Abstract

This article examines whether the subject of Nietzschean agonistic democracy is the ‘Sovereign Individual’. David Owen argues that the ideal community based on Nietzsche's philosophy is the agonistic democracy. According to him, agonistic democratic society based on Nietzsche is a community in which citizens strive to have their values recognized as the most outstanding values. He argues that for this community to be established and maintained, subjects must have two abilities: (1) honoring one’s commitments as autonomous beings (2) self-mastery which means critical evaluation of those who commit. And then, Owen argues that the subject with all the relevant abilities is the Sovereign Individual presented in 『On the Genealogy of Morality』. Against Owen’s arguemnt, I will stress the following three. First, there are many difficulties in considering the Sovereign Individual as an autonomous being. Second, the Sovereign Individual is not someone who actually possesses the ability to master himself, as represented by critical evaluation, but is only someone who deludes himself that he has it. Third, since the sovereign individual is not the ideal subject that Nietzsche positively evaluates, it is difficult to accept him as a subject of Nietzsche’s ideal community, a Nietzschean agonistic society. After analyzing Owen's discussion of the Sovereign Individual, I will examine 『On the Genealogy of Morality』 in which the Sovereign Individual appears and show that his reading is wrong.