Genealogy of morals second essay sparknotes
Just like Spinoza, those instigating evil who incurred punishment have for thousands of years felt in connection with their crime "Something has unexpectedly gone awry here," not "I should not have done that.
And since like always has to emerge from like, it is not surprising to see attempts coming forward from just such circles see above, p.
On the genealogy of morals essay 1 sparknotes
Daybreak, p. Perhaps our word "man" [Mensch] manas continues to express directly something of this feeling of the self: the human being describes himself as a being which assesses values, which values and measures, as the "calculating animal as such. It is rather the case that the wrong doer from now on is carefully protected by the community against this anger, particularly from that of the injured person, and is taken into protective custody. While this inner life led to the development of slave morality and bad conscience, Nietzsche also mentions some significant improvements: we became "interesting," we developed the concept of beauty, we distanced ourselves from other animals, and so on. Enmity, cruelty, joy in pursuit, in attack, in change, in destruction—all those turned themselves against the possessors of such instincts. If back then there was some criticism of the act, such criticism came from prudence: without question we must seek the essential effect of punishment above all in an increase of prudence, in a extension of memory, in a will to go to work from now on more carefully, mistrustfully, and secretly, with the awareness that we are in many things too weak, in a kind of improved ability to judge ourselves. To be entitled to pledge one's word, to do it with pride, and also to say "yes" to oneself—that right is a ripe fruit, as I have mentioned, but it is also a late fruit. Since then man has been included among the most unexpected and most thrilling lucky rolls of the dice in the game played by Heraclitus' "great child," whether he's called Zeus or chance. That unavoidable idea, nowadays so trite and apparently natural, which has really had to serve as the explanation how the feeling of justice in general came into existence on earth—"The criminal deserves punishment because he could have acted otherwise"—this idea, in fact, is an extremely late achievement, indeed, a sophisticated form of human judgment and decision making. We find the origins of conscience, guilt, and duty in the festiveness of cruelty: their origins were "like the beginnings of everything great on earth, soaked in blood thoroughly and for a long time. But this anger was restrained and modified through the idea that every injury had some equivalent and that compensation for it could, in fact, be paid out, even if that was through the pain of the perpetrator. The progress towards universal kingdoms is at the same time always also the progress toward universal divinities.For neither the ancients nor the Christians was suffering senseless: there was always joy or justification in suffering. We cannot entertain the slightest doubts about this: they were intended as celebrations for the gods—and, to the extent that the poet is in these matters more "godlike" than other men, as festivals for the poets as well.
That overlooks the first priority of the spontaneous, aggressive, over-reaching, re-interpreting, re-directing, and shaping powers, after whose effects the "adaptation" first follows.
From time to time it forcefully requires wholesale redemption, something huge as a payment back to the "creditor" the notorious sacrifice of the first born, for example, blood, human blood in any case.
With what sort of expression, do you think, did Homer allow his gods to look down on the fate of men?
Nietzsche nihilism genealogy of morals
Evil comes only from us, they claim, but they themselves Stupidly make themselves miserable, even contrary to fate. Only it was difficult and seldom possible to do their bidding. The darkening of heaven over men's heads always increased quickly in proportion to the growth of human beings' shame at human beings. Forgetfulness is not merely a vis interiae [a force of inertia], as superficial people think. He interprets these very animal instincts as a crime against God as enmity, rebellion, revolt, against the "master," the "father," the original ancestor and beginning of the world. How much blood and horror is the basis for all "good things. They were dealing with someone who had caused harm, with an irresponsible piece of fate. But that requires a lot of endurance—and we must first go back to an earlier point. For Spinoza the world had gone back again into that state of innocence in which it existed before the fabrication of the idea of a bad conscience. But even this disturbance in the head was a problem, "Indeed, how is this even possible? If the power and the self-confidence of a community keeps growing, the criminal law grows constantly milder. A terrible heaviness weighed them down. Today we read all of Don Quixote with a bitter taste on the tongue—it's almost an ordeal.In himself he arouses a certain interest, tension, hope, almost a certainty, as if something is announcing itself in him, is preparing itself, as if the human being were not the goal but only the way, an episode, a great promise.
Nietzsche suggests that, like the origin of humanity itself, there is no point of origin, but just a slow evolution. By contrast, they saw those who were weak, unhealthy, and enslaved as "bad," since their weakness was undesirable.
They served as the origin of evil—at that time the gods took upon themselves, not punishment, but, what is nobler, the guilt.