Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm, 1844-1900; Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm, 1844-1900 -- Criticism and interpretation; Philosophy
So great was the misunderstanding which attached to his phrase, "beyond
good and evil," and so persistently was this phrase interpreted in
its narrow sense of "beyond good and bad," that he felt the necessity
of drawing the line of distinction between these two diametrically
opposed conceptions and of explaining the origin of each. His first
essay in "The Genealogy of Morals" is devoted to this task. At the
outset he devotes considerable space criticising the methods and
conclusions of former genealogists of morals, especially of the English
psychologists who attribute an _intrinsic_ merit to altruism because
at one time altruism possessed a utilitarian value. Herbert Spencer's
theory that "good" is the same as "purposive" brings from Nietzsche a
protest founded on the contention that because a thing was at one time
useful, and therefore "good," it does not follow that the thing is good
_in itself._ By the etymology of the descriptive words of morality,
Nietzsche traces the history of modern moral attributes through class
distinctions to their origin in the instincts of the "nobles" and the
"vulgarians." He shows the relationship between the Latin _bonus_ and
the "warrior," by deriving _bonus_ from _duonus. Bellum,_ he shows,
equals _duellum_ which equals _duen-lum,_ in which word _duonus_
is contained. Likewise, he points out the aristocratic origin of
"happiness"--a quality arising from an abundance of energy and the
consciousness of power.
"Good and evil," according to Nietzsche, is a sign of slave-morality;
while "good and bad" represents the qualities in the master-morality.
The one stands for the adopted qualities of the subservient races; the
other embodies the natural functioning of dominating races. The origin
of the "good" in these two instances is by no means the same. In the
strong man "good" represented an entirely different condition than the
"good" in the resentful and weak man; and these two "goods" arose out
of different causes. The one was spontaneous and natural--inherent in
the individual of strength: the other was a manufactured condition, an
optional selection of qualities to soften and ameliorate the conditions
of existence. "Evil" and "bad," by the same token, became attributes
originating in widely separated sources. The "evil" of the weak man was
any condition which worked against the manufactured ideals of goodness,
which brought about unhappiness--it was the beginning of the conception
of a slave-morality, a term applied to all enemies. The "bad" of the
strong man was the concept which grew directly out of his feeling for
"good," and which had no application to another individual. Thus the
ideas of "good" and "bad" are directly inherited from the nobles of the
race, and these ideas included within themselves the tendency toward
establishing social distinctions.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account