Aurelius Vs Nietzsche

2062 Words5 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Concepts of altruism

A comparison and contrast between two philosophers, they lived in different times and had divergent views. Although there was a semblance to be found in both, the struggle, and the effort. The parallel drawn here is between Marcus Aurelius and Friedrich Nietzsche. Some view Aurelius as a resemblance of Plato’s philosopher king and a man fit to rule. And rule he did, as emperor of Rome. Who, although not viewed unanimous favorable he was a favorite of many. Nietzsche was a Germany philosopher during the 19th century. Who famously said he was the last philosopher. Dramatically different times contribute to vastly different perspectives, this is accurate in both Aurelius and Nietzsche.

Life experiences affect philosophies, therefore, discussing …show more content…

The Stoics and the Nihilists (people that follow a train of thought that Nietzsche brought about) have a common theme that they can both see value in suffering. There’s a price to pay for things and life, often that is suffering, and we should accept that. They both have different views on how they believe people should behave. In what I gather to be one of the most disappointing conclusions in philosophy is that Nietzsche doesn’t, or rather can’t, describe what exactly a perfect individual is. He claims that it is too high above him and that he’s just a prophet heralding of the overman’s coming (his name for perfect …show more content…

Sure I can see how evolutionary psychology would suggest that we would want to dominate our surroundings as that gives us the best chance to survive and reproduce. But, when we look closer animals and humans often display seemly altruistic behavior. And in some circumstances, this is clearly not just a ploy for power. On the other side, Aurelius wants me to live a life full of purposeful duty. I'm not sure if he’s right either. Why should I live a purposeful life? Ultimately it may just be a matter of perspective like Nietzsche expounds. However, I do believe that duty is useful. And in reality often one of the best ways to gain power is to have a duty. People that are dutiful are more efficient and obtain promotions and resources faster. Of course, there could be situations where this could lead to self-sacrifice, but on average I believe that dutiful living is a power to power. Ultimately it's not uncommon for acquiring power and being a good person to be different paths. It’s not hard to think of exceptions about that, but this might just be a minority. My life has improved ever since I have started attempting to live a more dutiful life, which it’s my duty to be a good student, friend, and employee. Overall I have more responsibilities, and I enjoy life more. In the end, I attempt to live a practical life (even arriving at truth through practicality, it’s not mutually exclusive) and through this, I believe that the

Show More
Related

  • Compare And Contrast Nietzsche And Martin Luther King

    560 Words  | 2 Pages

    Friedrich Nietzsche was a brilliant and outspoken man who uses ideas of what he believe in what life is about. He did not believe in what is right and wrong because if who opposed the power. Nietzsche was against Democracy because how they depend on other people to make some different or change, while Nietzsche believe they should of just pick the ones that were gifted and talent to choose what to change. Nietzsche also does not believe in Aristocracy because how they depend on an individual person to create the rules or change those benefits for him. As you see Nietzsche did not like how they depend on one person to decide instead of each person to decide for himself for their own benefits.

    Read More

  • Nietzsche’s Argument of Justice: The Debtor/Creditor Relationship

    1310 Words  | 3 Pages

    The system of justice that Nietzsche employs although somewhat cynical has a substantial amount of merit as a form of justice, which is present in our society. This is demonstrated through the depiction of the creditor/debtor relationship that exists in our democratic societies, and the equalization process that occurs, and furthermore that Nietzsche is correct to assess justice as such a principle. The issue is most obvious in the penal system; however it is also prevalent in personal day-to-day relationships as well as political structures.

    Read More

  • Macduff Foil In Macbeth

    1742 Words  | 4 Pages

    Since the beginning of mankind, it has been the need to attain a specific goal, which has driven humans to work hard. Without any ambition, humans would not be inspired to overcome adversities and challenge themselves to become increasingly adaptable. When one is motivated by certain factors in their environment, the probability of them being satisfied with the results of their deeds depends on the moral value of their inspiration. If the individual is aware of the fact that their deed is immoral, then no matter how dire their circumstances which forced them to perform the actions, they will not be content. The irony establishes itself in the fact that those characters who are motivated by a cause bigger than themselves, tend to be happier,

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Freudis And Nietzsche

    862 Words  | 2 Pages

    Both Freud and Nietzsche presented almost the same interpretations of human nature and the society they lived in. Though, the societies in which they lived in were different. Freud and Nietzsche’s thoughts may be similar, but human nature constantly changes. Freud is more aware, he examines into the past to find reasons that make life more civilized, however Nietzsche is more doubtful, he sees that humans should be led by a hero.

    Read More

  • Nietzsche: Moving Beyond Good and Evil

    1022 Words  | 3 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Revenge is Futile: Le’ Morte d’ Arthur by Sir Thomas Malory

    1097 Words  | 3 Pages

    Aurelius, Marcus. The meditations of the Emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus. New York: A.L. Burt, 189.

    Read More

  • Nietzsche’s Response to Schopenhauer’s Philosophy

    659 Words  | 2 Pages

    In order to understand Schopenhauer’s philosophy, one must understand the concept of the will. Schopenhauer seems to describe the will as a blind force of our feelings, our thoughts, and our perception. The only way we see the world is through the will. We are limited because we only see our representation of it through the will, not the actual reality, the thing in of itself. For this reason the world is will, our will, and it has desires. These desires are insatiable, so life becomes defined by suffering. Suffering, however, is only our representation. The world in of itself, aside from our representation, has no suffering. Schopenhauer says the only way to escape the will, which is suffering, is through knowledge and art. There is a distinction between ordinary knowledge and pure knowledge, however. Ordinary knowledge, according to Schopenhauer, was a result of the will. Pure knowledge is actual contemplation of the world in of itself without influence from the will. This can only be attained through art that is able to separate us from our perceptions of reality and reach a state of pure knowledge. In the Birth of Tragedy, Nietzsche responds to this by agreeing with Schopenhauer’s philosophy in that art is the way to avoid suffering. He argues that the art capable of ending suffering is tragedy, which is a fusion of the Apollonian and the Dionysian.

    Read More

  • Perspectivism and Truth in Nietzsche’s Philosophy: A Critical Look at the Apparent Contradiction

    2457 Words  | 5 Pages

    By looking at one of Nietzsche’s specific postulations of perspectivism, we can get a better idea of precisely how this term applies to his philosophy and how it relates to the “tru...

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Socrates And Sartre

    737 Words  | 2 Pages

    Philosophers are known for their unique and divergent views on people and the world as a whole. As a result of their unique ways of thinking, they often held contrasting views and beliefs that have been debated over the centuries. One of the earliest well known philosophers was Socrates. He was so firm in his beliefs that he was executed and became a martyr instead of denying them. However, even with the sacrifice of his own life, no one could say that Socrates lived a perfect life, although his teachings were extremely influential. Other prominent philosophers had different points of view and insisted Socrates went about his life incorrectly. An influential philosopher of the twentieth century, Jean-Paul Sartre, would have a lot to say about Socrates and how he lived his life. It is evident that Socrates’ actions and beliefs did not align with Sartre’s chosen way of life. This difference is emphasized by how Socrates believed he had a purpose in life, how he believed in the gods, and how he refused to leave prison when presented the opportunity.

    Read More

  • Comparing Plato And Aristotle

    1078 Words  | 3 Pages

    During the fourth century BC, Athens two most influential thinkers of all time had emerged, Plato and Aristotle. Socrates, a great influential philosopher who influence his pupil such as Plato, through his teachings. Plato, then became the teacher of Aristotle, who although was a long term follower, found fault in Plato`s theories. In fact, Aristotle became a great critic of his teacher. Despite his criticism, Aristotle was influenced by Plato and in so their works are easily comparable, however, some aspect of their philosophy can be contradictive.

    Read More

  • A Comparison Of Friedrich Nietzsche And Karl Marx

    1288 Words  | 3 Pages

    Both of the German philosophers, Friedrich Nietzsche and Karl Marx, have spoken levels on the nature and purpose of human beings, however, the defining difference in their criticisms and teachings is the idea of where ‘power’ comes from and what man is supposed to do with it. Despite the fact that the philosophers had separate objectives in mind when inditing their literature, their comparative delivery presents similarities due to the subjects that seem to have fallen prey to criticism in their writings. However, their difference in ideology is particularly significant due to the manner in which they address their main quodlibet of the power of human beings with either a targeted attack or invocation of herd-mentality to support their provocative theories. The

    Read More

  • Plato's Allegory of the Cave

    1411 Words  | 3 Pages

    Plato is one of the most iconic authors in the history of philosophy. Even today, his words live strong in modern thinking and society. He was a highly spoken citizen of Athens (Kraut, 2013). His input in the politics and the society of Athenian life made him a major player in the success of democracy in ancient civilization (Kraut, 2013). Being one of the first real “philosophers” in history, Plato was looked up to by scholars of that time, as well as current philosophers of our time. His most influential work of writing is The Republic where he makes many assumptions while also including ideas and conversations with other thinkers of the time like Socrates and Thrasymachus (Kraut, 2013). Current and future thinkers will forever interpret Plato’s work for centuries to come.

    Read More

  • Argumentative Essay On Utilitarianism

    1582 Words  | 4 Pages

    As human beings, we often have desires that are not always consistent with yielding the greatest good for the greatest amount of people. Utilitarianism would argue that putting one’s own desires first and pursuing one’s own interests is wrong and immoral behavior. While some moral theories acknowledge that pursuing one’s own interests can be morally optional, in Utilitarianism, it is always forbidden (Moral Theory, p. 135). This makes the theory overly demanding because one is constantly forced to consider others. Utilitarians can respond to this objection by challenging the claim that pursuing one’s own desires cannot ever be consistent with the greatest good for the greatest amount of people. Certainly there can be times when pursuing one’s own desires is also consistent with producing the greatest good for the greatest amount of people. Utilitarians might also point out that moral theories are meant to be demanding because they are teaching individuals how to act morally and acting morally is not always the desirable course of

    Read More

  • Raskolnikov Vs Nietzsche

    312 Words  | 1 Pages

    The presentation given on Ubermensch made the novel Crime and Punishment, by Feodor Dostoevsky, even more confusing than it already was. According to the presentation, a Freidrich Nietzsche was a man who organized the chaos within a symbol of a man that created his own values. One could even say that Raskolnikov could be considered similar to Nietzsche. The idea that Raskolnikov could be like Nietzsche makes sense, considering he does decide his actions by himself, which eventually affect his life, and the lives of those around him. The one thing that doesn’t make sense to me though, is that if Nietzche is capable of determining the future, and how their life is going, wouldn’t they want to go by a more positive way of life? Wouldn’t they decide

    Read More

  • Nietzsche Vs Aquinas Research Paper

    1408 Words  | 3 Pages

    Truth… what exactly is truth? Can words or expressions define truth? Was it created by discovery or did man create it as an artist creates a painting? Many thinkers have questioned the universe in search of truth, not just answers. But is there truth out there to find or is there only different perspectives? Philosopher Thomas Aquinas and Nietzsche have varying ideas. While Aquinas believes there is one truth; however, Nietzsche believes there is no truth, only perspective. While both philosophers have good as well as bad points, one stands above the others: There is only one truth, derived from Natural Law.

    Read More

More about Aurelius Vs Nietzsche

Open Document