retrograde

After talking about rejecting metaphysical ideas, especially theological ones like original sin and salvation, Nietzsche puts this forward: "Then, however, a retrograde movement is necessary: he must understand both the historical and psychological justification in metaphysical ideas. He must recognize how mankind's greatest advancement came from them and how, if one did not take this retrograde step, one would rob himself of mankind's finest accomplishments to date."

I'm not against metaphysics to the extent that Nietzsche is, but I do think there is something very important here in terms of ideas and how they are approached. What I find boring about much of philosophy, theology, and even history, is that first movement that Nietzsche talks about, where energy goes towards assent or rejection, proof or disproof. What I find more interesting is asking the question of why an idea is valuable and powerful, how it functions, and what it has done. I may not believe in substitutionary atonement, but I still find it to be fascinating for just these reasons. Not to mention, arguments centering around assent and rejection are unlikely to change anyone's minds, but arguments focused around function can be much more revealing.

Where I also get bored of philosophy and theology is the treatment of ideas as fixed forms, as stable entities, and as essences. I'm not sure that ideas ever reach a fixed state, in spite of various attempts to construct or identify stable systems of thought and how each part of the system works together. The history of an idea isn't just about how an idea passed through time, or even how it changed through time, but also how the manipulation and multiplicity of a single idea is necessary for it to function.