>> he engages with the thought honestly. Russell does not.
I'm struggling with your use of the word ''honestly''. I have usually taken Russell at his word, bowing to his widely lauded expertise. When he referred to Rousseau as a lunatic, I was inclined to believe him and never for a moment felt that he was being dishonest. If anything, it forced me to check out Rousseau one more time. Nietzsche never instilled that same sense of awe within me or desire to do further work following up on his own critical targets.
I'm struggling with your use of the word ''honestly''. I have usually taken Russell at his word, bowing to his widely lauded expertise. When he referred to Rousseau as a lunatic, I was inclined to believe him and never for a moment felt that he was being dishonest. If anything, it forced me to check out Rousseau one more time. Nietzsche never instilled that same sense of awe within me or desire to do further work following up on his own critical targets.