Comparing Nietzsche And Freud On Crime And Punishment

He proposes that all social contracts are based on the first masters, who had the power and stability to make promises that could be kept. In this early time Nietzsche explains, when a punishment is served, the creditor would be the one to dole punishment to the debtor. This idea of the social debt also mirrors Freud’s hypothesis of guilt as Nietzsche explains the similarity between the two words in German. Anyhow, Nietzsche claims that the current morality has reached a point of exhaustion. Mainly in the way punishment was valued. Whereas in the ancient system a punishment was the debt owed by the debtor, it had been transfigured into a different form entirely. The judicial system system imposing interpretations on actions doesn’t translate into different thinking by the actions, due to the growing stability of society as it advances. In other words, the negative consequences of an unlawful act would no longer threaten the integrity of the society, and thus would no longer necessitate a similar punishment. As the treat moves away from the victim and to justice in itself, punishment no longer induces a sense of guilt, but rather misfortune that one was caught. He doesn’t find the

Consider the design of a puppet. When observing this structure, one will give attention to the source of the puppet’s actions being dictated by the puppeteer. These actions are able to be transmitted from the will of the puppeteer into the puppet through the strings that the puppeteer uses to control specific parts of the puppet. Furthermore, one can infer that the strings of the puppet are the motive behind the puppet’s action. If the puppet’s actions are disoriented or even disjointed, one can infer that the strings or the motives behind the puppet’s actions are conflicting. A notable literary example of this depiction can be found in Victor Hugo’s Les Miserablés. Late in Book V: Valjean, Jean Valjean describes the method of reasoning behind Javert’s suicide when he says, “To owe life to a criminal...to betray society in order to remain true...these absurdities should come about and be heaped on top of him...it was this that defeated him” (Hugo 1181). Javert’s adherence to his internal conflict imploded and eventually influenced his suicide; a reader might see Javert’s decision and confirm that an inner conflict of motives prompted his unanticipated action. Fyodor Dostoyevsky, a 19th Century existentialist Russian author, portrays a similar theme in his book Crime and Punishment which tells the story of a man named Raskolnikov, the suspect of a murder case, who appears like a puppet with actions that become increasingly

Nietzsche is widely known as a critic of religion. In fact, he talks in depth about morality in regards to religion in his essays about the genealogy of morals. But the problem is not within religion itself or within morals. The problem is involved in the combination of the two to create society’s understanding of morality through a very religious lens. In fact, Nietzsche has criticism for almost any set of morals constructed by a group of individuals and meant to be applied to society as a whole. True morality, according to Nietzsche, requires a separation from these group dynamic views of morality- or at least a sincere look into where they originated and why they persist- and a movement towards a more introverted, and intrinsically personalized understanding of what morals mean in spite of the fact that “the normative force to which every member of society is exposed, in the form of obligations, codes of behavior, and other moral rules and guidelines, is disproportionally high” (Korfmacher 6).

Homicide always will be an aspect of life, whether it is in the 16th century, 21st century or in the future. At times of extreme stress, people may turn to murder as an outlet of a greater problem they cannot fix or control. Presently, homicide has a greater value in society due to popular culture references through the media such as television, film and writing; society constantly has homicide and murder in the subconscious. In David M. Buss’ findings in The Murderer Next Door: Why the Mind is Designed to Kill,

The way that Robert Nietzsche is simple on his eyes the strongest individual always wins. For Nietzsche this applies to both in the human race and in nature. This is the society loves and believes in and wants to implement throughout the entire world. He wants a society to produce the strongest and toughest people possible. To create this, he wants to beat down the weak. To create a superman or “ubermensch”. Also in the eyes of Nietzsche wait, he believes life is that you should beat down and belittle poor people or people below your social status. Life is incorporating being harsh, overpowering, and imposing your will on these poor people.in this scenario, there is a slave and master mentality involved, in which that the master believes that it is absolutely necessary to belittle the lesser poor people. This is not the

Psychodynamic (Psychoanalytical) theory was developed by Sigmund Freud in the late 1800’s and has gained increasing popularity in the history of criminality (Siegel, 2005). Freud believed that every individual carries “[the] residue of the most significant emotional attachments of our childhood, which then guides our future interpersonal relationships” (Siegel). Freud theorized that the personality is a three-part structure made up of the id, ego, and super ego. These three components work together in creating a behavior. The id creates the demands, the ego put the demands created by id into a larger context using reality, and finally the superego suppresses the id and attempts to make the ego behave morally, rather than realistically. Psychodynamic theory is significant to criminology because it explains “criminal” or “abnormal” behavior is the result of irregular development of the psyche.

This paper is a comparative study between Nietzsche’s Beyond Good and Evil and Martin Luther King Jr’s Letter from Birmingham Jail. Detailing their views regarding ethical and unethical law.

I agree with the Nietzsche’s claim that “Every elevation of the type ‘man’ has hitherto been the work of an aristocratic society and so it will always be”. I agreed because in our society those things happen between upper and lower class family. Most of the time upper class family used to dominate and criticize lower class family in each step of their foots. Some time middle class family also cannot leave to dominate lower class family in their each step. Higher-class family has more power, take delight or pleasure in things, and possess more wealth and benefit. Lower class family deprived from all of these things.

“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

Classical criminological theory was introduced in 1764. The tenants of this theory became the backbone for the development of all criminological theories to come. After over 200 years have passed since its conception, is classical criminological theory still relevant to today’s society in explaining the causes of crime? This essay will address this question by discussing the major components of classical criminological theory while highlighting its strengths and weaknesses. The essay will also examine a more modern criminological theory, Merton’s anomie/strain theory, and decipher major differences between the two theories. This essay will also explain the aspects of classical criminological theory that are applicable or outdated in their

While Nietzsche’s standpoint of the master morality can be viewed in the lifestyle of people today, it is not a morality that need be accepted or strived for as a sense of power or accomplishment in life. The Bible teaches that as we lose our live for Jesus we will find it (Matthew 10:39). Submitting to God is not an act of weakness, rather an honor and gain as we lose ourselves in Him and find our true selves. The Bible says that we were made in God’s image and likeness, and we were given dominion over the earth (Genesis 1:26). Nietzsche’s master morality appears to be just that, an attempt to gain dominion. Since Nietzsche did not believe in God, which is the way to salvation and eternal life (Romans 10:9), it is safe to assume that he was serving the god of this world and his ways, which have always been to try to copy or be like God (Isaiah 14:13-14). Nietzsche had knowledge about God but decided to turn away from him. Because of this, Romans 1:28 -29 shows that he, among other things would be arrogant, boastful heartless, and invent ways of doing evil, which to me is exactly what his whole master-slave morality portrays. Had Nietzsche just turned from his wicked ways and submitted to the One and only true God, he would have found the peace, love, and true authority with out death.

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

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.

The title of Feodor Dostoevsky’s work, Crime and Punishment, leads the mind to think that the book will focus on a great punishment set by enforcers of the law that a criminal will have to endure, but the book does not really focus on any physical repercussions of the crimes of the main character, Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov.

Nietzsche shares a similar view of man. The important thing in man is his potential; man is striving but for something different, Ubermensch or superman. It represents man constantly striving to overcome himself and become a man whose values are independent from societal conceptions of good and evil. Ubermensch must be willing and able to reject what he is now to become something different and never become content with present values. Similar to Kierkegaard, Nietzsche sees life as a series of stages that take man from the herd to Ubermensch. The first step for man to achieve Ubermensch is to overcome a collective herd view of values because they are not bridges to Ubermensch. Once this herd is overcome, man can begin to concentrate on overcoming himself.