Nietzsche’s theory of morality was without a doubt
the most confusing to me this semester.
It just baffles me that he believes that there is no free will in
humanity and people simply do what they are meant to do just like lightning
“flashes”. I think it is possible for
the strong to not emphasize their strength; many times does someone who would
be considered powerful might completely change their lifestyle and live a life
of poverty and selflessness. Someone as
“evil” and “powerful” as Hitler could have a change of heart and become a
slavish person. Although it sounds very
implausible, it is possible and has happened.
I do not think it’s right to simply say that the prey can do whatever
they please just because they have the ability to. With this kind of mindset, society would be a
mess. So I suppose in that case, the
slave revolt of morality was a good thing.
Even though it, in the opinion of Nietzsche, is an incorrect look on
life, it still allows for a safe and orderly society. If we simply threw morality to the wind and
allowed people to do whatever they can due to their strength or weakness, only
the strong would survive and then the strong will be the only ones left. In that scenario, the strong of the earth
will have to fight and compete with one another and thus some of the strong
will become weak and the competition will ensue once more. It is a vicious cycle that could never be
resolved. Judging from Nietzsche’s life,
he was a very tortured person and his philosophical views definitely reflect on
that. I believe his view on life and
morality is cynical and without any perspective on hope in life. It is interesting, however, to see a unique
perspective on morality.
This has definitely been one of the most confusing theories!! I think Nietzsche was more interested in people embracing their roles in society or simply trying to explain how people of lower social status cope with their feelings of insecurity and shortcomings, potentially a mindset Nietzsche was familiar with. To a certain degree, I can see what you mean by taking away a perspective of hope in life, but simultaneously I believe it has less to do with eliminating the element of hope and more so to do with humility. But like you said, if we throw morality to the wind and let all of the strong, noble people have at it, how long would it be until the strong people totally kill off the weak and start going against each other. I wonder if eventually everyone would just die out since there would always be a new competition to assert strength or wisdom or beauty to eliminate the weak.
ReplyDeleteI agree that this has been probably one of the hardest theories to wrap my head around. I really like what you said about strong people almost "becoming" the weak. What it reminded me of were the saints. some of them were people of status with a high class, but they set that life apart from them to take up the life of poverty. I also really like what you said about how it is a cycle. I hadn't even thought about how the strong would have varying degrees of strength and thus some of them would then be weak. I feel like should morality just be "thrown to the wind" then it would just be a big competition to be the best. Schools would teach survival methods. And that is even if schools could exist in such a world. One could go so far as to say in this ultimately competitive world, it would die off before a "master race" could be made because, everyone in this world is an enemy so therefore people would never get married and have children.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete