Nietzsche - The
Root of the Culture War
By Richard P.
Salbato
The
writings of Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche gave birth to a Culture War that has
effected every part of human society.
It is a war between husbands and wives, parents and children, parents
and schools, Churches and governments, science and religion, and created the
entire mess of the 20th Century.
This is the thinking that produced two world wars, created Hitler,
created the thinking of Carl Marx, gave birth to Psychiatry, destroyed the
American School System, produced the woman's lib movement, produced abortion on
demand, made people their own gods, and took the moral law out of
governments. It produced an American
Movie Industry that would rather sell immorality than make money, an industry that
stopped making things like "The Ten Commandments", "Ben
Hur", "Shirley Temple",
"Pinocchio", "Joan of Ark", etc. that had moral
messages and made a great amount of money and started making movies about homosexuals,
single moms, fiction, or any deviant behavior that they could think of and they
did it even if it did not make money.
Modern technology has saved them from bankruptcy by great graphics when
in fact there is no story at all, like "Star Wars" or "The
Matrix".
Instigated
by liberal elites who manipulated—and were manipulated by—the so-called
"youth movement" of the 1960s, this cultural decadence has become
evident in ways that are now all too familiar.
The deterioration of art and music; the popularization of pornography;
the collapse of the family and consequent social disintegration; the
radicalization of academia, law, and politics; legislation for divorce on
demand, abortion, assisted suicide, and euthanasia; racial politics; and the
decline of religion under multiple assaults from feminism and political
correctness. The revolution has been both deliberate and successful, and has
transformed our society into something no one could have imagined fifty years
earlier.
The
Catholic Church can be a major opponent of the nihilism of modern liberal
culture. Pope John Paul II has been attempting to lead an intellectual and
spiritual reinvigoration, but there is resistance within the Church. Modern liberal culture has made inroads
with some of the Catholic hierarchy as well as the laity. It remains to be seen
whether intellectual orthodoxy can stand firm against the currents of radical
individualism and radical egalitarianism.
The absence of an orthodox Catholic voice in society was of vital
importance in allowing the cultural collapse of the 1960s.
The
cultural war is an international phenomenon and the courts have the power of
judicial review to strike down statues or accept them. They have taken one side
in the culture war — the side of the intellectual elite, those people who think
they have a superior attitude in life and that those of us lower down the
social ladder should be coerced into accepting their views.
We
have been loosing this Culture War for the last 100 years but what makes me
want to write about it now is that something happened that makes me think we
can now turn this war around and win it.
And that is the success of Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the
Christ". What has happened to
the people who have seen this movie gives me hope that the 100 year war can be
won. But to win this war we must
understand it, we must see the enemy in our own distorted thinking, we must see
the enemy in the books we read, the movies we see, the teaching at school, in
almost everything secular today. Our
Lady of Fatima said that Communism would spread its errors throughout the
world. Those errors are the first
modern atheist thinking born of the writings of Nietzsche.
Life of Friedrich Nietzsche
Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche was born on October
15, 1844. His father died when he was 4 year old. Most of his family were Lutheran
ministers. He was raized by his mother, Franziska (1826-1897), his paternal
grandmother, Erdmuthe, his father's two sisters, Auguste and Rosalie, and his
younger sister, Therese Elisabeth Alexandra (1846-1935) - all women.
Momentous for Nietzsche in 1865 was his accidental
discovery of Arthur Schopenhauer's atheistic and turbulent vision of the
world, The World as Will and Representation, a work which criticized materialist
metaphysical theories from the standpoint of Kant's critique of metaphysics
in general. In 1867, he met the composer Richard Wagner. Wagner and
Nietzsche shared an enthusiasm for Schopenhauer
Nietzsche's enthusiasm for Schopenhauer, his
studies in classical philology, his inspiration from Wagner, his reading of
Lange, and his frustration with the contemporary German culture, coalesced in
his first book -- The Birth of Tragedy (1872) -- which was
published when he was 28. Wagner showered the book with unqualified
praise. Nietzsche met Paul Rée,
who, while living in close company with Nietzsche, would write On the Origin
of Moral Feelings.
In 1876, at age 32, Nietzsche made an unsuccessful
marriage proposal to a Dutch piano student in Geneva named Mathilde Trampedach.
During this time, His ailing health, which led to migraine headaches, eyesight
problems and vomiting, necessitated his resignation from the university in
June, 1879.
On a visit to Rome in 1882, Nietzsche, now at age
thirty-seven, met Lou Salomé, a twenty-one-year-old Russian woman who
was studying philosophy and theology in Zurich. He soon fell in love with
her, and offered his hand in marriage. She declined, and the future of
Nietzsche's friendship with her and Paul Rée appears to have suffered as a
consequence. In the years to follow, Salomé would become an associate of
Sigmund Freud, and would write with psychological insight of her
association with Nietzsche.
On the morning of January 3, 1889, while in Turin,
Nietzsche experienced a mental breakdown which left him an invalid for the rest
of his life. That Nietzsche had an extraordinarily sensitive nervous
constitution and took an assortment of medications is well-documented as a more
general fact. After a brief hospitalization in Basel, he spent 1889 in a
sanatorium in Jena at the Binswanger Clinic, and in March 1890 his mother took
him back home to Naumburg, where he lived under her care for the next seven
years. After his mother's death in 1897, his sister Elisabeth -- having
previously returned home from Paraguay, where she had been working with her
husband Bernhard Förster to establish an Aryan, anti-Semitic German colony
called "New Germany" ("Nueva Germania") -- assumed
responsibility for Nietzsche's welfare. On August 25, 1900, Nietzsche died in
the villa as he approached his 56th year, apparently of pneumonia in
combination with a stroke.
The Influence of Nietzsche
Friedrich
Nietzsche (1844-1900) was notoriously unread and un-influential during his own
lifetime, and his works suffered considerable distortion in the hands of his
sister Elisabeth, who managed his literary estate and twisted his philosophy
into a set of ideas supporting Hitler and Nazism (Hitler had Thus Spoke
Zarathustra issued to every soldier in the German army). By far his most
often quoted utterance--seldom understood--is "God is dead,"
which placed his thought beyond the pale for many readers.
But
Nietzsche's influence has been much richer and varied than these simple
stereotypes suggest. It is not surprising that an author who embraced such
contradictions should have influenced thinkers of an extraordinary variety.
Philosophy
The
only philosopher to feel his influence while he could be aware of it was the
Danish critic and philosopher Georg Brandes (1842-1927), who in the late
1880s developed a philosophy which he called "aristocratic
radicalism" inspired by Nietzsche's notion of the "overman." Nietzsche's
insistence that the decay of religion (the "death of God") requires
that humanity take responsibility for setting its own moral standards inspired
existentialists from Karl Jaspers (1883-1969) and Martin Heidegger (1889-1976)
to Albert Camus (1913-1960).
Nietzsche's
relativism has had a powerful influence on two of the most important
modern French Deconstructionist philosophers, Jacques Derrida (b. 1930)
and Michel Foucault (1926-1984).
Theologians
Oddly
enough, he has also been a powerful influence on certain theologians,
notably Paul Tillich (1886-1965), who developed an Existentialist,
human-centered theology which tried to salvage elements of traditional faith
while drawing on rationalism. Thomas Altizer (b.1927) created a
sensation (and found himself on the cover of Time) in the 1960s by
helping to create the oxymoronically named "death of God theology"
together with a number of other theologians who argued for religion without
God. Their constant use of Nietzsche's catch phrase is a reminder of their
indebtedness to him. Although the direct influence of this school hardly lasted
out the decade, other theologians used Nietzsche's thought as well, notably embracing
his idea that human values should be based not on denial ("thou shalt
not") but on affirmation ("thou shalt"). The Jewish theologian Martin
Buber (1878-1965)--also a great influence on Christian theology--translated
part of Thus Spoke Zarathustra into Polish. He read Nietzsche's works
very early, beginning in 1892. His emphasis on process in theology resembles
some of Nietzsche's ideas.
Although
he did not draw directly on Nietzsche's work, the notions of "creative
evolution" espoused by Henri Bergson (1859-1941) had a powerful
influence on the Greek writer Nikos Kazantzakis (1885-1957), who
combined his studies under Bergson with his reading of Nietzsche to produce a
version of what is known as "process theology" which is most readily
studied in the little book The Saviors of God and is also expressed in
his most popular novel, Zorba the Greek. According to Kazantzakis, God
is the result of whatever the most energetic and heroic people value and create.
This is clearly very similar to Nietzsche's ideas about the sources of
religion. Nietzsche's notion of heroes as creators is at the heart of
Kazantzakis' philosophy.
