It is not without good reason that Paglia refers to Freud as Nietzsche's successor. There is an abundance of sharp psychological observation that one typically obtains from a loner like Nietzsche. Although some of these observations make more sense than others, they all offer valuable insights into the human psyche.

What strikes me is that Nietzsche, despite being often regarded as the father of Post-Modernism, still seems deeply rooted in the Judeo-Christian/Ancient Greek tradition. When contrasted with someone like Foucault, who doesn't seem to believe in truth or Logos, Nietzsche appears to me like a Christian trying to break free from his background. He has a clear understanding of what constitutes right and wrong behavior, yet he is desperately attempting to sever it from its roots. As a result, there is still a palpable sense of direction within him.

I also find Nietzsche's intellectual honesty highly admirable. He dedicated himself to attacking everyone he considered wrongheaded, such as Wagner, or shallow, like the German nationalists, or weak, like Christianity. Moreover, he did not exempt himself from this unrelenting self-criticism. One of his aphorisms memorably states that one should envision one's opponent as a knight in shining armor before attacking.

'Dawn of Day' is taken from near the end of the book, where he explains that a phoenix will burn the contents of a scroll - which, as it turns out, contains his ideas. However, he doesn't mind because the idea will be erased and reborn, just like the dawn of every new day. While it may not be Nietzsche's most brilliant book, I still quite enjoy it.

Rereading Nietzsche is an ongoing challenge as it forces one to question one's own established beliefs and values. He clearly foresaw and described the nihilism that plagues us and completely permeates our society and our consciousness. It seems that he attacks Western civilization and its logos that has been formed over 2500 years, but in reality, his attacks are only ironic and scathing remarks on a major crisis in progress. I don't believe that the overcoming of the long-lasting and spreading crisis of values can be found in the recipes and rhapsodies of our Nietzsche. I think that following his indications leads only to suicide and depression, except perhaps for a few, or to an excessive mania of grandeur.

I hold on to my poor and banal beliefs, I always adhere with more conviction to Christ and the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and I always read more willingly the peaceful and silent reflections of Pascal.

In 'Aurora', Nietzsche finally breaks away from Schopenhauer and Wagner for good.

This marks a significant turning point in his philosophical journey. The affirmation of life becomes the key to unlocking the door of liberation from the chains that have bound him.

No longer is he held captive by the ideas and influences of these two figures. Instead, he forges his own path, exploring new concepts and perspectives.

With this separation, Nietzsche is able to fully embrace his own unique vision of life and existence. He begins to question and challenge the established norms and values, paving the way for a new era of philosophical thought.

'Aurora' thus serves as a symbol of Nietzsche's newfound freedom and independence, as he steps into the light and embarks on a journey of self-discovery and intellectual exploration.

**Title: The State of Morality in the Modern World**

In our present times, we are living in a highly immoral era. The power of customs has weakened, and the sense of morality has vanished. Morality is nothing more than obedience to customs, regardless of their nature. Customs are the transmitted way of acting and evaluating through tradition. In matters where tradition does not prescribe, morality does not exist. And if life is not defined by tradition, the sphere of morality is smaller. This means that someone must rule over you in the form of regulations, orders, and laws for you to be moral.

It follows that morality is prone to multiplicity, and its strength depends on the individuals who form the multitude, that is, on their ability to adhere to the prescribed norms. Every person who tries to escape from tradition simultaneously steps out of the circle of morality. Therefore, the one who strives to be free is also immoral because he wants to depend on himself in everything, not on any tradition. In such a constructed morality, "evil" means arbitrary and individualistic.

