Whatever questions you could have contact me

This book compares the ideas of Plato and Nietzsche, traditionally the opening of philosophy as metaphysics and its slow but inexorable dissolution. After the publication in Italy of the Platonic dialogues, the course that Nietzsche held in Basel in the winter semester 1871-72 and 1873-74 and in the summer semester 1876, experts have wondered if it were not the case for a revision of this traditional opposition.

The debate that arose was that the idea initially hypothetical and indirect, that "in its most radical and most important thesis, Nietzsche has always been a Platonic" (like Biuso says), had solid foundations. In this text, not only they were analyzed using a text-reconstruction on the writings of two philosophers, but we tried to identify the most plausible hermeneutical criterion by which to read unthinkable similarities and understand the real reasons of the remaining distances.

The comparison result is a common core of ethical-political foundation, incardinated in the figures of the philosopher-king and Zarathustra. The common enemy of both philosophers is the dominant culture of their time, Nietzsche engaging against nihilism and Plato against the Sophists. In common there is the great design of a new humanity where the bests (the philosopher for Plato, genious for Nietzsche) leads to a corrupt and decadent generation sunset to inaugurate a new kind of humanity, an new education and wisdom for our intelligence. The great hope of the two philosophers consists exactly in education of the best men, the genious who appears in the world sporadically, never as wanted, as programmed.

Whatever could have been the success of this planning, after the lesson of Plato and Nietzsche, nothing can remain as before. The actuality of their claims is reflected with unexpected reality in our daily life. Who thought of abstraction for professionals instead, has to begin to ask himself about all aspects of its own life, both individual and collective, and discover, with all the amazement whose only philosophy can, if our own lifestyle is or not into the republic of "bests."

If it is true that "the philosophy deserves this name only if something changes”, then the goal post by the two philosophers, has been completed.