Man's Identity According to Nietszche in Comparison to Marx's and Society's Definition

     For thousands of years the Bible has represented the foundation for one of the largest religions in existence, Christianity. “The Book” affects millions of people’s lives. The creation of morals makes the biggest impacts on individuals and society. Morals are hinted at throughout “The Book”, but are clearly stated in Matthew’s gospel. These morals are written in a series called the Beatitudes. Through morals, laws are created and society is given guidelines, most people see this in a positive manner. Friederich Nietzsche, a philosopher from the late 1800’s, views religion as a cult made for weak minded simpletons who need something to carry them through life. Nietzsche is often viewed as

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).

Nietzsche’s theory of truth states that truth in itself is a metaphor. Nietzsche was the opposite of Emerson because he had an existentialist view on the world. Whereas, Emerson believed there was a god and that he performed great miracles, giving him a transcendentalist view on the world. Nietzsche titles his essay, On Truth and Lies in a Non-moral Sense, because we receive our morals from our religious beliefs, but since he did not believe in a god, that highlights even further his dismay with “truths” in our language. We are told these concepts that we tell ourselves and convince ourselves are true, just to develop a logical sense of truth in our society. He believed we all formed these concepts or categories in where we group individual objects together to make sense of them. Nietzsche states in, On Truth and Lies in a Non-moral Sense, “Just as it is certain that one leaf is never

Christianity had become the enemy of life and nature and the church has stifled its followers by turning them into closed minded and weak humans. Nietzsche ultimately believed that religion creates a concept of anti-natural morality which damages our development as humans quite

“Man was created a rebel; and how can rebels be happy?”(Dostoevsky. The Grand Inquisitor. Trans. Matlaw. 131). Nietzsche elaborates on this point by affirming the idea that we are made up of two instinctual drives: the Dionysian, which causes us to be passionate, impulsive and unrestrained, and the Apollonian which makes us disciplined, restrained and controlled beings. Mill and other utilitarian’s like Jeremy Bentham denies the former. I embrace this idea that most of us are creatures of chaos, who are born wild and need to be tamed by the structures of society. What type of society would we live in if people did not believe in sins, or heaven and hell? Although we would like to deny it, the reality is that the greater majority of the human race is not capable of living without paternalistic laws, and moral limitations that stem from religious doctrines. J.S. Mill would strongly disagree with this statement: “ That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.”

Morals are set standards of right and wrong for society as a whole. One ’s self image of morals are what the individual thinks is right and wrong according to what he or she learns; however, this “Internal compass” can be influenced because society controls most of what they learn. One’s self image of morals allows an individual to provide compelling arguments, provides emotional stability and allows for an individual to have predetermined views of right and wrong; on account of the fact that said individuals choose to follow the revolutionary figures who provide a strong base for the creation of one’s self image of morals. In most cases, religion plays a major role in the creation of this aspect of identity; made evident in Martin Luther

Nietzsche strongest argument was 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. Nietzsche is quite critical in particular towards Christianity since it was stated as the religion of slaves and pity by Nietzsche, caused by limiting one’s personal development since they were too obsessed with the treasures of the afterlife. Having said that, Nietzsche also referred to Buddhism as the nihilistic and the “desire for nothingness” religion, however he does praise certain aspects of the Buddhist teaching in comparison to Jesus’. Last but foremost, Nietzsche proves Socrates death to be at the hands of the acceptance of slave morality. For those who practice religion are guaranteed to fall as a slave rather than to become their own master due to all the restriction and standards set up by God. I simply do agree with Nietzsche due to all the evidence connecting back to each and every religion and philosophers. One must strive to reach and achieve their desire in order to be satisfied with one’s life. As people say, “no pain, no gain”, therefore one must live through all the suffering to accomplish greatness in their lives and make the most out of the given life. One can conclude, the practice of religion led many to the acceptance of slave

Society decides what our moral failures are as human being. Dante did this in his epic poem The Inferno, putting his enemies who had committed crimes according to “society” in his own personal hell. He ranked his enemies in hell, and ranked them by their crimes that were committed. Some of his ranking where people were questionable to some who were reading.

In my opinion, some of the essential idea in Nietzsche’s “beyond good and evil” is his search for the truth. He believed everyone had the ability to explore truth in their own specific way. In Nietzsche’s “beyond good and evil” he also believes that self – preservation is not the main ambition of human beings but the fundamental creative force that motivates all creations is the “will to power”(122). Furthermore, Friedrich Nietzsche did not believe in the existence of God, to him, God was dead. God plays no vital role in our culture- except as a protector of the slaves morality, including the idea of equal worth of all persons (122).

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

In Twilight of the Idols Nietzsche emphasizes that the Christian Church is a false idol. He dares to say, “..God to be an enemy of life..” and, “Life ends where the ‘kingdom of God’ begins..” because he believes that Christian morality is against life itself (Idols, 23). The reason for this is because Nietzsche believes that, “to have to fight against the instincts- this is the formula for decadence: so long as the life is ascendant, happiness equals instinct” which simply means that if one goes against instincts, or an intuitive way of carrying ones life, then as a consequence it will lead to the degeneration of society and intellect while if life is on the rise, happiness must be equivalent to following ones’ instinct (Idols, 15). Because of his belief it is understood that Nietzsche wants one to embrace their instincts. Nietzsche states that a life in which

In the works of Friedrich Nietzsche, there is perhaps no group of people that is criticized more than Christians and the Christian Church. While Nietzsche shows a great aversion for western philosophy in general, one could certainly make the argument that his critiques against Christianity are just as equally as incisive, if not more. This comes across perhaps most clearly in his work, entitled The Anti-Christ, in which Nietzsche offers us a look into the beliefs of Christianity and its central figure, Jesus Christ, as well as the ways in which he believes Christians fail. It is important to recognize these shortcomings, but it is equally important to investigate the emotional tool they use, termed ressentiment, that rises from their misunderstanding of Jesus. Christians, according to Nietzsche, through their progression in ressentiment misunderstand Jesus through his death and teachings.

The fact that he gave up and refused to fight back gives room for more findings. He disagrees with the Christian community for making Jesus a martyr and sees that in so doing, they had made the Christ teachings vague. Nietzsche wrote his works in the process of rebuilding the damage caused by Christians during the ancient days. His inclination was to show the true way in which God wanted human beings to live as opposed to what Christians were doing.

People always wonder what makes them who they are. However, the extent to which our characters are derived from ourselves is always an argument for many philosophers. Marx, a German philosopher, and Mengzi, a representative thinker of Confucianism, present similar accounts in explaining how humans are shaped. Both Marx and Mengzi believe that our individual character is not solely shaped by ourselves but are shaped in ways by external forces. However, I will argue that, compared with Mengzi’s view of the moral attributes that inherently exist in humans themselves, Marx’s account is more systematic and compelling due to his emphasis of the effect of the interrelationship between humans themselves and the external forces of labor and social structures.

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