The Moral Concepts in Friedrich Nietzsche's On the Genealogy of Morals

The origins of an individual’s moral concepts exist as a confusing subject, often receiving no explanation. Friedrich Nietzsche, a German philosopher passionate about writing religious and moral critiques, composed On the Genealogy of Morals to scrutinize and elucidate these perplexing moral concepts. Although the original text consists of three separate essays, only an excerpt of the first essay “Good and Evil, Good and Bad is printed in Classics of Western Thought Vol. il. This essay specifically observes the social class corruption between “master morality” and “slave morality.

” Master morality was seemingly advertised by the strong and healthy members of society who labeled their happiness as good, while slave morality consisted of individuals who were feeble and enslaved, which in turn gave them the title of bad,” since their weakness was unfavorable. Nietzsche elaborates further on matters labeled as good, bad, or evil and the concepts rooted behind this identity.

The excerpt provided from Nietzsche’s “Good and Evil, Good and Bad” begins with the address of religion and priestly caste, This ostensibly stands as the opening topic due to the controversy entrenched in the subject.

Nietzsche
identifies the assumed label of “good” on the church but argues against it stating that they are in fact ‘the evilest enemies to have,” This claim is made based on his observance of the importance of the priestly mode. With the lack of power given to them, he claims that priests learn to hate; hate so menacing that it puts warlike nobles to shame, thus inflicting an evil label, He associated Jews as the superlative example of the priestly caste.

Get quality help now

Sweet V

Verified

Proficient in: Friedrich Nietzsche

4.9 (984)

“ Ok, let me say I’m extremely satisfy with the result while it was a last minute thing. I really enjoy the effort put in. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

Previously being the most refined cynics in history, the Jews somehow managed to reverse the label implemented upon them, Previously associated as “bad” or “evil” because of their financial and religious situation, the submissive and inferior soon became the “good” of society, whilst the licentious, authoritative nobles became the “bad.” The reversal of Cf moral codes became prominent in several aspects of society.

The eminence of moral-code reversal began, as suggested by Nietzsche when antipathy became a creative force. He describes the essence of slave morality as negative, which is why the reaction is so high. He claims that reactions are stimulated primarily by negative emotions. Slave morality consists of constant self-defense, where members argue against those that oppose them, which in turn generates a strong reaction. However, members of the master morality are incompetent of taking seriously all the things that compose a man of bitterness, whether it is mishaps, calamities, or enemies. By ignoring this negativity, members of the master morality generate no reaction which results in them being labeled as “good.” He continues to explain the unsteadiness that exists between good, evil, and bad, and how the social association with each label is frequently changing.

The driving force behind an ‘evil’ social class, as stated before, is the hostility possessed by its members. After addressing the constant change in social class association, Nietzsche targets the individuals of the master morality. After associating them as “good”, he discourses the evil rooted behind them. He observes that the noble men, those who construct the master morality, are passive and polite to their own, but become vengeful “blonde beasts” to strangers. The term “blonde beasts” refers to lions and their barbaric ways. The contemporary knowledge of society at the time was non-progressive, which is Why the association of the master morality with “blonde beasts” generated a negative outlook on the master morality by most of society. Although Nietzsche addresses the societal feedback, he evidently disagrees with it. The fear associated with the barbarians, commonly connected to evil, is seemingly admirable to him. His admiration is rooted behind his belief that fear has exited society, and that humans no longer fear for humanity. He blames this lack of fear on the slave morality, claiming that they have solidified society as insipid and dull.

Although Friedrich Nietzsche’s On the Genealogy of Morals observes his personal opinions on the good, the bad, and the evil of society, each remark made by him does not necessarily stand true today. After reading the excerpt nearly 150 years later, itis evident that he was wrong about the lack of fear amongst society. Fear has not left humanity, and according to Nietzsche, as long as fear is present in a society, then itis “good.” The information he bases his points on is not solid, and he often contradicts himself when discussing further developed aspects of his argument. The purpose behind this genealogy is not ully evident in the provided excerpt, and it seemingly exists as a materialistic
uide defining what is good, what is bad, and what is evil, which does not necessarily provide logical information for an argument.