Very well put and I think a fair analysis of Nietzsche’s observations on the “social fabric” – or at least what holds it together.
some have termed this the “Common Mind”, an amalgam of tradition, myth, common law / practice; whatever it is, it must be argued that at some level it rests upon *stupidity* in Nietzsche’s use of the term – i.e. a *knowing* and willful reluctance to see “through” the facile convention devised and agreed upon by humans to allow / permit peaceful relations amongst the citizenry.

Yet, remember Ole’ Freddie’s rhetorical question: “But what if Truth be a Woman?’ – she wishes to be conquered.

What this means for Nietzsche (us?) is that life is to be approached vigorously, with gusto, with discernible intent to overcome falsity in an effort to win the heart of Truth.


This does not (necessarily) mean that the discover, the successful *Lover* of Truth ought to then proceed to enlighten all the other citizenry. The real “Lover” of Truth and one that would in Nietzschean terms would share her * comforts* most fully would be one who deliberately refrains from exposing the “private parts” of the societal myth(s) and instead recognizes that Truth, though she be a woman, often prefers coyness, secrecy and the Noble Lie (here, at times, I think Nietzsche is somewhat reflective of the Ancient Greeks valuation of the Noble Lie).

Ole Freddie recognizes that in order to avoid, or at least provide some structure for the polis to deal with the inevitable *collisions* of human intercourse, that an overarching myth “LIE?) must be both imposed AND believed in.

If not chaos breaks out – that is when we start listening to all the “social justice warriors” who are quite adept at pointing out the Oakeshottian *collisions.*

Nietzsche would be a great convention speaker, don’t you think?