In such a way, Nietzsche affirms that the doctrine of the Christianity is incapable to take the humanity for a new period and a new way to think because it is fossilizada in a dogmatismo that was incorporated and has its origin in Plato. This submerged one in this Metaphysical dualidade that separates the body of the soul, the substance of the spirit, the sensible one of the intelligible one, the current world of suffering of a future world of joy. Therefore, so that if it can usufruct an existence ' ' dionisaca' ' it is necessary that if it modifies this panorama given for the tradition and the Christianity with the imploso of this dualism. It is necessary that if it assumes as new cloth of deep, not it promise of the future life, but yes, recognition of the terror and the nonsense of the existence. That if it recognizes the life in what it has of gladder and exuberant, but also of more terrible and painful.
Thus, Nietzsche interlaces the philosophy with the art, therefore she is necessary to accept the life in what it has of and better more beautiful, however also is necessary to accept horrible and the painful one, making that the philosophical activity on the existence of the man must be the art, therefore: ' ' the art is essentially to say yes, to bless, to divinizar the existence ' ' (FP14-55). The existence cannot be established in one ' ' moral' ' that it legislates absolutely enters the good and the bad one. He is against this philosophy ' ' platonic catholic ' ' that it disdains all you legitimize them to aspirations human beings to the life; that Nietzsche goes to nail a thought based on the art and the laugh, it ' goes to search a certain position; ' amoral' ' with the firm intention to demystify this requirement of a dogmtico idealismo and an excess of seriousness, it goes to look for to bring the philosophy for ' ' life here and agora' ' considering existence of the world as an aesthetic phenomenon, or in other words, is the dionisaca art that is for brings all of ' ' acontecer' ' of the reality: ' ' – one ' ' deus' ' , if thus it is desired, but certainly only a inconsiderado and completely amoral god-artist, who in constructing as in destroying, in the good one as in the bad one, wants to aperceber of its identical pleasure and autocrtica, that creating worlds, if disentangles from the necessity of the abundance and superabundance, of the suffering of the contrapositions in them apinhadas' '.