_Theory and practice._--This is a pernicious distinction, as if there were an _instinct of knowledge,_ which, without inquiring into the utility or harmfulness of a thing, blindly charged at the truth; and then that, apart from this instinct, there were the whole world of _practical_ interests. In contradiction of this, I try to show what instincts are active behind all these _pure_ theorists,--and how the latter, as a whole, under the dominion of their instincts, fatally make for something which _to their minds_ is "truth," to their minds and _only_ to their minds. The struggle between systems, together with the struggle between epistemological scruples, is one which involves very special instincts (forms of vitality, of decline, of classes, of races, etc.). The so-called _thirst for knowledge_ may be traced to the _lust of appropriation_ and of _conquest_: in obedience to this lust the senses, memory, and the instincts, etc., were developed. The quickest possible reduction of the phenomena, economy, the accumulation of spoil from the world of knowledge (_i.e._ that portion of the world which has been appropriated and made manageable).... Morality is therefore such a curious science, because it is in the highest degree _practical_: the purely scientific position, scientific uprightness, is thus immediately abandoned, as soon as morality calls for replies to its questions. Morality says: I _require_ certain answers--reasons, arguments; scruples may come afterwards, or they may not come at all. "How must one act?" If one considers that one is dealing with a supremely evolved type--a type which has been "dealt with" for countless thousands of years, and in which everything has become instinct, expediency, automatism, fatality, the _urgency_ of this moral question seems rather funny. "How must one act?" Morality has always been a subject of misunderstanding: as a matter of fact, a certain species, which was constituted to act in a certain way, wished to justify itself by _making_ its norm paramount. "How must one act?" this is not a cause, but an _effect._ Morality follows, the ideal comes first.... On the other hand, the appearance of moral scruples (or in other words, _the coming to consciousness of the values_ which guide action) betray a certain _morbidness_; strong ages and people do not ponder over their rights, nor over the principles of action, over instinct or over reason. _Consciousness_ is a sign that the real morality--that is to say, the certainty of instinct which leads to a definite course of action--is going to the dogs.... Every time a new _world of consciousness_ is created, the moralists are signs of a lesion, of impoverishment and of disorganisation. Those who are _deeply instinctive_ fear bandying words over duties: among them are found pyrrhonic opponents of dialectics and of knowableness in general.... A virtue is _refuted_ with a "for." ...