Nietszche=Whoa!

Philosophy is pretty dry. Educated men (fewer women) write down funny ideas that may or may not bear any relation to reality. Sometimes, philosophy has a prescriptive element, such as Thomas Hobbes’s call for a strong sovereign. Often, though, philosophy describes the world as is. Immanuel Kant had a largely descriptive philosophy, and one that does not have immediate interest.
Friedrich Nietszche’s philosophy is not dry at all. In fact, it is jarring, deeply symbolic, and made me a tad uncomfortable. One could read it as the ramblings of a crazy anti-Christian, and would be right. But if one looks even deeper, he sees a philosopher prepared to question everything that came before him. He not only questions our Judeo-Christian values, but how we construct our values in the first place. What do our values help us avoid? How did we come to those values?
To explain Nietszche’s philosophy is a waste of time, for I can do him no justice. What I can do is note the stylistic differences between Nietszche and all other philosophers. Unlike most philosophical texts, Nietszche’s book is deeply personal, and uses metaphors and literary devices freely. Nietszche makes huge empirical claims, such as his version of community formation in the middle of his second essay.
One other thing to note is that Nietszche’s three essays attack the same question from three different angles. Each is a criticism of traditional morality on three different fronts, leaving me confused where one distinction ends and the other begins. One thing for certain, though, is that Nietszche’s thought is so rich and consistent that it deserves time for contemplation.