Analysis Of Beyond Good And Evil By Friedrich Nietzsche

Improved Essays
In 1886, Friedrich Nietzsche published his book Beyond Good and Evil in Germany, a work in which he implies his criticism of dogmatism while simultaneously emphasizing the need for one to adopt his own moral code. I believe he published his book not only for past philosophers, but for the middle class as well. He states, “the gregarious European man nowadays assumes an air as if he were the only kind of man allowable” (Nietzsche, 121). With this statement, I believe Nietzsche targets past philosophers and criticizes their personal psychological approaches as ones used to support their own moral biases. He does not believe that science should have a bearing on a person’s morality, but these philosophers developed their scientific methods as a way to support the basis of their personal morality, thus allowing them to classify those who opposed them as evil and immoral. Similarly, I believe Nietzsche aims to persuade the middle class to stray from traditional moral codes such as ones …show more content…
From a cultural standpoint, he opposed August Comte’s theory of positivism. Comte believed that using scientific methods would reveal constant social laws; however, Nietzsche passionately disagreed, for he believed that society was consistently changing, and therefore, an absolute truth could never be found. Comte’s theory is one that exhibits the dogmatism that Niezsche harshly criticized (Hunt, 791). Because something may be applicable now does not mean it will be as early as tomorrow. His opposition of positivism influenced his writing of Beyond Good and Evil, for he criticized the belief of inherent ideas, something he addressed in his book. He wanted this criticism to reach past philosophers such as Comte, as well as those who may have been influenced by his and others’ dogmatic and/or traditional ideas, in an effort to convince them to reexamine their morality and define it with their own beliefs rather than

Related Documents

  • Superior Essays

    Torture is a controversial issue and extremely polarizing within the evangelical community. One side says that torture is never justified, while the other side says that torture is morally justified under certain straining circumstances. David P. Gushee takes the former ideology and argues in his 5 REASONS TORTURE IS ALWAYS WRONG that torture is never morally justified. Gushee forms a fairly solid argument that advocated his position with his use of historical scenarios, biblical evidence, and commonly shared beliefs, however, the downfall of the core of his argument consequently precipitates from his usage of false parallelism. In contrast, Michael Levin advocates in favor of the latter ideology.…

    • 1246 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    He incorporates an antithesis which supports his belief that government is bad and the virtuous man is good. Likewise, the virtuous individual is discouraged by an amoral government, but the amoral government should be discouraged by the virtuous individual. This antithesis serves to profess who is inclined to be disobedient. Thoreau also used aphorisms such as “it is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right.” His aphorisms teach his audience the moral and universal truths embedded in his message. Many express these truths in memorable ways, often containing some sort of parallelism of juxtaposition further to support his point.Additionally, Thoreau stimulates the reader 's mind through multiple hypophoria such as, “Must the citizens ever for a moment or in the least degree resign his conscience to the legislator?…

    • 1355 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The author says that social moralists do not have a humanistic conscience because they know the evil of authoritarian consciousness and are not sure if they know what is good. I disagree with Fromm. We all are born with a conscience of right and wrong, and we choose to make decision based on experience and…

    • 1582 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Cultural relativism says all one has to do is check if their action is in agreement with their societal code to determine if their action is right or wrong. But what if their societal codes are wrong? “Cultural Relativism not only forbids us from criticizing the codes of other societies; it also stops us from criticizing our own” (Rachels 34). Rachels final argument against cultural relativism is that it destroys the idea of moral progress and social change. We could not say that Martin Luther King, Jr. changed society for the better as that would be judging the social standards of another time.…

    • 412 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Therefore I think that people are divided on what is right and wrong. The criticism of Kant is fair, because Kant does not give us a full explanation or a decent argument about moral duty, therefore Schiller is ‘mocking’ Kant. Schiller wrote his critique to show that Kant was not explaining how moral duty worked. He also started to criticise Kant, but Kant wanted to say that we had an inclination towards having the right to moral duty. Furthermore Kant’s criticism goes on to allow us to have a deeper idea of the right to moral duty.…

    • 2052 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This is just self-interest and this is unethical. Another argument that he uses is that if God exist then God is good. Then God commands what is good. Kant strongly rejects the religious argument because he thinks that those are not the real argument. Suicide is when we take our life with the intention of avoiding or ending pain.…

    • 710 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    A Comparison of Medina and Nietzsche’s Philosophy The philosophies of Jose Medina and Friedrich Nietzsche differ in the sense that Medina focuses on the epistemic injustice while Nietzsche focuses on deconstructing morality. Medina explores injustice in society with the goal of finding factors that contribute to its existence. In essence, the philosopher believes morality to be a noble human virtue, and a factor that can be used to eliminate social injustices. However, due to social beliefs that alter the perspectives of oppressors and the oppressed, it becomes difficult to champion for morality. In the case of Friedrich Nietzsche, he argues that morality is a questionable human virtue that has no objective place in reality.…

    • 930 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    While many philosophical teachings argue that we must view concepts with indifference and objectivity, Nietzsche says that philosophers still tend to fall under the influence of their own prejudice and instincts. Therefore, the argument that truths are far more valuable compared to falsehood is invalid. Falsehoods (prejudice and instincts) determine what people believe to be truths. Nietzsche bring up past philosophers such as Kant and Spinoza as examples of philosophers that have guised their prejudice as definite truths. This reflects Nietzsche belief that all philosophies are based upon the individual philosophers own life, in his own words, he believes that philosophies are the “confessions of its…

    • 860 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    As seen from the last chapter, historians led my Carr, Acton, Croce, and Irfan Habib, immunize their historical work against passing of moral judgements with reference to present standards of moral values. They realise that danger of imposing moral judgements by historians will imply that moral standards of the past people were inferior to those residing in the present. Thus, consciously or unconsciously, they will tend to demean the character of the historical figures and of the society which he is studying. Other historians like Herbert Butterfield also out rightly rejects the use of morality in history. He says, "To make moral judgements in history is to engage in the most useless and unproductive of all forms of reflection".…

    • 712 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    I contend that the state was wrong in its judgment on Darwin’s theory, and in coercing the Biblical account to be taught it denied people their right to free thought and speech. Instead of allowing students to form their own opinions and reason the matter independently, they were inappropriately taught a story that fails to conclusively answer how humans came to be better than the explanation given in the theory of evolution. Therefore, it allowed the ignorance on human evolution to continue while the religious and moral motives for this Act faded on their own further proving Rousseau’s reasoning…

    • 779 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays

Related Topics