The prophet Zarathustra descended from the mountains after ten years of isolation. He has descended to teach the masses about the overman, and the belief system that accompanies him. Nietzsche, through Zarathustra, is offering a new value system to replace Christianity. This value system can be referred to as ‘Zarathustraism’. A vital part to embracing this value system is the deconstruction of Christianity. Man has redefined Christianity to better suit personal desire, and it has begun to fail as a result. Zarathustraism will teach Man to live in the light of the Overman, free of the negativity Christianity caused.
Zarathustra has learnt the nature of God. In the time he spent in solitude, the prophet has acquired the knowledge that “God is dead” (Z Pro. 2), a controversial idea for the time. Humanity has killed God, for their love of science and inquiry made theism inconsequential. “You great star! What would your happiness be, had you not those for whom you shine?” (Z Pro. 1) speaks Zarathustra as he watches the sun rise. This alludes to why God has succumbed. Those who believed in God gave Him life, and those who did not contributed to His death.
One thing that becomes apparent in Zarathustra’s beliefs is the push towards having only a single virtue. “I love him who does not desire too many virtues. One virtue is more of a virtue than two, because it is more of a knot for one's destiny to cling to” (Z Pro. 4). Christianity is filled with many testaments that restrain the believers, but this belief system implies an elastic moral code that would not grow old. The many laws of Christianity have been interpreted differently for over two thousand years. A self-defined virtue will only ever be interpreted by he who ...
... middle of paper ...
...ut they will eventually be able to reach this point. Zarathustra will gain respect for Man and vacate his adopted leadership role.
Zarathustrianism is Nietzsche’s way of offering humanity a relief from Christianity. Nothing has resulted in more death throughout recorded human history than religion. Replacing religion with Zarathustrianism would have people bettering themselves for the sake of betterment. Christianity has mortals living for an immortal life, and Zarathustraism has immortals (in the scope of the eternal recurrence) living for the present. A widespread, united belief system centered around bettering the spirit would shape the world in a more positive way. Zarathustrianism has the potential to unite the world under a single belief system, while having the elasticity to preserve cultural differences in a way that Christianity has been unable to do.
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.
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
Within mainstream society it seems as if there is not a great deal of emphasis on the contributions made by theologians in society, as well as contributions by theologians to religious thought. Particularly in Christendom, ecclesiastical assemblies are so consumed with vain ideas of worship, and content on hearing biblical messages that capitulate to their personal desires, that theological studies are often neglected. Yet the contributions theologians have made in society, and the impact these contributions have had on religious assemblies have been pivotal in guiding religious discourse on subjects such as ethics, morality, and social transformation. It is for this reason, that in this essay an attempt will be made to analyze three essays from three world-renowned theologians of the 20th century. The theologians are Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and Walter Wink, all of which have produced the essays used for this analysis, and have written works that have completely challenged status quo religion, and changed the landscape of Christendom forever.
This amazement continues when one ponders why the similarities are rarely, if ever, discussed when the topic of Judaism or Christianity comes up in an academic setting. It would seem as if the shared beliefs between the two are not simply a product of chance, but rather the opposite. It is clear that Zoroastrian theology had an enormous effect on the formation and rise of Christianity.
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
“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”
God may well be dead but Nietzsche’s assessment of the pitfalls of our new arbiter of value provides a staunch critique against which we must measure our morality. The question though remains as to whether we can ever accept a plurality of values within a given polity, whilst it may solve the philosophical problem of linking categories such as ‘Truth’ and ‘Purity’ can any aggregation of humans ever produce an agreement that is anything but slavish or self interested or vain or resigned or gloomily enthusiastic or an act of despair or each individually? God may well be dead but Nietzsche is right when he says that his shadow remains over us and, for the moment, there seems no way we can cast our own light on that shadow and overcome his legacy.
Nietzsche’s philosophy relied on the idea of the growth of the individual. He rejoiced the divinity of humanity rather than one of a higher power. He is most famous for his statement “God is dead,” which rejects Christianity and forces humanity to find purpose within itself. His concept of the Übermensch, a super-human or superman, is the finest execution of this belief, presented in his novel Thus Spoke Zarathustra.
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.
" Christianity & Literature 58.1 (2008): 81-92. Academic Search Complete. Web. 29 Mar. 2014. Fienberg, Lorne. "
Firstly, Nietzsche stated that life is death in the making and all humans should not be determined by an external force rather, he believed that humans should have the incentive to think for themselves. Nietzsche claimed the future of a man is in his own hands. Simultaneously, humans are phased with struggles in the attempt to self-create themselves. Nietzsche proceeded with his argument affirming
Dismayed by his poor fortune, Boethius’s question regarding how a just God could allow evil into His world generates the idea of a simultaneous yet omnipresent God. Boethius relates his experience with injustice with the actions of God saying, “It is nothing short of monstrous that god should look on while every criminal is allowed to achieve his purpose against the innocent. If this is so, it was hardly without reason that one of your household asked where evil comes from if there is a god, and where good comes from if there isn’t.”(Book 1, Prose 4)
In 1887, two years before succumbing to utter madness, existential philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche writes his ethical polemic, On the Genealogy of Morals, in search of a man with the strength to evolve beyond humanity: But from time to time do ye grant me. one glimpse, grant me but one glimpse only, of something perfect, fully realized, happy, mighty, triumphant, of something that still gives cause for fear! A glimpse of a man that justifies the existence of man. for the sake of which one may hold fast to the belief in man! Nietzsche, 18.
Zarathustra is always a favorite, with the ringing of God is dead throughout the mountains. Re-evaluating our idols, discovering the significance of their dethroning and how it relates to the intricate web that we create for our lives. Zarathustra, holy man in his blasphemy, ushering in a new era where the last men are eradicated, the filthy vermin masquerading intelligence led by the promise of cheese. Formerly the world was a mad place, filled with mice traps, and the drool pours down their uncomprehending faces. So much feces no longer serving the purpose to cleanse, but only lobotomized. All hail Zarathustra; all hail the maker of the overwoman. (Imperfection lies in the most perfect
“Christianity, along with all other theistic belief systems, is the fraud of the age. It serves to detach the species from the natural world, likewise, each other. It supports blind submission to authority[control of the masses].”(Zeitgeist 2007) In this essay, we will explore the different roots of religion and the plagiarism that Christianity and a number of different religions have committed.