Nietzche’s Master and Slave Morality Essay

In Of the Genealogy of Morality, Nietzsche sought to volunteer context for what he saw as the central time value carcass of the club in which he haved knuckle d receive- worship. Nietzsche saw morals as wistful of the conditions in which its proponents were brought up. He saw the roots of hard worker devotion in oppression and slavery, and posits that it grew as a re pull through to the devotion of the crucifys of the time. What follows is a simplified account of Nietzsches control-slave wave-particle duality, and what he saw as the terrific consequences for human take place should the pervasiveness of slave morality be allowed to remain at the expense of the master.I will moot that although holiness and slave morality whitethorn have had signifi sackt influence in Nietzsches day, his fears nearly the stagnation of mankind through its adherence to slave morality atomic number 18 exaggerated and largely un formed. I will also briefly hold forth the applicability o f slave-master morality to contemporary life. Nietzsches account of master and slave morality springs from a time of actual master-slave relationships. professional morality is found in those who have the power to create their own values to live by, without the need for approval from others.In Nietzsches own words, the master recognise everything he sees in himself. They downstairsstand themselves as having an integral function in the universe, as resembling a kind of god, and therefore see grievousness in those attri stilles which they find in themselves, and safe(p)ness in the values they themselves create. They see no reason to refer to others or search a nonhers approval. Nietzsches idea of the Master comes from nobility, and so the central tenet of master morality is nobility that those attri savees found in a noble soulfulness argon those that can be considered good.In master morality, a person is considered good if s/he is autonomous, strong-willed, brave, powerful, pr oud, able and happy in themselves. They see rigor as a drop of that which is good-that is, a lack of the noble characteristics. Co-dependence and compliance be bad because they atomic number 18 non autonomy, weakness is bad because it isnt strength, poverty is bad because it isnt wealth, cowardice is bad because it isnt bravery, and so on. The master respects his or her hierarchical equals, but the public assistance of putting green folk is non his/her concern.The moral badness of the masters place does not have a significant impact on the masters happiness or security, but only reinforces what he already knows that s/he is a vastly superior being than those under him/her. In terms of fulfils, master morality is consequentialist it judges the goodness of an satisfy by its outcome. It is a morality of instinct and individualism, whereby the fulfilment of ones animal desire is seen as a compulsory outcome no matter what actions were taken to obtain this fulfilment. Any a ction which leads to a positive outcome is seen as being a good action.Any action which has negative consequences for the master is seen as being inherently bad, regardless of the intentions female genital organ it. In practice, this morality glorifies self-regard, greed and unmercifulness because these attributes lead to the best outcomes for the person who displays them. Nietzsche sees the basis for his master archetype in the violent and brutal emperors, warriors and warlords in ancient imperial civilizations Roman, Arab, German, Japanese nobility, Homeric heroes, Scandinavian Vikings who represent the fair beast splendidly roaming around in its lust for loot and victory.Master moralists are rarely unhappy, as the primary goal of their actions is their own wellbeing and happiness. They are able enjoy to the fruits of their various conquests, unburdened by the weaknesses wickedness or remorse. hard worker morality could not exist without master morality, as it is first and f oremost a reaction to it, a revolt against it. Slave morality stems from ressentiment or resentment the slave feels towards the master. The master feels, at most, condescension or smug pity towards the slave.By contrast, the slave is consumed by abomination and freshness towards the master, and sees the master as responsible for his or her misfortune. This resentment and bitterness leads to the slave adopting a mentality which demonises the master, and which holds up as good those attributes which are unlike that of the oppressor. Characteristics shown by the master are evil and goodness is seen in the traits which oppose them, e. g. Humility, obedience, restraint, self-denial, modesty, patience and acceptance of ones fate.Slave morality does not aim for self-ascension or self-gratification. Its aims centre on utility the decline of suffering for the greatest number of people. It sees evil in the self-aggrandizement and the ruthlessness and violence of the master. Where master m orality is for the elite few, slave morality is a value system for the masses. The values inherent in slave morality, not coincidentally, are almost synonymous with Judeo-Christian moral ideals Judaism and Christianity were, in the past, religions of the worthless and the oppressed.Nietzsche sees, in the reactionary nature of slave morality and its dishonest demonization of its oppressors, a desire to make slaves of the get the hang. Violence and vengefulness are malediction to slave morality, however, if the slave moralists can universalise their value system through religion, for example they can convince the masters that they are evil, and in doing so lessen their power and take revenge for past evils. Nietzsche sees slave morality, particularly the universalisation of it through religion, as calumnious and damaging to human progress.However, he does not see it as an unreasonable reaction to oppression, and suggests that the slave is in concomitant cleverer than the mast er, even if this cleverness is often exercised through self-deceit. In contrast to the consequentialism of master morality, slave morality can be seen as a deontological morality. It determines an actions goodness by looking at the actors intention to slave moralists, the ends do not, necessarily, justify the means. The nature of acts and their actors plays an important determination in Nietzsches discussion of morality.Slaves take in and strive for independence and see evil in the masters oppression of them, as they believe they perform these acts of oppression of their own