The title of Part 6, “We Scholars” might, in retrospect, be seen as ambiguous. Does the “we” refer to the “free spirits”, and thus the study is of the free spirit in so far as she is also or in part a scholar? This is a natural reading, and one certainly borne out by the text, especially at its end. However, it could also mean “we modern Europeans”, and the analysis of the scholar is an analysis of the moral predicament we find ourselves in. In that case, it would be a study of how the scholar is a symptom of just that predicament. This too is borne out by the text, in its earlier sections. The two interpretations are not incompatible: even the philosopher of the future must in some sense be “of his time” in order to function as its “bad conscience”. He must be engaged in and against it, in the sense of over-coming its sedimentation within him, in the sense of using its constraints and roles (e.g. religion or scholarship) for other purposes, and in the sense of a revaluation of its core values as part of the continuing social or political task of cultivation.

Part 7 is entitled “Our Virtues”, and the same ambiguity arises. The very first part begins by interpreting the “our” as meaning “free spirits”. But, since it opens with a question mark it is not surprising that the Part soon turns also to the virtues (and vices) of the modern European culture of today, in general.