In his work “Beyond Good and Evil”, Nietzsche argues that the concept of “good” and “evil” are initially designated by those individuals with the political and social power to live their lives by sheer will (master morality abiders) whist the others who lack this force are doomed to be subjected to their power (slave morality abiders) until eventually the latter overthrows their masters.
One of the main themes Nietzsche formulates in this work is that ancient Roman society was grounded in master morality, and that this morality disappeared as the slave morality of Christianity spread through ancient Rome. According to him, the struggle between master and slave moralities recurs historically, as he argues that ancient Greek and Roman societies …show more content…
Good-bad identifies a hierarchy of people, the noble masters or aristocracy and the common people. The noble person only recognizes moral duties towards their equals; how they treat people below them is not a matter of morality at all. The good, noble person has a sense of ‘fullness’ – of power, wealth, ability, and so on. From the ‘overflowing’ of these qualities, not from pity (like the slave morality), they will help other people, including people below them.
According to Nietzsche’s theory of the master morality, elevation of mankind has been the work of an aristocratic society and so it will always be—a society believing in a long scale of gradations of rank and differences of worth among human beings, and requiring slavery in some form or other throughout history. These are essentially the people who represent the ‘master morality’ percentage, the “every elevation of the type man, has hitherto been the work of an aristocratic society and so. . . requiring slavery in one form or …show more content…
By relating such morality with the hero of a mythological story, he enhances positively the significance of this kind of morality through glorification of a character with such moral values.
Therefore, the benefits of the master morality are made evident in Nietzsche’s depiction of it through historical occurrences and mythological glorification. Master morality is the domain of the strong; it is knightly-aristocratic, appropriate to a warrior caste in possession of powerful physicality, devoted to war, adventure, hunting, dancing, and, in general, everything which involves strong, free, happy action. Its exponents exercise their privileges without concern for the consequences, for they are almost extra-moral or pre-moral. “Masters” come closest to the purest expression of the Will-to-Power5, which is Nietzsche’s variant on Schopenhauer’s view of the noumenal6.
Through this depiction of the ‘master morality’ it is evident to realize why the ‘master’ might be perceived as preferable by Nietzsche. Apart from this morality, Nietzsche coins another kind of morality, opposite to the master, in which Nietzsche depicts it with a negative connotation and sharper tongue: “the slave
One of the main themes Nietzsche formulates in this work is that ancient Roman society was grounded in master morality, and that this morality disappeared as the slave morality of Christianity spread through ancient Rome. According to him, the struggle between master and slave moralities recurs historically, as he argues that ancient Greek and Roman societies …show more content…
Good-bad identifies a hierarchy of people, the noble masters or aristocracy and the common people. The noble person only recognizes moral duties towards their equals; how they treat people below them is not a matter of morality at all. The good, noble person has a sense of ‘fullness’ – of power, wealth, ability, and so on. From the ‘overflowing’ of these qualities, not from pity (like the slave morality), they will help other people, including people below them.
According to Nietzsche’s theory of the master morality, elevation of mankind has been the work of an aristocratic society and so it will always be—a society believing in a long scale of gradations of rank and differences of worth among human beings, and requiring slavery in some form or other throughout history. These are essentially the people who represent the ‘master morality’ percentage, the “every elevation of the type man, has hitherto been the work of an aristocratic society and so. . . requiring slavery in one form or …show more content…
By relating such morality with the hero of a mythological story, he enhances positively the significance of this kind of morality through glorification of a character with such moral values.
Therefore, the benefits of the master morality are made evident in Nietzsche’s depiction of it through historical occurrences and mythological glorification. Master morality is the domain of the strong; it is knightly-aristocratic, appropriate to a warrior caste in possession of powerful physicality, devoted to war, adventure, hunting, dancing, and, in general, everything which involves strong, free, happy action. Its exponents exercise their privileges without concern for the consequences, for they are almost extra-moral or pre-moral. “Masters” come closest to the purest expression of the Will-to-Power5, which is Nietzsche’s variant on Schopenhauer’s view of the noumenal6.
Through this depiction of the ‘master morality’ it is evident to realize why the ‘master’ might be perceived as preferable by Nietzsche. Apart from this morality, Nietzsche coins another kind of morality, opposite to the master, in which Nietzsche depicts it with a negative connotation and sharper tongue: “the slave