How Did Nietzsche's Impact On Religion

Masters and slaves are constantly discussed throughout Nietzsche’s work, but the connection between them is discussed best in his book On the Genealogy of Morality. The first of the three essays outlines two alternate structures for the creation of values, which is credited to masters and the other to slaves.

What we have gathered so far by working on Nietzsche, is the notion that morals pervade our life spheres, providing us with the rules and ideals by which we live. Furthermore, we know that these normative codes derive their normative force from the values with which they are associated. Nietzsche grounds the effort of a genealogy of morals on the pre-assumption that these values are not the “ground zero” of morality. As Schacht puts it '[…] for Nietzsche […] all normativity is ultimately of extra-moral origin. For Nietzsche that ultimate origin – the Ur-source of all normativity – is to be found in the basic disposition he takes to be operative in all that transpires in this world, which he calls "will to power" and which expresses itself

We were introduced to Friedrich Nietzsche who had written several essays titled “On the Genealogy of Morality”. The beautiful thing about philosophy is it allows us to constantly keep thinking and consider other people’s point of view. Prior to reading these essays, we had read about Plato, St. Augustine and later the Buddha. All of them believed in some type of after life, while Nietzsche did not. He was considered an atheist to some, but he believed in asceticism.

With myself as an example, it is clear that Nietzsche’s description of morality is not complete or entirely accurate. Nietzsche’s philosophy is faulty in that he focuses completely on the selfish needs of the individual, and assumes that all humans are selfish and this selfishness is the basis of their morals. Nietzsche describes the morals of the übermensch as an alternative to the morals of Christianity. The difference between the two is that in Christianity the believer adopts the morals sanctified by the church for selfish reasons, while the übermensch creates his own selfish morals. This explanation stems from the view of morals as a purpose in life rather than a just a way to live. If one only has morals in order to gain purpose, then this morality must be selfish. I believe that the source of true morals is not selfishness, but the

Should society trust a man who claimed to be Jesus, Alexander the Great among other deities and historical figures? Despite suffering from madness when claiming these identities, Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche’s works inspire many historical leaders and present day scholars including Stalin, Hitler, and Mussolini. A 19th century German philosopher, he followed the beliefs of atheism, moral skepticism, and relativism. Throughout his books he mocked Christianity while promoting his own beliefs of morality, man reaching its potential, and society’s killing of God (Mastin).

Friedrich Nietzsche is a German philosopher known for his challenging ideas against common morality and his ideas commonly associate with anarchism. Nietzsche was born on 15 October 1844 in Röcken, Lützen, Prussia (currently Germany), where his father was a Lutheran priest. Nietzsche suffered from two terrible tragedies at a young age as his father passed away when he was only five years old and his younger brother also died only a year later. One year later, Nietzsche’s family moved to Naumberg and at the age of 14 Nietzsche earned a scholarship to the Pforta, a Lutheran boarding school known for academic excellence, near Naumberg. At Pforta Nietzsche excelled in Greek and Latin, but still did not show any signs of his radical philosophy

Let us begin from how Nietzsche frames genealogy first and foremost as a “genealogy of morals”. Accordingly, it is crucial that we understand what Nietzsche takes morality to be. According to Richard Schacht, 'morals […] are most properly thought of as a loosely related family of norms pertaining to human conduct of various sorts […]' . Moreover, Schacht adds that morals are to be seen in relationship with our 'forms or spheres of life […] the various sorts of sociocultural formations and configurations […] setting the contexts of the greater part of what we variously do in the course of our socioculturally articulated lives' . Morals are therefore normative codes according to which we orientate ourselves in the context of different spheres

Friedrich Nietzsche did not believe that absolute values existed. Rejecting the attempts to articulate the nature of the good life and what constitutes right actions, viewing it as nothing more than the expression of personal prejudice by people who are arrogant enough to believe they can prescribe for all human beings. Nietzsche believed there was only perspectives, no absolute values. Nietzsche’s views on the good life stemmed from his ideology of reality. He observed reality to be fundamentally amoral. That morality is one means through which humans can exert power. Whilst people view moral beliefs as factual, Nietzsche stated that, ‘moral beliefs are simply manifestations of the will in action.' Based on this statement, moral concepts can change over time as different dominant wills appropriate moral concepts and reconfigure are developed to suit specific needs. For Nietzsche, the notion of equal representation and equal rights represented an attempt to subvert the reality of human nature and to homogenise it. These ideals however, would lead humans to become mediocre, tame herd animals in whom the will is perverted According to Nietzsche, moral philosophy ignores the fact that morality is a problem, reduces it to a simple dichotomies like ‘good’ and ‘bad; and then assumes particular principles can be applied to all people. This, to Nietzsche, should not be the cause. Instead, Nietzsche advocated moving ‘beyond good and evil.’ The individual who understands that such