Psychology
The
two grandfathers of modern psychology, Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) and Carl
Jung (1875-1961), both had a deep admiration for Nietzsche and credited him
with many insights into the human character.
Alfred
Adler
(1870-1937) developed an "individual psychology" which argues that
each individual strives for what he called "superiority," but is more
commonly referred to today as "self-realization" or
"self-actualization," and which was profoundly influenced by
Nietzsche's notions of striving and self-creation. The entire "human
potential movement" and humanistic psychology (Abraham Maslow,
Carl Rogers, Rollo May, etc.) owes a great debt to this line of thought.
Even pop psychologists of "self-esteem" preach a gospel little
different from that of Zarathustra. The ruthless, self-assertive
"objectivism" of Ayn Rand (1905-1982) is difficult to imagine
without the influence of Nietzsche.
Fiction
Besides
Kanzantzakis, many novelists have drawn on Nietzsche. Thomas Mann (1875-1955)
wrote repeatedly about him and his characters are often engaged in struggles to
define their ideas in a world in which old philosophies are decaying, like
Nietzsche, torn between romanticism and rationalism (notably in The Magic
Mountain). Hermann Hesse (1877-1962) similarly explored the
necessity for the individuals to overcome their social training and traditional
ideas to seek their own way (Steppenwolf and The Glass Bead Game).
Many other famous writers influenced by Nietzsche include André Malraux
(1901-1976), André Gide (1869-1951), and Knut Hamsun (1859-1952).
Poetry
Given
the poetic style in which he wrote, it is not surprising that numerous poets
have been drawn to Nietzsche, including Rainer Maria Rilke (1875-1926).
He, like many writers influenced by Nietzsche, rejected the kind of traditional
Christian dualism which sorts existence into good and evil with the physical and
earthly being regarded as a source of evil and goodness identified with pure
spirit and the life after death. His celebration of mortal life as a sort of
religion is extremely Nietzschean. He was also became lover of Lou
Andreas-Salomé, a woman who ten years earlier Nietzsche loved unrequitedly.
Among
many others, one can find strong Nietzschean themes in the works of Beat
Generation poets such as Allen Ginsberg (1926-1997) and Gary Snyder (b.
1930), who were drawn to the vitalistic, anti-dualistic themes also earlier
expressed in the English and American traditions by William Blake and Walt
Whitman. Blake, Whitman and Nietzsche form a sort of triumvirate whose
influence runs through large swaths of modern literature in their rejection of
dualism and embrace of the body as good. Like many other poets, William
Butler Yeats (1865-1939) combined an admiration for Blake with interest in
Nietzsche.
Drama
George
Bernard Shaw
(1856-1950) expressed his version of Nietzsche's struggle for power in his play
Man and Superman, and more than one character in the plays of Eugene
O'Neill (1888-1953) is under Nietzsche's spell.
Influential
ideas
If
there are few names from the second half of the 20th century cited above that
you recognize, it is not because Nietzsche's influence has dwindled. Rather it
so pervades modern culture that many who have never read him are influenced by
his thought indirectly. Consider the following ideas circulating in American
culture today, all of them traceable at least in part to Nietzsche, although
many of them are much simpler than similar ideas held by him:
· The goal of life should be to find yourself.
True maturity means discovering or creating an identity for yourself.
· The highest virtue is to be true to yourself
(consider these song titles from a generation ago: "I Gotta Be
Me," "I Did It My Way").
· When you fall ill, your body is trying to
tell you something; listen to the wisdom of your body.
· People who hate their bodies or are in
tension with them need to learn how to accept and integrate their physical
selves with their minds instead of seeing them as in tension with each
other. The mind and body make up a single whole.
· Athletes, musicians, etc. especially need to
become so attuned to their bodies that their skills proceed spontaneously from the
knowledge stored in their muscles and are not frustrated by an excess of
conscious rational thought. (The influence of Zen Buddhism on this sort of
thinking is also very strong.)
· Sexuality is not the opposite of virtue,
but a natural gift that needs to be developed and integrated into a healthy,
rounded life.
· Many people suffer from impaired
self-esteem; they need to work on being proud of themselves.
· Knowledge and strength are greater virtues
than humility and submission.
· Overcoming feelings of guilt is an
important step to mental health.
· You can't love someone else if you don't
love yourself.
· Life is short; experience it as intensely
as you can or it is wasted.
· People's values are shaped by the
cultures they live in; as society changes we need changed values.
· Challenge yourself; don't live passively.
It
is notable that none of these ideas flows from the traditional Judeo-Christian
culture which dominated Europe for a thousand years. Many of them have their
roots in Romanticism, with Nietzsche merely articulating impulses that others
shared; but he is a major transmitter of them to the modern world.
Nietzsche's Writings
The
following are Nietzsche's own words on different subjects taken from some of
his books. This is the thinking that
produced two world wars, created Hitler, created the thinking of Carl Marx,
gave birth to Psychiatry, destroyed the American School System, produced the
woman's lib movement, produced abortion on demand, made people their own gods,
and took the moral law out of governments.
The
following are all quotes from Nietzsche's books.
Philosophy
How
I understand the philosopher -- as a terrible explosive, endangering
everything...
Those
who boast so mightily of the scientifically of their metaphysics should receive
no answer;
Even
today many educated people think that
the victory of Christianity over Greek philosophy is a proof of the superior
truth of the former - although in this case it was only the coarser and more
violent that conquered the more spiritual and delicate. So far as superior
truth is concerned, it is enough to observe that the awakening sciences have
allied themselves point by point with the philosophy of Epicurus, but
point by point rejected Christianity.
If
all goes well, the time will come when one will take up the memorabilia of
Socrates rather than the Bible as a guide to morals and reason... The pathways of the most various
philosophical modes of life lead back to him... Socrates excels the founder
of Christianity in being able to be serious cheerfully and in possessing
that wisdom full of roguishness that constitutes the finest state of the
human soul. And he also possessed the finer intellect.
When
we hear the ancient bells growling on a Sunday morning we ask ourselves: Is
it really possible! This, for a Jew, crucified two thousand years ago, who said
he was God's son? The proof of such a claim is lacking. Certainly the
Christian religion is an antiquity projected into our times from remote
prehistory; and the fact that the claim is believed - whereas one is otherwise
so strict in examining pretensions - is perhaps the most ancient piece of this
heritage. A god who begets children with a mortal woman; a sage who bids men
work no more, have no more courts, but look for the signs of the impending end
of the world; a justice that accepts the innocent as a vicarious sacrifice;
someone who orders his disciples to drink his blood; prayers for miraculous
interventions; sins perpetrated against a god, atoned for by a god; fear of a
beyond to which death is the portal; the form of the cross as a symbol in a
time that no longer knows the function and ignominy of the cross -- how ghoulishly
all this touches us, as if from the tomb of a primeval past! Can one believe
that such things are still believed?
Christianity
was from the beginning, essentially and fundamentally, life's nausea and
disgust with life, merely concealed behind, masked by, dressed up as, faith in
"another" or "better" life.
A
Jesus Christ was possible only in a Jewish landscape--I mean one over which the
gloomy and sublime thunder cloud of the wrathful Yahweh was brooding
continually.
All
the world still believes in the authorship of the "Holy Spirit" or is
at least still affected by this belief: when one opens the Bible one does so
for "edification."...
Paul thought up the idea and Calvin rethought it, that for innumerable people damnation has been decreed from
eternity, and that this beautiful world plan was instituted to reveal the glory
of God: heaven and hell and humanity are thus supposed to exist - to
satisfy the vanity of God! What cruel and insatiable vanity must have flared in
the soul of the man who thought this up first, or second. Paul has remained
Saul after all - the persecutor of God.
Christianity's
Nature - If the Christian dogmas of a
revengeful God, universal sinfulness, election by divine grace and the danger of eternal damnation were true,
it would be a sign of weak-mindedness and lack of character not to
become a priest, apostle or hermit --
The
Christian church is an encyclopaedia of prehistoric cults and conceptions of
the most diverse origin, and that is why it is so capable of proselytizing.
Christianity
possesses the hunters instinct for all those who can by one means or another be
brought to despair - of which only a portion of mankind is capable. It is
constantly on their track, it lies in wait for them.
Christianity
has done its utmost to close the circle and declared even doubt to be sin.
In
former times, one sought to prove that there is no God - today one indicates
how the belief that there is a God arose and how this belief acquired
its weight and importance: a counter-proof that there is no God thereby becomes
superfluous.- When in former times one had refuted the 'proofs of the existence
of God' put forward, there always remained the doubt whether better proofs might
not be adduced than those just refuted: in those days atheists did not know
how to make a clean sweep.