As a higher authority of tradition, a person is obliged not because of its order for his benefit but because of the very act of ordering. Oh, what a pitiful world when it has to be ordered and forcibly create an image of its distorted morality! It is necessary to crystallize two types of morality: there is a difference between the morality that shines with the morality of the easiest fulfillment and the morality that shines with the morality of the hardest fulfillment. In the case of the easiest fulfillment, the most moral is the one who makes a sacrifice. In the case of the hardest fulfillment, custom and tradition come to the fore despite individual benefit and contrary to inclination, and in this type of morality, the individual must sacrifice himself. In one morality, he is the doer, and in the other, the sacrificial lamb. Morality requires that one does not think of oneself but respects the rules. The individual's violation of morality falls on the burden of society, and then follows that unnatural punishment, the sting of hypocrisy. So, it is impossible to even imagine what free and sincere souls, individuals throughout history, have endured because they were considered evil and dangerous. Morality acts against the emergence of new and better customs; it dulls.

Ima toliko zora koje još nisu zarudjele.

A book such as this is not intended for reading straight through or reading aloud in a continuous manner. Instead, it is meant for dipping into, especially when one is out walking or on a journey.

You must have the ability to stick your head into it and then out of it again and again, only to discover that there is nothing familiar around you.

Just as the writer wrote about Daybreak, this book offers a unique experience. It allows you to explore different ideas and perspectives, even if they are unfamiliar at first.

By dipping into the book at various times and in different situations, you can gain a deeper understanding of its contents and perhaps even discover something new about yourself.

So, the next time you find yourself with a spare moment while out and about, consider picking up a book like this and dipping into its pages. You may be surprised at what you find.

A faint shadow, indeed, at the dawn of works yet to come.

Published in 1881 and translated into English in 1911, this work lacks the sustained arguments, the wit and eloquence, and the elegance of the coming works.

It consists of 575 loose aphorisms, without the concept of eternal return.

It is not a good place to start or to finish reading or thinking about Nietzsche.

Perhaps it serves as a precursor, hinting at the great ideas and profound insights that Nietzsche would later develop in his more mature works.

However, on its own, it may leave the reader feeling somewhat unsatisfied, longing for the fullness and depth that Nietzsche is capable of achieving.

Nonetheless, it still holds a certain charm and value, as it offers a glimpse into the early stages of Nietzsche's philosophical exploration.

It is a reminder that even the greatest thinkers have their beginnings, and that their ideas evolve and mature over time.

I firmly believe that I could write it better.

With my passion for writing and my dedication to the craft, I am confident that I can produce a more engaging, well-structured, and thought-provoking piece.

I would take the time to carefully analyze the topic, conduct in-depth research, and develop a clear and concise argument.

I would also pay close attention to the language and style, using vivid imagery, powerful vocabulary, and proper grammar and punctuation to bring the piece to life.

Additionally, I would seek feedback from others to ensure that my writing is clear, understandable, and effective in communicating my intended message.

In conclusion, I am certain that I could write it better and would be more than happy to take on the challenge.

Daybreak is undoubtedly the least well-known of all of N.'s books, yet it is truly a wonder. This remarkable work is filled to the brim with profound insights. It contains the seeds that would later develop into Foucault's influential works such as Discipline & Punish and The History of Sexuality. One could use Daybreak as the basis for a hundred dissertations and still only begin to explore its depths.

Daybreak showcases N.'s brilliance at a stage before his ideas became more refined, more intense, and more focused on world-building. If you have never delved into the works of Nietzsche and wish to gain an understanding of the breadth and scope of his thinking, Daybreak serves as an excellent starting point. It offers a unique glimpse into the early stages of his intellectual journey, presenting a wealth of ideas and perspectives that are both thought-provoking and engaging.

The man who engages in meditation upon his day's and life's work when he has reached the end of his journey and experiences weariness, typically arrives at a melancholy conclusion. However, this is not the fault of the day or his life itself, but rather of the state of weariness.

During the midst of creative work, as a general rule, we do not take the time to reflect upon life and existence. Nor do we do so in the midst of our pleasures. But if, by some chance, this were to happen just once, we would no longer believe that the person who waits for the seventh day and for repose to find everything that exists very beautiful is correct.

He had simply missed the right moment. It is in those fleeting instants, in the heat of creation or the height of pleasure, that the true essence of life and its beauty can be glimpsed. Waiting until exhaustion sets in often clouds our perception and leads to a more somber view. We should strive to be more attuned to these precious moments and not let them pass us by.

