Nietzsche's Will To Power

“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

Lists quotes Friedrich Nietzsche's statement " In every culture whoever cannot handle weapons is a slave, and weapons include words'' List is expressing that words really do affect a human being he mentions '' We have word- warriors in our culture , people who use words are weapons" he is clearly emphasising verbal profanities can really damage a person and turn them into a slave because the pain they feel from the harmful weapon thrown at them. This passage also mentions how lawyers clearly show " words are the weapons of the law" even though lawyers are very well educated and know how to use their words they still take power of their words and make people look pitiful, it can seriously harm people for the rest of their life such as simply

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.

Nietzsche starts this second essay by looking at and reviewing the importance of our ability to make and keep promises. To hold yourself and others to a promise means having the need of both a good memory, the ability to remember making said promise and a strong feeling of confidence what will happen next and a long term ability to know you will be able to fulfil said promise. In order for us to make the commitment and have the confidence to do so means that on some level, we must give a feeling and make ourselves into the ideal of becoming in a way predictable, to be able to achieve this we as humans need a set of guideline to follow, certain rules that make this predictability a possibility, the certainty that a set of actions will lead to a set of reactions both internally and externally.

Friedrich Nietzsche was a philosopher in the 1800’s. His work has since influenced, impacted, and brought forth new questions for many philosophers to follow. One of Nietzsche’s famous writings Beyond Good and Evil expresses his views on society and the two different classes it holds, slave and master. He expresses his belief that the two are in warfare with one another, the strong (master) fighting for the will to power, while the weak (slave) tries to pull the master down to their level using clandestine forms of revenge. Nietzsche believed the slave morality was one that included humility, obedience, and submission, and was the destructive choice and attribute of Christianity, while the master morality was full of arrogance and pride

On the Genealogy of Morals by Friedrich Nietzsche is typically listed as one of the most important philosophical works of the modern era. It is only modern, of course, to philosophical standards, being a mere 129 years old. It is also one of the most controversial works of its time, having the dubious distinction of being connected to Nazi ideology; it also has a not very subtle racist, sexist, and Darwinist bent that is a reflection of Nietzsche himself. That being said, I think that it is also serially misunderstood. Nietzsche directly mentions the role of interpretation in ethical discourse in the Genealogy, and the interpretive element factors heavily into one’s understanding of the polemic and by extension, ethics philosophy as a whole. Throughout the book, Nietzsche uses interpretation as a tool in itself to make a constructivist and existentialist argument about the history of ethics as whole. His idea that man has used interpretation throughout history, and the interpretive elements in Genealogy outside of the historical analysis, seem to say that almost all ethics are derived from interpretation and therefore constructivist in nature, which is a heavily existentialist argument. For example, the entirety of the first essay is based heavily upon the role of interpretation in the development of the early ethical systems that Nietzsche argues are built on the

Explain Nietzsche’s account of the Origin of the Moral Conscience: Friedrich Nietzsche was a German philosopher famous for his many works on a number of important topics such as nihilism, morality and consciousness. One of Nietzsche’s most notable pieces of work is his Genealogy of Morals. This is a collection of three essays Nietzsche has written that focus on the conscience and the concept of guilt. In this essay, I will be focusing on the second and third essay.

“Suffering” is a word which carries negative connotations, used to incite pity, empathy or fear. Why would it not? Is suffering not simply agony, defined justly by the Oxford Dictionary as “the state of undergoing pain, distress, or hardship” (“Suffering)? Yet, we accept suffering as part of life, a fundamental aspect that defines living. Nietzsche tells us that the very act of living is suffering itself, but to survive is to find value in that suffering. Yet, what sort of value can be attached to an idea so negative? Pico Iyer’s editorial in the New York Times explores the value of suffering, likening suffering to passion and “[p]assion with the plight of other’s makes for ‘compassion’” (________________).I began to think upon the cohesive

Humanity’s natural aggression means that civilization is “constantly threatened with disintegration” and it must make every effort to ensure these urges are curbed, in order for its continued existence. He continues in this vein, by stating that, in order for people to “forgo the satisfaction of their tendency to aggression” civilization encourages us to form into groups, however for this to work their must continue to be “outsiders,” that the aggression can be turned towards. This is in accordance with On the Genealogy of Morals, where it is the Slaves ascetic nature that forces them to also control their instincts. Likewise, both Freud and Nietzsche assert that these restrictions cause people to internalise their aggressions, turning inward.

Nietzsche’s writing about power dynamics and the creation of the “strong” and “weak,” the “good” and the “bad,” is very closely intertwined with the workings of fascist ideology, and how it understands itself to be “strong.” In a Nietzschean sense, however, fascism ultimately fails to be truly “strong” because it creates itself as a reformed moralistic approach to power, rather than freeing itself from moralism. More specifically, the construction of the Jews as “weak” by those who subscribe to fascist ideology, and the portrayal of themselves as “strong,”is almost wholly antithetical Nietzsche’s actual position concerning power dynamics. Instead, as Nietzsche lays out in The Genealogy of Morals, real power is

One of Friedrich Nietzsche’s theories, I have seen implemented in real life situations was when Barack Obama was elected for president. This example illustrates the concept about will to power because an African American living in the United States of America probably goes through a lot of criticism such as racism. Thus, this proves my point that Barack Obama had the will to power, which assisted him to go further and not give up. Another case, in which Friedrich Nietzsche’s ideas are played throughout humanity, can be seen in schools. Due to the advancement in technology and world, humans are able to learn more about the human race and the world itself.

5. Discuss Nietzsche’s theory of “will to power” and “the innocence of becoming”. Does the hypothesis of the will to power successfully “debunk” traditional religion, morality, and philosophical claims to provide the “disinterested” or “objective” truth?

When reading Nietzsche, The Will to Power, he talks about both a “Metaphysical” and “Organic”. The metaphysical that everything from a rock to a person is “the will to power” same as animism, everything has power. I tend to like his theories on organic. Organic is the will to power is specifically related to all life, and only living life. He states on 37 (Spring-Fall 1887) that, “The repudiated world versus an artificially built "true, valuable” one (Nietzsche)”. Stating man has power, man has purpose, and man has ideas. Ideas like what makes a king powerful, is it his ideas or his army? He talks about, “Detached and idealistic, values, instead of dominating and guiding action, turn against action and condemn it.” Which Foucault talks about

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).

When Medea kills her children, audiences react with shock and horror. Any sympathy viewers have built for the woman is, in the words of Elizabeth Vandiver, “undercut” by this act (15). Since Medea is the protagonist, we question why Euripides chose to make her a child murderer. Most scholars agree that he invented this part of the myth. He also lessened her role as witch by drawing attention to her human qualities. This only highlights the infanticide (14) because we cannot excuse her ruthless act as monstrous and non-human. However, Medea remains very human until after she kills her sons. Appearing at the end of the play in the deus ex machina, she takes over not only the position but also the