Aphorisms can be seen as an art: making the best connection between existing knowledge so as to reveal some truth through the shortest expression. There seem to be two conditions for achieving this: first, the aphorism must be both profound in the thought that it expresses (not just a commonplace or triviality) and the language used must be strong yet terse. If all of these are achieved, the aphorism can be both enlightening and memorable. 

Very few philosophers have tried to use this approach in their philosophy, although it was certainly there in the Ancient tradition of the Chinese sages, as well as in the writings of Parmenides and other Ancients. More recently, Nietzsche and Wittgenstein seemed to write almost in aphorisms. Here Zura Shiolashvili sets out to prove the case.

Martin Cohen, in the philosopher, Volume LXXXIX  No. 2 Autumn 2001

Aphorisms are essentially an aristocratic genre of writing, said W.H. Auden, the aphorist does not argue or explain, he asserts.

I like aphorisms, those pithy little one-liners which are supposed to encapsulate a great truth, and I like aphoristic philosophers. I am, though, rather aware of a certain academic strain which likes to look down on the popular or the simple, and takes exception at things which you can't mark, and you can't mark aphorisms, because the essence of a good one is that it isn't finished. It hints at more unsaid, it points you off towards somewhere else, a bit like that conceptual art stuff, where the customer has to take their own meaning away from the Trevi Fountains, or a pile of bricks.

Zura Shiolashvili seems to be one of the few willing to risk taking take on this dangerous philosophical form, in his 'The Art of Aphorism and Nietzsche's Blind Passion'. Now, if I were going to write something denouncing the Chinaman of Basel, I would probably try to do it my own way, but Zura, rather ingeniously, uses precisely the Nietzsche’s own aphorism- expansion- explanation form and turns it back on Friedrich. So he gives us aphorisms as blunt as Christianity is the embodiment of beauty, instead of Nietzsche’s  I call Christianity the one great curse,  or as abstruse as Sometimes joy is nothing but empty wind and fallen leaves are the fruit of it. or Gaining love is the greatest revenge.  If something rotten is only threatened by worms, it is due to decay and not the presence of worms.

I can't say it convinces me, but then I'm not convinced by Christianity, (Overcoming resistance is the shining minute of hope.) but it does very powerfully demonstrate the intense spiritual power of a force like Christian love, for as Mr Shiolashvili says:

The Spiritual values symbolise the true face of physical sensations.

Glyn Lloyd Hughes

In his fascinating book The Art of Aphorism and Nietzsche’s Blind Passion, Zura Shiolashvili has many trenchant and severe (yet just) criticisms to make of Nietzsche.  In his 322 aphorisms there is also a depth of wisdom that is highly positive.  Some of his aphorisms are brief and enigmatic, as aphorisms should be:

Music prolongs eternity (50); Life is but one – deaths are many (73).  Others have an immediate point that remains clearly in my mind: The snake which chuckles is more dangerous than the one which hisses (56); Life is the sea of wonder – wisdom but a drop found (78).  On many occasions I could do no more than say, ‘It is exactly so’, as when he writes:

To walk on the way of truth is more significant than to be born – to pass through this way is more bitter than death (114); A reptile cannot be got to genuflect – it has no knees (195); A man is a man only in God (208)

 Metropolitan Kallistos of Diokleia

Of course, it is not difficult to find a completely different Nietzsche. One of the dangers of picking quotations from Nietzsche is that like other philosophers who employ indirect discourse such as Kierkegaard, he speaks in multiple voices.

This is not a criticism of Zura Shiolashvili 's approach. He is partisan, and I am the last person to preach that philosophers should strive to be impartial. In fact, Shiolashvili's approach is Nietzschean in that regard. It was Nietzsche who questioned the value of 'knowledge for the sake of knowledge'. Each of us looks for what will strengthen us, enable us to grow, and avoids that which it is best that we do not know. Which is exactly what Zura Shiolashvili is doing, all credit to him for that.

Geoffrey Klempner

… reproduced in the Georgian philosopher Zura Shiolashvili's Christian response to Nietzsche. He urges that Nietzsche's advocacy of 'animal freedom' leads to 'spiritual slavery.'

Church Times, No.7755 - 4 November 2011

Amazon.co.uk
Customer Reviews
Captivating reading, 28 Dec 2011
This review is from: The Art of Aphorism and Nietzsche's Blind Passion (Paperback)

This is a must read for anyone wanting to look deeper into Nietzche. The Aphorisms are outstanding and some of the finest you will read in this area of study. Nietzsche is truly held to account in this text.

Dave Collins (Cardiff, UK)