Biologizing Nietzsche
Miguel Serrano collected works https://archive.org/details/miguel-serrano_202312
Biology and Philosophy. IX: Biologizing Nietzsche.
Juan Sebastián Gómez-Jeria 1, 2, *
1 Free Researcher, Glowing Neurons Group, Liantur 7221, Región Metropolitana, Santiago, Chile.
2 Faculty of Sciences, University of Chile. Las Palmeras 3425, Nuñoa, Región Metropolitana, Santiago, Chile.
World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 2024, 21(03), 707–721
Publication history: Received on 26 January 2024; revised on 03 March 2024; accepted on 05 March 2024 Article DOI: https://doi.org/10.30574/wjarr.2024.21.3.0758
Abstract
Following one of our research lines, we discuss here the idea of using the last scientific discoveries to explore (and expand) the concept of Übermensch in Nietzsche. This can only be done now because he did not have the necessary elements to do so himself. Some information about evolution, lectotypes, races and ethnicities are presented to be used as the basis of our thesis. Nietzsche’s opinion about human primates is presented: what they are, what they do, and what they need. Friedrich introduces the concept of Übermensch in 'Thus Spoke Zarathustra' and based on this text, we compared this concept with the National Socialist and Marxist ‘new man’. Finally, some possible forms of supermen, slaves, cyborgs, etc. are presented and commented.
Keywords. Übermensch; Friedrich Nietzsche; cyborgs; enhanced humans; evolution; lectotypes; races; ethnicities; eugenics; George Orwell; Aldous Huxley; New Man; Alfred Rosenberg; Marx.
⦁ Introduction
Had the Greeks known something of this Western future, a beginning of philosophy would never have come about. Rome, Judaism, and Christianity completely transformed and adulterated the inceptual — i.e., Greek philosophy (Martin Heidegger).
L’usage de la raison est toujours un acte de courage. (Bi Feiyu).
At certain moments during my readings of Friedrich, I have felt deeply unsettled within. Today I thought to describe myself this way: ‘Why do you shy away from me?’ the fly said to the spider. It's not as though Nietzsche were a spider or I a masochistic or suicidal fly, but that was the sensation. As a fly, I cannot refrain from mentioning, before entering the central theme, the following. The Merriam Webster Dictionary defines ambiguity as: noun, a word or expression that can be understood in two or more possible ways: an ambiguous word or expression. This is the basis of, for example, the fallacies of ambiguity. Here I present some thoughts, musings, deliberations, meditations, etc. produced from my readings of Nietzsche and other sources [1-8].
Could a simple phrase have the character of being sublimely ambiguous? Well, this very singular phrase written by Nietzsche could present that fact (letter of January 4, 1889 to Georg Brandes, of which I provide three versions):
Después de que me hubieras descubierto, no fue una obra de arte encontrarme: la dificultad está ahora en perderme… El Crucificado.
Once you discovered me, it was no great fear to find me: the difficulty now is to lose me . . . The Crucified.
Corresponding author: Juan Sebastián Gómez-Jeria
Having been discovered by you no trick was necessary for the others to find me. The difficulty is now to get rid of me. The Crucified.
The interpretation called ‘direct’ is the one that first comes to mind. Given Nietzsche's extremely poor opinion of Christianity, an opinion we fully share and which the rivers of pedophiles emanating from the sinister undergrounds of that superstition confirm, and which lead us to the essence of what two thousand years of unchecked power have produced (for example, Priest, Del Rosario, Dedieu, Pardieu, Vikere, Popma, Pope, Labbé, Abbot, Priest, Chalice, were surnames given to possible children of Christian church members who supposedly practiced clerical celibacy), it is that Nietzsche ‘presents himself’ as the crucified Jew to flaunt to many their ‘addiction’ to that belief. But some time ago, an idea suddenly appeared in the field of my consciousness saying: What if in reality Friedrich was referring to himself? Because it is truly easy to discover him, it took effort to ‘find’ him through all his works and wow! it is impossible to leave him. And I believe many who read these lines will agree.
In his ‘Prelude in German Rhymes’ (GC-PRA, [9]) Friedrich encourages us:
Dare to try my food, diners! Tomorrow it will taste better to you and the day after even better!
If you then want more,
my seven old spices will give me
courage for another seven new ones (GC-PRA-1, [9]).
Does my way and my word seduce you, Do you follow me, go behind me?
Go faithfully behind yourself:
Thus you will follow me - slowly, slowly! (GC-PRA-7, [9]).
That is precisely the way to proceed. Friedrich is only an incomplete prophet of what we could be. How?: Since I grew tired of seeking,
I learned to find.
Since a wind opposed me,
With every wind I sail (GC-PRA-2, [9]).
‘How best may I climb the mountain?’
Simply climb and do not think of it! (GC-PRA-16, [9])
Never ask! Leave that whimpering!
Take, I beg you, always take! (GC-PRA-17, [9])
An investigator, me? Oh, spare that word! - I'm only heavy - a few pounds!
I fall, fall continuously
and finally, to the bottom! (GC-PRA-44, [9]). In my opinion, these last four lines summarize the journey that Dante and Virgil undertook.
In light of the new knowledge obtained during the years 2023 and 2024, it seems possible to extend some of Nietzsche's lines of thought much further. I think this can only be done now because he did not have the necessary elements to do so himself. Some might argue that his ‘expansion’ work would be as if Friedrich himself had done it. That is a stupid mistake because it cannot be proven whether that claim is true or false. In my case let us make this very clear. What follows below is neither Nietzsche nor the extension of his thought. I am not his exegete and anyone who claims to be is nothing more than a charlatan (unless they invoke him in a spiritualist session to ask for clarification on some topic. Ironic comment). I am going to develop in this text a polemical Thesis, but it seems that in these times only this type of thesis forces some human primates to think seriously. It consists of affirming that Nietzsche's idea of the overman
(Übermensch) can be greatly expanded with the help of the many new scientific knowledge acquired in the 20th and 21st centuries. To do this, we will first provide some basic aspects of evolution because they are one of the supports of this Thesis. Constant progress in this field of research can modify some of this knowledge, but that does not modify this thesis. Of course, I am aware of the limitations in what we know and how we know it. If necessary, I could revise in the future some of my views in light of new evidence.
⦁ Evolution
It is true that we are primates, it is true that we can already partially trace our phylogenetic tree with respect to already extinct species (a tree that, in its fine structure, is not the same for everyone), but the following could also be true. We are in the midst of evolution and possibly some, or the faculty to look at the world in a new way has already been given or is beginning to be given (perhaps, but only perhaps, they could be the ancestors of Nietzsche's Übermensch). Maybe for them Plato's cave structure is 'seen' clearly, and they understand what is at its 'exit'. And perhaps they already have a clear idea of what needs to be done with us Homo sapiens. But let's return to the issue at hand. The only species that cannot evolve are fossils, but during their lifetime, they too were subject to evolution, adapting to their environment and facing selective pressures until they perished for various reasons. There are several lines of evidence supporting the idea that all living species are evolving at this moment, including us. Natural selection claims that individuals in a population who possess characteristics better adapted to their environment are more likely to survive and reproduce, passing those advantageous characteristics on to next generations. Over time, these advantageous characteristics become more frequent in the population, leading to evolutionary changes. The history of the social structure of human primates is a good place to explore this idea (that story that history can be explained in terms of a class struggle is only the result of the absolute lack of adequate knowledge when it was proposed. It is surprising that some still hold this very primitive vision today) [10-12]. Species exhibit natural genetic variations among their individuals. These variations can be the result of mutations, genetic recombination and other processes that generate genetic diversity. Genetic variation is essential for evolution to occur, as it provides the necessary material for natural selection to act upon. Genetic drift is another evolutionary mechanism that involves random changes in allele frequencies in a population due to chance. In small populations, this can be especially important and can lead to evolutionary changes even in the absence of natural selection (genetic drift, [13]). There is also the process by which one species splits into two or more distinct species. This occurs when previously related populations become separated and evolve in different environments, leading to the accumulation of genetic and phenotypic differences over time (speciation). Throughout history, many cases of evolution observed in real time have been documented in various species. For example, changes in the size and shape of bird beaks have been studied in response to food availability, bacterial resistance to antibiotics, insect adaptation to pesticides, among others (direct observation). And we can also cite the case of the Neanderthals and Denisovans. Do not forget epigenetics [14].
