Welcome to this lecture on Aspects of Western
Philosophy, Module 27.
This lecture is
dedicated to the works of a very important
German philosopher, very influential German
thinker Friedrich Nietzsche.
Nietzsche is important in many ways; one aspect
which
makes him important is that the way in which
he writes, he writes not like an academic
thinker not like an academic philosopher,
but with lot of passion into it.
So, his writing style is also unique there
is I could remember only another philosopher
who is very close to him is Wittgenstein,
not in terms of their ideas or philosophical
theories, but the way in which they present
their philosophical ideas and theories.
So, this lecture will focus on the topics
critic of western culture, religion and morality,
where Nietzsche is very important in as far
as these you know these issues are concerned
where the western culture, religion and morality
are critically evaluated and these
evaluations of Nietzsche’s tremendous influence
on later philosophy, particularly 20th
century philosophy.
So much so that Richard Rottie, one of the
prominent contemporary
thinkers has he even calls contemporary western
philosophy as post Nietzschean.
So, it is
a post Nietzschean philosophy, instead of
calling it post modern or something else he
calls it post Nietzschean.
To indicate the influence of Nietzsche or
probably the kind of
approaches towards philosophy which Nietzsche
has introduced in his thinking.
We will then see the concept of will to power
and also the notion of superman or over
man.
I would be using the word over man mostly
not superman, because superman the
contemporary translators preferred to use
the word over man.
And Nietzsche’s
philosophy is of course, related to several
terms several ideas which he has expressed
through several terms which some of them he
himself had coined in philosophy, terms
like will to power for example, or over man
which I have already mentioned and several
other terms like this.
His major books in which he elaborates his
philosophical theory
were written over a period of actually he
was born in 1844 in Rocken in Prussia and
died
in 1900, so not a very long life.
During his early days he was interested in
Greek and German literature, which he was
tremendously influenced by these two things,
German literature on the one hand and
Greek philosophy on the other hand.
And in his works also he often highlights
or
mentions his importance of Greek philosophy;
he considered the Greek thinkers
particularly the pre-Socratic Greek thinkers
are original and superior to all other
European thinkers.
In 1965 he joined the university of Leipzig,
and after that he started
you know after joining this university of
Leipzig he started distancing from Christian
faith his father was protestant and they were
quite religious people, but he started
distancing from religious faith from 1865
onwards and in 1869 he started teaching
classical philology at the university of Basel
in Switzerland.
Then in 1879 poor health forced him to end
his teaching career and in 1889, he had a
sudden mental breakdown and became psychotic
and in 1900 he passed away.
So this is
the short life history of Nietzsche.
And now let us see is the important task he
and we
searched for his philosophical career.
So, Nietzsche actually looks towards a new
mode of culture and society that would
create stronger and more fully developed individuals.
So, this is again a very unorthodox
kind of an approach in philosophy, all the
philosophers whom we had examined so far
were sort of more or less progressing towards
the traditional lines, they are interested
in
certain questions of philosophy which even
traditional philosophers themselves have
posited as important as perennial for philosophical
thinking.
But Nietzsche here takes a
very clear deviation and thinks about or rather
problematizes issues which are really
different.
So, how to create stronger and more fully
developed individuals is being
posited and his analyses are also extremely
unorthodox.
Modern age and it is moral and ideological
spirits are obstacles in human and social
development.
So, he is trying to prove this demonstrate
that how modern culture.
So, that
is the reason why we actually begin our analysis
of Nietzsche’s philosophy, the critic of
western culture initiated by him.
Again it is against prevailing rational, moral
and
religious approaches to human reality as we
have been examining in the previous
lectures, we can see the domination of rationalism
or a kind of rational approaches to
reality in the western civilization with the
advent of modernity and particularly with
enlightenment.
So, this rational approach and the morality
that follows it or the moral assumptions that
follow it and the religious approaches to
human reality all these are treated as a very
I
mean he was actually Nietzsche was targeting
all these things in this philosophical
career.
So, here is a quote from Nietzsche, it quote
- mankind does not represent a development
towards something better or stronger or higher,
in the sense accepted today.
“Progress” is
really a modern idea, that is, a false idea.
So, here preface to his book antichrist
Nietzsche makes this statement, normally when
we try to understand the modern
particularly 90th century, European culture
or European history if you examine, you can
see that there is a tremendous faith on the
progress science can make to humanity.
Because there is that is one period where
you know science had witnessed a lot of new
experimentations as a result of new experiments
and new advancement in scientific
theory, there are lot of changes that was
taking place in the world and in this context
it is
quite natural to think that one or it is quite
natural to be optimistic about the powers
of
science to change the change human destiny
in more positive ways.
But Nietzsche comes forward and expresses
an extremely pessimistic picture, by saying
that mankind does not represent a development
towards something better or stronger or
higher.
And it is very interesting to read in this
context along with this code from
Nietzsche.
It is very interesting to read this quote
from another very great intellectual of 90th
and
20th century, Sigmund Freud who was also influenced
by Nietzsche’s work, he says that
I have been careful to refrain from the enthusiastic
prejudice, that sees of civilization as
the most precious thing we possess or can
acquire and believes that its part will
necessarily lead us to heights of perfection
hither to under undreamt of.
So, this is
Sigmund Freud.
Now, when we try to understand natures critic
of western civilization, as I mentioned in
the beginning Nietzsche was particularly fascinated
by the ancient Greek civilization and
when he compares the ancient Greek civilization
with the modern or the contemporary
western civilization of his times, he always
condemned his contemporary culture and
never missed an opportunity to express his
admiration and respect towards the ancient
Greeks.
He says the highest culture of the ancient
Greece versus the sick and inferior 90th
century European and German culture that worships
weakness and mediocracy.
So, this
is his complaint this 90th century European
civilization or culture, worships weakness
and mediocracy, instead of the other benefit
and, but the instead if you examine the
ancient Greek culture you can see this is
not the case.
He appreciates ancient Greek life,
a blend of Dionysian and apollonian traits
the two central principles in Greek culture.
So, this is the God Apollo of a Greek mythology;
who represents the God of medicine
death dealing, and archery.
A God of music and poetry, again apollonian
are well
ordered rational and serene.
So, you have well ordered analytical people
and cultured
people in apollonian, all types of form or
structure and rational thought are apollonian.
So, this is one aspect of Greek, ancient Greek
civilization according to Nietzsche and
Apollo is treated as a God a divine figure
by the ancient Greeks.
And then whether God is Dionysian’s, who
is a God of ecstasy terror, guilt and
atonement, death and resurrection, vegetation,
trees, wine, madness and drama.
So, just
the opposite of apollonian you will have Dionysian’s,
and they are wild frenzied and
sensuous.
So, you have the antithesis of the apollonian
and Dionysian’s.
And all forms of
enthusiasm and ecstasy are Dionysian here;
so this kind of a creative or this kind of
a
conflict between the two aspects of ancient
Greek civilization.
When again this, a tension between these two,
a tension between and the fruitful merger
of these two were responsible for the greatness
of the ancient Greek civilization and the
principle of individuation, self control,
order, equilibrium versus these are all apollonian
values; versus the inclination to break any
border and norm and to lose self control is
the
apollonian sorry the ignitions.
So, there is a creative conflict between these
two.
And also a kind of creative merger of
these two that created the greatness, the
glory, the tragedy of this is actually in
the
context of writing the book, the birth of
tragedy, tragedy as the manifestation of a
human
creativity, the greatness of human creativity,
this was possible because these two traits
were present in Greek civilization and worshiped
by the Greeks.
The Greeks never
considered that one is superior to the other
and both of them were considered as God, but
instead if you come to modern Europe with
the adoption of Christianity the God, the
concept of God which modern Europe or Europe
after Christianity adopted is the God
which is good, which is rational or which
is always I mean there is a concept of goodness
which is also developing as a result of you
know the evolution of Europe into it is
modern age, which Nietzsche found his problematic.
Now, again the glory did not last much as
he says, you know this creative conflict it
did
not last much with the emergence of more rational
systematic thought domination Greek
civilization, particularly with reference
to he refers to people like Socrates, Plato
and
Aristotle and there is great systems of metaphysical
systems which is developed by Plato
and Aristotle and also the methodology of
dialectics employed by Socrates, where
rational thought was dominant was given a
dominant place.
So, what happens does he say with Socrates
Plato and Aristotle, they idealized the
rational over the passionate and then the
spirit of dialectics destroyed the primordial
instincts and life forces of man and culture,
and then later on of course, the adoption
of
Christianity.
Now in this context again this is a very interesting
concept in Nietzschean philosophy,
that idea of will to power.
One reason why we understand Nietzsche as
a hierologist or
there is a hierological approach adopted by
Nietzsche and though; however, anti
metaphysical Nietzsche looks, he is not actually
that radical anti metaphysist, he himself
proposes a kind of meta physics which is routed
in the conception will to power.
And
there what he refers to I mean what he means
by will to power is something which is so
intrinsic to all living creatures, all life
and which he considers should be ideally the
driving force of humanity or all human beings
as well and he considers this will to power
as the as the very principle of life and hence
as the very principle of life ideally also.
So, any act which goes against the will to
power the association of will to power needs
to
be considered as bad or something which is
inferior and all those actions, all those
initiatives that would promote the will to
power, that would assert the will to power
needs to be treated as a as ideal and good
by Nietzsche.
So, this will to power he
considered as I repeat the fundamental driving
force of all life, which is there in which
is
manifested in all life not just in human life
and he would say that ideally human beings
should imbibed or try to link to that expectation
or try to live to a life which would
ultimately strive to realize the will to power.
Now, let us come back, let us try to understand
what is this.
For Nietzsche it is the basic
impulse for all our acts, this understanding
to will to power is extremely important in
our
understanding of Nietzsche’s entire philosophy
and also his understanding of the critic of
western civilization.
So, it is the basic impulse for all our acts,
life is an in instinct of
growth sees that is the way he understands
life.
Life is not something which needs to be
lived on the basis of certain rational calculations
or certain rational procedures to be
followed and all that, but it is an instinct
of growth for survival, for the accumulation
of
the forces and for power.
So, he considers life in a very naturalistic
manner in a very
wild manner, which is an instinct of growth
and for survival, life itself is will to power
and instinct to growth for continuance, for
accumulation of forces for power.
So, this is a kind of will to power in that
sense is something which is the fundamental
principle of life, which enables all life
to continue it is living, continue in it is
path of life
and to be in the path of life to continue
living means to overcome the status quo one
has
to grow, one has to overcome what one is at
this moment in order to move to the next
moment.
It necessarily involves a process of self
overcoming.
So, this self overcoming is
what is materialized through will to power.
So, life itself is will to power and instinct
for
growth, for continuance, for accumulation
of forces for power and nothing in life has
value except the degree of power.
The more powerful or the more power you can
accumulate in life, the more power you
can exert through living, the more you are
progressing in the path of life because that
helps you to survive in a better way also
to overcome the status quo in a better way,
progress in a better manner.
Where the will to power is lacking there is
decline.
So, this
is his fundamental analysis.
So, to say his moral evaluation, he would
rather say that if
the will to power is slacking then that is
the beginning of the decline or rather that
indicates a decline both in individuals as
well as in civilizations and cultures.
So, accordingly when you try to understand
and analyze western civilization, this
happens.
This will is lacking in all the supreme values
of mankind.
So, this is his Trans
evaluation of values we can call.
Nietzsche is trying to analyze human values
the so
called human values, secret values and all
kinds of ethical and moral values and he says
that all these values ultimately aim at suppressing
the will to life, they all try to contain
it
or control it never allow it to express itself
freely, replace it replays the freedom of
the
will to power with the kind of control, with
the kind of domestication of the human self
and the human body.
So, this is what essentially religious traditions
and moral
philosophies do according to Nietzsche.
Every living thing does everything it can
not to preserve itself, but to become more
that
is why it is power to overcome, it is just
not survival just not be there what as it
is, but to
be more than what it is, by overcoming what
it is.
So, it is a kind of negation of it is
present state of affair to higher one, so
to become more.
Will to power is a proactive
force and not just reactive force to life
to surroundings, but it is a positive assertion,
it is
not just a reaction to what is going around,
but a positive assertion.
Not power over others.
So, it is another I mean there is a possibility
of misunderstanding
what is meant by will to power.
It is not just a kind of power over others
other people.
So, that you know others can control one can
control others.
So, this is one way in
Nietzschean philosophy is misunderstood by
many particularly when you try to read
Nietzschean philosophy in the context of historical
things, which has happened in
Germany during the initial half of the 20th
century, which has ultimately led to the
second world war the emergence of Nazi regime.
So, the Nazis were often identified with Nietzschean
philosophy or it is being argued that
the Nazis have derived their philosophical
assumptions or philosophical theory from
Nietzsche’s philosophy of superman or Nietzsche’s
philosophy of will to power etcetera,
which is actually not correct because for
Nietzsche it was not just overcoming or over
powering other people or asserting power over
others, it is more to do with oneself.
It is
but the feelings of creative energy and control
over oneself, that are necessary to achieve
self creation self direction and to express
individual creativity.
So, it is more a kind of
self overcoming, it is a kind of having control
over oneself.
So, that one can prepare
oneself for the higher attainments of life.
This concept of will to power is as I mentioned
so central to Nietzschean philosophy,
particularly when he examines or when he evaluates
the concept of values, morality
particularly.
All morality and religion are against the
assertions of will to power
according to Nietzsche; hence all morality
and religion have to be opposed.
All existing
moralities moral frameworks have to be opposed
and during his time the most dominant
kind of ethical frameworks were utilitarianism
and and he opposes
both of them.
They demand submission and they are anti nature
and anti body and
attempts to discipline the body and in short
kill the will to power.
So, all these religious traditions and moral
philosophies and when they are trying to
discipline the body, and by disciplining the
body they can ultimately kill the will to
power which is so central according to Nietzsche’s
for human life.
To replace will with
obedience, freedom with submission, creativity
with loyalty.
Loyalty to the authority, an
external authority of the society or of religious
traditions etcetera kind of analysis which
Nietzsche conduct is often called a genealogical
analysis of morality.
So, the importance is that he is trying to
he actually goes back to history and examines
where the decline actually begins.
So, he says that as I already mentioned he
considered the ancient Greek civilization
to be
superior, to the contemporary, to the 90th
century European culture and he says that
with
the emergence of a rationalist philosophical
approaches with Socrates, Plato and
Aristotle, the decline actually begins.
With the dominance of the doctrine nothing
in
excess in the moral tradition of the west,
so this is basically a reference to Socrates,
Plato
and also importantly to Aristotle.
Then again idealizing tame mediocricy or mediocrity
this is, with the rise of Christianity historically
we can see that you know when with the
Europeans adopting Christianity, this has
become the central motive of western
civilization the emergence of the morality
of the good and evil this is what Nietzsche
calls it is a morality of good and evil.
So, this morality is at the root of the decline.
So, what is the morality of good and evil?
So, this morality works on the basis of a
dichotomy, certain things are considered,
certain
actions are considered to be good and certain
other actions are considered to be evil.
So,
Christianity for example, is a religion which
has a very clear separation between good
and evil, certain acts are clearly dominated
clearly mentioned as good and certain others
as evil.
So, here we can see Nietzsche’s analysis
of culture what Nietzsche’s is says about
culture is it domesticates the body.
Every culture in once sense domesticates the
body,
submit individuals to discipline and mechanisms
of social control.
And on the right hand
side you can see you know this culture which
disciplines individuals and submits
individuals to the social control mechanisms
of the social control, can actually lead to
two types of consequences.
The first one is it can shape and form strong
and healthy
individuals, that is one possibility which
is visible which was visible in ancient Greece.
And the second possibility is it causes individuals
to be so severely repressed, resulting
in guilt sickness and decadence which is what
has happened in the case of modern
Europe.
So, according to him culture which is a double
edged weapon, can either shape very
strong and higher individuals, on the other
hand it can also there is it is also potential
to
make individuals weak and severely repressed.
So, and in this context he introduces
another dichotomy, the difference between
slave morality and herd morality the must
sorry.
The slave morality and master morality.
The master morality that existed in the
ancient age and the kind of slave morality
or herd morality that exists in contemporary
in
90th century Europe, as a result of the domination
of the moral traditions and particularly
of the Christianities religious morality.
Slave morality is created by domesticating
the body, you discipline the body because
body is according to Christianity the fundamental
principles of Christianity, body is
treated as the seat of all drives, all passions,
which man needs an individual’s needs to
overcome.
So, once you overcome the passions of the
body, the drives of a body you
have a perfect control over the body, so that
you can dedicate yourself completely due to
the service of the salt.
So, this is a Christian assumption.
So, the Christianity as a religion, assert
it and
highlighted the value of the salt over and
against body.
The ascetic priests did this and
negated the body according to Nietzsche this
was a mechanism by means of which the
weak took revenge on the strong and there
are historical reasons for that.
What happens
is that slave morality channels resentment
inward against the body and outward against
enemies of the herd.
So, here by domesticating the body, the weaker
individuals resent the prerogatives of the
stronger.
See stronger will always be a minority and
they will always dominate the rest
of the popular.
So, the weaker sections or the weak in the
society would unite and they
have invented this slave morality, which highlights
or which considers submission or
disciplining the body and submitting the body
to the kind of disciplines, social
disciplines as extremely important.
And by doing this they dominate the stronger
people
who are otherwise capable of expressing their
freedom and attaining what they desire.
So, this is what it does and herd morality
in that sense you know there is a kind of
relationship between herd morality and the
body.
Herd morality is primarily achieved by
means of domesticating and suppressing the
bodily desires, disciplining the body
suppressing all bodily drives and passions,
negate and sacrifice the body by submission
and obedience to the social forces and institutions
for the sake of salvation in future
heaven, this is precisely what Christianity
does.
For the sake of a heaven in your after
life, for the sake of this other worldly kind
of an enjoyment in the heaven you have to
sacrifice the pleasures of this world, sacrifice
the body where by means of which you
live in this world.
The ascetic priests transformed powerlessness
and resentment into discipline and social
control.
And the morality of the herd is created in
this way and it is characteristically
different from the master morality because
the herd morality is the morality of
Christianity, the roman slave class invented
it in order to claim their freedom and there
the.
So, they invented values like equality, considered
values like equality as very
important and justified this notion of equality
with the help of Christian (Refer Time:
28:34) that all men are created by God.
So, all men are equal.
So, this concept of equality has been projected
by the slaves, in
order to come out of their slavery, to dominate
over their masters or rather to equalize
everything.
They adopted Christianity and idealized it
is moral framework to justify their
liberation from their oppressors and on the
other hand master moralities that which
dominates the opposes all forms of submission,
it is against all forms of submission
because master morality aims at the assertion
of will to power, which actually is a will
to
overpower everything and it follows bodily
drives going beyond good and evil and
beyond morality in that sense.
So, for Nietzsche, the herd morality is the
morality of good and evil.
It presupposes the
fundamental dichotomy between the good and
evil.
So, what is it?
Works on the basis of
the dichotomy of good and evil and which according
to Nietzsche is the basis of all
modern sickness, whatever decline the 90th
century European culture, encounters is due
to it is adoption it submissions to this morality
of good and evil good as conceived as the
intrinsic value of people and the world which
is divine.
It presupposes the soul atomism
of Christianity: all souls are equal.
Hence all are equal equality then evil stands
for the behavior of the powerful warrior
type, Nietzsche tries to see it in this way
evil stands for the behavior of the powerful
warrior type.
Those people who are capable of expressing
themselves without any hint
rends, without any inhibitions, those people
who are capable of expressing and asserting
their will power, their behavior is being
considered as fundamentally evil by this new
morality, which is evolving as a result of
Christianities adoption.
They are uninhibited by
conscience and hence are considered as ruthless.
So, this is what happens and again you
know it presupposes the dichotomy of the strong
and the weak.
The strong is expression of independent brilliance
are capable of realizing their desires
directly, but on the other hand the weak can
never do this, they cannot realize their
desires directly because they are characterized
by cowardice and helplessness.
Then what
is it?
The desire for freedom is materialized by
these people by advocating the herd
morality which according Nietzsche is the
mark of all decline.
According the Nietzsche, the notion of evil
is invented by the weak for the rescue of
the
enslaved.
And to control the independent brilliance
of the strong who define their own
place in the world this is I have already
mentioned this.
So, they unite and they try to
contain, they try to stop the strong that
are capable of expressing their will to power.
So,
it is actually morality is in that sense the
morality of the good and evil in that sense,
is a
revenge of the weak and helpless upon the
strong.
And here we can see that, he is advocating
a severe criticism of the 90th century
European culture.
Which is characterized by two things, number
one there is a trust in
scientific progress life in this world is
ensured by this trust and number two there
is a
faith in Christian morality lie in the other
world.
So, Christian morality is based on the concept
of other world in us, the concept of
heaven.
Every action you perform here as a greater
significance to the life afterwards.
This jointly these two kinds of the trust
in scientific progress and also the faith
in
Christian morality, initiate a kind of culture
which is a culture of optimism, life is safe
and meaningful for the masses according to
Nietzsche this leads to a kind of cultural
sickness.
And here this is what Nietzsche talks about
the intrinsic worth of these moral values.
I
quote this is from the genealogy of morals,
the intrinsic worth of these values was taken
for granted as a fact of experience and put
beyond question, nobody up to now has
doubted that the good man represents a higher
value than the evil in terms of promoting
and benefiting mankind generally even taking
the long view, but suppose what exact
opposite were true?
What if morality should turn out to be the
danger of dangers?
So,
this is Nietzsche’s view.
So, morality is not a science according to
him.
So, there are no moral facts perceive and
morality has been based on obedience he says,
as I mentioned it involves a domesticating
the body, the disciplining the body in a certain
sense.
And authority of the social
institutions rules and church will demand
obedience from the individual, and moral and
religious judgments belong to a level of ignorance
according to him and value judgments
concerning life are stupidities.
So, this is his conception of or is a valuation
of morality
in general.
And when he talks about modern morality, the
90th century morality, which is
dominated by Kantian ethics, he says that
modern morality characterized by
utilitarianism and Kantian ethics; reduce
the great passion of living to ‘calculations
and
difficult formulations.
So, it makes morality or it makes life a rational
exercise, instead of trying to understand
and live life very quote and quote lively
manner.
They weaken the human spirit by
controlling and domesticating it is creative
and selfish passion and herd morality is
created by the denial of life and Nietzsche
says this is a code furnished right life itself
is
essentially appropriation, injury, conquest
of the strange and weak suppression, severity,
obtrusion and peculiar forms obtrusion of
peculiar forms incorporation and at the least
putting it mildest exploitation.
Now, what Nietzsche does is, he attacks the
very conception of morality by attacking
what the very notion that lies at the basis,
at the foundation of all moral values.
The basis
of morality according to him is number one
the concept of universal and unchanging
truth, if there is such concept of universal
truth we can say that everything should be
or
to be subscribing to that or complying to
that.
So, morality assumes such a consumption
of truth number one.
Number two there is a concept of God and other
worldliness as it is treated by
Christianity.
Number three the essential goodness in human
nature which is advocated by
modern philosophers and the ideas of human
essence advocated by philosophers like
Plato, the recognition of the rational faculty
in man as underlined by Immanuel Kant.
So, these can be understood as the basis of
morality, which Nietzsche attacks and tries
to
expose them by showing that they are actually
not worthy to be perceived.
And he says that this has happened what he
calls as a result of something he calls as
the
death of God.
So, what is it?
He says that truth in the modern age the concept
of truth in
the modern age can no longer advocate a conception
of universal unchanging truth,
particularly with the advent of philosophical
contributions by people like Hegal, and also
the invention important theory initiated by
Charles Darwin, where truth is related to
a
concept of evolution.
So, a truth which evolves that is the kind
of idea which dominates modern age and such
a
conception of truth cannot be the absolute
truth of traditional philosophy.
Because truth
is now becomes, since it is an evolving truth
it becomes perspectival and a truth which
is
perspectival cannot be conceived as the truth
in the traditional sense of the tomb.
So,
truth is nothing, but truthlessness or there
is no truth.
So, all these ideas like universal
truth universal human nature, according to
Nietzsche are fabrications, built by man and
reflecting his psychological need designed
to promote the smooth succession of the
status quo.
What do you mean by the succession of the
status quo?
Prevention or the rejection of the
will to power which is asserted by individuals,
so this has ultimately led to what is
known as moral nihilism, if truth is perspectival
then there is neither good not evil:
everything is permitted and truth is perspectival.
And if everything is permitted this
situation will open up a boundless area of
freedom of strong men and races and again
concepts of just and unjust good and evil
are inapplicable to the world and this indicates
the death of God.
So, as a result of this conceptions the changing
conception of God, the changing
conceptions of truth, truth becoming perspectival,
truth losing it is absolute status and the
fundamental dichotomy is that exist at like
just and unjust good and evil they were all
based on the concept of truth, which is foundational.
Now with this concept becoming
shaky, these associated notions also become
shaky; this indicates the death of God.
So, this is another very important and interesting
aspect of Nietzsche’s philosophy, the
concept of death of God.
In modern world people have lost faith in
absolute values and
truths.
As a result of the spread of perspectivalism,
the idea of God that unites all men
and gives meaning to human life has died in
the hearts and souls of western Man.
So, this
according to Nietzsche indicates a very interesting
and a very important gesture in the
history of western life, in the history of
Western Europe death of God; the disappearance
of the values from the horizon of European
culture.
So the Thou shalt have lost meaning.
As a result once God disappears the Thou shalt
which ultimate find their justification and
authority in the concept of God will also
vanish.
So, they also lose their meaning, with the
death of God, there are no absolutes.
And
Nietzsche’s Zarathustra thus takes Zarathustra
his book, the protagonists of this book
Zarathustra has to discover new realities
for man.
Now grand reality which human
beings had, the concept of God is dead, larger,
that broader that all encompassing moral
horizon has disappeared it is no longer there.
So, now you have to discover new realities
for yourself to create new meaning out of
the
chaotic aftermath of Gods death.
See once God is not there, then as stated
by (Refer
Time: 40:12) in his novel brothers chromosome,
everything is possible then.
So, it opens
up a boundless domain of freedom, anything
and everything is possible in that context.
So, here there is a kind of Khios and out
of this Khios you have to create your own
values.
The concept of Overman or superman is introduced
in this context.
So, this is
another important concept in Nietzsche’s
philosophy, the idea of Overman or
overcoming man.
I just have two quotes here, it is I quote.
I teach you the Overman.
Man is something that
shall be overcome what have you done to overcome
him?
All creatures so far have
created something beyond themselves and you
want to be the ebb of this great flood, and
even go back to the beast rather than overcoming
man?
Again this is from the spoke
Zarathustra describes the path of overcoming
man as consisting of three stages camel
lion and the child.
But before that see this all notion of Overman
is again routed in the
notion of the will to power.
The will to power as I already mentioned is
that driving force
of life which enables man to Overpower.
Overpower is surroundings overpowering is
his
own his own status quo his own reality which
limits him, which controls him or which
consists him.
And this actually he says that this is done
through a process a kind of metamorphosis
takes place in three stages, The camel, the
lion and the child, where the camel represents
the average man, it kneels to accept it is
load, just as we kneel to carry the weight
of
what we believe are our duties.
So, here the camel moving in the desert is
a metaphor,
which never complains which can move miles
and miles without any water or food, it
just obeys because it thinks that it is duty
like the average man does things, thinking
that
it is his duty never questions it.
So, he carries the burden of tradition of
all these moral traditions.
Again a sense of duty
in bearing what is ordered to bear, we feel
guilt if we do not maintain the burden.
So, this
is another this is an this is a consequence
of or rather an implication of this view,
if an
average man always has this guilt feeling
if he does not do what he was expected or
o to
be done.
Obeys the Thou shalt with no protest.
The camel does not will there is no will,
crescent because all will is essentially controlled
or dominated by the will to power, but
the will to power is being annihilated the
camel or camel allows it to get annihilated
by
the tradition, by customs, by religion, by
morality.
So, that what it does it obeys what it
ought to do.
What it ought to do is always given by the
society, by institutions, by the
church, by moral traditions etcetera.
It has given it is will to what it believes
are it is
duties.
Now, the next stage is the transformation
to the lion, like the camel that moves in
the
desert, the spirit moves in its own desert
and here it encounters a reality.
What happens
in the loneliest desert the spirit becomes
a lion.
He wants to conquer his freedom and be
a master of his own desert, here the spirit
will encounter the thou shalt fight it and
conquer it and here what happens the lion
then says no and violently kills the status
quo
of Thou shalt.
So, here the lion actually goes against those
factors which controlled it and
says no it kills Thou shalt.
But not completely free from the morality
of good and evil.
See now what happens is,
now with this killing of the Thou shalt, killing
of this moral, that the morality the
dichotomy the morality that functions on the
basis of the dichotomy of good and evil, it
has escaped from that, but now there is a
Khios, now it has to create it is own morality
which is it is incapable of doing it at the
moment.
Because it is the weight of the burden
of the past is already there, it is there
it is still there.
So, it is yet to overcome the burden
completely.
So, the next stage is where the child, where
it completely overcomes it.
It is the child I
mean if you examine the child, the child is
totally unremorseful because the child is
not
bothered by the moralities of a good and evil
which we adults are trained and bothered
about.
The child is completely unremorseful it does
things just because it wants to do
things, it never thinks about consequences
and grad gradually the child learns because
we train them, we discipline them, we domesticate
them, the society does all these things
discipline the child and the child is gradually
you know initiated to a world of good and
evil to a moral tradition of good and evil.
So, here the child is the over man who says
yes it is not just it actually goes beyond,
the
violent no of the lion and says a positive
yes to life and creates a new reality and
a new
self.
The child creates it is own morality because
it is not bothered and worried about the
morality of good and evil.
It applies it is will in developing and achieving
unique values
and developing autonomy it creates itself.
So, the child is compared with the Overman.
A strong and free individual who has
overcome man in himself, has overcome his
trivial weak petty tendencies through a
process of self overcoming, it rejects all
creations of the self by external factors
like
religion and morality, but creates himself.
So, there is an assertion of self creation
and it
is not prepared to get created by others it
writes it is own stories.
The Overman writes his
own stories and never allow to write allow
his story to be written by others.
No Thou
shalt, no what is ought to be done, but what
it wills.
So, there is a clear assertion of the
will to power, and the will to power is dominant
Overman creates his own values and
lives fully and passionately.
So, I have just two quotes here, I just quote.
What is the ape to man?
So, he actually talks
about evolution and he says that evolution
every other creature produce it is higher
creature, what is the ape to man a laughing
stock or a painful embarrassment and man
shall be just that for the overman.
A laughing-stock or a painful embarrassment
again I
quote, man is a rope stretched between beast
and overman-a rope over an abyss: a
dangerous crossing, a dangerous on-the-way,
a dangerous looking-back, a dangerous
shuddering and stopping.
So, here he talks about he actually mentions
he talks about this evolution, every creature
has evolved to it is higher species.
Every creature succeeded in producing it is
higher
species as a result of evolution, following
the principle of evolution.
And what is this
principle of evolution?
It is a principle of overpowering ones status
quo, it is with the
assertion of the will to power, but evolution
stops with man.
In a sense biological
evolution stops with man, because with the
evolution of or with the emergence of
consciousness, biological evolution stops
with man.
Now, evolution needs to take a new turn.
From here man has to evolve and produce his
higher species the overman, but man has failed
to do that why?
Nietzsche’s says man has
failed to do that because of these conditions,
which man applies on himself in order to
domesticate him, in order to discipline him,
in order to ad culture him.
So, all culture or
civilization all religious traditions and
all moral traditions have ultimately done
a great
damage to humanity by stopping man from evolving
further, from man to overman, from
man to the super man.
So, this morality of equal shalt’s which
is the moral philosophy, and the religious
morality which philosophical traditions advocate,
actually has the power in sort of
stopping man from evolving further to the
domain of superman overman.
Now, I will wind up this discussion on the
philosophy of Nietzsche’s this course.
One
overcomes oneself: to become oneself.
“What does your conscience say?
- You shall
become the person you are” not the person
you ought to be because this ought to be is
not something which you have willed about
you, it is something which is other which
other others have commanded and you are obeying.
So, you have to actually overcome that and
start asserting yourself, this is from gay
science.
And the Thus Spake Zarathustra says, the new
values and the process of value
creation are not prescriptive I cannot give
your values, someone else’s value.
This is now
my way, where is yours?
Thus I answered those who asked me the way
for the way does
not exist, the way does not exist.
The way is the way which is cited by a religious
traditions moral philosophies, there is no
the way for all human beings, we have to create
our own life’s.
So, Nietzsche in that sense is a perfect philosopher
of freedom, who
advocates complete autonomy for human beings
and higher and higher states of
existence by assertion of human freedom and
creativity.
So, the three terms which I would say are
most important in understanding Nietzsche’s
philosophy are freedom, creativity and power.
With this we will wind up this discussion
on the philosophy of Nietzsche.
Thank you.
