How seriously do academic historians take Nietzsche's

How seriously does anyone take academic historians?

>>1435266
Everyone knows he was describing a plausible arc for history, not a perfect account of it. GoM is mostly social critique and most academics know that

>>1435266
They don't care, it has little to do with what historians do.

>>1435336
>Everyone knows he was describing a plausible arc for history
k, but does his slave-master morality dichotomy actually match our documents from the ancient world?

>>1435266
Academic historian here.

Nietzsche was a syphalitic madman.

>>1435584
Didn't Kaufmann explain that when Nietzsche is talking about having the power to hurt to do great things, he was often referring to his mother's hurt when she found out what he was writing?

Literally, "Mom is gonna freak!"

>>1435584
Foucault (who worked historically) and Bourdieu (who used Nietzsche extensively) both took him very seriously.