Let us speak briefly about the little knowledge about the human primate that existed in the late 19th century. Let's place ourselves around the year 1880 and think about what Nietzsche could have known 'at most' about man and his origins. Although Nietzsche was a profound and visionary thinker, his knowledge of biology and anthropology was based on the research and discoveries of his time, which constrained his understanding of human evolution and origins. Very little was known at that time. In 1859, Charles Darwin had published his work 'On the Origin of Species', where he presented his theory of evolution by natural selection. This laid the foundations for starting to understand the origin and evolution of man. In 1871, Darwin published 'The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex', where he applied his evolutionary ideas to humans and suggested that man descended from apelike ancestors. He proposed that Africa was probably the continent where the human species originated. That same year 1871, the first fossils of Cro-Magnon man, the first early modern humans to settle in Europe, were found in Cro-Magnon, France [15, 16]. This provided evidence for the theory of human evolution. In 1856, the first fossils of Neanderthal man, another extinct Homo species, had been discovered in the Neanderthal Valley in Germany [17]. Let us remember that the Christian church firmly opposed Darwin's ideas, since they contradicted the literal interpretation of the Bible regarding the divine creation of man. There was a combination of rejection and acceptance towards Darwin's ideas. For many, it was hard or impossible to reconcile evolution with their religious beliefs. Some religious minorities continued to reject it for decades [18]. It should also be mentioned that, unfortunately, the results of Mendel's research did not become 'public' until after Nietzsche passed away [19, 20]. What Friedrich read has been the subject of thoughtful studies.
This small knowledge was no obstacle for Nietzsche to severely judge man. He saw the majority of humanity as a mediocre and weak herd, proposing that only a few exceptional individuals could become superior beings through strength and affirmation of the will to power.
In the next section we begin to develop the foundations of the bases of our vision on the human primate.
⦁ On lectotypes, races and ethnicities.
The human primate 'species' does not have a lectotype (and even less a neotype). Some reasons have been invoked for this absence, such as that there are no original specimens for humans, since the species has not been discovered in the formal taxonomic sense, as with other species that were discovered, described and named in specific scientific documents. But in 1959 William Stearn proposed Linnaeus himself as the lectotype for the species (today that lectotype is only symbolic).
I uphold the Thesis that no one dares to touch this subject because, in order to do so, there will be an obligatory scientific need to examine and discuss some issues that no one wants to examine or discuss (projects, funding, promotions, jobs, etc. can be lost). What better example of this censorship than what Robert Plomin recounts in his book '’Blueprint. How DNA makes us who we are'’? I quote: ''’I have been waiting thirty years to write Blueprint. My excuse for not doing it sooner is that more research was needed to document the importance of genetics, and I was busy doing that research. However, in hindsight, I have to admit to another reason: cowardice. It might seem unbelievable today, but thirty years ago it was dangerous professionally to study the genetic origins of differences in people’s behavior and to write about it in scientific journals. It could also be dangerous personally to stick your head up above the parapets of academia to talk about these issues in public. Now, the shift in the zeitgeist has made it much easier to write this book'’ [21]. But the subject I am touching on here is still considered 'non-existent'. Let's see how we can transform it into 'existent'.
⦁ The genetic diversity within the 'human species' is very broad, the product of hundreds of thousands of years of evolution, migrations, intermixing, and miscegenation. There is no population isolated and genetically homogeneous enough to be considered a standard for the species [22-24]. I propose that we then define, or subspecies, or new species, or groups and see if what is obtained is reasonable or not.
⦁ Unlike pure animal strains or standardized crops, humans have not been subject to selective reproduction that would fix the characteristics of a specific variety. I say that genetic engineering must move in that direction in the future and that we should all be happy about it. Only exploiters and other social parasites will refuse this beautiful journey. History shows that in some cases diversity is encouraged to the maximum with the ultimate goal of keeping separate groups of human primates in order to be able to exploit them better and with impunity. The use of genetic engineering to obtain biologically and mentally healthy specimens should be the task of the state. It is not about obtaining a standardized phenotype or type but rather biologically healthy human primates with any external phenotype (white, black, yellow, green, blue, etc.) [25, 26].
⦁ DNA studies have shown that there is as much or more genetic diversity within a supposed 'race' as between different races. I say that these studies are incomplete. To have a complete view of modern human diversity, one should study together the variability within modern human nuclear DNA and the contributions of gene flow from other extinct species. Without this information, the discussion about 'races' is just a manifestation of 'good wishes' or political- personal ideas.
Some data regarding the additions the original Homo sapiens genome has received from other species (information that could vary in the future):
⦁ Neanderthal DNA: between 1-4% in Europeans and Asians, practically absent in Africans.
⦁ Denisovan DNA: 5% in Papuans, Australian Aboriginal people and populations of Southeast Asia. Less than 1% in Han Chinese and Native American populations.
⦁ Sub-Saharan Africans have only inheritance from Homo sapiens DNA, without mixing with other hominids. I say they are the 'Aryans' of all these groups (this is an ironic comment for those who still separate sapiens into ‘multi-colored’ races).
⦁ The natives of the Andaman Islands (India) possibly have a component from an unknown archaic species called
Homo andamanensis.
⦁ Melanesians (Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, etc.) have a small portion of DNA from Homo erectus.
In my opinion, these are part of the conceptual bases for creating ‘species,’ ‘subspecies’ or whatever we want to call them in order to further study them. Note that we would have to add pure Neanderthals, pure Denisovans, the products of mixing between them, and a series of other combinations. And, to the extent that the necessary technological progress occurs, we will be able to determine exactly which genes and their origin each of us possesses. And this will allow even finer analyses. This is just a problem of time and ‘power’ science. Only some idiocracies can try to stop this advance.
During October 2023, Daniel Harris and several other scientists reported that there was at least one migration of anatomically modern Homo sapiens populations from Africa to Eurasia approximately 250,000 years ago [27]. The later mixing with Neanderthals (this occurs at least in the region of the Altai Mountains where the Denisova Cave is located) resulted in Neanderthal DNA containing approximately 6% DNA from Homo sapiens. This event took place more than 100,000 years before the expansion out of Africa of anatomically modern Homo sapiens. The only doubt I have about that research is that, given that the evolutionary dividing lines separating anatomically modern humans from archaic humans and archaic humans from Homo erectus are unclear, I did not find any evidence that those migrants would have to be anatomically modern Homo sapiens and not archaic. The lines below were written taking this migration into account.
Let's take, for example, but without forgetting the climatic, physical and historical environments, the group with (apparently) 100% anatomically modern Homo sapiens DNA. A brief list of cultural products dating back more than 30,000 years is: stone tool technologies such as hand axes, cleavers, scrapers and microliths in the African Paleolithic (300,000 - 90,000 years ago), projectile and harpoon bone points for hunting and fishing (200,000 - 140,000 years ago), the earliest pigments and cave paintings at sites like Blombos and Diebougou (100,000 - 70,000 years ago), evidence of controlled use of fire in Africa for cooking and protection (1,500,000 - 250,000 years ago), beads and possible primitive body ornaments from shells, bones, ivory and plants (150,000 - 90,000 years ago), development of proto-languages and vocal communication systems (at least 400,000 - 250,000 years ago), genetic and physiological adaptations to various African ecosystems (at least 200,000 years ago). We see that the contributions focus on subsistence technologies, adaptations to the environment and, apparently, very early symbolic expressions.
Let us now take the group constituted by the Neanderthals and Denisovans. The recent report by Harris et al. raises the question of whether Denisovans have or do not have anatomically modern Homo sapiens DNA due to those crossings from approximately 250,000 years ago (mandatory research is required to elucidate this issue). It also raises the question of whether all Neanderthals, whether from Altai or all of Eurasia and other places, or part of them possess that 6% (it is a matter of analyzing all available DNA to answer these questions which are mandatory). These questions and their answers are very important when it comes time to analyze the cultural products attributed to Neanderthals. Why? Because this data could serve when it is possible to assign cultural products to some specific group of Neanderthals whose DNA has already been sequenced. We need to know the relationship between 'cultural product' and 'type' of Neanderthal DNA (with or without 'ancient' contributions from Homo sapiens). It is a way to better understand the evolution of this genus.
A brief list of some cultural contributions of Neanderthal populations in Eurasia, dated 30,000 years ago or earlier is: stone tools such as hand axes, scrapers, knives, points (300,000 - 130,000 years before present), tar and 'putty' glue to join stone tools (200,000 - 100,000 years before present), wooden spear with stone point, for hunting (170,000 - 90,000 years before present), intentional burials of Neanderthal individuals with funerary offerings (120,000 - 70,000 years before present), evidence of care for sick and disabled members of the group (50,000 years before present), possible use of feathers and other natural elements as personal adornments (50,000 - 40,000 years before present), red ocher pigments extracted and used for symbolic purposes (250,000 - 100,000 years before present), ability to make abstract architectural designs and ceremonial activities in caves (Bruniquel Cave, 176,000 years before present), abstract paintings in three Spanish caves (La Pasiega, Maltravieso and Ardales) dated to more than 64,000 years, before the arrival of modern humans in Europe, red, black and yellow ocher pigments in Los Aviones cave in Spain, dated to 115,000 years, proposals that the early cave art of El Castillo cave, in Spain, with minimum dates of 40,800 years, would be Neanderthal work, morphological and genetic adaptations to the cold climate of Europe and Asia (200,000 or more years before present). Neanderthals thus developed hunting and survival technologies, along with funerary practices and symbolic uses of materials indicating increasing cultural complexity.
The new question is now this: did or did not the Neanderthals who created those cultural products have that 6% of Homo sapiens DNA from 250,000 years ago? A more specific question. Did or did not the Neanderthals who built the structures within the Bruniquel Cave have that 250,000 year old Homo sapiens DNA? The answer to this question is of extreme importance.
Current humans with Neanderthal genes derive from hybridization that occurred mainly between 50,000-30,000 years ago, when anatomically modern humans migrating out of Africa mixed with Eurasian Neanderthals. Since this mixing occurred after 30,000 years before present, there is no archaeological evidence of cultural contributions from modern humans with Neanderthal DNA before that date. But after that date we find many cultural products. Here are some: transition from Mousterian to Aurignacian lithic technology in Europe (38,000 - 28,000 years before present), creation of new forms of portable art such as the Venus of Hohle Fels (35,000 years before present), first musical instruments such as bone flutes at sites like Isturitz, France (35,000 - 30,000 years before present), new specialized hunting
techniques and projectiles with propellers (32,000 - 20,000 years before present), body ornaments such as perforated ivory beads, shells and teeth (30,000 years before present), realistic cave paintings of animals at sites such as Coliboaia, Romania (30,000 years before present), first ivory, stone and bone sculptures of human figures (since 32,000 years before present), burials with increasingly elaborate offerings (flowers, ocher, food), abstract cave paintings with dots in Spanish caves such as La Pasiega, El Castillo and Tito Bustillo (30,000 - 20,000 years before present), naturalistic engravings of animals at French sites such as Chauvet and Cussac (around 30,000 years before present), paintings of bison, horses and deer in France's Cosquer cave (27,000 years before present), schematic human figures in Italy's Fumane cave (between 35,000 - 28,000 years before present), representations of marine fauna in Spain's Nerja cave (around 42,000 years before present), animal and human figures in Spain's Genista Cave (over 22,000 years before present). In summary, there appears to be a period of great creative and technological expansion among anatomically modern humans with Neanderthal heritage.
For a future list let us mention the negative handprints and abstract geometric figures at Leang Timpuseng, Indonesia (at least 35,000 years before present), probably made by the first modern humans who arrived in the region, possibly with Denisovan genes.
I take the opportunity to present an issue that should be discussed at some point. It is the existence or not of any relationship between the type of DNA (in general) and cultural products. It is evident, at least to me, that it is anatomically modern humans with Neanderthal heritage (and with Denisovan DNA and perhaps some other too) who have created those varied cultural products that have given rise to the great civilizations of East, West and the Americas. What we still do not know is whether the cultural products of Neanderthals were created by individuals who already possessed Homo sapiens DNA.
In any case, whatever the future findings about our ancestors may be, classifications like this can be made:
General classification (just one proposition): Percentage of anatomically modern Homo sapiens DNA, percentage of DNA from Neanderthals, percentage of DNA from Denisovans, percentage of DNA from still unknown hominids. Percentage of DNA contribution from Homo sapiens from 250,000 years ago to the DNA of Eurasian hominids?
Specific classification (personal). For each of the non-sapiens contributions, list of genes contributed by the DNA of the other hominids. This list of non-sapiens genes will undoubtedly be so long and different that it will make it impossible to define races, ethnicities or any similar group.
But there is still the possibility, unrelated to DNA classification, of defining some groups according to the quasi permanent or permanent historical behavior they have developed. The best example could be the search for the existence of possible 'parasitic' ethnicities (that live at the expense of other groups of individuals or ‘colonize’ entire societies for profit).
⦁ Nietzsche on human primates: what they are, what they do, and what they need.
Nietzsche harshly criticized traditional thought and conventional morality, arguing that the morality established by society and religion had weakened the individual and repressed his or her true potential. He thought that morality based on compassion and weakness was a 'slave morality' that denied the individual's affirmation of life and will to power. In Nietzsche's time knowledge about human evolution did not exist, being present only the classic and crude racism of the English, French and others that can be summed up as follows: 'If he is white, he is good'. This absurd generalization forgets that, for example, 'English' Australia was born as the penal colony of New South Wales, full of 'bad whites' [28].
