Nietzsche's Views On Beyond Good And Evil

After comprehensively examining one of the writings of well-known German philosopher, Friedrich Nietzsche, titled, “Beyond Good and Evil,” I was able to perceive several elements that characterize his work to be knowledgeable, thought-provoking, and obscure. Although difficult to decipher because of his abundance of knowledge, it became evident through his reading that he detested ideas of nationalism; relatively alike, the indication of commonwealth principles, too. Despite the fact that nationalist activities were flourishing in this era, and commonwealth doctrines were supplicating to be practiced, Nietzsche unequivocally expresses his views in a way that shines light and institutes the viewpoints of nation-states and commonwealths to be frowned upon.
As mentioned in the opening, Nietzsche abhors the idea of …show more content…
Fichte. These two philosophers have diverse standpoints on nationalism and convey no similarities with Nietzsche. Overall, John Locke presents a pro-nationalism sentiment because it promotes unity for a good purpose. That purpose consists of protection, an absence of fear, and an absolute majority who make decisions on behalf of their citizens. This concept is contrary to what Nietzsche believes, which is why I decided to highlight Locke’s ideas regarding outlets towards nationalism. Additionally, Fichte believes that nationalism is a great aspect, because it is perfectly identical with patriotism. According to Fichte, patriotism is “absolutely the highest, ultimate, and independent authority.” In all, Nietzsche favors individuality, while Fichte and Locke portray ideas favorable to that of nationalism. Because of their large distinctiveness, it is prevalent that the works of these philosophers are far from comparable and rather, more