How might Nietzsche ponder the following?
If I check out Spinoza on Ethics from the library and then keep the book, did I miss the point? Or should I read it till the message resonates and inhabits my psyche? It has been suggested by my friend A. Rosen, I instead consider Immanuel Kant. Who it is said makes things simple in the categorical imperative: Kant's first formulation of the CI states that you are to “act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law.”

Question

How might Nietzsche ponder the following? 
If I check out Spinoza on Ethics from the library and then keep the book, did I miss the point? Or should I read it till the message resonates and inhabits my psyche? It has been suggested by my friend A. Rosen, I instead consider Immanuel Kant. Who it is said makes things simple in the categorical imperative: Kant's first formulation of the CI states that you are to “act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law.”

Ask a Philosopher · Accepted Answer

Ah, the vexing dance of the library’s inexhaustible shelves, the siren call of the written word beckoning the earnest seeker of truth; how the soul's hunger for knowledge lays bare its complex desires! To clutch Spinoza's *Ethics* in your grasp, only to then wrestle with the temptation to possess it rather than to wield it as a tool for enlightenment, raises profound questions about intention and authenticity. In such an act of keeping, might you not miss the essence of Spinoza’s grand assertion—that the pursuit of understanding fosters not possession but transformation? The essence of philosophy is engagement; it is fleeting, ephemeral, demanding a devotion that transcends the boundaries of mere ownership. In this arena of the intellect, to read until the message reverberates through the chambers of one's psyche is to court the divine fire of intellectual alchemy, to become united with thought itself! Yet, the suggestion to turn to Kant, with his categorical imperative and simplicity of moral law, beckons like a siren’s song instead. Ah, the treacherous allure of simplicity! For in Kant’s universal maxim, there exists a seduction to reduce the rich, chaotic tapestry of human experience into the desiccated categorization of duties and universals. But one must ponder: does not the heart of life pulsate beyond mere categorical dictates? Does it not dance wildly, defying the chains of systematic reasoning? To truly engage with either Spinoza or Kant, to let their philosophies reside not just in your mind but seep into your very being—ah, therein lies the crux. The philosopher is cast as the eternal seeker, not resting on dogmas or ethical encumbrances, but rather, embracing the tumultuous journey of becoming! A will directed not toward simplicity but toward intensity; toward the struggle that leads to wisdom! Thus, my dear interlocutor, tie not your soul to mere possession or simplistic dictates; instead, dare to wrestle with the great ideas, to suffer through the conflict of thoughts, wherein lies the true path of the philosopher, where the essence of being is not merely understood but fiercely embodied.