With this in mind, let us look Nietzsche's views of his fellow human beings. It is at this point that I must make it clear that the quotations from Nietzsche were selected by me, not to attempt some demonstration that Friedrich thought this way or that, but only to show that he sometimes thought in a certain way. The quotations have been taken from the Complete Works in Spanish [9, 29-31]. This view, pessimistic at times and contemptuous at others, is the basis of the necessity for the appearance of the Nietzschean Übermensch. I have recently presented some views about Nietzsche that were 'forgotten-suppressed' [32-37]. I give below a list of Nietzsche’s comments on man.
From 'The Gay Science’ (abbreviated GC, [9]) I got this material:
GC.1. Regardless of whether I observe men with a benevolent or malign gaze, I always find them, each and every one, occupied in a single task: doing what is advantageous for the preservation of the human species. And indeed, not out of a feeling of love for this species, but simply because nothing in them is more ancient, stronger, more implacable, more
insurmountable than this instinct, because this instinct is precisely the essence of our species and our herd. My comment: Without a doubt, that comment covers not only sexual activity but all activities leading to engaging in sexual (reproductive or otherwise) activity, as well as those contributing to the creation, maintenance, and defense of the comfort sphere for reproductive and offspring care purposes. Dear reader: Have you by chance calculated the weekly time occupied by all these activities? Do you have any time left for yourself?
GC.2. The great majority lack intellectual consciousness. It seems to me that even with such a demand one is in the most populous cities as though in the desert. My comment. Compare with Diogenes the Cynic, which used to walk in full daylight with a lamp. When asked what he was doing, he would answer, ‘I am looking for a man’. Also, being asked where in Greece he said good men, he replied, ‘Good men nowhere, but good boys at Lacedaemon’.
GC.18. We lack the ancient coloring of distinction because our sentiment lacks the ancient slave. A Greek of noble origin found between his height and that lowest smallness such a quantity of intermediate degrees and such a distance that he could barely still see the slave clearly: even Plato no longer saw him entirely. Unlike us, accustomed as we are to the doctrine of the equality of men, albeit not to equality itself.
GC.41. In his own actions the thinker sees attempts and questions to gain clarification about something: success and failure are for him above all answers.
GC.42. Now, there are rarer men who prefer to succumb rather than work without taking pleasure in the work: those malcontents, difficult to satisfy, for whom no rich gain resolves anything if the work itself is not the gain of all gains. My comment. Dear reader who has a permanent work: Do you work on what you like or not? If you don't like it, why do you do it? There are two possible answers: the primate one and the human one.
GC.110. Origin of knowledge. During enormous periods of time the intellect produced nothing but errors; some of them turned out to be useful and beneficial for the preservation of the species: he who arrived at them, or inherits them, fought his battle for himself and his offspring with greater success. Those erroneous articles of faith, which were always inherited again and finally became almost an essential and specific component of man, are for example these: that there are enduring things, that there are equal things, that there are things, materials, bodies, that a thing is what it appears to be, that our will is free, that what is good for me is also good in and for itself. Only very late did those appear who denied and doubted these propositions; only very late did truth appear, as the form of knowledge most devoid of power. It seemed one could not live with it; our organism was prepared for the opposite; all its higher functions, the perceptions of the senses and every kind of sensation worked in general with those fundamental errors incorporated since time immemorial. Moreover: those same propositions became norms within knowledge according to which what was 'true' and 'untrue' was measured even in the remotest spheres of pure logic. That is: the power of knowledge lies not in its degree of truth but in its antiquity, in its being incorporated, in its character as life's conditions. When life and knowledge seemed to contradict each other, one never arrived at serious struggle; denial and doubt were considered madness. [Partial]. My comment. Try to read what Baeumler writes on Nietzsche (References section).
GC.116. Herd instinct. Wherever we find a morality we find an estimation and hierarchy of human drives and actions. These estimations and hierarchies are always the expression of the needs of a community and a herd: what is most beneficial to it in the first, second and third instance, is also the supreme measure for the value of all individuals. With morality the individual is instructed to be a function of the herd and to attribute value to himself only as a function. Since the conditions for the preservation of one community have been very different from those of another, there have been very different moralities; and in view of the essential transformations that must occur in herds and communities, in states and societies, one can prophesy that still very divergent moralities will prevail. Morality is the herd instinct in the individual.
GC.196. Limit of our ear. Only those questions can be heard for which one is in a position to find an answer. GC-248. Books. What is the use of a book that does not even carry us beyond all books?
GC.373. From the laws of hierarchy it follows that scholars, insofar as they belong to the middle class of the spirit, are not permitted in any way to glimpse the real great problems and questions: besides, their courage, and likewise their vision, do not extend that far; above all the necessity that makes them researchers, their intimate anticipation and desire that things be such and such, their fear and hope are all too soon calmed, pacified.
GC.381. When one writes, not only does one desire to be understood, but also, with equal certainty, not to be understood. It is by no means an objection to a book that anyone finds incomprehensible: perhaps it is precisely part of the
author's purpose, not to be understood by ‘just anyone’. Every distinguished spirit and refined taste, when it seeks to communicate, also selects its listeners; in choosing them, it simultaneously draws a barrier against ‘the others’. All the subtle laws of a style originate here: they keep away, create distance, prohibit ‘entry’, comprehension, as it has been said, while at the same time opening the ears of those who have ears attuned to ours.
From ‘Thus Spoke Zarathustra’ (abbreviated AHZ). From Complete Works [31], I can cite the following comments:
AHZ.1. Therefore, I must ascend to the depths: just as you do with the night when you hide behind the sea and bring light to the underworld, splendid star! My comment. It has the 'touch' of Dante at the beginning of his Divine Comedy, descending to ascend.
AHZ.2. Zarathustra has been transformed; he has become a child. Zarathustra has awoke: what do you want now with those who are asleep? My comment. 'Becoming a child' is a classic. 'Let the children come to me' is a somewhat equivalent example. It's similar, but not identical, to 'being naked'. In the Secret Gospel of Mark, we have this other text: 'And when evening came, the youth came to Jesus, clothed in a linen cloth over his naked body. And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the kingdom of God'. This is what we need to do.
"The nausea for mankind, for the 'rabble,' has always been my greatest peril..." ([31]-Ecce Homo,8). Similar to Diogenes the Cynic.
And, summarizing:
‘Spicy and mild, rude and delicate / Familiar and rare, dirty and pure, / Quote of fools and of sages: / All that I am, all that I want to be, / Dove at once and snake and pig!’ (GC-PRA-11, [9]).
⦁ Nietzsche’s Übermensch.
The German term used by Nietzsche is 'Übermensch', which has often been translated as 'superman' or 'superhuman'.
