to what purpose? To what utility? Because of this regard towards utility they are, as a whole, less objective than when looked at in their specialized aspects.Nietzsche, Human, All Too Human
Nietzsche at his best, on the attack and feeling out the underlying failures of so many systems! The tussle between philosophy and science is an interesting one because philosophy, especially that which is enshrined in the American college system, is not studying something that is in itself objective. Science is studying what is measurable, repeatable and proveable. While philosophy certainly can be considered the starting point for science, sciences evolution has made it something altogether different than the discipline that birthed it.
Nietzsche is speaking of those who try to look at science as a whole, to try to find some guiding principle. When one does this, they have taken to science in the wrong way. Utility, reason and goals are all subjective in nature. Hence when Philosophy speaks of the utility of science, they are not speaking of science at all. Science is objective, philosophy speaks of subjective things. Hence any answer that may be had for what the utility of science is has nothing to do with science at all.
This is a shorter post than normal because I had great difficulty with this aphorism. I suspect that I will need to revisit at a later date. I need a break from Human, All Too Human and plan on spending some time working on Nietzsche’s unfinished works found in Will To Power. While the post itself is lacking in depth, I hope the recording of the aphorism provides at least some value.