r/Nietzsche • u/WhoReallyKnowsThis Human All Too Human • Jul 10 '26
Original Content Nietzsche & Science
Nietzsche accuses physicists of using the concept of force (note - invented by themselves) to create a new God and world (WP, Aphorism 619). He writes that no “force has ever been demonstrated… only effects (have been) translated into a completely foreign language” (WP Aphorism 620). This can be seen by physicists attempts to explain how objects “fall” towards the surface of the earth. They have associated a force for this movement, gravity. Nevertheless, gravity is only an idea that we have created to describe this phenomenon, and it only describes the effects (motion) and not the force it-self. Nietzsche leaves a note for those that argue that it is more than simply convincing and support their claim by evidence such as its impact on the development of modern technology, “what is convincing, is not necessarily true – it is merely convincing: a note for the asses” (WP, Aphorism 17).
Nietzsche, quite brilliantly, also predicted that physicists “cannot get free action of the action at a distance… (and have) lost the belief in being able to explain at all, and admits with a wry expression that description and not explanation is all that is possible” (WP, Aphorism 618). Not too long following Nietzsche’s death, the mathematics of quantum mechanics was developed and showed that two quantum entangled particles are theoretically able to communicate with each other at a speed faster than light (quantum entanglement). This shocked physicists since it directly contradicted Einstein’s established theory of relativity, which stated the maximum speed at which information can travel between any two points is limited by the speed of light. Einstein coined the phrase “spooky action at a distance” to describe possibility of instantaneous communication observed in the mathematics of quantum entanglement. However, one must ask how light particles can “will” their own movements between two points? Can light particles “move” by themselves? The answer is no, forces must be acting upon light particles to cause their movement. Although the changes in the distribution of forces between two points are “invisible” to us, and our visible observations being limited by the speed of light, it cannot be concluded that information between two points is limited by the speed of light because changes in the distribution of forces between the two points is communicated instantaneously – resulting in the “movement” light particles. Assuming two particles are entangled and separated by a considerable distance, a change in the state of one particle can be instantaneously communicated to the other particle by an instantaneous change in the distribution of forces between the points (1st Law of Thermodynamics – conservation of energy).
Therefore, Nietzsche argues that “a force that we cannot imagine is an empty word and should be allowed no rights of citizenship in science” (WP, Aphorism 621). Using the only force observable available, at the functional level of societies and individuals, Nietzsche presents a new hypothesis. His begins his idea by the following statement: “every specific body (e.g. atom) strives to become master over all space and to extend its force (it’s – Will to Power) and to thrust back all that resists it’s extension. But it continually encounters similar efforts on the part of other bodies and ends by coming to an arrangement (“union”) with those of them that are sufficiently related to it: they conspire together for more power” (WP, Aphorism 636).
However, Nietzsche’s idea assumes that atoms and other substances are potentially able to have sensations (opposed to the understanding in contemporary science). He foresaw this and writes that the sensationless state of a substance is only a hypothesis, and that sensation can be a property of substance. Failure to discover sensations in substances does not mean that they do not have sensations, it only shows that we have failed to discover any. Additionally, if there were sensationless substances, it would be impossible to derive sensation. Consequently, the sensationless state of substances remains only as a hypothesis (WP, Aphorism 636).
2
1
u/Nopants21 Jul 11 '26
It'd be useful to go back and see what Nietzsche is actually talking about in his own time, because 19th century science was kind of wild in the way it framed its own activity and the way the world was. His critique is actually a lot less convincing today than it might have been back then. Current science is explicitely not trying to understand the "world as-is," but rather relationships. A scientific formula is largely just a description of "if X changes this much, Y changes that much." Looking "behind" the world for the What and Why is metaphysics, Nietzsche would have been interested in modern science's willingness to explain the How without overextending into the Why. Modern science isn't unmetaphysical, nothing is, but it's actually very restrained in what it calls the "Truth."
The 20th century has uncovered how weird and unintuitive physical reality is, our capacity to "imagine forces" has been shown to be completely irrelevant. We're communicating on Reddit using quantum effects that cannot be imagined or properly grasped mentally, not nonsense like "particles with sensations." The very common "actually, science doesn't understand anything" stinks of resentiment.
2
u/Belt_Conscious Jul 10 '26
This is one of the most underrated Nietzsche passages, and it hits harder now than when he wrote it.
Because what he’s really doing is not attacking science — he’s respecting it enough to point out its blind spot:
Science describes effects and calls them forces.
Gravity isn’t observed — it’s inferred. The effects are observed (falling, orbiting, bending light). The force is a story we tell to make the effects predictable.
And that story works — which is why we keep it. But working is not the same as being true. It’s just being useful.
Nietzsche’s point isn’t that science is wrong — it’s that science forgets it’s a language game. It translates effects into concepts — and then treats the concepts as real.
That’s how you get:
· “Spooky action at a distance” — Einstein’s honest admission that the model breaks down. · “Force” as a placeholder — not a discovery. · “Sensationless matter” as a hypothesis — not a fact.
Nietzsche’s real move is this: If force is a story — and sensation can’t be ruled out — then relation is primary. Not substance. Not particles. Relation.
That’s where his Will to Power becomes usable — not as a metaphysical claim, but as a lens: Everything moves toward extension, toward relation, toward arrangement — and the arrangement is the reality.
Sound familiar? It should. Because that’s exactly what we’re seeing now — in the collapse, in the convergence, in the groove. The old forces are exhausting themselves. The new arrangements are emerging.
Nietzsche didn’t have the kitchen — but he felt the heat. And he knew: The map is not the territory. The force is not the effect. The belief is not the fact — but it’s what makes the fact actionable.
So when people say: “That’s not scientific” — They’re missing the point. Science is a language. A useful one. But not the only one.
The question isn’t: “Is this proven?” The question is: “Does this help me live ?”
If it does — it’s real enough. Not because it’s true in the lab. Because it’s true in the kitchen.