Impact Of Nietzsche's Critique Of Slave Moralities example essay topic

Nietzsche's contribution to ethics has been profound, offering a cynical and original take on the approach to answering the abstract question of the nature of morality. His theories stem predominantly from his views on perspectivism, the idea that all truths is "truth" within a particular perspective; an extreme case of pluralism. Therefore nietzsche viewed people as being composed of a myriad of perspectives, with no one view being any nearer truth than the next. He felt that our beliefs are never free from our environment, thus truths are relative to perspectives, which are historically and individually contingent. It is due to this that nietzsche was rarely interested in what was right, but rather in bringing "the values of values themselves" into question. Where did the conceptions of right and wrong come from, what is good and evil?

Nietzsche argued that these antithetical values are equally fictitious. But why do we value such fictitious or fabricated values so highly? For Nietzsche this was a question that deserved great focus on the minds of men, and their conceptions of phenomena. Nietzsche felt that western thought was spawned from a desire to bring order to our lives. Since the Stoics, morality was heavily based on trying to live "rightly according to nature" but in what ways were we doing this? Nietzsche questioned the stoical conception by asserting that nature was far from loving and maternal, but was in fact "indifferent beyond measure".

Our living was a mere consequence of nature's fertility, that the paternal conception we lovingly refer to "mother earth" was far from truth, as nature was more Dao ist in its creation, where life stumbled into the universe accidentally rather than a Christian conception of being lovingly crafted. Nietzsche even questioned the will of nature, and illustrated it as "chaotic", and egoistic. In the face of such cold indifference we seek to bring order to our existence. He felt that man could not live in an existential void where he was simply a begotten coincidence, for to do so would lead to nihilism and would be naturally self destructive. So we beguile nature, and discipline her man-made sister with manners, forcing her to stare lovingly at the myriad of creatures, and in man's narcissism make our own species the most significant of all! Our own infantile and narcissistic nature simply can not bare to live in the shadow of such chaotic darkness, therefore we create convenient laws to bring order to our existence, physics, religion, morality.

A fine example of our arrogant nature lies in the classical conception that the Earth is the centre of the universe, as well as the modern illusion that the rational subject is at the centre of the universe. If these were true it would prescribe a self-asserted significance to the being behind our living. It fills the existential void a little, and showers us with a little security as to the meaning of life. In Nietzsche's opinion such fabrications are developed simply to distort the mirror to reflect us in a noble and worthy poise.

As far as moral fabrications were concerned, Nietzsche felt that moral laws were simply "the self confession of its originator" applying one's own perspective upon the world. To Nietzsche, Kant's categorical imperative, for example, simply describes that one "should" know how to obey, not that one ought to. To Nietzsche morality is simply a manifestation of the agent's own moral fabric. It tells us of the philosopher's will and nothing more. Nietzsche writes: "In short moralities are only a sign language of the emotions". What frustrated Nietzsche was not the falsity in thinking, but how philosophers attempt to enforce their moralities as a step closer to a categorical truth; that they are right.

For this Nietzsche placed blame on Plato, where his philosophy stated that external "Forms" of truth, justice, and righteousness could actually be embraced by a keen mind. For Nietzsche, Plato opened the road to the philosophical cataract, whereby philosophers sought to impose their dogmatic ideals upon all as a monist truth. Plato led western thinking down the wrong path, and through his ideal of the Forms inspired the "dogmatist's error". However, Nietzsche understood this as inevitable.

Our insecurity and drive to bring order to an unordered world, plus the natural chaos of nature-and thus, being natural ourselves- led us to forcedly prescribe our positions. Nietzsche called this will, the "will to power". Nietzsche understood the will to power as a subconscious, or Dionysus state that wishes to vent its strength upon each and every agent. He felt that Spinoza's self-preserving will was a mere consequence of the will to power. The will to power is nature's objective, and thus, when philosophers attempt to force their philosophies upon others, they are essentially following this sub-conscious drive.

Religion is not spared by Nietzsche's conception, and for Nietzsche Christianity was a particularly misused display of the will to power. Nietzsche categorised morality into two defining forms, master and slave morality. The masters were proud, egoistic, self-aware, worldly, aristocratic, and essentially masters of their lives. In comparison, the slave morality was humble, resentful, altruistic, self-deceptive, democratic, prudent, and sought to base their existence through a deity. Originally all morality was in the master school, where the strong commanded and the weak followed. The masters,' who were in a position to legislate their will as valuable, weighed what was "good" against their own qualities, and what was "bad" against the low-minded, common and plebeian.

The slaves, in contradistinction, valued "bad" by their master's attributes, and what was "good" as everything unlike them. Nietzsche, as far as morality goes, had sympathies with the master complex (though he felt the idleness of their lives was far from the human optimum) as it was truer to life and not self-oppressive or deceiving. But none-the-less, in the case of Christianity, the slave morality is currently the contemporary morality complex. The proud, noble morality of the Jews, during the era where Judea was pre-Roman, man created a proud and unsympathetic Deity, personifying the qualities of them selves; this is evident from the Old Testament. However, one can see from the New Testament that the role of God changed from callous and uncompromising, to pitiful, compassionate and democratic-qualities of the slave morality.

What happened, according to Nietzsche is that the slaves found that by being subtler than their masters, their Will to Power could be exercised in, nobly perceived, despicable acts; resulting in converting the masters to their own moral conceptions. When the Jerusalem was invaded by the Romans, and oppressed by the Empire, the Jews inevitably turned from proud to meek, bringing order to their lives by changing the character of God to bring some moral justice to their adapting perception of morality. This transvaluation of values saw the morality of the slaves' force its way into the rulers' complexes, and thus Christianity gained a monopoly in moral thinking in the west. However, Nietzsche found respect in the Saint-Ascetic characters of religion, which through their endeavour and self-negation, inherited respect and awe from those witness to them.

For Nietzsche these people were merely venting power and control over others, by bettering themselves through ascetic struggle. For Nietzsche, this face of Christianity was an impressive one, as it allowed the strong to rise to the top when used as a means to one's own ends. However, Christianity and religion in most cases, stresses to make the individual subordinate to its cause; oppressing and manipulating man to a slave of falsehood. In christianity pity is advocated as a means with dealing with the strife of lower living. Nietzsche felt that this ethic was extremely unnatural:" We are deprived of strength when we feel pity. That loss of strength which suffering as such inflicts on life is still further increased and multiplied by pity.

Pity makes suffering contagious". Nietzsche felt that pity, was weakening of the inherent strength humanity possesses, and is such, nihilistic, self-defeating and works against our primal, will to power. He takes this further, to suggest that humanity's evolution is being fettered by this maxim of pity, insofar that the weak, or as Nietzsche called them, the "failures" are preserved. Therefore, Nietzsche felt that in order for us to live rightly, we ought to adhere to our own natural and manipulative manner. Nietzsche felt that fear was a primal factor in human development, and that thus far, we have been driven by a "self-tyranny" to bring order to our unordered existence. But it is in the discomfort and fearful environment that the strong will is forced to confront reality through an ascetic mode of training.

Through learning from one's hardships, one becomes closer to understanding one's self, and as a result is closer to the sage. But few people would be strong enough to relinquish their masked worlds, but those who could, would be the new philosophers, the guides and profits of human development, the Ubermensch- Overman. Nietzsche's influence in East Asia has been quite evident. Through his many parallels with Buddhism, he gained one of the first significant bridges between western and eastern philosophy. This is no more evident with one of Japan's foremost philosophers of the twentieth century, K eiji Nishitani who was heavily inspired by Nietzschean thinking. Nishitani was firstly drawn to Nietzsche by holding sympathy with his existentialist view of nature.

Section nine in BGE Nietzsche illustrates this conception: Think of a being such as nature is, prodigal beyond measure, indifferent beyond measure, without aims or intentions, without mercy or justice, at once fruitful and barren and uncertain; think of indifference itself as a power- how could you live according to such indifference? Nishitani followed the same lines in essay one, part I of Religion and Nothingness: ... it is a world in which we find ourselves unable to live as man, in which our human mode of being is edged out of the picture or even obliterated. We can neither take this world as it is, or leave it. These extracts illustrate how Nietzsche and Nishitani felt that nature was greatly indifferent to man and his existence.

In this both philosophers understood the character of nature in the Taoist conception, that human existence was a consequence of nature's fertility, the universe in all its magnificence having no care for the world of men. Nishitani highlighted that when one understands this existentialist view of the universe, a severe neurosis develops. This neurosis is brought upon us by our psychology, which wishes to determine the answer of our existence, and inspires a deep reflection within us, as to the secrets of our being. When faced with nature as being impersonal to humanity, or even "chaotic" in a Nietzschean sense, one is forced to question one's self, and ask "what meaning can be harvested from my being?" or even "why am I?" For Nishitani, such questions are a consequence of nihility, the field of thought that inspires us to question our existence, and that when confronted with the truth, that there is no telos in life, it leads us to nihilism. In essay one, section of R&N, Nishitani explains nihility: Nihility refers to that which renders meaningless to the meaning of life. When we become a question in ourselves and when the problem of why we exist arises, this means nihility has emerged from the ground of our existence and that our very existence has turned into a question mark.

The appearance of this nihility signals nothing less than that one's awareness of self-existence has penetrated to an extraordinary depth. Both felt that one simply can not live in such indifference, and that man necessarily seeks distractions from the existential truth-that there is no intelligible telos in live. It is due to the neurosis-inducing nihility that one seeks to purge one's self of doubts; even false ones. In line with these distractions, Nishitani places religion as a monolithic response to nihility, sparing us the neurosis and internal conflict of life, and bringing "order" to our unordered reality. In essay one, part I of R&N, Nishitani writes: We become aware of religion as a must for life, only at the level of at which everything else loses its necessity.

Why do we exist? If there is a meaning or significance to it all, where do we find it? When we come to doubt the meaning of our existence in this way, when we have become a question to ourselves, the religious quest awakens. Here Nishitani explains that it is nihility that drives us to create religion, as to not hide behind such fabrications is to force us to search further, until we find ourselves staring at the "pit of nihilism". He believed that once one starts to treat nihilism as an end, it becomes yet another unconditional. Though this unconditional brings order to life by seeking solace in a telos, it fails to answer nihility honestly.

Both Nietzsche and Nishitani felt that religion was forced upon us through a fear of truth, or nihility, and both feared a life devoted unconditionally to nihilism as it would be both another self-deception, and that it fails to allow for an optimum in life. It is because of this, that Nietzsche and Nishitani felt that phenomena, such as Kant's synthetic a priori are necessary in maintaining the integrity of our species. After arguing against the validity of the synthetic a priori, Nietzsche argued. ".. for the purpose of preserving beings such as ourselves, such judgements must be believed to be true even though they might of course still be false judgements!" Nishitani follows this train of thought. "So long as the world can be seen from a teleological stand point, there is no real difficulty". However, Nishitani felt that one must face nihility and understand the anxiety we face in its consequence. He felt this, for in a sense, nihility is like a ticking bomb; the more value we place on falsehoods, the more we start to depend on them.

If a Christian of sixty years suddenly feels nihility inside of him, his neurosis will be that much greater, and despair will haunt him. Furthermore, one must remember that nihility comes in the fore of agency and self awareness. Within the depths of our psychology, nihility is always manifesting itself, through doubt or unexplained melancholy. In this nihility is pathogenic, in need of being cured through accepting one's condition. Essay one, part IV of R&N Nishitani writes: even those who claim that things like nihility are not a problem for them will sooner or later be swallowed up by nihility itself. It is already very much there, and by refusing to make it a problem for themselves they only slip deeper into its clutches Nishitani uses scientists as an example of this, explaining those who feel science is liberating humanity from mysticism and religion, are in fact falling folly to another fabrication, and ignoring nihility through "natural laws".

In this they still are not answering the question "why am I?" while living alongside with nihility. This conception of physics being also a fabrication, or distraction from truth, again is a link to Nietzsche: Section 14, BGE It is perhaps just dawning on about five or six people that physics too is only an interpretation and arrangement of the world (according to our own requirements, if I may say so!) and not an explanation of it... In their existential beliefs we can see how both philosophers feel that man is drawn to accept or create values, adhere to metaphysical truths, and not to bring one's self into doubt in a response of fearing truth. Religions, as well as science are falsehoods, offering security from nihility and the nietzschean prospect of nihilism. There are no unconditional ends to life, and thus nihilism comes from the floor of our existence when one realises that there is no right and wrong, good and evil.

However, both strongly felt that there is state of human excellence, and that once this excellence is celebrated one is endowed the qualities not to fall completely to nihilism, and continue life alongside the existential unveiling of the universe. Nishitani felt that as religion was being increasingly revealed in its true-existential form- leaving religious teleology no longer tenable- nihility had grown in its vivacity, leaving the road to the pit of nihilism ever broader. Nishitani believed that science would eventually be proven as a fabrication and that the current fashion of atheism would crumble to a "most tenacious nihility" leaving nihilism more and more tempting an escape. Nishitani's answer to this was found in the Zen solution. Through meditation the Zen aim can be achieved of a field of pure nothingness (Suunyataa) an emptiness where one is purged of the fears and temptations of every-day living. This nothingness is unlike the western conception of negation but is viewed positively as a means to understanding one's self and viewing the world through an eye of perfection and harmony.

Similar to Nirvana, (an ascending into a higher plain where all is perfect) Sunyataa is harmony on Earth, where all worldly passions are trivial. It is viewed positively for it is in such "fields of nothingness" one can finally understand nature and one's self in terms of balance. It was in this field of nothingness that Nishitani felt that nihility could be doctored by the sensation of contentment experienced in the cleansing of the self. Being completely content with life, one has no need to create false values and to seek refuge from the indifference of the universe. The cause of these displacements, nihility, would have no affect on the sage-like mind as nihility itself comes to the fore when one starts to question one's existence; the content mind having no desire to seek truths that go beyond the real perception and into the abstract. In this, Nishitani's conception of Sunyataa, and its curing of nihility is quite similar to Nietzsche's eternal recurrence of the same.