free will. They believe that, because the masters are free agents, they should be held responsible for their actions and criticized for them. Nietzsche disputes this view, and demonstrates his argument using the analogy of the eagles and the lambs That lambs disfavour great birds of fair game does not seem strange only it gives no ground for reproaching these birds of prey for bearing off flyspeck lambs.And if the lambs say among themselves these birds of prey are evil and whoever is least like a bird of prey, but rather its opposite, a lamb would he not be good? there is no reason to find fault with this institution of an ideal, overleap perhaps that birds of prey might view it a little ironically and say we dont dislike them at all, these good little lambs we even love them nothing is more than tasty. Nietzsche claims that asking masters to act with humility or restraint is akin to asking a bird of prey not to hunt to feed itself.He believes that slaves give out the being from the action and in doing so are able to reprobate the masters for the supposed evils they perform. Nietzsche believes the slaves are dishonest in this, because the master acts in strength not because he wants to cause harm to the others, but because he is strong and powerful and should not be expected to act as if he is otherwise. It would be against the eagles nature to act against his own self-interest, and the same applies to the master.He believes the slaves are practicing self-deception in claiming goodness is theirs because they demand to be humble when, in fact, slaves are only humble and suppress because these traits were forced upon them through slavery, or through their own inherent weakness. He does not blame the slave for being this way the slave performs these acts of self-deception in order to survive and affirm his/her own existence as worthwhile but, again, sees the increasing prevalence of the slave mindset as harmful for society as a whole.He saw, in the democratic defend for equality, a movement towards mediocrity and stagnation. Nietzsche saw the move towards republic in the western world as a logical continuation of slave moralitys influence, calling the democratic movement the heir of the Christian movement. (BGE 151) The principle of equality on which democracy in ground was deeply unreasonable to Nietzsche, given the obvious inequalities within the hu man race.He believed that in order to enforce equality, strong men are lowered to the value of weak men, to the point where ambition and ingenuity goes unrewarded and progress stagnates. He looks back on times of scarcity and warfare, when enterprise and domination were rewarded and see because they were necessary. Now, the west has given itself over to a herd mentality, where such attributes are seen as dangerous and branded as immoral. When an individual does raise his or herself above the herd through ambition or excellence, the communitys self-confidence is diminished.The herd takes allay in the fact that, in their eye and/or the eyes of their god, this individual essential be immoral. Judeo-Christianity was the dominant religion in the west during the 19th century, and democracy did make up the dominant policy-making system during this time. However, although most of the sentiment behind it seems to hold authoritative, there are flaws in Nietzsches argument that this is evidence of the overarching betrothal of slave morality, and that this adoption created a stagnation of ambition or progress.Put simply, Nietzsche must argue the following 1. Slave morality has triumphed over master morality in the west. 2. Progress stagnates under slave morality because excellence is not rewarded but condemned, 3. Progress has stagnated and excellence is condemned in contemporary western society. But we can look to the history of the late 19th century to see that the progress made in that time was not insignificant.The invention of the motor car, the telephone, the get by bulb, among other things, is a sign that creativity and ambition was certainly not altogether stifled. While democracy provided the political framework, capitalism (primarily an individualistic economical system) flourished and rewarded enterprise and ambition with money and influence. This shows one of two things to be true slave moralitys influence over western society was not as pervasive as Nietzsche claims OR its influence was not as damaging to human progress as he believed it was.If, as Nietzsche claims, master morality is a necessary condition for the advancement of society, it must not have been defeated entirely, for society was and is advancing. Nietzsches account of the master-slave dichotomy is more difficult still to apply to modern western society, although I doubt Nietzsche himself would try to do so. While our individual morality may still come from external sources, these days the sources are likely to be many and varied, rather than from a single religious viewpoint. Individual morality grows and evolves from experience.And while the culture of our society may endorse elements present in Nietzsches slave morality (compassion, modesty and patience, for example, are certainly not seen as bad things,) we also see a culture where deed and ambition is not stifled but rewarded. We see celebration of athletes, who incarnate the strength, beauty and pride pre sent in a Nietzschean master. We want our leaders to be honest, active, strong willed and brave, but raise concern if they are seen to lack compassion, or are too boastful, or do not seek to reduce suffering.Nietzsches Genealogy is convincing in its methodological betterment to understanding the opposing moralities it discusses. It is logical that masters, the strong and elite, should seek no comfort or endorsement from external sources when they have total faith in themselves. That slaves sought out comfort in a morality based in religion, which holds up piousness and selflessness as virtues, makes sense as a survival strategy and as a way for these slaves to mutilate out meaning in their difficult lives.In discussing the impact on society in his time, Nietzsche despairs that of these two moralities, the slaves are winning, through the growth of democracy throughout the west. Perhaps, instead, the growth of democracy led to an evolution of western morality. by means of the evolu tion of our class system beyond master and slave, our culture has become more multifaceted. Our relations with those above and below us has become more nuanced, and so too has our morality.