It should be observed that criticism is _never_ levelled at the ideal itself, but only at the problem which gives rise to a controversy concerning the ideal--that is to say, why it has not yet been realised, or why it is not demonstrable in small things as in great. *** It makes all the difference: whether a man recognises this state of distress as such owing to a passion or to a yearning in himself, or whether it comes home to him as a problem which he arrives at only by straining his thinking powers and his historical imagination to the utmost. Away from the religious and philosophical points of view we find the same phenomena. Utilitarianism (socialism and democracy) criticises the origin of moral valuations, though it believes in them just as much as the Christian does. (What guilelessness! As if morality could remain when the sanctioning _deity_ is no longer present! The belief in a "Beyond" is absolutely necessary, if the faith in morality is to be maintained.) _Fundamental problem_: whence comes this almighty power of _Faith? Whence this faith in morality?_ (It is betrayed by the fact that even the fundamental conditions of life are falsely interpreted in favour of it: despite our knowledge of plants and animals. "Self-preservation": the Darwinian prospect of a reconciliation of the altruistic and egotistic principles.) 254. An inquiry into the _origin of our moral valuations_ and tables of law has absolutely nothing to do with the _criticism_ of them, though people persist in believing it has; the two matters lie quite apart, notwithstanding the fact that the knowledge of the _pudenda origo_ of a valuation does diminish its prestige, and prepares the way to a critical attitude and spirit towards it. What is the actual worth of our valuations and tables of moral laws? _What is the outcome of their dominion?_ For whom? In relation to what?--answer: for Life. But _what is Life?_ A new and more definite concept of what "Life" is, becomes necessary here. My formula of this concept is: Life is Will to Power. _What is the meaning of the very act of valuing?_ Does it point back to another, metaphysical world, or does it point down? (As Kant believed, who lived in a period which _preceded_ the great historical movement.) In short: _what is its origin?_ Or had it no human "origin"?--Answer: moral valuations are a sort of explanation, they constitute a method of interpreting. Interpretation in itself is a symptom of definite physiological conditions, as also of a definite spiritual level of ruling judgments. _What is it that interprets?_--Our passions. 255 All virtues should be looked upon as physiological _conditions_: the principal organic functions, more particularly, should be considered necessary and good. All virtues are really refined _passions_ and elevated physiological conditions.