It offers a genuinely original attempt to resolve the apparent contradiction between Nietzsche's advocacy of a particular metaphysical doctrine, that of 'will to power', and his 'perspectivalist' account of truth. Sorgner's contentious but well-argued interpretation deserves to stimulate considerable critical discussion among students of Nietzsche. If he succeeded, then of course he failed, for if it is true that nothing is true, something is true after all. If it is false, then something again is true. Nietzsche was alive to these difficulties, I believe.
Philosophy is a creative business, and the way is always open.
Philosophy is a contest of will with will. Insofar as you oppose my philosophy, you illustrate and confirm it. I doubt that everyone would be satisfied with such an answer, for I am not even certain that it is an answer. But I have no other to offer. The traditional replies given by Danto, Nehamas, and Poellner are that Nietzsche's metaphysics is only valid for Nietzsche himself, and they, thereby, turned his philosophy into a form of relativism.