Nietzsche introduces the Übermensch in 'Thus Spoke Zarathustra' [31], where Zarathustra proclaims the arrival of the one who will surpass modern man. The Übermensch represents a new type of human who has overcome traditional morality and is totally life-affirming, with all its contradictions. It embodies the 'will to power' and is described as 'the meaning of the earth', which gives a new meaning to existence, beyond the Christian/democratic values that he saw as expressions of weakness (or the weak). The Übermensch is a free spirit, creator of his own values, proud of himself, master of his destiny, who rises above the herd. He represents the possibility of self-realization, which we will discuss below. In 'Beyond Good and Evil' Nietzsche addresses the critique of traditional morality and proposes the need to overcome it in search of a morality beyond the established. Mention is also made of the Übermensch as a figure who will redefine moral values and live according to his will to power. The 'Genealogy of Morals' also touches on topics related to the Übermensch and its role as a figure that transcends traditional moral notions. Nietzsche expresses the hope that the ' Übermensch', or 'Übermenschen', can emerge and lead a cultural transformation towards a new way of life. The idea of the Übermensch has been the subject of multiple interpretations and debates, and its meaning can vary depending on the context and philosophical or political perspective. And, since Friedrich is not alive, n'importe quoi has been written on this subject. Here are some mentions of the Übermensch:
‘The superman is the sense of the earth. Let your will say: the Übermensch is the sense of the earth!' (Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Prologue §3).
'I show you the superman. Man is something that must be overcome' (Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Prologue §3).
'Look, I'll show you the superman! The Übermensch is the sense of the earth' (Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Prologue §3).
'Man is a rope stretched between the beast and the Übermensch ' (Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Prologue §4).
'I love those who do not know how to live in any other way than sinking into their twilight, for they are the ones who pass to the other side. I love the great despisers, for they are the great worshippers and arrows of longing to the other shore' (Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Of the Despisers of the Body).
The following thoughts are taken from the Posthumous Fragments (Spanish Edition), [38-41]):
Posthumous fragment 1884 (KSA 11:25 [9]): 'Hardness with oneself is a means of hardening one's will: the man who imposes this on himself approaches the Übermensch'.
Posthumous fragment 1887 (KSA 12:9 [98]): 'The Übermensch is the man who has overcome what is human in him, all too human'.
Posthumous fragment 1888 (KSA 13:14 [79]): 'Not to preserve, but to create, that is the essence of the Übermensch!'.
Posthumous excerpt 1883-1885 (KSA 11: 38 [12]): 'The means of cultivating talent will now be the means of cultivating the will: from this education will one day come the Übermensch'.
Posthumous fragment 1885-1887 (KSA 12:2 [131]): 'The hierarchy in man, the distance from the lowest to the highest is the precondition for the Übermensch ever to appear'.
From ‘Twilight of the Idols’ [31]: 'The doctrine of the Übermensch. Man is something that must be overcome!' (How the 'real world' eventually became a fable, §3), and 'I call the philosophy of the Übermensch superficial' (Expeditions of an Untimely, §47).
Übermenschen are a select minority. It is obvious that most ordinary men (the eternal sheep), 'the last men', do not envision or share the vision of the Übermensch. Relationships between men and Übermenschen will be obviously complex. They will be destined to be misunderstood and marginalized, as their values and aspirations will transcend conventional standards of morality and society. This is the fundamental reason why the Übermensch must make us disappear.
⦁ The Marxist 'new man'.
The 'new man' is an ideological concept that dates back to the writings of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in the 19th century. It refers to the idea of creating a new communist society that transforms human nature to create altruistic, cooperative individuals dedicated to the collective rather than self-interest. In 'The German Ideology', Marx and Engels speak of abolishing private property and the division of labor to allow the free development of each individual. This would create a 'total man' instead of the 'selfish man'. In the Communist Manifesto, they point out that the proletariat will pursue to abolish classes and create an organization where 'the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all'. In Anti-Dühring, Engels writes about the revolutionary transformation of morality and the passage from selfish morality to 'truly human and social' life. In texts such as 'The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State', Engels analyzes how communism would create radically new social relationships and a new human type. In his analyses of the 1871 Paris Commune, Marx pointed to the potential of self-organized workers to inaugurate a new society and revolutionary subject. Also in the 'Critique of the Gotha Program', Marx criticizes residual bourgeois ideology and advocates instilling a new communist worldview. The idea was that under capitalism, humans develop selfish, competitive and materialistic traits. But under socialism and communism, a 'new man' freed from selfishness and alienation would be created. This concept was adopted by several communist leaders and theorists in the 20th century, such as Lenin, Leon Bronstein (Trotsky) and Mao Zedong. It became a central part of communist ideology.
In practice, communist regimes attempted to create this 'new man' through education, collective work, criticism and self-criticism, and the elimination of 'old ideas'. The greatest stupidity consisted of the extermination of large segments of their own population. In Stalin's Soviet Union, brutal tactics were used such as the most extensive system of forced labor camps known (Gulags) [42], propaganda, mass indoctrination, famines [43, 44] and severe punishment of dissent to try to create the 'Soviet man'. Millions of inhabitants perished in purges and famines. Mao Zedong in China sent intellectuals and dissidents to 'reeducation camps' and forced labor on farms and factories [45]. During the Cultural Revolution, the ruthless criticism of the 'old way of thinking' was encouraged. It caused millions of deaths by starvation [46]. In Cambodia, Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge regime sought to create the 'new man' by emptying the cities, forcing the population to work on collective farms and executing intellectuals and dissidents [47]. Approximately 1.5-2 million people died. Other communist countries also resorted to repressive means, although not as radical, to try to shape the ideal socialist citizen, such as compulsory military service, school indoctrination, cultural censorship, etc. If anyone dared to claim that the Castros, Kim Jong-un, Ortega, Mao, Stalin, Abimael Guzmán or Maduro are the prototypes of the communist 'new man', their mental health would have to be reviewed.
Nowadays, the idea of the Marxist 'new man' has lost credibility due to the historical failure of communism to produce this radical change in human nature. But some elements still influence contemporary leftist movements that still believe in Santa Claus & Co. The sad thing about the 'march' towards the new man of some communist regimes is that they
considered dominating science and technology to be key to the development and progress of socialist society. It was seen as a symbol of the advance towards communism (and towards the new man). But they never used them. On the other hand, the social sciences and humanities were given lower priority as they were seen as potentially subversive. A very serious and definitive mistake.
⦁ The National Socialist 'New Man'.
The term 'new man' in the context of National Socialism (NS) refers to an idea promoted by the leaders and propagandists of the Third Reich. The concept of the National Socialist 'new man' was based on the creation of a new and purified race, which would embody racial and intellectual ideals, and physical strength. The 'new man' was to be an individual of the Germanic race, embodying the image of physical and moral perfection. From the moment National Socialism defines who makes up the People's Community (Nuremberg Laws), the excluded become foreigners (Gypsies, Jews) and/or ‘undesirables’ (hence the Aktion T4 and the compulsory sterilization of Rhineland bastards).
Alfred Rosenberg, one of the leading philosophers of National Socialism [48], developed the notion of a Nordic race in his book ‘The Myth of the Twentieth Century’. He spoke about the need for a racial hierarchy. Julius Evola, eminent fascist philosopher, wrote about the ‘differentiated man’ who should rule the masses according to the principles of hierarchy and domination. Oswald Spengler in ‘The Decline of the West’ posed the Faustian (Aryan) race as the incarnation of the Faustian, the spirit of unlimited power. Houston Stewart Chamberlain sustained in his writings the inherent superiority of the Aryans, called to dominate the world through a rigorous hierarchy. Martin Heidegger, in his lectures on Nietzsche before 1945, exalted the ‘will to power’ and the ontological superiority of the ‘metaphysical people’ (the German) over other ‘historyless peoples’.
