afraid the answer can only be found by studying the thoughts of Nietzsche and Zhuangzi. The direction of human modernization in China's modernization may become clearer in this study. Nietzsche said, "The worst readers are like soldiers who plunder people's property: they take what they can, spoil it, disturb the rest and desecrate the whole." "It teaches us to read, that is, slowly, deeply, looking forward and backward, thoughtfully, opening the open door and reading with slender fingers and eyes." I hope we can compare Nietzsche and Zhuangzi from the overall logic, instead of tearing down the seven treasures and comparing them with fragments of thoughts. Lin Tongji believes that "Nietzsche, like Zhuangzi Plato, is a first-class genius." So it may be a little presumptuous for me to try to compare Nietzsche and Zhuangzi in overall logic. However, "knowing what you can't do is not an academic attitude." Please read this article, teachers and students can tolerate my "lies" with a "lie" attitude. I. Significance of comparison I agree with Liu Xiaofeng's "Latitude Language", from 1837 to 1995, which is vertical in time, but for Liu Xiaofeng personally, it is a horizontal vision. (1) Although Zhuangzi and Nietzsche are far apart in time and space for me, because I am a contemporary of China, they are deeply impressed and feel similar here, and often appear like twin brothers. I thought it was the boss talking to me, but later I found it was the second child. It should be said that in the process of modernization, people in China may have this similar feeling, but it is especially obvious among literati, because they are close to the water. Liang Qichao, Wang Guowei, Chen Duxiu, Lu Xun, Chen Quan, Feng Zhi and Zhu Guangqian. . . The list of modern and contemporary music, music, music, music and music can be longer, but outside the list, you will find more unknown thinkers who, like them, put Nietzsche and Zhuangzi at the same time in the position of spiritual fathers and devoted almost the same love and awe to them. What is the reason why two thinkers so far apart give students in this country a very similar feeling? There are two reasons: first, people who know twins, if I were the mother of twins, I would certainly be able to tell others many subtle but crucial differences between them. If I can be as familiar with Nietzsche and Zhuangzi's thoughts as I am with their mothers, I certainly won't confuse them. On the receiver side, the euphoria and decadence experienced by China people in the process of modernization gave the opportunity for "Nietzsche's use" and "Zhuangzi's use" to exert their strength at the same time, subverting traditional morality, introducing aesthetic spirit into life, and pursuing personality beyond the secular world-Nietzsche and Zhuangzi seem to be the twin cylinders of the engine for China people to advance on the road of modernization. Another reason is that the twins look a little alike in appearance, even in temperament and tone. Nietzsche and Zhuangzi both like to use metaphors and fables in the way of telling stories. They both like to use symbols to describe the truth that is logical and unspeakable. They both like to reveal the wholeness and authenticity that the truth points to by covering up the narrowness and falsehood of what is in front of them. Then, the temperament of Nietzsche and Zhuangzi is lonely in people's eyes, and their spirits are far away from people. Nietzsche and Zhuangzi made many scholars in China fall in love with them at the same time, thinking that they are interlinked, but in fact, this feeling is largely due to the illusion of ignorance. Reading Zhuangzi and Nietzsche is totally different. The former makes people meditate and calm, while the latter makes people meditate and throb. Isn't that strange? If there are so many similarities between the two, and not only the way of argument, spiritual temperament and even reading conclusion are similar, why does the reading experience give people such a big difference? Thought of here and returned to the bifurcation point just now. One question is, what are China people who accept Nietzsche and Zhuangzi? Because the mentality and experience of the recipient can directly castrate the thoughts trapped in words and words. We take this passage of Nietzsche as a neutral point of view: "However, no matter how deliberately vague a philosopher should be (people are used to accusing Heraclitus in this way), it is totally unreasonable if he has no reason to hide his thoughts or is not stubborn enough to cover up his lack of thoughts with words." . . . . Jean paul has a good warning: Generally speaking, if all great things-things that are meaningful to a few minds-are simply expressed and (therefore) obscure, so that an empty mind would rather interpret them as nonsense than translate them into its own shallow thoughts, then that's right. Because the layman's mind has an abominable ability, that is, in the deepest and richest aphorisms, nothing can be seen except his daily common views. "(Greek philosophy in tragic times) Don't think about arguing with Nietzsche about whether laity is as bad as he said. Nietzsche's words and the research results of reception aesthetics can prove what I just said: the subject of reception is likely to regard dissimilar things as similar. Scholars in China, for example, have a strange question: We think Zhuangzi is similar to Nietzsche. Why do westerners like to study Confucius and Nietzsche together? Before discussing the following, I'll make a decision. In fact, Confucius' theory is closer to Nietzsche than Zhuangzi's. Because this article does not discuss the subject. Therefore, I can only say, for example, the previous academic research on Nietzsche and Zhuangzi in China was like a girl who fell in love with her twin brother. Before getting to know them, she felt as happy as marrying anyone. For example, Mr. Chen Guying likes to compare Nietzsche's philosophy with Zhuangzi's, but when I read Mr. Chen Guying's monograph Nietzsche, the Tragic Philosopher, I really have an unspeakable feeling. Even such a great scholar is openly misreading Nietzsche, and it is completely unconscious misreading! (2) No matter how rigorous his textual research is and how rich his thoughts are, his understanding of Nietzsche is only very shallow. He compared Zhuangzi and Nietzsche in the aspects of "romantic style", "allegorical expression" and "requirements for individual liberation". These comparisons are just his own casual feelings. How significant can they be for grasping Nietzsche and Zhuangzi's philosophy itself? Although Mr. Zhang Shiying's comparison between Nietzsche and Laozi and Zhuangzi should be compared from the overall idea, he still made a big mistake. No matter how philosophy changes, the biggest feature of philosophy is its cognitive system. If we abandon their system when we know two homes and grasp simple feelings and experiences, it is actually a blind man touching an elephant, or we simply deny the inherent logic of philosophy. Mr. Zhang Shiying compares Nietzsche's egoism with Laozi's emphasis on body, Nietzsche's ignorance with Laozi's abandonment of wisdom, Nietzsche's drunkenness with Laozi's Tao, Laozi's metaphysical thoughts, forgetfulness and Nietzsche's farsightedness. (3) This messy, axiology, epistemology, ontology and methodology are all put together in a mess, and then two are randomly selected for comparison, just like the welfare lottery. Therefore, my article does not solve the first problem that just diverged, that is, why China researchers treat Nietzsche and Zhuangzi like this. This issue involves the history of modern thought, communication, thought, the influence of nationality and traditional culture on China people and so on. I cann't do it for the time being What I solve in this article is the second problem: I try to see how Nietzsche and Zhuangzi think about different objects in different ways from the internal logic of their thoughts, but my conclusion is similar. This makes us not trust our feelings easily, which helps us to know Nietzsche and Zhuangzi more clearly, and also helps us to know ourselves more clearly. Second, the comparison between the focus of thinking and the object of conversation-Zhuangzi's focus of thinking and the object of conversation-Zhuangzi is chaotic. When I first read Zhuangzi, I was frightened by Wang Yang's wanton words. Later, I realized that people, gods and saints seemed to have no special dust, and avenues appeared so frequently in Zhuangzi. Therefore, not many people have read Zhuangzi and don't even know what Zhuangzi is saying. When I say "I don't know what Zhuangzi is talking about", I mean almost everyone who misreads Zhuangzi under Guo Xiang. The most contradictory thing about Zhuangzi is his attitude towards benevolence and righteousness. Zhuangzi's attitude towards the whole world has been fully revealed in the opening "Wandering around" and "On Everything". "Happy Travel" should actually be a self-defense article, talking about the difference between the realm and the level of understanding; On the other hand, Wuqi Lun made his understanding level very clear. What he understands is "Yuan Dian" and "primitive", so he will say that "the world is not bigger than the end of autumn, and Mount Tai is smaller; Mo Shou died and Peng Zu died. " "People's wet sleep will lead to partial death of lumbar disease, but what about loach? . . . . . . Self-concept, the end of righteousness, the way of right and wrong, the chaos of food, can you know the debate of evil? " (Zhuangzi's theory of the homology of all things) He even canceled the time and space in the ordinary sense of the world, and even canceled the difference between people and animals. How can he care about the social consciousness form of "benevolence and righteousness"? Some people may say that Zhuangzi made a logical mistake, confusing people's "right place", "right taste" and "right color" with the animal kingdom, which is exactly Zhuangzi's logic: in terms of origin, there is no difference in value between people and animals. Comparatively speaking, the original value is higher than other values, and the re-established value of non-original things is particularly suspicious-"a gentleman of man is a villain of heaven." (Master Zhuangzi) Since benevolence and righteousness are not worth mentioning at all in Zhuangzi's logic, there is no reason for Zhuangzi to say anything after "Happy Journey" and "On Wuqi", and there is no reason to attack the small life criterion of "benevolence and righteousness" with great efforts-what did he want to express when he wrote "Master", "DeChongFu" and "A Man's Life"? People who have been frightened by Zhuangzi since ancient times, when they continue reading and don't understand, immediately recall the "swim" and "Tao" that stunned them at the beginning, so they pretend to suddenly realize: Ah, Zhuangzi is talking about heaven. He wants us to know about heaven and then transcend this world. He continued to write so many books and so on. In fact, since Lao Zi, Lao Zi and Lao Zi are all regarded as absolutely true descendants of Lao Zi, how can he not care about the focus of Lao Zi's attention at all? At the beginning of the Warring States Period, Lao Tzu also had a famous name, which was called "Jun Zhi Shu Nan". Reading through Laozi's 5,000 words, we can certainly apply the truth to business, war, literature and art, etc. But this is exactly what the readers are inspired by. I don't intend to inspire everyone. He appeared as the teacher of the emperor. At that time, civilians were not qualified for education. What I said was for the nobles who wanted to rule the world. What inspired those civilians later was not his focus. It is precisely because the primitive and chaotic society died out, the world came into being, and the arduous problem of governing the world was in front of us, so a hundred schools of thought contended. Please read "The World": "The world is in chaos, the sages are unknown, and the morality is different. There are many ways to take care of yourself. For example, the eyes, ears, nose and mouth are clear and cannot communicate with each other. There are hundreds of skills, all of which have their own strengths and are useful from time to time. Although, it should not be repeated, people who sing a song are also. Judge the beauty of heaven and earth, analyze the principle of everything, and examine the whole of the ancients. Scarcity can prepare for the beauty of heaven and earth, which is called the ability of the gods. Therefore, the way of inner saints and outer kings is dark and unknown, gray and not fat. People in the world do whatever they want. Sad husband! A hundred schools of thought contend, not to give way! Scholars of later generations, unfortunately, can't see the purity of heaven and earth, and can't see the vastness of the ancients. Taoism will crack for the world. " The problem here is obvious. The difference between philosophers does not lie in the difference of life concept, and the focus of later generations is not the focus at that time. At that time, the focus of studying Tao, Fa, Li and Yi was "the world" rather than "people", and their differences were the way to govern the country. The analysis of the essence of "man" stems from the emergence of the "world" problem. Solving the problem of "people" is not for "people" but for "the world". In Zhuangzi, the word "Tao" appears 372 times, "Tianxia" appears 278 times, "Emperor" and "King" appear 248 times, "You" appears12 times, "Saint" appears 108 times, and "Knowing People" only appears. Statistics can't prove my truth, but they can prove my conclusion. Without the consistency of thinking purpose, Laozi and Zhuangzi can never be regarded as a school, otherwise it is absolutely impossible to achieve theoretical consistency just because the thinking path and cognitive style are similar. Lao Zi and Zhuangzi are not talking to ordinary people. Ordinary people and kings have different emphases, although they are the same in class. Ordinary people are most concerned about "fate" and the survival, development and death of people who come with this focus, while kings should be most concerned about and concerned about not their own survival and development, but the survival and development of the world. This determines that what philosophers such as Laozi, Zhuangzi, Confucius and Mencius discussed revolved around the focus of "the world", rather than the "life" that later generations and current scholars cared about. Therefore, if we completely copy the philosophy of various philosophers to practice life, we will actually use the engine of the space shuttle to push the donkey-eating too much will not work. Laozi is talking about "the art of monarch going south". Of course, he wants to build a pattern diagram containing the operation of "world"-"Tao", and then face the problem of "world" by relying on this understanding of "Tao". What is Zhuangzi saying? He inherited Laozi's way and continued to guide the king to solve the problem of "the world" with a correct attitude and method. At the same time, he taught the king how to treat himself when he took the "world" as his responsibility. Although the focus of Zhuangzi's discussion is the attitude that the king should have, the focus of his discussion is how the king treats the "world". Only in this sense, Zhuangzi will cancel the distinction between things and me and be born in death: "Self-observation, the end of benevolence and righteousness, smearing right and wrong, when confused, my evil can be argued!" Nie Que said, "If the son is not interested, then people really don't know what is interested?" I hope you say, "It's amazing! Osawa burns but not hot, rivers are cold but not cold, thunder breaks mountains and rivers, and the wind vibrates the sea without being surprised. If so, take the cloud to drive the moon and travel four overseas, life and death will not change to yourself, but the end of the world! " ("The Theory of Everything") "Life and death, life is also; This is an ordinary night and a day. People are different, and everything has feelings. Peter takes heaven as his father, but he still loves heaven. The situation is remarkable! People think that having a monarch is more important to them, but they still die. This is really the case! When the spring is dry, the fish is on land, and the fish is wet (xu 1), so it is better to forget each other in the rivers and lakes. It is better to forget Yao than to be outstanding "("The Great Master "). You see, Zhuangzi always goes back to Yao's reputation and outstanding figures, and Zhuangzi's works are basically like this. As some people who have never been in contact with Laozi and Zhuangzi said, since you don't care about anything, why do you want to talk about it? In fact, they hit the nail on the head: if Zhuangzi is really so detached, he should not leave words on earth. People who pretend to read Lao Zi and Zhuang Zi explain: Ah, that's their kindness. Because you are stupid, you still have to speak a little. Actually, pretending not to know is more harmful than not knowing. With the Warring States period, there were fewer and fewer emperors, and few people could really look at the problem from the logic of Laozi and Zhuangzi. Heaven and earth are cruel to everything. If Laozi really transcends and follows his own logic, human kindness should not be the purpose of his writing at all. In his theory, everything has the same value and comes from Tao, which is impossible. Why should he betray himself by talking? The reason why Laozi and Zhuangzi talk is because of "the world", and in their logic, if the king has a heart of likes and dislikes, a heart of right and wrong, and so on, "foresight" will inevitably affect the governance of "the world". The judgment of "Yao" and "Jie" is the moral judgment of the lower class, and as an emperor who wants to govern the world, he must do his own thing well on the secular level and reach the realm of "Tao is one". If you are interested in studying the ancient history of China and seeing how Wanli conformed to moral judgment, but made repeated mistakes in national policy, you can understand the profound meaning of Lao Zi and Zhuang Zi. ⑤ Zhuangzi's attack on benevolence and righteousness, Zhuangzi's indifference to life and death, Zhuangzi's "wandering", "pure white simplicity" and "forgetting me", Zhuangzi's "keeping in good health" thought, Zhuangzi's "transcendence" to the secular world and the faint darkness in Confucianism and Taoism can all be found in the word "world". If we insist that Zhuangzi's philosophy is a philosophy of life, then he was not built for ordinary people. Like Laozi, he constructed a special philosophy of life for a special individual who was born unable to take care of himself-a person who had to suppress his existence and seek social stability.
Second, Nietzsche's thinking focus and conversation object. Next, let's look at Nietzsche's key points. At the beginning, I said it in the chapter "The Meaning of Comparison". Nietzsche and Zhuangzi both feel lonely, and their spirit is far higher than that of the people. Zhuangzi began to think when chaos was broken and the world was in chaos. Nietzsche's thinking environment is similar to that of Zhuangzi-God is dead and people are awake, so they give people the same feeling, but the focus of thinking is completely different. The focus of Nietzsche's thinking is the meaning of human life. After being relayed by Heidegger, the sentence "God is dead" seems to be the most powerful sledgehammer in Nietzsche's ideological arsenal. But when Nietzsche said this sentence, he took it as a fact and said it in vernacular. It is easier to understand that "God is dead" is neither the beginning nor the end of Nietzsche's thought, nor even the midpoint. "God is dead" is a fact in Nietzsche's view, which is the premise for him to start thinking, not the conclusion of his painstaking research. Nietzsche said that "God is dead" is not to oppose Christian morality, but because he deeply understands the paradox of "accidental existence". He wants to find a meaning for life that does not actually exist when life loses its absolute background. So he converted to the ancient Greek philosopher and sought truth first. In his notes in the 1970s, he said: "People are not born to know; Sincerity (and metaphor) produces love for truth "(Tian: translated Philosophy and Truth: Selected Works of Nietzsche 1872- 1876). Shanghai Social Sciences Publishing House,1June 1995) "Another feeling of truth is the feeling of self-love: proof of strength" (ibid., p. 42). Nietzsche wrote: "What is the relationship between truth and man? If you don't believe that you have the truth, you can't have the purest and noblest life. People need to believe the truth ... intellectual impulse has a moral origin "(ibid., p. 52). But in another place, Nietzsche wrote: "How much truth can a talented scholar reveal and how much truth can he accommodate?" This contradiction proves Nietzsche's great determination to pursue truth all his life. For a philosopher on the sidelines, positive language is a deception to himself, and unknown choices may always jump out when he thinks more. As Nietzsche said: "All the pursuit of epiphany, in terms of its essence, seems to be never satisfied and unsatisfied." So, he said, "When our value is interpreted as something, does it have the meaning of freedom?" (Will to Power) This actually requires a lot of strength and courage, and it must be frank and dignified. Rolling in the mire of reality, how many people can know that they are in the mire, even if they are stained with dirt, they will not lose their dignity as proud as emperors and grow their own white stems in the mire? Some sages who think their spirit is already in the clouds of Qionglou Yuyu actually turn a blind eye to reality and dismember their "existence" and "present". Therefore, "Nietzsche's positive affirmation of life is clear. Teach people to be loyal to the land where we live; . . . . . . People often say that he yearns for a distant place or another land, which is translated as "distant love" in this translation. That distant place or another piece of land is still in this world, and there is no other world created by the heart. " Nietzsche does not expect all people to understand this truth. He didn't even put his hopes on the people. Seeking and practicing the value given by yourself requires not only reason, but also "strong will", because you know it is meaningless. "Human nature, too human nature", Nietzsche was tired of the hypocritical philosophy of spiritual separation, including from Plato to Christianity, and shouted: "Man must transcend!" The most difficult thing for Superman to do is to face the real human nature composed of body and reason, and then lead it to real strength and harmony, "joining the WTO" and "surpassing people". Nietzsche's superman model is actually born out of the nobles in ancient Greece and the philosophers before Socrates who understood Raphael's prophecy. "They are full of strength, so they must be full of enthusiasm. Similarly, they know that action is inseparable from happiness, and they regard positive action as a necessary part of happiness. . . . . . Noble people are full of confidence and frankness in life (Noble Descent emphasizes "sincerity" and perhaps "innocence"). . . . . . Noble people only enjoy intelligence as an elegant and exquisite carrion:-Even in this respect, intelligence, as a perfect functional guarantee, is no longer so important compared with unconscious adjustment instinct. Even compared with a certain kind of stupidity, compared with a braver brute force, even brute force will bring disasters and make enemies, and crazy emotions such as anger, love, awe, gratitude and revenge that need to be re-recognized for noble souls of past dynasties. When a noble person feels resentment, it will explode and be consumed in an instant reaction, so it will not be toxic; in addition, on many occasions, noble people will not feel resentment at all, and all weak and incompetent people will feel resentment without exception. The sign of a person with a strong and perfect nature is that they will never take their enemies, misfortunes and mistakes seriously, because they are rich in shaping, repairing, healing and forgetting (there is a good example in the modern world, he is Milla Bao, he can't remember any insults and injuries from others, and he can't forgive others just because he forgot everything. This kind of person jerked off a lot of parasites, but these parasites went deep into other people's skin; Only in this case will there be so-called "self-loving enemies" on earth. (The Theory of Moral Genealogy, section 10) Such a person is the prototype of Superman. If he wasn't facing such an object, Zarathustra would hesitate to speak like a snake. The focus of Nietzsche's philosophy is not to think about the ultimate truth, but to understand the true human nature. Therefore, you will find that what he keeps trying to tell you is that human nature is not what Christianity describes, let alone what Christian morality requires you to do. In the past, their understanding of human nature was wrong, so the balance mechanism they established actually pushed you to decadence, weakness and depravity. In Nietzsche's view, not only Christianity (only because of the universality of Christian morality, Nietzsche took it as a big target), but most of the previous philosophies were anti-natural. They alienate themselves from reality, and then go back to teach people how to be a man. In fact, they completely distort human nature and lead people astray. To transcend this tradition, this phenomenon and this world full of evil and cruelty, we must have a strong life instinct. The reason why the focus of thinking and the object of conversation are compared first is because these directly determine the starting point of an idea logic generation and the path of thinking system derivation. If we don't consider these, talking directly about the original intention of thinkers is actually to impose our wishes on thinkers, especially geniuses like Nietzsche and Zhuangzi. Their language art shines brightly in the eyes of readers, and they discuss brand-new things different from traditional