In this essay I will debate and discuss the various aims which Nietzsche may have had when writing ‘The Genealogy of Morals’. Since its publication philosophers have put forward a wide range of viewpoints debating the question of his overall aim. With interpretations of his aims ranging from such lofted goals as curing the human condition, to bringing about a new objective and universal morality, to other more measured goals such as a re-evaluation of moral values. These viewpoints are necessarily highly influenced by broader beliefs about what type of philosopher Nietzsche was. Was he naturalist or a postmodernist? A moral realist or anti-realist? Thus, I will be taking a divergent route to answering the title question but one that is justified

Nietzsche discusses the evolution of critical and empirical thinking. He also talks about morals and the demands of Christianity back in time and what it demands now. As a result of this, he knew that a some point all the values that church/ Christianity teaches Christians or members to religion, little by little would deplete power over the masses. At this day and age, we manipulate religion to our convenience, more so we follow religion to some extend and at our on personal benefit, as we don't follow all the set of rules that religion

Nietzsche is quoted for writing “God is dead.” Thus, he believed that the moral authority that people gave God was absurd. Nietzsche attacked Judaeo-Christian morality because he saw “the victory of the Jewish slave morality as a kind of poisoning” (Glover 12). The idea that “more complete human beings” should have superiority over inferior people shifted towards “compassion and love of one’s neighbour” (12). In other words, the Jews’ “slave revolt in morality,” which preached virtues of the poor and weak, had been a victorious movement. Because of the collapse of religion validating morality, the idea of self-creation would replace the external authority of morality that religion possessed.

One of Nietzsche’s primary studies was on the problem of morality. However, he seems to contradict himself on the matter of values. Tansesi claims it is because of the different definitions of value - “values in a descriptive sense as that which is thought to be of value by an individual or by the members of a group, and values in a normative sense as that which is objectively of value” (652). Because of Nietzsche’s committed denial of any moral values, it would seem impossible to attribute him to him a commitment to the existence of any values in the normative sense (652). In Thus Spake Zarathustra, he claims that to value is to create, and that it is only through valuing that there is value. In the same section it is also claimed that men did not discover values, nor were they given by a god; rather, human beings

Nietzsche’s quote is perhaps his most notorious statement, accompanied by his gallery of daring philosophical conclusions; one would not expect anything less from a critical thinker. Was Nietzsche’s declaration relevant to his period (due to the rise of science and critical thinking) or was it universally implied? From Nietzsche’s perspective or perhaps from his cultural and social circumstances religion was dead. However, theologians and sociologists propose otherwise; faith in God has been an increasing awakening throughout history and not necessarily during and after

The paper discusses, in detail, some of Nietzsche 's major philosophies such as master and slave morality. It looks further into his view on nihilism; his definition, why he was so much against it and what he thinks should replace it. Also, the write-up explains Nietzsche 's analysis of Christianity as a dominant religion and its teachings. Lastly, it points out the prejudices of philosophers and the relationship between philosophy and truth.Beyond good and evil is a detailed account of Nietzsche’s mature philosophy.

Karl Marx is a German materialist philosopher, socialist, economist and journalist whish was born in5 May 1818. His philosophy and thoughts have been influenced by Hegel’s philosophy and believes that the essence of human beings is relationship with nature and other beings. In the case of religion, he has a negative and pessimistic view about religions .Marx believes that, there is no God and there is no need of God. He believes that religion is an illusion of human being minds that avoid people to seek the reality as it does not allow people to question religions. As he compares it to opium; “It is the opium of the people”( Eggers). Opium reduces the pain from human’s body in the short term, but it is harmful in a long time and it reacts like poison in human’s body. Religion is also like this; it reduces the suffering, but it will reduce the energy and willingness to fight against the oppressive system of capitalism. Religion cannot find the real cause of suffering. He mentions that for having a real