But
in the end one also has to understand that the needs that religion has
satisfied and philosophy is now supposed to satisfy are not immutable; they can
be weakened and exterminated. Consider, for example, that
Christian distress of mind that comes from sighing over ones inner depravity
and care for ones salvation - all concepts originating in nothing but errors of
reason and deserving, not satisfaction, but obliteration.
Christianity
came into existence in order to lighten the heart; but now it has first to
burden the heart so as afterwards to be able to lighten it. Consequently it
shall perish.
After
Buddha was dead, his shadow was still shown for centuries in a cave
- a tremendous, gruesome shadow. God is dead; but given the way of men,
there may still be caves for thousands of years in which his shadow will be
shown. -And we- we still have to vanquish his shadow, too.
There
are no facts, only interpretations.
Convictions
are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
Every
word is a prejudice.
Why
does man not see things? He is himself standing in the way: he conceals things.
Mystical
explanations are considered deep. The truth is that they are not even
superficial.
It
is true, there could be a metaphysical world; the absolute possibility of it is
hardly to be disputed. We behold all things through the human head and cannot
cut off this head; while the question nonetheless remains what of the world
would still be there if one had cut it off.
Even
great spirits have only their five fingers breadth of experience - just
beyond it their thinking ceases and their endless empty space and stupidity
begins.
What
then is truth?
A mobile army of metaphors, metonyms, and anthropomorphisms -- in short, a sum
of human relations, which have been enhanced, transposed, and embellished
poetically and rhetorically, and which after long use seem firm, canonical, and
obligatory to a people: Truths are illusions about which one has forgotten
that is what they are; metaphors which are worn out and without sensuous power;
coins which have lost their pictures and now matter only as metal, no longer as
coins.
We still do
not know where the urge for truth comes from; for as yet we have heard only of
the obligation imposed by society that it should exist: to be truthful means
using the customary metaphors - in moral terms, the obligation to lie according
to fixed convention, to lie herd-like in a style obligatory for all
What
are man's truths ultimately? Merely his irrefutable errors.
The
reasons for which 'this' world has been characterized as 'apparent' are the very
reasons which indicate its reality; any other kind of reality is absolutely
indemonstrable.
Let
us beware of saying that there are laws in nature. There are only
necessities: there is nobody who commands, nobody who obeys, nobody who
trespasses... But when will we ever be done with our caution and care? When
will all these shadows of God cease to darken our minds? When will we complete
our de-deification of nature? When may we begin to "naturalize"
humanity in terms of a pure, newly discovered, newly redeemed nature? from Nietzsche's The Gay Science,
s.109,
We
have arranged for ourselves a world in which we can live - by positing bodies,
lines, planes, causes and effects, motion and rest, form and content; without
these articles of faith nobody could now endure life. But that does not prove
them. Life is no argument. The conditions of life might include error.
Over
immense periods of time the intellect produced nothing but errors. A few of these proved to be
useful and helped to preserve the species: those who hit upon or inherited
these had better luck in their struggle for themselves and their progeny. Such
erroneous articles of faith... include the following: that there are things,
substances, bodies; that a thing is what it appears to be; that our will is
free; that what is good for me is also good in itself.
How did logic come into existence in man's head?
Certainly out of illogic, whose realm originally must have been immense. Innumerable beings who made
inferences in a way different from ours perished; for all that, their ways
might have been truer. Those, for example, who did not know how to find often
enough what is "equal" as regards both nourishment and hostile
animals--those, in other words, who subsumed things too slowly and cautiously--were
favored with a lesser probability of survival than those who guessed
immediately upon encountering similar instances that they must be equal. The
dominant tendency, however, to treat as equal what is merely similar--an
illogical tendency, for nothing is really equal--is what first created any
basis for logic.
In
order that the concept of substance could originate--which is indispensible for
logic although in the strictest sense nothing real corresponds to it--it was
likewise necessary that for a long time one did not see or perceive the changes
in things. The beings that did not see so precisely had an advantage over those
who saw everything "in flux." At bottom, every high degree of caution
in making inferences and every skeptical tendency constitute a great danger for
life. No living beings would have survived if the opposite tendency--to affirm
rather than suspend judgment, to err and make up things rather than
wait, to assent rather than negate, to pass judgment rather than be just-- had
not been bred to the point where it became extraordinarily strong.
Cause
and effect, such a duality probably never exists; in truth we are confronted by a
continuum out of which we isolate a couple of pieces, just as we perceive
motion only as isolated points and then infer it without ever actually seeing
it. The suddenness with which many effects stand out misleads us; actually, it
is sudden only for us. In this moment of suddenness there are an infinite
number of processes which elude us. An intellect that could see cause and
effect as a continuum and a flux and not, as we do, in terms of an arbitrary
division and dismemberment, would repudiate the concept of cause and effect and
deny all conditionality.
To
renounce belief in one's ego, to deny one's own "reality" -- what a
triumph! not merely over the senses, over appearance, but a much higher kind of
triumph, a violation and cruelty against reason -- a voluptuous pleasure
that reaches its height when the ascetic self-contempt and self-mockery of
reason declares: "there is a realm of truth and being, but reason
is excluded from it!"
Henceforth, my dear philosophers, let us be on guard against the dangerous old
conceptual fiction that posited a "pure, will-less, painless, timeless
knowing subject"; let us guard against the snares of such contradictory
concepts as "pure reason," absolute spirituality,"
"knowledge in itself": these always demand that we should think of an
eye that is completely unthinkable, an eye turned in no particular direction,
in which the active and interpreting forces, through which alone seeing becomes
seeing something, are supposed to be lacking; these always demand of the
eye an absurdity and a nonsense. There is only a perspective seeing, only
a perspective "knowing"; and the more affects we allow to
speak about one thing, the more eyes, different eyes, we can use to
observe one thing, the more complete
will our "concept" of this thing, our "objectivity," be.
But to eliminate the will altogether, to suspend each and every affect, supposing
we were capable of this -- what would that mean but to castrate the
intellect?
Morality
Nevertheless. -- however credit and debit
balances may stand: at its present state as a specific individual science the
awakening of moral observation has become necessary, and mankind can no longer
be spared the cruel sight of the moral dissecting table and its knives and
forceps... the older philosophy... has, with paltry evasions, always avoided
investigation of the origin and history of the moral sensations. With what
consequences is now very clearly apparent, since it has been demonstrated in
many instances how the errors of the greatest philosophers usually have their
point of departure in a false explanation of certain human actions and
sensations; ...a false ethics is erected, religion and mythological monsters
are then in turn called to buttress it, and the shadow of these dismal spirits
in the end falls even across physics and the entire perception of the world.
Custom
represents the experiences of men of earlier times as to what they supposed
useful and harmful - but the sense for custom (morality) applies,
not to these experiences as such, but to the age, the sanctity, the
indiscussability of the custom. And so this feeling is a hindrance to the
acquisition of new experiences and the correction of customs: that is to say,
morality is a hindrance to the development of new and better customs: it makes
stupid.
Whoever
has overthrown an existing law of custom has always first been accounted a bad
man: but when, as did happen, the law could not afterwards be reinstated
and this fact was accepted, the predicate gradually changed; - history treats
almost exclusively of these bad men who subsequently became good
men!
What
is new, however, is always evil, being that which wants to conquer
and overthrow the old boundary markers and the old pieties; and only what is
old is good. The good men are in all ages those who dig the old thoughts,
digging deep and getting them to bear fruit - the farmers of the spirit. But
eventually all land is depleted, and the ploughshare of evil must come again
and again.
To
admit a belief merely because it is a custom - but that means to be dishonest,
cowardly, lazy! - And so could dishonesty, cowardice and laziness be the preconditions
for morality?
...
hitherto we have been permitted to seek beauty only in the morally good
- a fact which sufficiently accounts for our having found so little of it and
having had to seek about for imaginary beauties without backbone! - As surely
as the wicked enjoy a hundred kinds of happiness of which the virtuous have no
inkling, so too they possess a hundred kinds of beauty; and many of them have
not yet been discovered.
It
is, indeed, a fact that, in the midst of society and sociability every evil
inclination has to place itself under such great restraint, don so many masks,
lay itself so often on the procrustean bed of virtue, that one could well
speak of a martyrdom of the evil man. In solitude all this falls away. He
who is evil is at his most evil in solitude: which is where he is at his best -
and thus to the eye of him who sees everywhere only a spectacle also at his
most beautiful.
Where
the poor power of the eye can no longer see the evil impulse as such because it
has become too subtle, man posits the realm of goodness; and the feeling that
we have now entered the realm of goodness excites all those impulses which had
been threatened and limited by the evil impulses, like the feeling of security,
of comfort, of benevolence. Hence, the duller the eye, the more extensive the
good. Hence the eternal cheerfulness of the common people and of children.