concepts, which are easily misunderstood and taken out of context. The most serious misunderstanding of Nietzsche in the past was that his philosophy was the source of Nazi philosophy. Literally, he said this in "The Genealogy of Morality", which really seems to be the driving force for Jews to suffer: "On earth, all actions against" nobles ","powerful people ","masters "and" powerful people "cannot be compared with what Jews did in this regard: Jews, the clergy, know that they only need to be completely rebuilt. This is just right for the clergy, who have the deepest religious revenge. It is the Jews who dare to persistently reverse noble values (kindness = nobility = strength = beauty = happiness = God's favor), bite the bullet and be filled with unfathomable hatred (incompetent hatred), and declare that "only those who suffer are good people, only those who are poor, incompetent and humble are good people, and only those who are tortured, poor, sick and ugly are the only kindness and piety. "-On the contrary, you permanent vicious people, cruel people, greedy people, dissatisfied people and unbelievers will also suffer permanent misfortune, curse and be sentenced to hell!" ..... We know who inherited the Jewish reappraisal of value. When I think of this terrible initiative, the most fundamental challenge of all the war challenges put forward by the Jews, I think of what I said on another occasion (The Other Side of Good and Evil, page 1 18)-that is, the Jews launched a moral slave uprising: this uprising has a history of two years, and we are confused about it today only because of it. The Jewish nation he despised is an ancient skeleton that is incompatible with the Greek nobility and has long since disappeared; Although Christianity theoretically comes from Judaism, it is not Jews who make the creativity of powerful people decadent, but the "conformity morality" advocated by Christianity. The Nazis took Nietzsche's philosophy as a banner and deliberately amplified Nietzsche's key points for their own use. The most misunderstood place of Zhuangzi is his thought of "valuing oneself" and "preserving the truth" and his spirit of "obeying others", which is the expression of his individualism. Even "not dying halfway" is Zhuangzi's concern for individual self, not individual social value, but the natural end of individual life. Then, according to the words "Because of the short shin, it is sad to continue, and it is sad to break", it is inferred that any external restraint or correction is harmful to the natural nature. Zhuangzi should abandon and peel off the hypocritical and pretentious social attributes imposed on individuals by ethical codes, advocate the autonomy and transcendence of individual life, and realize the denial and criticism of the existing order of alienation. All landowners, in fact, it is obvious that this is the focus of today's thinking, focusing on Zhuangzi's thinking and taking today's people as the object of Zhuangzi's talk. Judging from the above logic, Zhuangzi is a savage who is completely opposite to the real order, so it is meaningless for Zhuangzi to put human values above ordinary people. If he compares like that, he is contradicting himself. Nietzsche is talking about people who are more powerful than the people after the awakening of the Enlightenment. This division is a humanistic division. Zhuangzi's object is "Jun", and the choice of this object is a political division. Although people think they are far away, they don't all choose to go beyond and stay away from the people. In fact, Zhuangzi did not transcend, or his original intention was not to surpass, but to suppress and digest the already strong living condition of the "monarch". Nietzsche is a transcendent person, and he wants to make the usually meaningful "person" surpass the truly meaningful "person". Nietzsche's focus is on real human nature. Only by talking to powerful individuals can he oppose the existing morality and reason. He doesn't want the whole society to abolish morality and reason. Zhuangzi's focus is on the world, and he talks to you. " Let nature take its course, no selfish considerations are allowed, but the world is governed. "This will make the king forget that on the one hand, he is pure and simple, respects himself, keeps the truth, and makes his life like this. There is no need for everyone to take the medicine according to the prescription. The object of Nietzsche's dialogue with Zhuangzi is not "people" in the ordinary sense, and the focus is not what ordinary people care about. Therefore, people who are not understood seem to have the temperament of "loneliness" and "loneliness". At the same time, they are all different from the mainstream, so it is easy to classify them into one category. Although readers of later generations can read loneliness from them, it is true that Nietzsche and Zhuangzi are both difficult to understand because of their profound thoughts, but Nietzsche's loneliness is due to mastering too many truths, and Zhuangzi's loneliness is due to focusing on too broad a field. So we can see that they are similar in temperament, but they pursue different behaviors.
This is only a part of it, er, specifically on the resource website.
I hope it can play a role in attracting jade. ...