Nietzsche's Moral Philosophy

883 Words4 Pages
Both within Deontological and Utilitarian Ethics, the regulatory ideal implies an objective inherent value which justifies the possibility of making moral judgements. Nietzsche marks a shift in paradigm by reframing the regulatory ideal and implicitly the fundaments of its justification. To better understand what Nietzsche’s Moral Philosophy is, we must also take a brief overview of his Philosophical paradigm. For the purposes of this paper I will only use and highlight particular aspects, as a full, in-depth description would risk a deviation from the point which needs to be made. Nietzsche’s shift is a radical one, in the sense that he rejects both „Ancient” and „Modern Morality”. His rejection is structured as a criticism of „moralities”,…show more content…
For Nietzsche „Each person has a fixed psycho-physical constitution, which defines him as a particular type of person”, in this sense, substance must be understood and as consequence, people’s actions are determined by their non-conscious-type facts. On this basis, he argues the issue of free will. The „moralities” which he criticises, admit the presupposition that the agent is morally responsible because he/she has free will, but Nietzsche argues that for this to be valid, he/she would have to be causa sui (self-caused, or the cause of itself – see Kant). As each person is a type, and his/her type is predetermined, it cannot be self- caused; therefore free will does not exist. Will, for Nietzsche, is basically a raw impulse, the effect of type-facts, an impulse of life underscored by Eros, which is reaffirming and which he calls Will to Power, a concept which I will contextualize later on in this segment. Nietzsche’s critique of „moralities” starts with the issue of free will, and on this basis affirms that they are incompatibilist at their core. On the criterion of necessity universality is claimed (see Kant and religious moralities), but to Nietzsche, given the substance principle, thus the fact that every person is constituted by pre-determined-type facts, a universal morality…show more content…
In other words, what he argues is that these „moralities”, as they demand asceticism, deem the natural impulses as inherently negative and condition people “to despise the very first instincts of life” and “to experience the presupposition of life, sexuality, as something unclean”; and it “looks for the evil principle in what is most profoundly necessary for growth, in severe self-love”. These „moralities” hold and value „Good” through happiness as the end which must be achieved through suppression of the preconditioned impulses: “A man as he ought to be: that sounds to us as insipid as ‘a tree as he ought to be’” “the voluntary is absolutely lacking…everything has been directed along certain lines from the beginning” “one will become only that which one is (in spite of all: that means education, instruction, milieu, chance, and
Open Document