For many centuries religion seemed to be the most accurate source of truth and value to life. As humanity started to question the foundation religion had established, science began to unfold its own perspective of life. From then on humanity juggled ideas of conscience, morality, and the true meaning of life. On one hand science began to explain the world around us in a more empirical and understanding perception to humanity; with the use of emerging technologies and theories. On the other hand religion outlined a way of life and possibly another approach to the understanding of our existence. The question lay in the hands of the individual, do we allow science and/or religion to give us a value to our life or do we need to look further from the perspective of the masses. In “The Gay Science.” Friedrich Nietzsche outlines the evolution of mankind from religion to science and finally his ideal value of life. Nietzsche believes that neither science nor religion are adequate enough to live by. Nietzsches argument holds some consistent ground against science but does not fully refute it. Science holds the key in holding a balance between the unexplainable and quantifiable to put balance and meaning in someones life. Nietzsche starts by laying out the famous example of the madman screaming, “God is dead.” The madman exclaims that humanity doesn’t understand what it has done. They have killed god and they don’t seem to mind, they can’t see the consequences yet. He states that he thinks he has come too early and that this is just the beginning of the problem. This passage introduces the idea of a loss of religious fate in humanity. The madman has a negative outlook on this event, questioning what is next to come. Historically religion se... ... middle of paper ... ...an build from, convictions that may be theoretical but are regarded to unconditionally almost as a faith. Nietzsche says science believes that “’Nothing is needed more than truth, and in relation to it everything else has only second rate value’(pg281).” He then questions how we even know that the scientific perspective is the correct one. Science condemned religion for lack of truth but what gives validity to science if the scope is only through one perspective. Nietzsche states “We cannot look around our own corner…(pg336).” The possibility that there are an infinite amount of interpretations that could be correct cannot be disregarded. This puts pressure on the scientific perspective, why should it be regarded to as the highest form of truth. He even goes on to say that its naïve to say your morality or idea on life is better or more correct than someone elses.
However, Nietzsche debunks Edward’s idea of sin, claiming it as a contrivance used to invoke fear in the believers of Christianity and to denote ruling power to the Priest (Nietzsche, Sec. 49). Nietzsche proceeds to deride the value system of Christianity, spelling out what he sees through the will to power as definitions for happiness, good, and bad (Nietzsche, Sec. 2). For Nietzsche, happiness is the feeling bolstered by power: “that a resistanc...
Nazis and Nietzsche During the latter parts of the Nineteenth Century, the German existentialist philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche wrote a great deal on his ideas of morality, values, and life. His writings were controversial, but they greatly affected European thought. It can be argued that Nietzschean philosophy was a contributing factor in the rise of what is considered our world's most awful empire, the Third Reich. Such a stance is based on the fact that there are very similar currents in thought between the philosophy and the empire.
Enter here The ear splitting crackle from a whip is heard as a master shouts orders to a slave. This to most people would make them comfortable. The idea of slavery is one that is unsettling to most people. This is because most people feel it is unmoral or morally wrong to own another human being. However Nietzsche would not necessarily believe this because he did believe in a morality that fits all. Ethics and morality are completely objective and cannot be one set of rules for everyone. Ethics and morality that are more strictly defined are for the weak, the strong do not need a set of rules because they can take care of themselves.
“Has he got lost? Did he lose his way like a child? Or is he hiding? Is he afraid of us? Has he gone on a voyage? Emigrated?” No the madman says; “we have killed him – you and I. All of us are his murderers” This exchange encapsulates the aphorism that underpins much of Nietzsche’s thought; that “God is dead”. But what does this mean - What is Nietzsche telling us by claiming that we have murdered God? This essay is going to attempt to try and understand what Nietzsche argues has changed and what hasn’t with the death of God and to examine his critique of 19th century morality in the context of the 21st century politics and see if he offers a constructive alternative to the way we engage in political discourse.
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.
...jects are described by using a language that is accepted by those around them, does not give an exact realistic knowledge of what people are actually experiencing. This suggests that because each human experiences situations differently, they cannot or should not be explained using the same words or language. Nietzsche argues that because one word can mean many different things to many different people, there is no exact truth or complete explanation. Nietzsche argues that understanding objects and/or things through systematic groupings or concepts is not possible since every single organism and object is individualized and unique in one way or another and therefore, can’t be considered to be similar to any other object and/or thing. As a result, Nietzsche suggests that the only “truth” the results from the use of metaphors is that of a form of deception or lies.
...n emphasis on the self, and created two different realms in which we could discover truth about the external world. Nietzsche claimed that to know God you would need to find Him through logic. Since the only way to find God was through the modern world was through logic, there was no need for a god in our culture. The only thing we are left with from Nietzsche’s perspective is the will to power. He even went as far as to say that Jews and Christians made up God just so they would feel better about themselves. I believe Nietzsche’s statement to be true. Our society today is based on the individual rather than the community. Now the culture we live in today is said to be “post-modern.” Post modernity is not just relativistic; it is simply a critical response to modernity. As Christians, we must attempt to answer the questions post-modern thinkers are asking from a Biblical response. The best option is not to become part of it, but to transform. Isn’t that what Paul wrote about to the church at Rome? We shouldn’t just buy into the consumer mentality of the day; we must seek to be salt and light in an ever-changing culture.
