Marx and Nietzsche

In these paragraphs Marx takes into reflexion the first illusion of German Ideology and questions it validity. German philosophy found its premise ab extinct tender-hearted consciousness on idealism whereas Marx develops it from the framework existence of humans. He says that the premises from which we begin are non arbitrary ones, not dogmas, but certain premises (Marx, p. 311), these premises are found on the real individuals, their activity and the material conditions low which they live (p. 311) whereas German premises does not originate from human existence but is a production of mental exercise.Marxian method is historical materialism but it does not mean that it is not based on premises but opposed German premises, it is based on real feeling. So Marx says In lineal ancestry to German philosophy which descends from heaven to humankind, here we ascend from earth to heaven. That is to say, we do not set out from what men say, imagine, conceive, nor from men as narra ted, thought of, imagined, conceived, in order to arrive at men in the flesh. We set out from real, active men, and on the basis of their real life-process we certify the development of the ideological reflexes and echoes of this life-process. (Marx, p. 315)Marx is of the view that primarily human beings are nut-bearing as they must develop a system of production to keep up with their means of subsistence and only hence they can satisfy their material needs. This destiny generates a chain reaction i.e. new needs and new production. And these deep forces and processes develop the social existence of human being. So it is the material life that determines the social life of humans. So materialism directs the social and hence the human consciousness. Consciousness is, therefore, from the very beginning a social product, and remains so as long as men exist at all. (Marx, p. 317) jibe to Nietzsche, classic Tragedy was evolved from the traditional chorus that was innovative and origi nal dramatic play evolved from Greek ritualism.Nietzsche refutes Aristotelian theory pertaining to origin of Greek tragedy and rests his premises on the theory of Schiller. Schiller theory is of the view that chorus is a financial backing wall that has enveloped the Greek tragedy in order to detach itself from the real world and its realities. And thus it has retained its poetic autonomy and saved itself from naturalism. The satyr, as the dionysian chorist, lives in a religiously acknowledged reality under the sanction of myth and cult. (Nietzsche, p. 322) Chorus, an epitome of myth and cult of religions becomes the basic of Greek Tragedy in opposition to naturalism prevailing in the present-day(a) intellectual world. The tragedy chorus replicates this natural occurrence in an esthetical way.Nietzsche illustrates that tragedy as an art pee-pee is valuable for humanity. In contrast to Schopenhauer, Nietzsche demonstrates that tragedy as the art form of corporeal recognition and adulation of pathos and miseries of life and exulting in these harsh realities adoration of pre-destination. Apollonian and Dionysian differences on Tragedy stem from their intellectual differentiations and practical presentation of this form of art. Nietzsche is of the view that tragedy is endangered when music is discarded. To Nietzsche, Apollonian music was Doric architecture in sonic mode but Dionysian music was of compulsive kind with poignant power of sound and melodious current. Nietzsche further points out the differences between the Dionysos and Socrates thematic expression. Overall, Nietzsche considers tragedy as beautiful fusion and manifestation of Dionysian astuteness and Apollonian art.