A little difficult went forward, but unfortunately I hadn't read an influential book before.

After this book, a kind of thinking was established. A little translation was not perfect, but this is the situation that it is possible to ignore the translation.

It seems that this book has opened up a new world for me. Although there are some difficulties in understanding, I am still very interested in it. I believe that as I continue to read and study, I will be able to have a deeper understanding of this book and gain more inspiration and knowledge.

At this point, for Nietzsche, his fundamental critique of morality reaches a new level. It is a higher form of indifference compared to what he presented in "Human, all too Human." To better understand his stance, it's fair to recall a quote from the preface of "Daybreak or Dawn."

"This Preface comes late, but not too late; what difference, after all, do five or six years make? A book, a problem such as this, has no hurry; besides, both of us, I just as much as my book, are friends of the lento. Having been a philologist is not for nothing; perhaps you remain one, a teacher, in other words, of slow reading -- in the long run, you end up writing slowly as well. Nowadays it is not only a matter of habit for me, but also one of taste, a malicious taste perhaps?"

So, Nietzsche retains a positive, active, and provocative view of the world. He attempts to understand the foundation of moral claims about existence and whether there is any fundamental merit within them. In other words, he still plays with logic against the moral prejudices of German philosophers like Kant and Schopenhauer, and even against the devotees of Christian morality prevalent in today's Western culture.

His assault on Christianity has become more solid, frank, and cold. In many passages, he speaks as different characters, compelling the serious reader to question their inner drives and motives. He emphasizes in the deconstruction of Schopenhauer's pessimism and subjectivity that the belief in moral certainty is based on the omission of the actions' occurrence.

Nietzsche demands that if humanity gets rid of the belief that life is evil, sinful, and wrong, then we can move forward. This, of course, leads to an emptiness of feeling when simply questioning the value of living, which concerns him throughout the book.

Continuing from the previous explanation, Nietzsche's impassioned interest in the aesthetic use of art becomes evident. His concern for humanity expands in a crude way, making them accept that life brings misfortune and hardship, and that morality is a complex and malleable tool that should not be used in only one direction.

Calling in the Greeks, his admiration for them shines through his passion and intellectual exertion of their progress. As an old species, they affirmed life as tragic but still livable through aesthetic valuations. For example, the creation of their gods was to bear the tragedies of living, but at times, they would rage against their own creation.

Nietzsche assesses the devastation of mankind's universal attitude to life at the time, which is still relevant today. The Christian morality, which depends on the science of its hidden needs to dominate over its enemies, has reprimanded the nature of the world for not confronting the gloom and loom that the Greeks accepted.

So, what does it really mean for Nietzsche? Living and constantly discovering that we are not in control of our will to the degree we assume? This book closes with certainties that don't sum up Nietzsche's philosophy as he still had to develop his ideals. Fortunately, he idolizes those who can read him sensibly and patiently and may have even intimately requested to be understood as unsure of themselves.

Recalling art once more, his elaboration of the average individual's inclination to music, the poet's over-witty style of expressing nature's simplicity, and the philosopher's desire to make an impression on his readers for the sake of feeling exalted - he only latches onto these things inquisitively. In other words, his "thoughts on the prejudices of morality" are like a set of tools used to undo what has been built from the common view of morality and draw new attention to its elasticity.

All in all, it's a powerful book. One shouldn't read it with the hope of emerging completely happy or even melancholy. Instead, one should accept life as it is, trusting what comes their way, as a burden of pain can give birth to the beautiful. Maybe then one's daybreak will come too.

If you are not prepared to see everything that you and humanity believe to be "right" crumble to the ground, do not read this book. Brilliant! Nietzsche peels away all the layers of our understanding about morality and universal truths. By reading this book, I realized that everything is just a concept, and that things are the way they are because since the beginning we are made to believe that they are so. In fact, we could live in such different ways if we could, or rather, if we allowed ourselves to create our own concepts about everything. Morality is a created value and not fundamental. Reading this book is like taking the blinders off our eyes and the weight of religions off our backs.