While Nietzsche may have been an atheist, I don't think he intended to destroy religious methods of thinking as he mentions “Brahminism” and Islamic philosophy quite favourably. Nietzsche also accepted there was some determinism based on our biology and inherited terminology and concepts, similar to Wittgenstein's later and much more detailed analysis.Wyrmfang wrote:It truly has certain resemblances to Nietzsche. It was already Heidegger who thought Schelling as a kind of pre-Nietzsche. Also Nietzsche´s distinction of appolonic and dionysian has some connections to Schelling´s will of the ground and will of love. Yet Nietzsche is a strict atheist while Schelling´s main point is to save religious intellectual thinking. Nietzsche is also an extreme relativist, while Schelling, although a kind of perspectivist too, does believe in absolute truth. Unsystematically it could be said that Nietzsche aimed beyond good and evil but Schelling tried to conceive "good beyond good and evil".
Perhaps Nietzsche's hated pseudo-scientific constructs could be seen as explorations aiming for a state roughly analogous to absolute truth beyond good and evil. Although, as far as I can tell, Nietzsche viewed this as a cumulative evolutionary concept rather than an individual psychological possibility.
I recently started reading Slavoj Žižek's The Indivisible Remainder: On Schelling and Related Matters, so when I've finished it I can provide a review/summary if anyone is interested. I'm not sure how much I'll understand as Žižek refers to a variety of philosophers and psychologists I've never read (especially Lacan), but I can give it a go. I've only read the first 20 or so pages, but Žižek has already quoted the section Noesis quoted .
Žižek has also quoted from Schelling's Die Weltalter/The Ages of the World which I haven't read. However, a section that has been referenced referred to a contraction of god as the beginning of creation, which is basically identical to the Tzimtzum of the Kabbalah.