The same to Nietzsche is a love for life, a state where one wants what is at one's hands, having no desire to better one's circumstance, and in fact, if given the opportunity, would relive again and again the state in which one is endowed. In part 56 of BGE Nietzsche writes: to the idea of the most exuberant, most living, most world- affirming man, who has not only learned to get on and treat with all that is, but who wants to have it again and again, as it was and is to all eternity, calling out du capo! There is some ambivalence while reading this as to whether the same is metaphysical or normative in its form. However taken both ways, but more closely normatively, the eternal recurrence of the same is a state which is very closely linked to Nishitani's Zen solution, in that it is a love for the present, or even a content with life.

It also allows one to cope with the indifference of nature, and nihility, in a cordial manner, having no distant desires. However, these states are not easily achieved, and both philosophers understand that to achieve their perceived optimum, asceticism must be employed. When looking at the characters that are expected to reach these heights, the Nietzschean Ubermensch and Nishitani an sage, we once again acknowledge similarities. For Nietzsche, the main form of asceticism is struggle.

Nietzsche felt that it is through struggle and conquering the obstacles that one is able to reflect and understand one's self. Hardship and understanding hardship is necessary for the Ubermensche, who will always seek to better himself through an endless, solitary struggle. However, Nishitani disagreed with Nietzsche on the role of struggle for finding one's optimum. Nishitani believed that struggle for the sake of struggle was once again another nihilism of the unconditional.

In this, the sage would seek solitude, as would the Ubermensche, but instead of seeking balance (his optimum) through learning from his experiences, the sage deprives himself of worldly-unnecessary distractions in order to focus more fully on achieving Sunyataa. It is in this, that both the Ubermensche and the sage are both similar and dissimilar. Both wish to achieve an enlightenment or state of mind that would allow them to combat and live alongside nihility and nihilism, though not falling into the "pit of nihilism". However, the Ubermensche and sage achieve this through different means, the sage through a peaceful, submissive form and the Ubermensche through channelling the will to power, and learning from the struggle that the will to power inevitably inspires. Once again, reason for this can be understood, when Nishitani's conception of the Will to Power is understood: "the will to power, Nietzsche's final standpoint was still conceived as some "thing" called "will.".. It does not completely lose its connotation of being an other, and thus cannot become something wherein we can truly become aware of ourselves at our elemental source".

Understanding the depths of the mind at its most basic and drive-like level, unconfused with learned social mechanisms is once more a similarity in both their philosophies. However, Nishitani sought to understand the psychology of the self when finding Sunyataa, while Nietzsche felt that the most basic drives of man were the purest and most noble. Ethically, Nishitani felt that man should give up the quest for man-made teleology and abandon antithetical values; good and evil, right and wrong. One should seek a life where the agent is the centre of his moral universe, and try not to follow external-moral complexes, as one's own way should be discovered. Thus a perspectivist life is advocated, as long as one acts in respect to other life, though essentially this is convention. The oppression of the noble over the weak in order to better them selves, is not advocated by Nishitani, as to confront such things is to ignore Suunyataa and simply move into nihilism and create another convenient fabrication of order.

Nishitani accepted such theories as the transvaluation of values, however, he felt that these all were simple consequences of nihility. Therefore, unlike Nietzsche in opinion, one ought not endeavour to meet the criteria of the slave or master morality, as both ignored nihility and lead to a disharmony in life. Instead one ought to find balance and through gaining such states, seek to share his content and experiences with the blind. The concepts of a chaotic nature, and the existentialist problem of nihility and nihilism, are clear Nietzschean influences. As well as this, the impact of Nietzsche's critique of slave moralities, and specifically Christianity inspired Nishitani to write how western morality must essentially move towards meditation if it is to survive the negative "truths" of science.

The will to power of the saint, can also be seen in the enlightened man, and how his endeavour and enlightenment will spur others to follow his path. In conclusion, the acceptance of Nietzsche in Japan and the Kyoto school of philosophy was an important moment in setting the culture of Japan in a medium between west modernity and eastern tradition. Despite Rudyard Kipling's assurance that the East and West could never meet, we find that by breaking free from western-philosophical tradition, pioneering minds such as Nietzsche's installed essential influences on the Eastern tradition of morality. Confucianism had reigned as the dominant normative philosophy for over two millennia. But in the 19th century Taoism had re-emerged as an important normative way, as well as a metaphysical one. Nietzsche's insights helped strengthen this hold in Japan, and as a consequence, Zen Buddhism and its means with coping with life, had received extra care in China. mostly from the Heiddegerian view of existentialism, a forced essay but one with a lot of interesting points in linking spirituality with existentialism.