We begin to read about the Ascetic ideal. Nietzsche asks the question, “What is the meaning of the power of this ideal, the monstrous nature of its power?...Ascetic ideal has a goal.” (582) As I continue to read this essay, it is believed that this life has only one purpose and there are no others. Humans are attracted to this ideal because it provides them with answers others may not have. It gives them a sense of purpose to their life and it helps them understand it better. It provides them with a sense of freedom. As we continue to read farther into the essay, we see that Nietzsche has a strong opinion about science. It is hard to determine if he follows any sort of religion because he expressed his views with Christian and Jewish religion, but also talks down upon science when the thought that science could have a part in Ascetic ideal. From my understanding, Nietzsche says that science is unable to have a part in Ascetic ideal, while it is presumed that it is because it does not have to have any “assistance” from anyone or anything. Nietzsche comments about science with, “Science is not nearly self reliant enough to be that;” (589) Nietzsche is stating that science does not have any sort of “motive” or does not have any sort of feeling so how could that contribute to the ascetic ideal. It is always supporting something else and is in a
Nietzsche’s arguments favor the individual’s power against conformity within the context of religious ideals, in addition to the objection to religion being used by authoritative figures as a form of
Nietzsche proclaimed in The Gay Science, "God is dead: but given the way men are, there may still be caves for thousands of years in which his shadow will be shown.-- And we -- we still have to vanquish his shadow, too."[1] The death he witnessed was the tide of atheism that has dominated science and philosophy since his time. This atheism invariably comes from one of two different backgrounds: Enlightenment science and Enlightenment morality.
...ns, he loses validity in his critique of objective thinkers such as Aquinas. His arguments’ inherent contradictions undermine his own assertions and do nothing to lessen the validity of objective claims to truth either. This is again not to agree with Aquinas, but to point out that Nietzsche is still working in a system correspondence in order to refute the correspondence theory of truth. Nietzsche’s primary contribution to ethical theory is the realization that we no longer truly believe in God, that we must confront the consequences of this moral and spiritual gap in our lives and look for something to replace Him. His writings contain criticisms of these new replacements such as skepticism, nihilism, feminism, democracy, utilitarianism and scientific positivism, but these criticisms I don’t believe justify the demarcation of ‘False’ by Nietzsche’s own standards.
Nietzsche’s contradictory remarks about the nature of truth raised many controversial debates in the scientific and philosophical world. At first sight, the rejection of the theory seems quite paradoxical. The denial of the existence of truth causes the problem of self-reference. In asserting: ‘Is it true that there is no truth?’, the claim turns out to be true in either affirmative or negative sense. Nietzsche analyses the notion of truth mostly in the unpublished essay Truth and Lie in which he raises various arguments. It is important to distinguish between the causal and normative evaluative sense concerning the question of truth: ‘why do we value truth?’ and ‘why should we value truth?’ The causal and genetic account of truth consists in the essential utility to know the truth of certain beliefs as a tool for survival. For example, the Darwinian evolutionary account describes the likelihood of an offspring to adapt and survive in a given environment. On this proposal, truth is valuable as a way to further human reproduction in the generations to come. On the other hand, there is the normative evaluative theory that analyses the ultimate meaning of truth. On this view, Nietzsche is mostly not concerned about metaphysical truth but, rather, analyses the reason why humans care about truth as the most overriding value. The former theory fails to provide an answer to this question, unless we consider survival as the ultimate motivating force of life. According to Nietzsche, truth is not the only ultimate value that there is in life, but also other important aspects of life such as the promotion of high culture and genius. These two values will be analyzed In greater detail later in this essay.
The philosopher Nietzsche has been scrutinized for most of his work because he stood against the Christian faith. He believed that Christianity held people back from achieving a full life because it countered all the wants and needs of the human. He believed that slaves made up Christianity to replace the things that they could not receive. Sex, power and revenge were all out of range for a slaves so in return they made up Christianity to follow. Nietzsche’s greatest works however is what he describes as Übermensch or Superman. This “superman” is someone that has evolved even greater than any of today’s humans. He compares evolution from apes to humans and believes that the human isn’t done with evolution yet, instead is still growing and
Friedrich Nietzsche was without a doubt one of the most influential thinkers of the 19th century. He was a man who ventured to question all of man's beliefs. He was out to seek the important questions in life, not always their answers. Some consider Nietzsche to be one of the first existentialist philosophers along with Søren Kierkegaard. He was the inspiration for many philosophers, poets, sociologists, and psychologists including Sigmund Freud. His goal to seek explanations for society's commonly accepted values was an inspiration for Freud's psychoanalysis theory1. Nietzsche's life as well as his theories such as the will to power, the Übermensch, eternal recurrence, and his thoughts on religion all had a momentous affect on 19th and 20th century philosophy.
All of Friedrich Nietzsche quotes were made before the age of 44. For the last 11 years of his life, he had no use of his mental capabilities. While many of Friedrich Nietzsche quotes were focused on religion, or the fallacy of it, it would be interesting to see what he would have written about later in his life and if his opinion would have changed. Although, the statement 'God is dead' did come from him, so there would likely have been no change in how he viewed religion. Many of his quotes are focused on human behavior and existence, and following are some that moved me.