And Lie In An Extra-Moral Sense By Nietzsche And Carl Sagan

What is morality? Where does our sense of morality come from and why is it important for us to know? The cognitive scientist, psychologist, linguist, and scholar, Steven Pinker discusses this in his essay, “The Moral Instinct”. In this essay, Pinker claims that our morality sense is innate, it constantly changes, and it is universal among each culture. Pinker also explains that moral sense shapes our judgement as it is something that we value and seek in other people. The science of the moral sense is important since it shows how morality impacts our actions and it explains why we act in certain ways.

Leo Tolstoy, author of “My Confession”, succumbed to a profound emergency. With his most noteworthy works behind him, he discovered his feeling of reason lessening as his VIP and open recognition surged, sinking into a condition of profound wretchedness and sadness regardless of having a vast bequest, great wellbeing for his age, a spouse who had given him fourteen children, and the guarantee of endless artistic acclaim. On the very edge of suicide, he made one final handle at light in the midst of the obscurity of his life presence, swinging to the world 's religious and philosophical conventions for answers to the age-old inquiry with respect to the importance of life.

Morality in its basic definition, is the knowledge between what is right and what is wrong. In Joan Didion’s essay, “On Morality,” she uses examples to show how morality is used to justify actions and decisions by people. She explains that morality can have a profound effect on the decisions that people chose to make. I think that morality is an idea that is different for every individual based on morals and background.

4) How did the work of established and recognised theatre practitioners, and/or the work of live theatre, influence the way in which your devised response developed?

Despite such claims, Nietzsche criticizes this mistaken idea that the knowledge of the universe can be comprehended by any method; he argues that not even the “most scrupulously conscientious analysis and self-examination of the intellect” cannot successfully interpret the progressive history of the world as “the human intellect cannot avoid seeing itself in [only] its perspectives” (Nietzsche 336). To Nietzsche, Kant and Hegel’s attempts to find truth in history is faulty because faith is just now found in science and reasoning rather than religion. What Kant and Hegel fail to realize is that the human race’s separation from this faith gave rise to “our new ‘infinite’”, in which “the world has become ‘infinite’ for [humanity] all over again, inasmuch as we cannot reject the possibility that it may include infinite interpretations” (Nietzsche 336). Thus the new infinite is self-consciously made by the individual members of humanity itself, as we can now independently interpret the world ourselves as we see fit. Nietzsche declares that even if some of these interpretations may include “too much devilry, stupidity and foolishness”, it does not matter because it does not rely on faith (Nietzsche 336). The new infinite that arises is ours, in which the abundance of perspectives is too overwhelming for any scholar to give meaning to such chaos. There is no logical reason how such disorder should

Embedded in the human spirit is the notion that people possess an innate sense of being an individual, free to think, act, and understand the world surrounding them. In George Orwell’s 1984, individuality is removed to support the Party’s abilities in controlling and exploiting the masses. Yet, despite their success in suppressing the citizens of Oceania there is something rooted in humanity that although can be repressed, still remains implanted within the deepest parts of a person’s mind. In the novel, while the Party attempts to annihilate all human instincts in order to acquire pure and absolute power, it is unknown to them that despite their best efforts there lies something much more dominant in the human mind which although can be inhibited may never be entirely eliminated. As Winston ponders revolutionary ideas, his physical body unknowing to his conscious mind, is complacent with his innermost thoughts to rebel in any way possible. Winston’s thoughts of unorthodoxy become enhanced through Julia because he discovers someone who desires and understands him, conjuring up something instinctual in him which has been waiting to be released. To care and protect someone else becomes instinctive when he/she experiences suffering or pain and this kind of understanding is acknowledged through the only people Winston believes express any sanity in a corrupt world: the proletarians. A person’s impulse to resist an oppressive nature is instinctual and this is validated through

In his book, Twilight of the Idols, Friedrich Nietzsche aggressively challenges conventional schools of thought dating back to the ancients. Philosophy, as we know it, began over two-thousand years ago in Athens with the birth of Socrates. Socrates introduced the practice of reasoning and dialectics—the art of discourse hoping to bring individuals closer to some universal truth—to an Athenian society that previously held aesthetics, not logic, as indicative of goodness. Socrates revolutionized life in Athens, and by extension, the Western tradition. His beliefs are found in works written centuries after his death. He is heralded as the “father of philosophy.”

Certain philosophers would have you believe that science at best is an integrated, and reconstituted distillation of all the current knowledge at any one time (much like Campbell's condensed Tomato soup: boring and uninteresting). A diminutive subset of these natural thinkers has even dared to characterize our universe as one with an infinite number of happenings outside the current domain of knowledge.

In The Moral Instinct, Steven Pinker cites Haidt’s “primary colors” of the moral sense (329). Pinker believes that all moral decisions can be categorized with these primary colors and, though everyone can see these colors, they are prioritized differently by different people. Haidt identifies five primaries—harm, fairness, community, authority, and purity—all of which make up the moral spectrum. These recurring moral themes can be found everywhere from cultural norms to the decisions and beliefs of individuals. Though the themes can be identified in works regarding ethics and morality, they—if applied correctly—can also give insight into the way the author prioritizes the moral colors.

He believes that knowledge has the ability to not take itself too seriously. Nietzsche is an advocate for uniting knowledge and play. He supposes that we create our values ourselves and do not discover them from nature or reason, as supposed by Plato. However, both philosophers believe that knowing your own ignorance and having a willingness to accept the fact that we are sometimes wrong and at fault is a vital step in creating the morals and values that we hold.

Nietzsche’s claim alludes to the dogmatic claims of Metaphysicians about the truth _ i.e., their way of dealing with truth in the absolute sense. This claim seems similar, from an epistemological perspective, to Kant’s that there is a distinction between appearances and the thing in itself. This latter “ is not and cannot be cognized through them, [ representations ] ” ( Banham : 270 ) and all we can know are the appearances _ which are mere representations _ “ which, as they are represented, as extended beings or series of alterations, have outside our thoughts no existence grounded in

Although the problem of the relationship between Nietzsche and metaphysics might seem to be a settled issue, this is in fact a quite complicated and fascinating problematic. The difficulty with this subject lies in the often unacknowledged ambiguity that the term ‘metaphysics’ exhibits in Nietzsche's writing, as this word assumes different nuances and connotations in different contexts. Therefore, if we can get past the usual rhetoric on the topic, we come to realize that Nietzsche addresses the topic of metaphysics in at least two distinct ways.

Nietzsche would look at freedom of speech and talk about truth. Truth to Nietzsche is similar to metaphors, simply stating that when we speak the truth it is based upon what we deem to be considered correct by that definition. To what we think correlates to what that truth is. Relating back to the idea of freedom of speech, when we are free speaking, we speak on behalf of our beliefs. We get our beliefs from the influence of culture, and our values and norms. We have our freedom of choice to decide what we believe, “…perhaps because it facilitated that sublime self-deception whereby the majority of the dying, the weak and the oppressed of every kind could construe weakness itself as freedom, and their particular mode of existence as an accomplishment.”

Nietzsche introduced an idea of philosophy that was more than simply a rational groundwork of existence or as the pursuit of an absolute truth. Instead, he suggested that philosophy is something to be respected as a personal interpretation of life and all its faculties (morality, existentialism etc.) and that was – for him - focused on life affirmation. Furthermore, this thinking implies that philosophy is not a be all and end all answer to life’s questions; rather, it is merely a

“God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him.” (Gay Science, 126) This harsh statement remains among Friedrich Nietzsche’s most powerful and disturbing quotes, spoken by a proclaimed Madman to a crowd of disbelievers. After making this claim, the Madman becomes horrified by his audience’s ignorance, noting that “This tremendous event is still on its way.” This has an effect of suspending the Madman’s message in time, expanding its audience infinitely, for the event of God’s death could still be on its way. Therefore, nearly 150 years after these words were written, we must ask ourselves, does God remain dead, and has our modern society killed him? This is a haunting and disturbing question, but in many ways our society does resemble Nietzsche’s masses. However, it also resembles the Madman himself, due to its inherent individualism.