Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Introduction to A Critique of Friedrich Nietzsche's Concept of Morality
Nietzsche views on morality
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
and for society.
The real genealogy of morality
Nietzsche repudiates the above view, saying that it is obvious that “the judgment ‘good’ does not stem from those to whom ‘goodness’ is rendered” (Nietzsche, On the Genealogy of Morality, page 10). Instead, Nietzsche considers morality as ultimately derived from strength and superiority, saying that “it was ‘the good’ themselves, that is the noble, powerful, higher-ranking, and high-minded who felt and ranked themselves and their doings as good, which is to say, as of the first rank, in contrast to everything base, low-minded, common, and vulgar” (10). In other words, morality is the strong simply being strong, exercising their own strength over those who are weak. Even on an etymological level,
…show more content…
the origins of the words for “good” in various languages originally meant “noble” or “aristocratic,” while the concept of “bad” was derived from the words that meant “common,” “vulgar,” or “base” (12-13). With his morality based on the strong exercising their own strength, Nietzsche turns to the animal kingdom for an analogy. When someone is strong, it is right for them simply to be strong, just as it is right for birds of prey to feed upon defenseless lambs (25). For the strong to do anything but exercise their strength would be against nature – to do so would be utterly irrational. How morality became upside-down Over the course of history, morality became flipped upside down.
This happened when weak people wanted to become strong, but they were unable to do so by acquiring physical strength, riches, or status, so they gained power by reversing morality. For example, instead of valuing strength, they sought to contain the strong by condemning many uses of strength and instead praising the “virtue” of mercy - those who refrain from using their strength. Similarly, they turned the tables on those who gave orders by condemning pride and praising the “virtue” of obedience. Man naturally wants to get revenge for wrongs committed against him, but the weak people unable to exact revenge instead gained power over the strong by creating the “virtue” of forgiveness. When the weak, low-born people were tired of being subjugated but were unable to physically control the powerful people, the weak people instead controlled the powerful people through their new, twisted …show more content…
morality. This reversal of morality was done by the “priests,” and their role as the who are the main facilitators of this atrocity has made them the “most evil enemies” of mankind (16). The specific group of priests that has been most successful in their work are the Jews and their descendants, the Christians. Christianity has successful engulfed Europe for centuries, and Nietzsche sees a pervading, suffocating fog of Judeo-Christianity as the source of many of the problems of the modern European man. Nietzsche views this reversal of morality as both as a tragedy and as an amazing accomplishment.
On the one hand, Nietzsche sees the work of the priests as a grotesque dis-figuration of morality coughed up from the bowels of Jewish hatred. A radically diseased morality that paints weakness as virtue and strength as dangerous vice. The priests took the natural order of humanity and managed to make the strong guilty for exercising their strength. It is akin to criticizing an animal predator for chasing down its prey - would you really morally criticize the bird of prey for preying upon and eating the lamb or the lion for preying upon and devouring the gazelle? To do such a thing would be
absurd. On the other hand, it worked. The priests have won. Christianity has taken over Europe, drenching Europe in its reversed morality. Out of their powerlessness, the hate of the priests grew “into something enormous and uncanny, into something most spiritual and most poisonous,” successfully infecting all of Europe (16). The Judeo-Christian priests were able to win against “their enemies and conquerors through a radical revaluation of their values, that is, through an act of spiritual revenge” (16).
However, Nietzsche’s idea of the powerful forcing their will on common people resonates with me. It is something we see in our modern society, wealthy people seem to have a higher influence over the average American. Examples of powerful people controlling others are found in politics, economy, media, and religion. Common people are lead to think in certain ways that the powerful need them to. Nietzsche said that people will only be equal as long as they are equal in force and talent, people who have a higher social group are more influential in decisions because average people look to them for information. The thing I do not agree with Nietzsche on his view as Christianity as a weakness because religion is a main cause of people’s decision
By inborn nature, Man does not hate wickedness, and love virtue. God gives us lessons to show us how to live good and Godly lives. The below story is a modern adaptation of the Rich man and Lazarus
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.
According to him, the noble individuals who praise themselves and their actions, egoistic or egoistic, as good are defined as ‘good’. For Nietzsche, it is the feeling of superiority, powerfulness over the low class from where the concept of good originates. In contrast to the original morality, Nietzsche marks the modern morality as a product of Jewish radical reevaluation of values. Spilt off between the knights and the priests led to reevaluation; as per him, priests make the evilest enemy. Although physically weak, priests are more intelligent and have more say over the knights, and can do anything when it comes to power, virtue, revenge, pride. Comparing the Jews with the priest, Nietzsche marks the radical reevaluation when the Jews rejected the aristocratic definition of good and divided modern morality from the original
Friederich Nietzsche suggests an answer to these problems. In Beyond Good and Evil, one of his attempts to sum up his thought--indeed, throughout his philosophical work, as far as I can tell, Nietzsche describe...
Nietzsche’s Genealogy of Morals can be assessed in regards to the three essays that it is broken up into. Each essay derives the significance of our moral concepts by observing
Friedrich Nietzsche’s “On the Genealogy of Morality” includes his theory on man’s development of “bad conscience.” Nietzsche believes that when transitioning from a free-roaming individual to a member of a community, man had to suppress his “will to power,” his natural “instinct of freedom”(59). The governing community threatened its members with punishment for violation of its laws, its “morality of customs,” thereby creating a uniform and predictable man (36). With fear of punishment curtailing his behavior, man was no longer allowed the freedom to indulge his every instinct. He turned his aggressive focus inward, became ashamed of his natural animal instincts, judged himself as inherently evil, and developed a bad conscience (46). Throughout the work, Nietzsche uses decidedly negative terms to describe “bad conscience,” calling it ugly (59), a sickness (60), or an illness (56); leading some to assume that he views “bad conscience” as a bad thing. However, Nietzsche hints at a different view when calling bad conscience a “sickness rather like pregnancy” (60). This analogy equates the pain and suffering of a pregnant woman to the suffering of man when his instincts are repressed. Therefore, just as the pain of pregnancy gives birth to something joyful, Nietzsche’s analogy implies that the negative state of bad conscience may also “give birth” to something positive. Nietzsche hopes for the birth of the “sovereign individual” – a man who is autonomous, not indebted to the morality of custom, and who has regained his free will. An examination of Nietzsche’s theory on the evolution of man’s bad conscience will reveal: even though bad conscience has caused man to turn against himself and has resulted in the stagnation of his will, Ni...
The origins of the priestly morality came from hatred and jealousy. “It is because of their impotence that in them hatred grows to monstrous and uncanny proportions, to the most spiritual and poisonous kind of hatred. The truly great haters in world history have always been priests; likewise the most ingenuous hat...
The first morality Nietzsche writes about is the master morality. Nietzsche defined master morality as the morality of the strong-willed. The people that fall under the category of master morality typically think of themselves as "the good,"which is defined as
have power are imposing their will on those with less power. The fact that at some point in the
Others still have pity for the poor and needy etc. Nietzsche dislikes religion especially Christianity because it encourages and promotes slave morality. Nietzsche says that we should be striving towards master morality, but Christianity has the completely opposite values to those of the master morality. For example, religion wants us to be like slaves and give things up instead of trying to be great. He talks about a slave revolt in morality, which leads to the dominance of slave values over master values.
Where Kant’s system is based on a set of principles or duties, Nietzsche’s system is based on virtue. Nietzsche is critical of Christianity in general and its evaluation of morality. In the reevaluation of values, he shows how the characteristics of morality in Christianity are more prohibitive of living virtuously than those of Ancient Greece, which include strength, confidence, sexuality, and creativity. In Christianity, those values are pity, shame, asexuality, and humility. The set of values of Ancient Greece is considered Master Morality and the values of deontology is considered to be Slave Morality. Master morality is a step in the right direction for morality but still not the
At first we see “what is in it for us”. After that, we “take this effect as the intention”. At last, we “ascribe the harboring of such intentions as a permanent quality of the person whose behavior we are observing”. Following from these steps is how we can determine whether a person is harmful, beneficial or kind (102). Nietzsche claims that our judgment is always based on how the actions of the other relate to me “What harms me is something evil (harmful in itself); what is useful to me is something good (102).” From here, Nietzsche refuses the idea that we are able to morally judge the other. Nietzsche then questions that if we assess the right actions relatively then “we ourselves must constitute the principle of the good (102).” But how can we constitute the principle of good if we are ignorant about our actions, our ego, and our neighbor. The truth is that we are deceiving ourselves and we are shaping this principle of good in a manner that suits us. From here, our principle of good is conditional, and we don’t constitute the “principle of
In summary, Nietzsche, through the character of the madman, argues that morality cannot exist without God, and that atheists must therefore reject morality. If one is to abandon God, one must also abandon the corresponding concepts of “right” and “wrong.” In the parable, the villagers reject this argument, and continue to uphold the same morals they would have if they did believe in God. According to Nietzsche, morals hold people back from being able to choose what is right and wrong for themselves. Furthermore, he believes that it is inevitable that
In the play Doctor Faustus the main character sells his soul to the devil and later dies and is sent to hell. A question that comes to mind when reading this book is, "Does Doctor Faustus have a Christian moral?" Even though he is persuaded to sell his soul to the devil he still may have some Christian beliefs. Some of the dialogue in the play gives some signals that tell the reader if Faustus has a Christian moral. The Cultural Studies method is shown in this paper because we are talking about someone's beliefs or morals. In this play, Marlowe shows Dr. Faustus's religious beliefs.