This piece of work will try to find the answer to the question ‘In Nietzsche’s first essay in the Genealogy of Morals, does he give a clear idea of what good and bad truly are, what they are based on and what his opinion of those ideas is’. It will give a more simplistic overview of his first essay, it will also go into greater detail of what he claims good and bad truly are, and finally look at what he is trying to prove with this argument.
Nietzsche introduces the differences between what he names later in his first essay the "master morality" and "slave morality." The first master morality is the ideas of the nobles, including solders and other ruling classes. This he says is power deciding what good and bad is they see the qualities they
…show more content…
He seems to be doing the very same thing he accuses them of doing, In that he seems to praise the master and condemn the slave classes, but with one key difference. He does critique the two different view on morality and does seem to focus and talk more harshly about the slave morality, but he does not do so after picking a side of the two morality’s, he does not base his judgements upon his own personal likes and dislikes it seems but he does look at the person that each morality would mould and create. In this he sees that the save morality become a very damaging concept. Being driven and caught up in the past and focused upon the hatred and resentment, it means the focus of those in the slave morality become less of everything that makes us human, such things as creativity or we become so deeply pulled into the mind set of hate and resentment that we can no longer see a way out of it and in turn become less motivated, it would create a band of people who care not for improving themselves or their situation, but people who sit and simmer in the ideals of hate and resentment. This is how Nietzsche separates how he talks about and condemns the slave morality from how the past biased psychologists looked upon the origins or …show more content…
In this he seems to take a physiological view of why and how people tend to look upon and think of ideals that way, instead of the more philosophical view of if I follow this path will it end up at the right and logical answer or, does the premise lead to a logical conclusion. This makes it hard to see what evidence Nietzsche can put behind his arguments because as stated above he bases then of people and thought trains rather than logic. He does seem to define what his view of good and bad is and where the ideas were born from, and what the key ideas were in forming said ideals. He seem to be trying to put forward the case that there is no real good or bad and that they are just the product of the ideas and needs of men, he puts this most clearly in his argument of the slave morality and when he brings it back to the idea that it is both helpful in creating and strengthened by the Christian religion. So over all Nietzsche does put forward what he see as a clear view on what good and bad are and also makes clear his opinion on them which simply is, they are products of human wants and a need to justify how
Douglass continues to describe the severity of the manipulation of Christianity. Slave owners use generations of slavery and mental control to convert slaves to the belief God sanctions and supports slavery. They teach that, “ man may properly be a slave; that the relation of master and slave is ordained by God” (Douglass 13). In order to justify their own wrongdoings, slaveowners convert the slaves themselves to Christianity, either by force or gentle coercion over generations. The slaves are therefore under the impression that slavery is a necessary evil. With no other source of information other than their slave owners, and no other supernatural explanation for the horrors they face other than the ones provided by Christianity, generations of slaves cannot escape from under the canopy of Christianity. Christianity molded so deeply to the ideals of slavery that it becomes a postmark of America and a shield of steel for American slave owners. Douglass exposes the blatant misuse of the religion. By using Christianity as a vessel of exploitation, they forever modify the connotations of Christianity to that of tyrannical rule and
During a period of time, the world lost its values due to ambition. Blacks were enslaved for being different. Races became a huge part of people’s everyday talk and to succeed, farmers and business owners had to make African Americans do their dirty work for them. During this period of time, people like Joe Starks from “The Eyes Were Watching God” and people like Frederick Douglass’s slavemasters became abundant in the world. The belief that they were superior to everyone else lead them to impose power in a way that even themselves could not tolerate. Even though “The Eyes Were Watching God” was written after slave abolition, Joe Starks and Douglass’s slavemasters have many characteristics in common and differences which are worthy to be noticed.
Lastly both Frankenstein's monster and Roy Baty state what it means to be a slave, one to his envy and rage, and the other to a human race that spurns him. "..but I was the slave, not the master, of an impulse, which I detested, yet could not disobey...Evil thence forth became my good."
I found that, to make a contented slave it is necessary to make a thoughtless one. It is necessary to darken his moral and mental vision,and, as far as possible, to annihilate the power of reason. He must be able to detect no inconsistencies in slavery; he must be made to feel that slavery is right, and he can be brought to that only when he ceases to be a man.* (315)
In Frederick Douglass’s Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave, one of the major themes is how the institution of slavery has an effect on the moral health of the slaveholder. The power slaveholders have over their slaves is great, as well as corrupting. Douglass uses this theme to point out that the institution of slavery is bad for everyone involved, not just the slaves. Throughout the narrative, Douglass uses several of his former slaveholders as examples. Sophia Auld, once such a kind and caring woman, is transformed into a cruel and oppressive slave owner over the course of the narrative. Thomas Auld, also. Douglass ties this theme back to the main concern of authorial control. Although this is a personal account, it is also a tool of propaganda, and is used as such. Douglass’s intent is to convince readers that the system of slavery is horrible and damaging to all included, and thus should be abolished completely. Douglass makes it very clear in his examples how exactly the transformation occurs and how kind and moral people can become those who beat their slaves and pervert Christianity in an attempt to justify it.