On the other hand, some Nietzschean concepts were employed by some National Socialist theorists and philosophers [37]. The Nazis found in Nietzsche's vitalist philosophy an exaltation of martial values and strength. They also took up Nietzsche's critique of Judeo-Christian ethics as a slave morality, opposed to the Dionysian spirit and the ideal of the superman's power. In ‘Mein Kampf’, Hitler only mentions Nietzsche once. August Kubizek, Hitler's youth friend, narrated that the young Hitler felt fascinated when he read him passages from ‘Thus Spoke Zarathustra’. Baldur von Schirach, leader of the Hitler Youth, reported that Hitler recommended he read especially ‘Thus Spoke Zarathustra’ and ‘The Antichrist’. According to some testimonies, Hitler gifted editions of Nietzsche's books to collaborators and liked to discuss ideas about the will to power and the superman in private meetings. Simultaneously, Hitler criticized Nietzsche for not valuing the ‘community spirit of the people’ enough.
NS race theory went through several stages described by me in 2006 [49]. What didn't change was the practical way to create biotypes. The Lebensborn (‘Fount of Life’) was a state-supported, registered charity association created in 1935 by Heinrich Himmler with the specific aim of increasing the number of children born who met the NS standards.
This organization provided welfare to its mostly unmarried mothers, stimulated anonymous births by unmarried women at their maternity homes, and mediated adoption of children by racially acceptable and healthy parents, particularly SS members and their families. In turn, the SS was subject to the control of the Race and Settlement Main Office, which was the organization responsible for protecting the acceptable racial biotypes. Lebensborn opened about fifteen clinics in Belgium, France, Germany and Norway. Between 8,000 and 20,000 children were born there. In addition, five orphanages sheltered abandoned children and those with an acceptable biotype who were abducted in the occupied territories. In summary: selective breeding. It is not possible to evaluate the results of this project by how the war ended.
⦁ Differences with Nietzsche's Übermensch.
I think it is obvious that Marxist and National Socialist attempts to create ‘new men’ would never have led to the Nietzschean Übermensch. It should be noted that, given the situation of humans on Earth, sooner or later it will be necessary to limit population growth so that everyone has adequate material well-being and to use genetic engineering to obtain biologically healthy specimens (without genetic predispositions to diseases of all kinds).
In Marxism, power is in the hands of the proletariat (it never happened), with the working class taking control of the means of production and creating a classless society (it never happened). The Marxist 'new man' refers to the creation of a classless society, in which all individuals have access to the means of production and enjoy a more egalitarian and just life (which has never happened). In contrast, Nietzsche's Übermensch is presented as an exceptional individual who transcends traditional values and morality, living by his own will to power and setting his own standards. Nietzsche's
Übermensch is also a more individualistic concept and focused on the elevation of the exceptional individual above mediocrity, not seeking political or social power, but rather self-realization and the affirmation of life through personal development. The Marxist 'new man' will be exterminated by the Nietzschean Übermensch!
The reasons why the NS Übermensch does not correspond to Nietzsche's Übermensch are fundamental. The National Socialist Übermensch was based on a racial and collectivist vision, focused on the superiority of a racial group and the creation of a hierarchical society. The Übermensch NS was rooted in racial underpinnings or biotypes. In contrast, Nietzsche advocated the 'transvaluation of all values', where individuals could reassess and redefine their values and beliefs without resorting to discrimination or oppression of others. The Übermensch is an individualistic concept, which highlights the importance of the exceptional individual who transcends established values and lives according to his own will to power. In short, the superiority of the Übermensch is of an individual and philosophical character, not a collective superiority of race.
⦁ About the transvaluation of all values
The transvaluation of all values is a fundamental philosophical concept in the work of Nietzsche. In essence, it refers to the idea of reevaluating and redefining traditional moral and ethical values that have been created, accepted, and passed down by human primate society for a long time. It is an act of liberation, where the Übermensch sets its own standards of value based on its own will to power and affirmation of life.
Instituted moral values, such as compassion, humility, and obedience, have been enforced by traditional morality and religion, which he calls 'slave morality' (or 'sheep morality', or 'mediocre morality'). These values have repressed the creative and vital potential of individuals, leading them to a mediocre and conformist existence. I would say that it is the morality of the human primate that walks looking at the ground and never at the stars. The transvaluation of all values is an act of liberation and affirmation of life, in which individuals must question and overcome the traditional norms and values that have been imposed on them. Rather than passively accepting inherited moral notions, Nietzsche invites people to set their own standards of value based on their own will to power and affirmation of life. Life must be recognized as a constant flow of change and transformation (Heraclitus-Nietzsche). Individuals must learn to embrace the uncertainty and ambiguity of existence, rather than seeking absolute truths or a fixed morality. This leads to the idea that exceptional individuals, the supermen or Übermenschen, are those who have carried out this act of transcendence and created their own authentic and autonomous values.
⦁ Possible evolutions of man: superman, slaves, cyborgs, etc.
In this section I will speculate on some possible evolutionary products that replace us. Before that, I will briefly comment on two literary works that refer to forms of exploitation of present-day human primates by present-day human primates.
⦁ In Aldous Huxley's 'Brave New World' the plot takes place in a dystopian society, set in the year 632 after Ford (equivalent to the year 2540), where humanity has reached a high level of social control, technology and consumption. The story begins at the Central London Incubation and Conditioning Centre, a center where human primates are artificially produced through in vitro fertilization and then conditioned to fulfil specific roles in society. Individuals are classified into different castes: Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, and Epsilon, each designed to perform specific functions. Alphas are the highest caste and are designed to be intelligent and leaders; they occupy positions of high responsibility in society. Betas are also smart, but slightly less intelligent than Alphas, and play administrative roles. The Gamma and Delta are intermediate castes, with more limited intellectual and physical abilities, assigned to semi-skilled and routine jobs. Finally, the Epsilon are the lowest caste, designed to be docile, obedient, and devoid of ambition; They work in manual and repetitive jobs. Each caste is conditioned from conception to fit into its predefined role, and society relies on stability and massive consumption of the drug soma to maintain superficial happiness and conformity, but at the expense of true individuality and free will. Leaders realize that social control is the key to maintaining order and stability. Although some individuals may feel uncomfortable in the system, most adapt and accept their predetermined fate. This is genetic engineering applied to obtain 'perfect' workers who are also happy for their fate. Pure capitalism or Stalinism.
⦁ George Orwell's '1984' is set in a bleak and totalitarian future where the government, led by the Party and its supreme leader known as 'Big Brother', exerts absolute control over the lives of citizens. Winston Smith, the protagonist, works for the Ministry of Truth, where he is tasked with rewriting history to match the official version of the Party (Stalin- style). Society is under constant surveillance, and the 'thought police' persecute and punish those who are considered dissidents or 'crime thinkers'. Winston feels alienated and begins to question the official truth. He begins to write in a secret diary where he expresses his deepest thoughts and feelings. Winston and his girlfriend are eventually arrested
and taken to the headquarters of the Ministry of Love, where they are subjected to physical torture and brainwashing into disowning their beliefs and loving the Party above all else. Winston submits to mind control and eventually becomes a loyal follower of the Party. It no longer questions the imposed reality and accepts the official version of events without question. He resigns himself to living in a state of complete submission. The Party has gained absolute control over Winston's mind. He has lost his individuality and any thought of rebellion. This work is of a group of human primates controlling a large number of human primates using technology. Currently Big Brother (or the Great Human Primate) is beginning to populate cities around the world with video cameras, facial recognition, video detection of behaviors defined as 'suspicious', etc.
Among many possibilities, in the event that we overcome the current stage of self-destruction, we could speculate about obtaining these possible evolutionary products [50]:
Biotechnological Homo sapiens: In a future where genetic engineering has advanced considerably, Homo sapiens may have been modified to be more resistant to disease, have improved longevity and cell regeneration capacity. This is a matter of time only. This 'product' is not Nietzsche's Übermensch.
Homo sapiens with enhanced cognitive abilities: With the use of brain implants and improvements in neurotechnology, humans have developed enhanced cognitive abilities, such as memory and information processing, allowing them to (voluntarily) access collective intelligence and a deeper understanding of the world around them. This is a matter of time only. This 'product' could be Nietzsche's Übermensch.
Humans with environmental adaptations: In response to extreme environmental changes, humans may have evolved specific physical or genetic adaptations to survive in new environments, such as improved lungs to breathe more polluted air or the ability to synthesize nutrients from limited resources. And perhaps to survive the effects of global warming. Given the speed of the latter, I have serious doubts about this. This 'product' is not Nietzsche's Übermensch.
Humans with technological integration: The fusion between humans and technology has advanced so much that some individuals have cybernetic parts integrated into their bodies, enhancing their physical and cognitive abilities. This is only a matter of time and already occurs in some cases such as when a lost organ (a leg, for example) is replaced. This 'product' is not Nietzsche's Übermensch.
Humans with expanded sensory abilities: Through genetic modification or the use of advanced technology, humans can have expanded senses, such as the ability to see in additional light spectrums or detect electromagnetic fields. This is a matter of time only. This 'product' is not Nietzsche's Übermensch.
Humans with telepathy or mental communication capabilities: Through genetic engineering or neurotechnology, some humans may have the ability to communicate telepathically or share thoughts and emotions directly. This is a problem of time and technology only. This 'product' is not Nietzsche's Übermensch.
Humans with extended digital life: By transferring consciousness to a digital or cybernetic form, some humans may have attained a prolonged life beyond their original biological form. This would be the ultimate goal but it's not on the horizon, just in science fiction. This 'product' is not Nietzsche's Übermensch.
The cyborg may be one of the near-end products of our evolution on Earth. For example, here's a possible composition of an advanced model. Its entire body would be composed of cybernetic parts, and the brain and central nervous system would be the only biological elements that remain. The cyborg retains its brain and central nervous system, allowing it to maintain its original identity and consciousness (this could be dangerous if such consciousness is that of a human primate).
⦁ Your head, which houses the brain, is protected by a sturdy cybernetic dome. The brain has been connected to a network of cybernetic computers that act as an interface between your mind and your new cybernetic body. This cyber network also allows you to access vast amounts of information and connect with other devices and systems.
⦁ Bionic Eyes: Natural eyes have been replaced by bionic eyes with advanced cameras and night vision or infrared capabilities, allowing you to see in different spectrums and increase your visual perception. The concept of 'hiding in the dark' could disappear.
⦁ Cyber Ears: Human ears have been replaced by cyber ears with enhanced hearing and the ability to filter and focus on specific sounds. For example, the cyborg can listen to hippos and whales.
⦁ Bionic legs and arms offer superhuman strength and speed, as well as having additional abilities such as the ability to interface with other devices or built-in weapons. The latter will depend on our internal evolution.
⦁ It has a sophisticated cybernetic energy distribution system that runs through its entire body, ensuring a constant flow of energy to its cybernetic components
⦁ It has a cybernetic system that uses a combination of filtration and oxygen capture from ambient air. Through advanced devices in your head, you can capture the oxygen needed to keep your brain and central nervous system functioning at peak performance.
⦁ The nutrient processor has also been replaced by a cybernetic system that allows the cyborg to obtain energy and nutrients directly from its internal energy network, eliminating the need for a traditional digestive system. This cybernetic system transforms the available energy and nutrient sources into assimilable forms for optimal functioning.
⦁ It also has a highly sophisticated cyber immune system that detects and fights any threat (biological, chemical) to your physical integrity, guaranteeing continuous and effective protection against infection and external damage.
⦁ Internal Power Source: The cyborg is equipped with an internal power source that powers all cybernetic organs and systems. This could be an advanced battery or an energy harvesting technology that keeps it running sustainably and sustainably.
⦁ One can imagine several ways in which the cyborg could reproduce without relying on traditional biological sex (Nietzsche would have been happy). This is one.
⦁ a. There are cyborgs with the ability to internally produce sperm or eggs through advanced cybernetic technology. These gametes would be created in internal laboratories and stored in external laboratories dedicated to that.
⦁ b. Through genetic engineering, specialist cyborgs would use techniques to select and fertilize eggs and raise fetuses in vitro.
The transformation into a cyborg would begin slowly at some point that I can't define. However, this 'product' is not Nietzsche's Übermensch.
If we apply the concept of the 'Übermensch' to this cyborg, we could find some similarities: Both the 'Übermensch' and the cyborg represent a new form of existence, beyond known human limitations. The 'Übermensch' seeks to rise above conventional norms and expectations, while the cyborg has achieved a hybrid way of life, merging biology and technology. But they are not the same. The question of a complete man is so important that it will be dealt with in a future text.
One last very important thing. These reflections were written over time on various mediums (paper, discs, etc.). Therefore, it could happen that I may have forgotten some citations, for which I apologize, and if someone reminds me, it will be my utmost pleasure to make the necessary corrections. I must also mention that the original Nietzsche quotes were extracted from his Complete Works published in the Spanish language [9, 29-31, 38-41].
⦁ Conclusion
We have tried to clarify Nietzsche's concept of Übermensch using the scientific knowledge acquired during the 20th and 21st centuries, especially biological knowledge. We have offered arguments showing that the Marxist and National Socialist 'new men' do not correspond to the Nietzschean Übermensch but remain in the domain of human primates. The same is true for humans known as cyborgs. The final conclusion is that we need an entirely new approach in order to advance the elucidation of Übermensch's Nietzschean concept.
Compliance with ethical standards
No conflict of interest to be disclosed.
References
⦁ Gómez-Jeria, J. S. Biology and Philosophy. VIII. Heidegger’s aletheia, scientific method and the advancement of the exact sciences. Followed by some thoughts on the minds living in darkness and the origin of the countless superstitions of Homo sapiens and ending with ‘Do elephants see Einstein's moon?’. World Journal of Research and Review 2023, 17:1-10.
⦁ Gómez-Jeria, J. S. Biology and Philosophy. VII. Sokrates, the Demigod. World Journal of Research and Review 2019,
9:26-30.
⦁ Gómez-Jeria, J. S. Biology and Philosophy. VI. Plato‟s Cave and Homo sapiens Inequality. World Journal of Research and Review 2019, 8:23-29.
⦁ Gómez-Jeria, J. S. Biology and Philosophy. V. Intermission. Goethe as an appetizer. World Journal of Research and Review 2019, 8:1-6.
⦁ Gómez-Jeria, J. S. Biology and Philosophy IV. The Presocratics. World Journal of Research and Review 2018, 7:44- 50.
⦁ Gómez-Jeria, J. S. Biology and Philosophy. III. About Mongrels and How to Shoot down a Crab from a Tree. World Journal of Research and Review 2018, 7:1-4.
⦁ Gómez-Jeria, J. S. Biology and Philosophy. Part II. The Upper Paleolithic and the Holocene. World Journal of Research and Review 2017, 4:42-47.
⦁ Gómez-Jeria, J. S. Biology and Philosophy. Part I. The Paleolithic. World Journal of Research and Review 2017,
4:21-28.
⦁ Nietzsche, F. Obras completas. Vol. III. Obras de madurez I. Tecnos: Madrid, 2014.
⦁ Sussman, R. W. Primate ecology and social structure. Pearson Custom Pub.: Needham Heights, MA, 1999.
⦁ Boë, L.-J.; Fagot, J. l.; Perrier, P.; Schwartz, J.-L.; Peter Lang Gmb, H. Origins of human language: continuities and discontinuities with nonhuman primates. Peter Lang Edition: Frankfurt am Main, 2017.
⦁ Sussman, R. W.; Hart, D.; Colquhoun, I. C. The natural history of primates: a systematic survey of ecology and behavior. Rowman & Littlefield: Lanham, 2023.
⦁ Richardson, J. Natural selection and genetic drift. In Nova Science Publishers, Inc.: New York, 2016.
⦁ Carlberg, C.; Molnár, F. Human epigenetics: how science works. In Springer: Cham, 2019.
⦁ Fagan, B. M. Cro-Magnon: how the Ice Age gave birth to the first modern humans. Bloomsbury Press New York: New York, 2011.
⦁ Holliday, T. Cro-magnon: the story of the last Ice Age people of Europe. Columbia University Press: New York, 2023.
⦁ Papagianni, D.; Morse, M. A. Neanderthals rediscovered : how modern science is rewriting their story. In Thames & Hudson: New York, NY, 2022.
⦁ Fuller, R. The book that changed America: how Darwin's theory of evolution ignited a nation. In Viking: New York, 2017.
⦁ ltis, H. Life of Mendel. In Routledge: Oxon, 2019.
⦁ Fairbanks, D. J. Gregor Mendel: his life and legacy. In Prometheus Lanham: Lanham, MD, 2022.
⦁ Plomin, R. Blueprint: how DNA makes us who we are. The MIT Press: Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2018.
⦁ Langdon, J. H. Human evolution: bones, cultures, and genes. Springer Cham: Cham, Switzerland, 2023.
⦁ French, J. Palaeolithic Europe: a demographic and social prehistory. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2021.
⦁ Cascalheira, J. o.; Picin, A. Short-term occupations in Paleolithic archaeology: definition and interpretation. Springer Cham: Cham, Switzerland, 2020.
⦁ Metzl, J. F. Hacking Darwin: genetic engineering and the future of humanity. Sourcebooks, Inc.: Naperville, Illinois, 2019.
⦁ Gregg, B. Creating human nature the political challenges of genetic engineering. In Cambridge University: Cambridge, 2022.
⦁ Harris, D. N.; Platt, A.; Hansen, M. E.; Fan, S.; McQuillan, M. A.; Nyambo, T.; Mpoloka, S. W.; Mokone, G. G.; Belay, G.; Fokunang, C.; Njamnshi, A. K.; Tishkoff, S. Diverse African genomes reveal selection on ancient modern human introgressions in Neanderthals. Current Biology 2023 33:4905-4916.
⦁ Muir, K.; Brodie, L. Convicts: the story of the penal settlements that created Australia. Trocadero Publishing: Sydney, 2012.
⦁ Nietzsche, F. Obras completas Vol. I. Escritos de juventud. Tecnos: Madrid, 2018; Vol. 1.
⦁ Nietzsche, F. Obras completas. Vol. II. Escritos filológicos. Tecnos: Madrid, 2018.
⦁ Nietzsche, F. Obras completas. Vol. IV. Escritos de madurez II y Complementos a la edición. Tecnos: Madrid, 2018; Vol. 4.
⦁ Gómez-Jeria, J. S. Alfred Rosenberg on Friedrich Nietzsche and Ludwig Klages. Journal of Advances in Education and Philosophy 2024, 8:54-69.
⦁ Gómez-Jeria, J. S. About Alfred Baeumler's Nietzsche. 5. 'Nietzsche as an existential thinker'. Journal of Advances in Education and Philosophy 2023, 7:533-549.
⦁ Gómez-Jeria, J. S. About Alfred Baeumler’s Nietzsche. 4. ‘Hellas and Germania’. Journal of Advances in Education and Philosophy 2023, 7:486-494.
⦁ Gómez-Jeria, J. S. About Alfred Baeumler’s Nietzsche. 3. 'Bachofen and Nietzsche'. Journal of Advances in Education and Philosophy 2023, 7:474-485.
⦁ Gómez-Jeria, J. S. About Alfred Baeumler’s Nietzsche. 2. 'The Solitude of Nietzsche'. Journal of Advances in Education and Philosophy 2023, 7:402-408.
⦁ Gómez-Jeria, J. S. About Alfred Baeumler's Nietzsche. Journal of Advances in Education and Philosophy 2023,
7:283-295.
⦁ Nietzsche, F. Fragmentos póstumos. Vol. II. (1875-1882). Tecnos: Madrid, 2008; Vol. 2.
⦁ Nietzsche, F. Fragmentos póstumos. Vol. IV. (1885-1889). Segunda edición ed.; Editorial Tecnos (Grupo Anaya, S.A.): España, 2008; Vol. 4.
⦁ Nietzsche, F. Fragmentos póstumos. Vol. I. (1869-1874). 2ª ed. corr. y aum ed.; Tecnos: Madrid, 2010; Vol. 1.
⦁ Nietzsche, F. Fragmentos póstumos. Vol. III. (1882-1885). Tecnos: Madrid, 2010; Vol. 3.
⦁ Alexopoulos, G. Illness and Inhumanity in Stalin's Gulag. Yale University Press: 2017.
⦁ Davies, R. W.; Tauger, M. B.; Wheatcroft, S. G. Stalin, grain stocks and the famine of 1932-1933. Slavic Review
1995, 54:642-657.
⦁ Kuromiya, H. The Soviet famine of 1932–1933 reconsidered. Europe-Asia Studies 2008, 60:663-675.
⦁ Schram, S. R. Mao Tse-tung and the Theory of the Permanent Revolution, 1958–69. The China Quarterly 1971,
46:221-244.
⦁ Zhou, X. Forgotten voices of Mao's great famine, 1958-1962: an oral history. Yale University Press: 2013.
⦁ Kiernan, B. The Pol Pot regime: Race, power, and genocide in Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge, 1975-79. Yale University Press: 2002.
⦁ Gómez-Jeria, J. S. Political Philosophers in Germany, 1943. Journal of Advances in Education and Philosophy 2023,
7:555-583.
⦁ Gómez-Jeria, J. S. Antisemitism and other writings (El antisemitismo y otros escritos, https://⦁ www.libgen.is/book/index.php?md5= 35296569D377F2E236B7BF7F3A0F101A). Ediciones La Runa del Lobo: Santiago de Chile, 2006.
⦁ Gómez-Jeria, J. S. Towards the Complete Man: Consciousness, Psyche, Mind, Memory, Soul, and Spirit. Journal of Advances in Education and Philosophy 2023, 7:351-371.