Hence the gloominess and grief - akin to a bad conscience - of the great
thinkers.
All
philosophers have the common failing of starting out from man as he is now and
thinking they can reach their goal through an analysis of him. They
involuntarily think of 'man' as an aeterna veritas, as something that
remains constant in the midst of all flux, as a sure measure of things.
Everything the philosopher has declared about man is, however, at bottom no
more than a testimony as to the man of a very limited period of time.
Lack of historical sense is the family failing of all philosophers.
Error
has transformed animals into men; is truth perhaps capable of changing man back
into an animal?
Mighty
waters draw much stone and rubble along with them; mighty spirits many stupid
and bewildered heads.
You
will never get the crowd to cry Hosanna until you ride into town on an ass.
The
most senile thing ever thought about man is contained in the celebrated saying
'the ego is always hateful'; the most childish is the even more celebrated
'love thy neighbor as thyself'. -- In the former, knowledge of human nature has
ceased, in the latter it has not yet even begun.
Out
of damp and gloomy days, out of solitude, out of loveless words directed at us,
conclusions grow up in us like fungus: one morning they are there, we
know not how, and they gaze upon us, morose and gray. Woe to the thinker who is
not the gardener but only the soil of the plants that grow in him!
It
is not things, but opinions about things that have absolutely no
existence, which have so deranged mankind!
Consider
the following signs of those states of society which are necessary from time to
time and which are designated with the word "corruption." As soon as
corruption sets in anywhere superstition becomes rank. and the previous
common faith of a people becomes pale and powerless against it. For
superstition is second-order free spirit: those who surrender to it choose
certain forms and formulas that they find congenial and permit themselves some
freedom of choice.
Fourth,
when "morals decay" those men emerge whom one calls tyrants: they are
the precursors and as it were the precocious harbingers of individuals...
In these ages bribery and treason reach their peak, for the love of the newly
discovered ego is much more powerful now than the love of the old, used-up
"fatherland"... Individuals--being truly in-and-for-themselves--
care, as is well known, more for the moment than do their opposites, the herd
men... The times of corruption are those when the apples fall from the tree: I
mean the individuals, for they carry the seeds of the future and are the
authors of the spiritual colonization and origin of new states and communities.
Corruption is merely a nasty word for the autumn of a people.
The
greatest danger that always hovered over humanity and still hovers over it is
the eruption of madness - which means the eruption of arbitrariness in feeling,
seeing and hearing, the enjoyment of the mind's lack of discipline, the joy in
human unreason. Not truth and certainty are the opposite of the world of the
madman, but the universality and the universal binding force of a faith; in
sum, the non-arbitrary character of judgments... Thus the virtuous intellects
are needed - oh, let me use the most unambiguous word - what is needed is virtuous
stupidity, stolid metronomes for the slow spirit, to make sure that the
faithful of the great shared faith stay together and continue their dance... We
others are the exception and the danger - and we need eternally to be
opposed. - Well, there actually are things to be said in favor of the
exception, provided that it never wants to become the rule.
Suppose
nothing else were "given" as real except our world of desires and
passions, and we could not
get down, or up, to any other "reality" besides the reality of our
drives--for thinking is merely a relation of these drives to each other: is it
not permitted to make the experiment and to ask the question whether this
"given" would not be sufficient for also understanding on the
basis of this kind of thing the so-called mechanistic (or "material")
world?...
In
the end not only is it permitted to make this experiment; the conscience of method
demands it. Not to assume several kinds of causality until the experiment of
making do with a single one has been pushed to its utmost limit (to the point
of nonsense, if I may say so)... The question is in the end whether we really
recognize the will as efficient, whether we believe in the
causality of the will: if we do--and at bottom our faith in this is nothing
less than our faith in causality itself--then we have to make the experiment of
positing causality of the will hypothetically as the only one.
"Will," of course, can affect only "will"--and not
"matter" (not "nerves," for example). In short, one has to
risk the hypothesis whether will does not affect will wherever
"effects" are recognized--and whether all mechanical occurrences are
not, insofar as a force is active in them, will force, effects of will.
Suppose,
finally, we succeeded in explaining our entire instinctive life as the
development and ramification of one basic form of the will--namely, of
the will to power, as my proposition has it... then one would have
gained the right to determine all efficient force univocally as--will
to power. The world viewed from inside... it would be "will to
power" and nothing else.
