To completely understand the base instincts of the philosopher and give him the due credit for his competencies of the ideologies formed, it is crucial to eliminate any doubt that may arise regarding his views. These is no denying the fact that all men, categorically, are inclined towards the direction they are, with the help of an emotional push. The personal life and experiences of one greatly shape his world view. In classical literature of philosophy, these emotions are not completely disregarded. Rather it is important to understand and accept them as the part of the greater picture of the world. This is another way to say that philosophy is as much a reality of the world as the emotions humans feel. Pupil of modern philosophy may find this concept new and seemingly naive, as the rise in the concept of rigid rationalism has created such mindsets. Modern philosophy has unfortunately brought along this crisis of the concept of a rationalism such rigid that it disregards human emotions completely whenever they are weighed against intellect. This is often done in the proclaimed attempts to eliminate bias and derailing from logical reasoning. However this concept, more than often ends up with several plot-holes at his hand, as all intellect, at all levels, is innate with human emotion. From us is intellect after all, creation would not have been possible if it was the other way around.
Therefore, to critically analyse or to properly comprehend the concept presented by Nietzsche or any other philosopher, it is important to understand the history of the words being spoken. In this case, Nietzsche starts off by constructing a metaphor such that said “supposing that Truth is a woman”. This is a very interesting analogy used here, he continues by adding”what then?” to the aforementioned sentence. The entire nature of this analogy is in a very passive aggressive environment. Nietzsche completes painting the picture by explaining that the use of this metaphor is to explain the relationship of how philosophers approach truth and he does that by putting it side by side to as how men approach women. He continues, “Is there not ground for suspecting that all philosophers, in so far as they have been dogmatists, have failed to understand women—that the terrible seriousness and clumsy importunity with which they have usually paid their addresses to Truth, have been unskilled and unseemly methods for winning a woman?”. Initially Nietzsche lays the foundation that the method in which philosophers have approached the truth since forever is wrong, as he says that they don’t understand women. He further states that they lack the skills to get the work done. The situation however complicates further with him stating that these are “unseemly methods for winning a woman” At this point it can be said that it is unclear whether or not he thinks that the problem is with the methods that these men use to win women, or completely with the fact that they are trying to win her. Even though the context preceding is in the support of the earlier, as he states that they have failed to understand women and lack seriousness towards her. However it is immediately followed by stating that “Certainly she has never allowed herself to be won” this creates a turmoil and raises the initial question back as to whether he thinks that the problem is with the methods that these men use to win women, or completely with the fact that they are trying to win her, or perhaps both. This remains unaddressed.
The initial problem however also remains standing still. Nietzsche has clearly criticised that the way that men use to approach to truth as dogmatic. This is to say that their concept of truth, or as of this point since truth has not been defined nor revealed its true form hence the philosopher can only make an assumption as to what truth would be. So whatever form of truth the philosopher is in contact with, he approached it with a dogmatic and rigid way. So one context can explain that this is the result of these inappropriate ways that the truth or the women has never let herself be won, because the methods of the attempt to win her were wrong in the first place. This however call for the animation of truth and the universe, but since even philosophers of abstract realities base their concept into some degree of realism hence to animate truth and morality in any way is to actually paint the picture of an alive universe, or perhaps of a greater a power, a God. But this entire concept is left out and almost never discussed by Nietzsche. This is not only due to the fact that the truth in this example shows a property or reaction of some sort. But more importantly this is a call for the concept of the absolute truth. When it is established that all men are approaching women in the wrong way, and she is supposedly also showing a reaction, this must mean that the women is an absolute entity. This in-itself is grounds for annihilation of the concept of perspectivism. If there is an entity that every man has approached inappropriately, and thus their perception and concepts about that entity are different, but by stating the very fact that every man has approached this entity, whether or not appropriately, or whether or not they have seen its true form but that all have approached it and have come in contact with some form of it. Now these forms might be conflicting to other versions of stories told by other men who approached this entity. But in either case, an absolute true form of that entity does exist. In other words, for a women to be approached by men, the women first must exist as an absolute entity. Just because every man received a separate answer, does not mean that no absolute entity of that women does not exist. Whether or not has anyone ever seen its true form is a completely different debate. At most it can call to need the concept of an unachievable absolute of that entity. But it very strongly establishes the fact that there is a form and existence of that entity.
Most critiques have written that Nietzsche was a “philosopher of metaphors” and he used extensive metaphors to explain different scenarios, therefore women being used as a metaphor for the truth does not call for the need to animate truth because it is entirely just a metaphor and all properties of the examples used within the metaphor do not necessarily have to reflect the reality. Even though this is semantically correct however the metaphor was not used just to define the method used by men to win women, it was also used to explain the properties and reaction of the women and only then was the scenario complete. By stating that men have showed incompetency would not have allowed Nietzsche to completely demonstrate the flaws in the base of the traditional concepts of truth. By stating that the approach is flawed Nietzsche has himself made a call for the concept of a central truth.
To understand the complete extent and context of this metaphor explained by Nietzsche, and as to why exactly was the women analogy used, it is important to have a look over Nietzsche’s own relationships with women. Philosophers are generally very frail to give in in front of a women. This have often been explained because of the longing they form in themselves after being alone for a long time, whether physically alone or as a state of mind of loneliness. Both of these situations have to do with the fact that they are often repelled away from the society and laymen people. The have a world view that only few can share and so is unique their approach of life. This often throws them in the pit of loneliness. The nature of philosophical studies also requires a certain time-block resulting in philosophers spending great lengths of time in solitude. Solitude is a long standing friend of the philosopher, and often the motivation factor of their work too. Philosophers are also usually found, within philosophical literature, to form a need or longing for a master, or a teacher. This pattern can be seen in Nietzsche too in his famous concept of Übermensch.
Nietzsche was however also observed to form a need or longing for a “disciple”. Some writers have interpreted it to mean that Nietzsche longed for a dominant role and looked for a submissive partner, in the general nature of relationship. Others have however argued that Nietzsche might have been looking for a “Lebensgefährtin” – a partner on his journey of philosophy. Both concepts are not too far stretched, it is perhaps more than likely that Nietzsche longed for a partner, but was easily gravitated towards the type of women who also shared a worldview like him, or that is in the field as him. This is what could have given birth to the concept of “Lebensgefährtin” for Nietzsche’s longing.
In his personal life, Nietzsche’s was not successful in forming a spousal relationship or love life of any sort. Historian write that he proposed a close friend of his, Lou Salomé, thrice within seven months but got rejected every time. To his friend, Paul Rée, Nietzsche wrote: “Greet this Russian woman for me, if this makes any sense; I long for this type of woman, I’m even thinking about plunder in this regard, when I think about what I want to do in the next ten years. Marriage is a totally different matter. I would only be interested in a two-year marriage, and this, again, only in view of what I have set out for myself over the next ten years.” Here Nietzsche clearly expressed that she was his “type of women”, and we know from historical records that Lou Salomé was a psychoanalyst, author and analyst who had great Interest in intellectual and academic topics. It is also interesting to see that Nietzsche, who had stated that men often approach women with inappropriate methods, he himself has a very blunt way to approach this women, specially when he states in a rather rude manner that “I would only be interested in a two-year marriage”. Many writers try to justify such blunt language of his by often stating that due to his academic background, he had a commanding, and at times satirical tune that is often criticised in his works too. However, Nietzsche is infamous for being blunt with his words unnecessarily.
Nietzsche was initially introduced to Lou Salomé through Paul Rée, however, at the time of writing to Paul Rée about Lou Salomé, Nietzsche did not know that Paul Rée had himself proposed Lou Salomé earlier, to which she had rejected. This created the infamous love triangle , as referred by the historians, in which Nietzsche found himself trapped for almost the entire rest of his life. All three of them were also in some sort of residential arrangement and lived, or for the most part travelled and made brief stays together. Nietzsche had however agreed to remain close friends and continue the residential arrangements with Lou Salomé and Paul Rée, even after being rejected. This also opens up to speculation that Nietzsche simply had this women as the only choice, or hope, so to say. Therefore, It is worth noting that we do not find any other record of Nietzsche’s involvement in any sort of affair prior to this. This is open to interpretation that is it so because he completely did not have any such affair before this, or we simply do not have record of any affair prior to this one. Given that any affair existed before, it could have only, most likely, ended in rejection. Given that no affair existed before this, can mean either Nietzsche did not find himself gravitating towards anyone before Lou Salomé, which might give support to the argument that Nietzsche truly found Lou Salomé to be his type of women. On the other hand, he simply did not have an opportunity such. Either way, the situation got even more complicated when Nietzsche’s sister, Elisabeth, felt that Lou Salomé was a “vile” women, and so Elisabeth tried to make Nietzsche part ways with Lou Salomé . This however resulted in Nietzsche having a bitter relationship with his sister.
All in all, by taking a look at his personal life and interaction with women, it is vivid from where and why was the “supposing women is the truth” metaphor born. All his life Nietzsche was, the least to say, unable to understand women. He faced several heartbreaks from women that left scars on his emotional existence. Such experiences, specially ones that span over several years of one’s life, greatly shape their thoughts, perspective and worldview. There is no exaggeration or far-stretching to say that Nietzsche’s ideas of perspectivism, absolute truth and possibly many other philosophise can be greatly affected by his personal experiences relating to women, family and social belonging in general. This metaphor used by Nietzsche would have been a mere empty analogy and the depth of this could not have been understood without analysing Nietzsche’s personal interaction with women throughout his life.
