Analytical reason against continental reason: Nietzsche in dispute on the old fields of philosophical battle

Abstract

This paper aims at establishing a confrontation between two traditions of the nietzschean interpretation: the french, and the analytical. After presenting an aproximative synthesis of its main arguments, at the end I propose a balance of this confrontation, trying to point out the pros and cons of each position: if the analytical tradition has the advantage of requiring the greatest precision as possible in the grounding of the philosophical arguments, it has the disadvantage of adopting too narrow criteria; if the french tradition, in its turn, tends to fall into the paradox of relativism, its emphasis on the symbolic richness of Nietzsche’s thought allows us to preserve his fundamental concepts without the risc of dogmatizing them.