pp.

313-314 Section Three Having long kept a strict eye on the philosophers, and having looked between their lines, I say to myself: the largest part of conscious thinking has to be considered an instinctual activity, even in the case of philosophical thinking; we need a new understanding here, just as weve come to a new understanding of heredity and the innate. Just as the act of birth is scarcely relevant to the entire process and progress of heredity, so consciousness is scarcely opposite to the instincts in any decisive sense most of a philosophers conscious thinking is secretly guided and channeled into particular tracks by his instincts.

Although I partially agree with the fact that instinctual activity is happening during the process of thought and during conscious being, I can not believe fully that all my thought process is guided by unknown forces alone. The first thought that popped in my head after reading this section of the writing was the idea of child (although Im sure Nietzsche had something to do with that due to his metaphor of birth and heredity). Unlike the instincts of the child to feed, cry, touch, and sleep the child has no instinct to think or to begin development of thought. In fact, the only thing that allows the child to begin having conscious thought is written word and the childs knowledge of it. As the child learns language, conscious thoughts start inhibiting his mind. But according to Nietzsche the language is a human-made tool that defines the truths by which the whole world lives. Language is then a lie within itself and an illusion. Thus children must accept illusions as reality in order to function within the world and in order to have any kind of conscious thought. As I read past the initial idea I looked for proof of the claim made I stumbled upon a metaphor which I hoped would give me some answers. However, the metaphor Nietzsche has constructed is irrelevant to the argument he is making. He states that just as the act of birth is hardly relevant to who you are to become so is conscious thinking is hardly opposite of decisive instincts. This metaphor is my main roadblock in understanding the parallel and image Nietzsche is trying to create. Perhaps he could sway me in his favor but I cannot get past the few nonsensical lines that Ive read. But even if I got past my dislike for the metaphor I would say that decisive instincts, although a helping hand in the process of conscious thought, are based on experience and values formed throughout life. Decisions are derivatives of learned morals. Decisive instincts are then a contradiction because the ability to make decision on whats best (or worst) for someone is relative to the person making the decision. An instinct on the other hand is the lack of having to make decisions at all because instincts are built in mechanisms in each person and animal.