Nietzsche's On The Genealogy Of Morality

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

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.

The Gilded Age and the Progressive Era, spanning roughly from the 1890s to the 1940s, were transformative periods in American history characterized by significant economic, social, and political changes. Various factors contributed to the regional variations during these eras, and understanding the distinctions between the Gilded Age and the Progressive Era is crucial to comprehending their interconnectedness. The Gilded Age was marked by rapid industrialization, urbanization, and the rise of big businesses. Different regions experienced economic growth at varying rates, with the industrialized North and Midwest seeing significant prosperity, while the agrarian South struggled with the remnants of Reconstruction. The era was characterized by

At times, entire populations are sheltered from the rest of the world and its ‘pleasures’, to comply with an principle such as egalitarianism or socialism, i.e. communism in North Korea, and formerly the Soviet Union. These very same people are led to believe in blind faith that their society is always right, and therefore perfect. Unfortunately, the government in Anthem abuses

Nietzsche was a revolutionary author and philosopher who has had a tremendous impact on German culture up through the twentieth century and even today. Nietzsche's views were very unlike the popular and conventional beliefs and practices of his time and nearly all of his published works were, and still are, rather controversial, especially in On the Genealogy of Morals. His philosophies are more than just controversial and unconventional viewpoints, however; they are absolutely extreme and dangerous if taken out of context or misinterpreted. After Nietzsche's death it took very little for his sister to make some slight alterations to his works to go along with Nazi ideology.

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.

Nietzsche and Mill have explored the theory of ‘morality’ from different perspectives. The two philosophers appear to get along that the notion ‘morality’ has been exploited to a great extent, though a little certainty has been provided on the issue. The two philosophers agree on the complexity of the issue. Mill’s theory of ethics is based on the concept of ‘utility. ' The philosopher provides the meaning of the idea as it has been largely perverted. Nietzsche stipulates that ‘morality’ is not a common notion due to the existence of ‘the masters’ and ‘slaves. ' Thus, ‘morality’ can be regarded from the perspective of the ‘masters, ' and ‘slaves, respectively. ' Both ethical theories have the right to be like each of them contributes to understanding the origins of ‘morality. ' However, in his theory, Nietzsche is trying to explore the human nature beyond good and evil, while Mill simplifies the human nature. Thus, Nietzsche would criticize Mill’s theory.

In his second essay of the Geneaology of Morals, Nietzsche attempts to identify and explain the origin of the conscience. He does not adopt the view of the conscience that is accepted by the “English Psychologists”, such as Bentham, J. Mill, J.S. Mill and Hume, as the result of an innate moral feeling. Rather, it is his belief that the moral content of our conscience is formed during childhood under the influence of society. Nietzsche defines the conscience as an introspective phenomenon brought about by a feeling of responsibility, in which one analyzes their own morality due to the internalization of the values of society. This definition holds the position that the conscience is not something innate to

Nietzsche critiqued modern civilization since the entire scheme of modern society went against his philosophy. Nietzsche was afraid modern society and religion would bring the individuals to nihilistic voids, as they would eventually turn into uninteresting herds of controlled animals. Nietzsche wishes the individuals to achieve self-awareness, in that individuals would act upon themselves for what they truly want, instead of following the social construct. This state of achieving the higher self was defined as being the “overman”, which was achieved by redefining one 's world, in a purely personal manner. Thus in some sense, Nietzsche would agree that great men are “criminals” since they act in a way that is not deemed “good” in society and stay true to what they desire. As Nietzsche states, “A rebel can be a miserable and contemptible man; but there is nothing contemptible in a revolt as such--and to be a rebel in view of contemporary society does not in itself lower the value of a man. There are even cases in which one might have to honor a rebel, because he finds something in our society against which war ought to be waged--he awakens us from our slumber” (The Will to Power, pg 391). However, the state often suppresses these “criminals” from acting as the overman by demanding rules, which create fear and guilt and prevent individuals from heightening oneself and also prevent

Friedrich Nietzsche’s “On the Genealogy of Morality” includes his theory on man’s development of “bad conscience.” Nietzsche believes that when transitioning from a free-roaming individual to a member of a community, man had to suppress his “will to power,” his natural “instinct of freedom”(59). The governing community threatened its members with punishment for violation of its laws, its “morality of customs,” thereby creating a uniform and predictable man (36). With fear of punishment curtailing his behavior, man was no longer allowed the freedom to indulge his every instinct. He turned his aggressive focus inward, became ashamed of his natural animal instincts, judged himself as inherently evil, and developed a bad conscience (46).

In contemplating my own beliefs of what is sought as “good” and what is “bad,” I chose to expand my ideas and compare them to Friedrich Nietzsche’s first essay in “On the Genealogy of Morals.” Nietzsche first debunks the ideas of Nietzsche sees two types of morality at play creating these original definitions of good bad and evil, master morality and slave morality. I will also use Nietzsche’s concept of “will to power” to evaluate each of these ideas. Nietzsche believes that the will to power is the force that pushes humankind. To clarify for my readers, I’m looking to separate deontology from virtue ethics to improve my own understanding of good and bad not as what is right or wrong.

In the book, “The Element of Moral Philosophy”, James Rachels explores the several criticisms of Utilitarianism. In this essay, I will touch on these criticisms, outlining the major implications they propose to Utilitarianism. I will also explain why many of the notions proposed against Utilitarianism are self-serving, and instead serve to improve the general good of a minority population, which contradicts the Utilitarian theory of equating moral aptitude to the general good of a majority population, and that in this respect a greater consequence is achieved. Lastly, I will demonstrate how many societal values have a Utilitarian basis, which proves that Utilitarianism can be salvaged in the face of most criticisms.

Nietzsche argued that a distinction existed between the morality of master and those of their slaves, or those who are poor and powerless compared to the masters. Master morality is attitude where good and bad are equivalent to noble and despicable respectively. The master creates value and it defined as good by the master, because of the power they have. The masters look at the slaves and see that the slaves characterized by the opposite of what characterizes them as master, and thus think that the slaves are bad. So, master’s morality defined by the identity of the masters. In the other hand, slave morality, is something that is developed by the slaves, or those who are poor, powerless and weak compared to the master’s morality. They resent

The anticipated law, whose purpose is to ban the use of the burqa and veil, finally took place in France. The ban started within school, and expanded into a restriction within the entire country. France drew international attention, questions, and opinions on the justification of this new law. Even though France’s main response to their justification of the ban is to preserve the French culture, the law also positively addresses other problems such as: religious freedom, public safety, and women’s rights.

While it is damning for the people upholding a cause to never question why they support it, the ruling classes of my dystopia are extremely aware that their comfortable lifestyles and social prosperity come at the expense of others’ human rights, and most are indifferent, accept this as a necessary evil, or violently support it, similar to Omelas where the child’s abuse is public knowledge, but besides “the one who walks away” from Omelas, all members eventually come to accept that they value their way of life more than the one child. However, in this society, instead of prioritizing the happiness of the people, or even just a fraction of the population, the priority is survival and expansion as a unit.