Nietzsche's New Morality as Reaction to the Old Essay

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).

Exegesis and Critique of Nietzsche’s Conception of Guilt In The Second Essay of On the Genealogy of Morality

In this Commentary of sections 1-7 of essay two in Friedrich Nietzsche’s The Genealogy of Morals, I will give a brief overview of the text, to help with showing the content that the comment covers, the go deeper into the individual sections and relate them to Nietzsche’s way of thinking and also look into any problems or solutions offered by those arguments.

Because we are so keen on learning, we are disengaged from our experiences, and therefore are not in the right place to understand ourselves (3). The words that are used to define any given concept are not to be taken at face value since the judgment of our moral values depends on their respective time periods and cultural influences, which are subject to change as everything else does. In other words, they are products of the moral projections of people’s values, which often have a multitude of dimensions that surpass the shallow fields of initial interpretation. Consequently, we need to look beyond the surface interpretation of these words by re-interpreting their meanings many times to be able to judge what we believe. As we change with time, our interpretations are subject to change, and our value systems evolve, both preventing us from establishing absolute meaning regarding anything. As a result, we cannot truly understand concepts unless we remove several historical layers from them. Many times throughout his polemic, Nietzsche hints at the necessity of asking a question from “various perspectives” (41). “Understanding the demonstrated purpose or utility of a thing, its form, its organization” is not

Nietzsche makes an attempt on “Restoring the innocence of becoming” by getting rid of “Punishment” and “Guilt”. He makes this claim in his “Error of Free Will”, by saying that, “Nowadays, since we are engaged in a movement in the opposite direction, since we immoralists especially are seeking with all our strength to eliminate the concept of guilt and punishment again and to cleanse psychology, history, nature, social institutions and sanctions of them, there is in our view no more radical opposition than that which comes from the theologians who, with their concept of ‘moral world order’, persist in plaguing the innocence of becoming with ‘punishment’ and ‘guilt” (pg. 472). Nietzsche

During the late 19th century, Friedrich Nietzsche examined the history of morals in his Genealogy of Morals. In his work, Nietzsche reveals the origin of morality, and he goes further to tear down the basis of Christianity and Kant’s Moral Law to show that there is a plurality of conflicting morals in society. Max Weber, who was a philosopher greatly influenced by Nietzsche, writes further on the plurality declaring that there is a polytheism that is the result of many conflicting values. Weber concludes that there is no science of ethics after Nietzsche, so there is no way to determine the “correct” value system. There is currently polytheism and a plurality of values that will not be resolved because all values are valid despite them conflicting

In his Genealogy of Morals, Friedrich Nietzsche examines the origins of the pervading moral system of his time to Christian values, which elevate restraint and self-denial. In his writings, Marx attributes societal ills to capitalism and the exploitation of the working class.

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.

Terri Murray, 2009, delivers his aspect from ‘Philosophy Now’, stating that “One may accept Nietzsche’s view, as do I, that orthodox Christianity reeks of hypocrisy”. However, although Christianity does have corrupt elements established within it, it is more complicated than simply stating the religion is corrupt. It seems logical to assume that Eli has been used as a symbol to represent all divine religions. Therefore it can be regarded as being slightly prejudice to claim Christianity as being corrupt, but rather it is used in a corrupt manner, and is tweaked and changed to suit the desires of immoral beings. Another religion seen in a similar light is Islam. This religion has been labelled as contradictory, violent and sexist as a pitiful

Individuals consider morality sacred because of the assumption of an existing transcendental basis for the morals ranging from tradition, reason to God or any other thing. The society has an assumption of “evil,” “bad” or “good” to have a similar meaning at all times but Nietzsche uses the genealogical process to indicate the evolution of these terms, thereby shattering the impression that the moral concepts of the present are true or a continuity from the past. It is therefore evident that Nietzsche precipitates for a valueless culture that dissents the highly regarded traditional meanings of things and attempts to enlighten individuals to adopt a new system of reasoning

That all strive to self-overcome, and in turn, attain freedom, is a fact accepted by Nietzsche. What the thundering philosopher renounces is morality and its ill-mannered objective comprehension of the will to power. This he sees as the culprit who impedes on (modern) man 's ability to understand and attain said power. The perplexity of objectivity and will to freedom is inevitably space from which the concept of morality arises. Nietzsche provides a detailed account of two forms of morality, that of the master and the slave. The individuals who correlate to master morality are characterized as strong individuals with a set of self-manifested which they live in accordance with. The masters think themselves powerful beings and equate this power to the Good. These individuals value create and determine good is that which is noble, good, strong, and powerful. This is affirmed by power and in turn, affirms the beliefs. (Nietzsche 115). Once a definition is ascribed to the concept of Good, the Bad is defined. That which is labeled as the Bad is likened to the weak-will, confused, oppressed individual. These are the individuals who compose the mentally of the slave morality. In likeness to their counterpart, they also long for power but due to subtle suspicion of the masters, attain it differently. Deducing a new set of values of that which is the Good, and declaring it that which is good for the whole. This Good they identify as the practice of patience, humility, pity, and

In our constantly changing world, situations can arise that need to be dealt with in a logical way to meet everyone’s needs. Although, this is extremely difficult, keeping majority happy, can seem perfect for a country. Friedrich Nietzsche discusses plenty about moral goods, and ultimately tries to develop a critical understanding of morality, in his novel written On the Genealogy of Morality (2007). This can be compared to many situations that have occurred, from citizens revolting against their government to minorities being left out of society. The two articles that I will be comparing to Nietzsche’s ideologies for this assignment are based upon the Burkini ban in France. The first article discusses the causes for this issue and is called

Throughout many centuries philosophers have tried to explain the nature of reality and the order that exists within the universe around us. The purpose of this paper is to first trace the developments that led up to modernity. Next I will react to the claim made by Fredrick Nietzsche that “God is dead” from a Biblical perspective.

Altruism is the practice of selfless concern for the well-being of others, or the behavior of an animal that benefits another at its own expense. Evidence shows that the act of altruism is unique in the world of animals. The interaction between those who are selfish and those who are altruistic is vital to human cooperation. A small group of altruistic people can give enough motivation to a large number of egotistical to move a mountain. Just as a large number of selfish people could push a small group of charitable people to change the world. It is the interaction between both that make this world go around (Nature). The world we live in is a big machine, and those who help others are the ones who keep it running effectively. People who

Friedrich Nietzsche was a 19th-century German philosopher and held in regard amongst the greatest philosophers of the early part century. He sharpened his philosophical skills through reading the works of the earlier philosophers of the 18th century such as Immanuel Kant, John Stuart Mill, Arthur Schopenhauer and African Spir; however, their works and beliefs were opposite to his own. His primary mentor was Author Schopenhauer, whose belief was that reality was built on the foundation of experience. Such as it is, one of his essays, Schopenhauer als Erzieher, published in 1874, was dedicated to Schopenhauer (Mencken, 2008). In the past two centuries, his work has had authority and influence in both