Nietzsche Slave Morality

As we approach Nietzsche's philosophy within the text, we must first begin by adopting the principle of the will to power as the fundamental drive of all things. The principle of the will to power states that everything must obey something, and if one cannot obey oneself, one must obey someone else. Those who can transcend and command themselves then, according to Nietzsche, are the sole carriers of true freedom. The will to power for Nietzsche is not simply the desire for power or even something that one could choose to have or not, but is rather a characteristic of everything that lives. Such is observable through the human history of interaction but the will to power must not only be applied to human beings since ideas like religion, morality, and truth are also prevailing concepts that are all positioned in the alike struggle that dictates life.

“As soon as a religion comes to dominate it has as its opponents all those who would have been its first disciples.” Nietzsche was one of the first modern philosophers to rebel against rationalism and when World War I came about, the revolution against religion truly became a legitimate statement. Friedrich Nietzsche strongly believed that many of those that practiced religion were led to the acceptance of slave morality. Religion had always played a fundamental role in society as it sets strict boundaries and standards of what is morally correct and incorrect. However, Nietzsche claims that, “Human nature is always driven by “ ‘the will to power’ ”, but religion will tell one otherwise, saying that one should forbid their bad desires. In Nietzsche’s

Nietzsche was a revolutionary author and philosopher who has had a tremendous impact on German culture up through the twentieth century and even today. Nietzsche's views were very unlike the popular and conventional beliefs and practices of his time and nearly all of his published works were, and still are, rather controversial, especially in On the Genealogy of Morals. His philosophies are more than just controversial and unconventional viewpoints, however; they are absolutely extreme and dangerous if taken out of context or misinterpreted. After Nietzsche's death it took very little for his sister to make some slight alterations to his works to go along with Nazi ideology.

Humanity, according to Nietzsche, is infected by an illness. It is the kind of illness that has infected every single man, religious or non-religious alike. It is his aim to release his readers from the illness. In much the same way as a doctor, he wishes to do so by primarily sourcing the cause of the illness, and secondly by diagnosing it. It is Nietzsche’s belief that this metaphoric illness is morality.

Nietzsche believes that this value system of suffering, which was at the heart of ancient civilization, did not go against life but celebrated the vitality of it,

In Nietzsche’s aphorisms 90-95 and 146-162 he attacks what he believes to be the fundamental basis of the “slave” morality prevalent in the Judeo-Christian tradition as well as other religions and societies. From the beginning, he distinguishes the two different types of moralities he believes to exist: the “master morality”, created by rulers of societies, and the “slave” morality, created by the lowest people in societies. The former stresses virtues of the strong and noble while looking down upon the weak and cowardly. This type of morality, however, is not as widespread as the “slave morality” that has been adopted by so many religions. Nietzsche looks through the psychology and logic of

Slave morality is reactive and negative and originates in the denial of all aspects that are different from it. On the other hand, master morality is concerned with the outside. The bad tends to be an afterthought, and it is a contrast, which brings out the noble ones’ superiority (Cothran 91-2). Meanwhile, both the master and slave morality can encompass the distortion of the truth; master morality does it more lightly. The minorities in the societies are unhappy and the nobles deem themselves as happy. Any misunderstanding is rested on the distance and contempt they hold for the lower class. Masters have the inability to take seriously the aspects that build and fester in the resentment of people such as enemies, misfortunes, and accidents. In permitting hatred and resentments to grow, relying on secrets, patience and scheming, the minorities become clever, as compared to the noble (Fitzgerald

There is only a strong man in his eyes that the society has progressed from. In Beyond Good and Evil, Nietzsche says that to keep our society, only powerful people should join together because respecting the weak causes the powerful to become weak, and will result in a weak society. In order to live, the strong crushes the weak to stay dominant because in history the strong are the ones that always win. One of Nietzsche moralities was slave, which was the term that identified the weak individuals. In Nietzsche eyes, people with power exploit the weak, and if the strong honors the weak then the strong will get weaker and destroy the society. Friedrich supported the master morality, stating that dominating people defines good in a person, and that you are masters of other people. He only helped others to better himself, not because he has sympathy on the weak. Nietzsche is just making claims and giving no proof. He assumes the strong makes a better society. He wanted us to look to the past and see the strong always win, and we should not look at the future, at things that will destroy society. Nietzsche believed, only show respect to the strong. He contradicts himself saying there are no standards but creates standards by saying, strong should get their way. He has no logic, just

Before characterizing slave morality, it is necessary to illustrate master morality, as the origin of slave morality is founded on a revolt of the master morality. Master morality is secular in nature – unassociated with a religious world view. Nietzsche describes the masters as a class of noble and strong men who create their own morality. Noble men do not seek approval from others. They determine what is good on the basis of its affirmation of nobility and power. Noble men are physically powerful and courageous akin to warriors. They are characterized as overflowing with health and athletic. The noble race takes pride in victory. Noble men possess a high level of genuine

According to Nietzsche’s assertions in the first two essays of On the Genealogy of Morals, human beings suffer because they have lost the ability to enjoy life to its fullest extent. A significant shift in morals occurred from the time of the ancient Greeks and Romans, who carried out good deeds with a surplus of energy simply because they could afford to do so, to the predominantly Judeo-Christian era of self-repression. This transition demonstrates a decline in our ability to make sense of our lives and understand our true human purpose. Nietzsche suggests that we have become out of touch with the truth – we are no longer present in our lives. He urges us to recognize the social constraints to which we sometimes unknowingly submit

The act of punishing is what pushes the feeling of resentment within slaves. Nietzsche believed

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.

In his book, Genealogy of Morals, Nietzsche examines the origins of Good and Evil. He postures that these two concepts are derived from language, rather than essential morality. He argues that people label things as good or evil based upon their personal feelings and position of privilege. Douglas Smith translated this edition of Genealogy of Morals into English, but he also included explanations of some of Nietzsche’s key concepts. According to Smith, “A central concept in Nietzsche’s argument, ressentiment is the essence of slave morality, a purely reactive mode of feeling which simply negates the active and spontaneous affirmation of values on the part of the nobility” (142). Ressentiment stems from the oppressed party’s jealousy. The oppressed do not accept that it is bad that they do not have the luxuries and rights that the nobility posses. Instead, the oppressed use ressentiment, flip the moral spectrum, and declare that those luxuries are evil.

It does not find its root and origin in objective circumstances; it originates from a place of suppression, of seeking freedom, and most significantly, of ressentiment. Herein the idea Nietzsche proposes is that the slaves are responsive against their noble masters because they are weak and impotent, leading to the festering of hatred and resentment. This means that values culminating from the revolt would be inaccurate in representing the true meaning of “good” or “evil”, because they were formed through the tainted lens of the slaves of ressentiment. They would portray the slaves, the weak, and the powerless as “good” and favourable, while casting the nobles, the masters, and the upperclassmen in an “evil” and malicious light. This inverts the original notion that the nobles are the definition of “good”. Nietzsche expounds this situation by clarifying that the nobles become “blond beast[s]” (Nietzsche, page 128) when out of their familiar circumstances, insinuating that they turn into a barbaric state where they seek victory over those who are inferior to them. In turn, displays of brutality will be expressed, as a by-product of this barbarism and therefore, fulfilling the morality of the nobles as “evil”. Nietzsche also expresses that this form of morality may not always be beneficial; it cages the

5. Discuss Nietzsche’s theory of “will to power” and “the innocence of becoming”. Does the hypothesis of the will to power successfully “debunk” traditional religion, morality, and philosophical claims to provide the “disinterested” or “objective” truth?