In
order to sustain the theory of a mechanistic world, therefore, we always have
to stipulate to what extent we are employing two fictions: the concept of motion
(taken from our sense language) and the concept of the atom
(=unity, deriving from our psychical "experience"): the mechanistic
theory presupposes a sense prejudice and a psychological prejudice...
The
mechanistic world is imagined only as sight and touch imagine a world (as
"moved") --so as to be calculable-- thus causal unities are invented,
"things" (atoms) whose effect remains constant (--transference of the
false concept of subject to the concept of the atom)...
If we eliminate
these additions, no things remain but only dynamic quanta, in a relation of
tension to all other dynamic quanta: their essence lies in their relation to
all other quanta, in their "effect" upon the same. The will to power
is not a being, not a becoming, but a pathos --the most elemental fact
from which a becoming and effecting first emerge--
My
idea is that every specific body strives to become master over all space and to
extend its force (--its will to power:) and to thrust back all that resists its
extension. But it continually encounters similar efforts on the part of other
bodies and ends by coming to an arrangement ("union") with those of
them that are sufficiently related to it: thus they then conspire together for
power.
[Anything
which] is a living and not a dying body... will have to be an incarnate will to
power, it will strive to grow, spread, seize, become predominant - not from any
morality or immorality but because it is living and because life simply is
will to power... 'Exploitation'... belongs to the essence of what lives,
as a basic organic function; it is a consequence of the will to power, which is
after all the will to life. Never yield to remorse, but
at once tell yourself: remorse would simply mean adding to the first act of
stupidity a second. from Nietzsche's The Wanderer and his Shadow,s. 323
My
philosophy brings
the triumphant idea of which all other modes of thought will ultimately perish.
It is the great cultivating idea: the races that cannot bear it stand
condemned; those who find it the greatest benefit are chosen to rule.
I
want to teach the idea that gives many the right to erase themselves - the
great cultivating idea..
Everything
becomes and recurs eternally - escape is impossible! - Supposing we could
judge value, what follows? The idea of recurrence as a selective
principle, in the service of strength (and barbarism!!)...
To endure
the idea of the recurrence one needs: freedom from morality; new means
against the fact of pain ( pain conceived as a tool, as the father
of pleasure...); the enjoyment of all kinds of uncertainty, experimentalism, as
a counterweight to this extreme fatalism; abolition of the concept of
necessity; abolition of the "will"; abolition of
"knowledge-in-itself."
Greatest
elevation of the consciousness of strength in man, as he creates the
overman. from The
Will to Power,
"I
teach you the overman. Man is something that shall be overcome. What have
you done to overcome him?
All beings so far have created something beyond themselves; and do you
want to be the ebb of this great flood and even go back to the beasts rather
than overcome man? What is the ape to man? A laughingstock or a painful
embarrassment. And man shall be just that for the overman: a laughingstock or a
painful embarrassment...
Behold, I teach you the overman. The overman is the meaning of the earth. Let
your will say: the overman shall be the meaning of the earth! I beseech
you, my brothers, remain faithful to the earth, and do not believe those
who speak to you of otherworldly hopes! Poison-mixers are they, whether they
know it or not. Despisers of life are they, decaying and poisoned themselves,
of whom the earth is weary: so let them go.
Once the sin against God was the greatest sin; but God died, and these
sinners died with him. To sin against the earth is now the most dreadful
thing, and to esteem the entrails of the unknowable higher than the meaning
of the earth...
What is the greatest experience you can have? It is the hour of the great
contempt. The hour when your happiness, too, arouses your disgust, and even
your reason and your virtue.
The hour when you say, 'What matters my
happiness? It is poverty and filth and wretched contentment. But my
happiness ought to justify existence itself.'
The
hour when you say, 'What matters my reason? Does it crave knowledge as
the lion his food? It is poverty and filth and wretched contentment.'
The hour when you say, 'What matters my
virtue? As yet it has not made me rage. How weary I am of my good and my
evil! All that is poverty and filth and wretched contentment.'
"I
say unto you: one must still have chaos in oneself to be able to give birth to
a dancing star. I say unto you: you still have chaos in yourselves.
Alas, the time is coming when man will no longer
give birth to a star. Alas, the time of the most despicable man is coming, he
that is no longer able to despise himself. Behold, I show you the last man.
Democratic institutions are quarantine arrangements to combat that ancient
pestilence, lust for tyranny: as such they are very useful and very boring
Marriages
contracted from love (so-called love-matches) have error for their father and
need for their mother.