Hello good everyone; Today I come to talk about an author that I am very excited about because he was the first of the philosopher authors with whom I delved into philosophy texts and I am talking about Nietzsche I and my first philosophy book that I found at home by chance turned out to be my mother's and the idea passed through my head that it would be a good idea to read this philosopher and at the moment in which I entered into the birth of tragedy and began to read Apollonian and Dionysian my The lights went out and up to this point, I continued reading but I understood absolutely nothing and years later I realized that I could have understood many things, not only the birth of the tragedy but also his entire work. If I had understood its context well, both philosophical and political, economic, social, and personal, that is why I have decided to make a series of publications, this will be the first with which I will try to give some tools or I will try to explain in the best way this author and the most important points of his philosophy in order to understand him. Here I am going to deal with some very general lines, who was this philosopher, where did this philosopher arise, what is his motivation and we could say his political, social, economic, historical context and what made all that philosophy lead him to his work, to everything he postulated, so I am going to start with some brief biographical notes to be able to understand it, I will try to do it in the best way and so that it does not become too heavy. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche is a man who was born in 1844 in Germany in Rocken. His family was very religious, especially his father, but he died when Nietzsche was only 5 years old and his father actually wanted Nietzsche to dedicate himself to the same thing as him. leaves very evidently with quotes of total contempt towards those two women and we could say in general it has not always been attributed to him as something of a misogynist or something like that. His studies at first began to be theology, but he did not finish his degree and ended up studying classical philology and this is actually a somewhat curious note because his first book, Birth of Tragedy, was intended to be a philological study, but it ended up being philosophy. It is worth mentioning that Nietzsche's entire life will be marked by his poor health. 1900. We have to understand the context in which he finds himself, he grows, it is the great Germany, we could say why because it is the birth of an empire, the German Empire, because until then that empire had been the Austro-Hungarian Empire, in the end we could say those nationalist thoughts begin to emerge or what would be the origin of nationalism, let's say that that is the context in which it is found, it is also worth highlighting the industrial revolution and something very important is the birth or even the predominance of some movements of the Workers' struggle, such as the communism, Marxism, socialism, things that are practically synonymous.

We will see how Nietzsche was actually totally opposed to all mass movements, and ultimately colonialism, which is something that really are very general features, but I do not want to give it special importance because it seems to me that what is most relevant is the failure of the enlightened project, we already realized what that enlightened project was looking for and precisely for Kant in the 17th century he sought to ensure that the human being himself did not exceed that age of majority because this meant the emancipation of the subject himself, this gave him the ability to develop the rationality of An autonomous way means thinking autonomously and not heteronomously, not that the rules imposed on us what we should and had to think.

In this context we have to say that Kant, for his part, fully supported the Enlightenment project, that is why he believed that we were capable of achieving world peace or what he called it, not that cosmopolitan society where it was precisely the people who were the legislators and established those moral maxims, those imperatives, that ethics of duty, which moved us all as ends in themselves and not as means, all this was very far from those particular interests of each one, this is precisely what he intended to be developed. or let's say that what he called perpetual peace would lead to.

Here we find a problem and it is that this entire project failed, because the Enlightenment sought precisely that enhancement of reason in order to precisely be able to evolve in society, because technical progress and moral progress have never walked hand in hand together, while one evolved, the one was left behind, while the one who was left behind could evolve, the one who was evolved went back behind, so they never went hand in hand.

They did not make us believe that technical improvement, that we improve in a scientific way, would lead us to be better people, what happens is that we realize how the atrocities that were committed during that period and above all the presence of societies, there was a very great inequality that was perpetual in those societies and that also using reason, what the Enlightenment reason proposed in this case, did not make us better people in better societies, because the reason that the Enlightenment defended was instrumental reason, this reason is the reason that is at the service of those manipulative and above all mercantilist interests, which is precisely what has taken over, we could say, all areas of our existence to make everything useful.

Until publication, I hope you have retained the main ideas of the beginnings of this 19th century illustrated book.