The Origin Of Paul Ree By Nietzche

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).

Humanity, according to Nietzsche, is infected by an illness. It is the kind of illness that has infected every single man, religious or non-religious alike. It is his aim to release his readers from the illness. In much the same way as a doctor, he wishes to do so by primarily sourcing the cause of the illness, and secondly by diagnosing it. It is Nietzsche’s belief that this metaphoric illness is morality.

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

Friedrich Nietzsche was born in Friedrich, Germany in 1844, later died in 1900. Nietzsche literature and history philosophy was considered to be worst sophist. All moral philosophers have been soporific, misleading. In other words, do not believe in just anything a “God” tell you because there is no God. Nietzsche was a moral theorist as new moral theorist many try to adopt moral theory and add science aspects. But not consider idea of conscience in same way as former moral theorist have in the past. Being a moral theorist in regards to actually raises doubt that there is such thing as morality. There are two known moralities, Master and Slave morality. These moralities came based on what Nietzsche said, “to be a human is to be a beast, and tube a superior beast, a person must be able to attack, control, happiness, exploit the weak. All societies have a class and within the class, known as ruling caste. The ruling caste originated from barbarian caste in state of nature. Where violence and power is wanted greatly. The hire you are in the caste you are considered to have more power, or in Nietzsche case you have more knowledge. Having more knowledge is the only way a person can reach true happiness. Nietzsche created these steps to Astuteness moral castration. The steps consist of making virtue the goal, set up standards for the virtue, opponents are ungodly, suffering

Good Bad is that of Nietzsche. Good Evil is the verbiage of the plebian, the nihilists that perpetuate the fallacy of Christian morality. Nietzsche’s genealogy of morality is intriguing because of the ironic, and hypocritical origin story that he develops. By pinpointing moments of inaccuracy and hypocrisy, he demonstrates the inefficacy of Good-Evil morality. Christian morality is rooted in envy and inefficacy, in a wish to achieve the strength of the aristocracy. This is replicated through ascetic teachings using weaknesses to the Christian advantage. Termed ressentiment – meaning hatred, and hostility – the envy of the proletariat, of the weak is used as the key term. Nietzsche claims that ressentiment refers to an inability to change a situation – to guilt. By focusing narrowly on the origins of Christian values, Nietzsche builds a story of emotion, trying to stimulate anger and resentment against the church. For Nietzsche, Christian Values arose out of weakness and trickery. The premise of their core values – justice and patience are used to explain away an inability to fulfill the desires of the slaves or the weak. However, a significant problem originates in Nietzsche’s attempt to acknowledge that Christianity originated in a lie that neither the weak nor the strong believed. If both the strong and the weak have memory on which to develop a history and morals – how did the Christian morality gain

As perhaps one of the most important pieces of work written by Nietzsche, “On the Genealogy of Morality” contains some of his most complex and provocative thoughts on the nature of morality and its origins. It is evident throughout his essays that Nietzsche has a profound discontent with modern society and its values, a discontent that Nietzsche attempts to explain through a thorough critique of the modern values that have stemmed from the rise of Judeo-Christianity values that have shaped today’s civilization. In his analysis of concepts such as morality and guilt, he explores the history of the deformation of the once noble and animalistic human society that succumbed to its death

In this paper, we will discuss Friedrich Nietzsche’s perspective based on the main question in unit 3, also known as “What is God?” Friedrich Nietzsche has created a vast amount of controversy and cultural influence since his publication in 1883. Nietzsche is known for his intricate work that has a substantial reputation throughout history. For example, in “The Gay Science,” his most known and recognized statement was “God is dead.” His bold declaration led to controversy in religion, nihilism, and morals.

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

Nietzsche begins his discussion of good and moral with an etymological assessment of the designations of “good” coined in various languages. He “found they all led back to the same conceptual transformation—that everywhere ‘noble,’

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

In this term paper I would like to discuss a brief history of Nietzsche’s life, how he developed his criticisms, a brief examination of some of his criticisms and misconceptions that are held by the

In “The Portable Nietzsche,” Nietzsche investigates the meaning of truth in the apparent world and its relationship to the proposed existence of God. More specifically, the philosopher attempts to explain how our world is misguided by the moral framework propagated by Christianity. This religion promises a God created “true world,” but only for those who are the

Friedrich Nietzsche, an extremely controversial thinker of his time, was an “outspoken critic of German nationalism, anti-Semitism, and religious dogmatism” (Kellner). Indubitably, Nietzsche has had a great impact on the improvement of twentieth century social thought. Key ideas from Nietzsche are included in the following: The Gay Science, On the Genealogy of Morality and Beyond Good and Evil. In the Gay Science, Nietzsche presents the famous image of the madman declaring “God is dead… and we have killed him”. Much of Nietzsche’s work problematizes Christianity and urges humanity to rethink the basis of morality. The artful self-stylization that may be implied by this is also suggested, and how to live without religious certainty. After the

Nietzsche can be misunderstood from the surface. It would seem he was against morality, but he was not, he simple just believed morality could not be achieved under the code of Christianity. Nietzsche thought if we threw away morality as we know it we would have a happier freer life. In his theory of the master/slave relationship he uses his thoughts about morality. He compares the masters to Gods having the freedom to do as they will without any regulation and this made them free and happy. The slaves on the other hand thought this was wrong and immoral and decided to change the rules. When the rule changes the masters were slaves to the new moral codes and the slaves were free. This is a flawed concept in my opinion Nietzsche needed a