A Quote by Friedrich Nietzsche

Necessity is an interpretation, not a fact. — © Friedrich Nietzsche
Necessity is an interpretation, not a fact.
Necessity is not a fact; it's an interpretation.
Necessity is not an established fact, but an interpretation.
It is, therefore, possible to extend a partially specified interpretation to a complete interpretation, without loss of verifiability... This fact offers the possibility of automatic verification of programs, the programmer merely tagging entrances and one edge in each innermost loop.
When Nietzsche praises egoism it is always in an aggressive or polemical way, against the virtues, against the virtue of disinterestedness (Z III "Of the three evil things"). But in fact egoism is a bad interpretation of the will, just as atomism is a bad interpretation of force. In order for there to be egoism it is necessary for there to be an ego.
To avoid the hard necessity of either obeying or rejecting the plain instructions of our Lord in the New Testament we take refuge in a liberal interpretation of them. We evangelicals also know how to avoid the sharp point of obedience by means of fine and intricate explanations. These are tailor-made for the flesh. They excuse disobedience, comfort carnality and make the words of Christ of none effect. And the essence of it all is that Christ simply could not have meant what He said. His teachings are accepted even theoretically only after they have been weakened by interpretation.
The challenge for a writer looking at history is to figure out what is history and what is myth. After all, what you are looking at is an interpretation of history, and so at some level, it becomes an interpretation of an interpretation.
Manhood begins when we have in any way made truce with Necessity; begins even when we have surrendered to Necessity, as the most part only do; but begins joyfully and hopefully only when we have reconciled ourselves to Necessity; and thus, in reality, triumphed over it, and felt that in Necessity we are free.
Modern masters of science are much impressed with the need of beginning all inquiry with a fact. The ancient masters of religion were quite equally impressed with that necessity. They began with the fact of sin-a fact as practical as potatoes. Whether or not man could be washed in miraculous waters, there was no doubt at any rate that he wanted washing.
In reality, the law always contains less than the fact itself, because it does not reproduce the fact as a whole but only in that aspect of it which is important for us, the rest being intentionally or from necessity omitted.
Necessity is an evil; but there is no necessity for continuing to live subject to necessity.
Every interpretation is but an introduction to another interpretation, and that is how Talmud pages are printed.
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
The real problem is not the religion itself, but its insistence that the interpretation it offers of the world is the only valid interpretation.
What is and isn't justified by military necessity is, naturally, open to interpretation. One of the key concepts, though, is the law of proportionality. A military attack that results in civilian casualties - 'collateral damage' - is acceptable as long as the military benefits outweigh the price that is paid by humanity.
In the performance sense, I find that interpretation is improvisatory in nature. You can go anywhere with an interpretation on any given day.
Today, we're encouraged to believe that we should have a verbal interpretation for what we view as art - when in fact the words are an intrusion on the experience.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!