Reflecting upon generalities is always retrograde: the last of the "desiderata" concerning men, for instance, have never been regarded as problems by philosophers. They always postulate the "_improvement_" of man, quite guilelessly, as though by means of some intuition they had been helped over the note of interrogation following the question, _why_ necessarily "_improve!_" To what extent is it _desirable_ that man should be more _virtuous,_ or more _intelligent,_ or _happier!_ Granting that nobody yet _knows_ the "wherefore?" of mankind, all such desiderata have no sense whatever; and if one aspires to one of them--who knows?--perhaps one is frustrating the other. Is an increase of virtue compatible with an increase of intelligence and insight? _Dubito_: only too often shall I have occasion to show that the reverse is true. Has virtue, as an end, in the strict sense of the word, not always been opposed to happiness hitherto? And again, does it not require misfortune, abstinence, and self-castigation as a necessary means? And if the aim were to arrive at the _highest insight,_ would it not therefore be necessary to renounce all hope of an increase in happiness, and to choose danger, adventure, mistrust, and seduction as a road to enlightenment?... And suppose one will have happiness; maybe one should join the ranks of the "poor in spirit." 394. The wholesale deception and fraud of so-called _moral improvement._ We do not believe that one man can be another if he is not that other already--that is to say, if he is not, as often happens, an accretion of personalities or at least of parts of persons. In this case it is possible to draw another set of actions from him into the foreground, and to drive back "the older man." ... The man's aspect is altered, but _not_ his actual nature.... It is but the merest _factum brutum_ that any one should cease from performing certain actions, and the fact allows of the most varied interpretations. Neither does it always follow therefrom that the habit of performing a certain action is entirely arrested, nor that the reasons for that action are dissipated. He whose destiny and abilities make him a criminal never unlearns anything, but is continually adding to his store of knowledge: and long abstinence acts as a sort of tonic on his talent.... Certainly, as far as society is concerned, the only interesting fact is that some one has ceased from performing certain actions; and to this end society will often raise a man out of those circumstances which make him _able_ to perform those actions: this is obviously a wiser course than that of trying to break his destiny and his particular nature. The Church,--which has done nothing except to take the place of, and to appropriate, the philosophic treasures of antiquity,--starting out from another standpoint and wishing to secure a "soul" or the "salvation" of a soul, believes in the expiatory power of punishment, as also in the obliterating power of forgiveness: