摘要
在对尼采在学术思想史上的定位,对尼采著作的解读和对尼采思想遗产的评价等方面,周国平、刘小枫各自有不同的说法。二人对尼采在学术思想史上地位的界定大相径庭。刘小枫认为尼采超过了马克思、弗洛依德。周国平则具体地“把尼采当作一位人生哲学家看待”。从研究方法也有根本的不同。周国平从多角度进行研究,刘小枫主要是索隐的方法。对尼采思想遗产的评价二人的立场也大不相同。周国平重实际,合理评价尼采。刘小枫则像尼采那样“说谎”,并且赞赏尼采的贵族主义、等级秩序和对平等主义的反对。
ZHOU Guo-ping and LIU Xiao-feng are quite different in the following aspects such as historic orientation of Nietzche, interpretation of Nietzche＇s works and evaluation of Nietzche＇s legacy. Firstly, LIU argues that Nietzche exceeded Marx and Freudian while ZHOU only regards him as a life philosopher. Secondly, in the researching method, Zhou applies various methods while LIU uses reference method. Finally, on the evaluation of legacy, ZHOU emphasizes on practice to assess rationally while LIU appreciates Nietzche on his social civil order and opposition to egalitarianism.
出处
《湖北经济学院学报》
2006年第2期103-108,共6页
Journal of Hubei University of Economics
关键词
尼采
阐释
索隐
周国平
刘小枫
Nietzche
interpretation
reference method
ZHOU Guo-ping
LIU Xiao-feng