Douglass's narrative is, on one surface, intended to show the barbarity and injustice of slavery. However, the underlying argument is that freedom is not simply attained through a physical escape from forced labor, but through a mental liberation from the attitude created by Southern slavery. The slaves of the South were psychologically oppressed by the slaveholders' disrespect for a slave’s family and for their education, as well as by the slaves' acceptance of their own subordination. Additionally, the slaveholders were trapped by a mentality that allowed them to justify behavior towards human beings that would normally not be acceptable. In this manner, both slaveholder and slave are corrupted by slavery.
... noble morality (16). Furthermore, in contrast to the self-contentment of the noble morality, the slave’s lack of outward power led him to direct his power inwards, resulting in man’s first exploration of his inner life.
“On Truth and Lies in a Nonmoral Sense” is an unfinished work written by Friedrich Nietzsche in 1873. In this work, Nietzsche takes an approach to explaining the truth in a way that we would all find very unusual, but that is merely the Nietzsche way. In this essay I will analyze how Nietzsche views the truth, as explained in “On Truth and Lies in a Nonmoral Sense”
With the use of character development, Douglass retains an important component in his argument by illustrating the alteration of Sophia Auld whose “kindest heart turned…into that of a demon”(39). He states that a human being having control of another has a soul-killing effect on his moral righteousness and results in the loss of innocence. At first Douglass writes, “The meanest slave was put fully at ease in her presence, and none left without feeling better for not having seen her. Her face was made of heavenly smiles, and her voice of tranquil music”(39). Douglass’s initial description fixes his argument that the slaveholder is not necessarily evil. His choice of words reveals his complete astonishment of her gentleness that he had never experienced before. However, Douglass’s tone appears to be disturbed of her behavior for she is “unlike any oth...
We have grown weary of man. Nietzsche wants something better, to believe in human ability once again. Nietzsche’s weariness is based almost entirely in the culmination of ressentiment, the dissolution of Nietzsche’s concept of morality and the prevailing priestly morality. Nietzsche wants to move beyond simple concepts of good and evil, abandon the assessment of individuals through ressentiment, and restore men to their former wonderful ability.
September 10, 2009. Cambridge Critical Guide to Nietzsche’s On the Genealogy of Morality, Simon May, ed., 2010. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1473095>. Nietzsche, Friedrich.
The terms of Master and Slave Morality are easy to misunderstand. First of all, the assumption that there is master morality vs. slave morality already makes you believe master morality is the superior one, just by the words itself. Master morality is overall shaping slave morality. Following one another causes a misguided idea of the terms good and evil replacing the idea of “good” and “bad”. But, some would say few people disagreed with Nietzsche because no one really knew Nietzsche existed during his own time, his impact came later and his message became clear in fact
In Nietzsche’s Genealogy of Morals, he discusses morality and divides this concept into two parts: “master morality” and “slave morality.” To briefly summarize, master morality, which was usually followed by the nobility, or ruling class, emphasized individuality and being strong willed – essentially promoting the creation one’s own set of values. In contrast, slave morality stemmed from oppression by, and resentment towards, the ruling classes onto the lower. The idea of “herd mentality” may be related to “slave morality.” Slave morality and being a part of the “herd” promote the idea of conforming humanity into calculable human beings, which in turn serve to oppress the masses.
Friedrich Nietzsche’s On Truth and Lies in a Nonmoral Sense represents a deconstruction of the modern epistemological project. Instead of seeking for truth, he suggests that the ultimate truth is that we have to live without such truth, and without a sense of longing for that truth. This revolutionary work of his is divided into two main sections. The first part deals with the question on what is truth? Here he discusses the implication of language to our acquisition of knowledge. The second part deals with the dual nature of man, i.e. the rational and the intuitive. He establishes that neither rational nor intuitive man is ever successful in their pursuit of knowledge due to our illusion of truth. Therefore, Nietzsche concludes that all we can claim to know are interpretations of truth and not truth itself.
But he objects to the values of the New Testament that shouldn't be linked to the Old Testament. They demote power. He sees religion as intensely nihilistic - it's all about denying life and being negative. Nietzsche feels that the New Testament is also like that. We have to go beyond this.