Leitner calls Nietzsche a naturalist thinker about morality
Thinking of him in line with Hume and Freud, rather than the popular view of thinking of him as a precursor to postmodernism
“Naturalist” is a fraught term. Need to distinguish:
“substantive”
a certain ontological view (no ‘supernatural’ things exist)
“methodological”
an idea of how one does philosophy
There aren’t any distinctive philosophical practices, no difference in kind with other sciences (primarily psychology)
No reliance purely on a priori
Nietzsche is at least the latter. Calls himself the ‘first psychologist’
He is a ‘speculative methodological naturalist’ like Hume.
Same kind of structure of argument that is characteristic of Hume:
Take some class of beliefs (e.g. beliefs of morality)
Be skeptical that the beliefs can be rationally arrived at
Construct a psychological narrative for how we could have arrived at those beliefs / why they are attractive to human beings as they are.
E.g. in geneology of morals: how did the acetic ideal come to dominate the human mind / major religions.