In this work, Nietzsche constantly criticized ancient thinkers who argued for dualism. According to him, the ancient Greeks were not rationalists. He goes forward t give an example of the rejection of the senses because of change and multiplicity which prompted Heraclitus to reject their testimony. According to him, dualism presented things in a way that presumed they were permanent and uniform. In practice, there is a contrast in the manner that people conceive the problem of appearance and error. Whereas in the past change and alteration were considered as a proof of appearance, this is not the case today. Permanence, cause, substance, being, thinghood and identity dictate the extent to which someone can be forced into era.
Nietzsche vividly talks about senses as instruments of observation. Whereas people do o not attach the required value to the senses, they play a significant role. He gives an example of the nose and how it plays a role of detecting chemical concentrations. Nietzsche rejects and criticizes the dualistic nature of human beings. He dismisses this view not only as being childish, but also as being immature. He argues that the mature view should be to recognize that the body and the mind are one thing. In advancing this argument, Nietzsche proposes that what people call the soul, or the mind is an aspect of the physical nature of people. This approach was shaped by his religious foundation (Christianity) which stipulated that the body was filthy, evil and even despicable and, as a result, always the center of sin and depravity. There is no doubt that Nietzsche was completely against the dualism approach. According to him, it was erroneous to consider the body (rather than a mind that was non-physical) as a person’s true self.
I think the materialism implied by Nietzsche’s argument is misleading. Whereas he is considered to be among the earliest modern philosophers in the world, his assertions contradict the arguments raised by other philosophers as regards to the argument about self. It is difficult to argue against the two-fold nature of human beings. Historically, both religion and philosophy had it that people (human beings) have a nature that is two-fold. It makes a lot of sense to argue that human beings are made of non-physical minds and physical bodies. Whereas the body is tangible, the mind is no. This is sufficient to ignore attempts o classify the boy and the mind as being one and the same thing. Although there is a thin relationship between the soul and the body (because they are depended), it would be very wrong not to separate them when defining self.
Normally, the body is considered as a person’s true self. Although this does not address key issues such as intuitions, instincts and deep-seated drives, the soul plays a significant role in leading the body. The two work hand in hand, hence the need to involve both of them in defining a person’s self. Without the soul/mind, the body is useless. Similarly, without the body, the soul is useless. Nietzsche’s approach of classifying intuitions and instincts as assets ignores the major role that they play in directing the body. The correct approach should be to address each of the two components separately and appreciate the role that they all play. As such, Nietzsche’ argument is incorrect.