In the notebook(1) excerpts published as The Will to Power Nietzsche describes nihilism as ‘ambiguous’ in that it can be symptomatic of either strength or weakness. Nietzsche claims that nihilism is a necessary step in the transition to a revaluation of all values. Passive nihilism is characterised by a weak will, and active nihilism by a strong will. Nietzsche emphasises that nihilism is merely a means to an end, and not an end in itself. Nihilism, according to Nietzsche, is the most extreme form of pessimism.
In this respect, morality and Socratism are the expressions of a vital drive analogous to those which give birth to the figures of Apollo and Dionysus, as they are both connected to the metaphysical inquiry into the nature of things. Still, the Socratic worldview fails in seeing its dependency and connections to these drives, and thus fails to see its connection to life and its irrational kernel . According to Nietzsche, this mindset is the result of a pathology, as it gives too much merit to appearances while it excludes the Will from its view, making the former absolute and arranging them in a rational but insincere way. Socratism is then made of the same substance of the drives which inspire tragedy insofar as it is an expression of life, but, in both a literal and a metaphysical sense, it is the result of a sick form of this substance – it presents a metaphysical view of reality, just like art, but at the same time causes life to retreat within the safe walls of reasonableness, as by contrast art pushes the person to transcend them . In some respect, we can see here one of the seeds of Nietzsche’s later intuitions, and I believe there is no harm in employing them to elucidate this point.
Critiques of Kantian moral philosophy on the basis of emptiness come from a variety of thinkers and from many different schools of thought. For example, Mill claims the universal law permits commonly immoral behavior and can only become consistent by resorting to Utilitarianism. ‘‘All he shows is that the consequences of their universal adoption would be such as no one would choose to incur’’ (Mill.Uti.162). Mill criticizes Kant for failing to identify ‘‘the actual duties of morality’’ (Mill.Uti.162). Mill’s critique derives from the Introduction of Utilitarianism, where he makes the claim that Kantian ethics, and all a priori abstract concept of ethics, derive from first principles (Kant’s the CI) that go unstated, leaving an actual description of action as elusive, and thus the prescriptive ethical determinations derived from the CI unable to inform action (Mill,
Will to power and political thought If we are to understand Nietzsche’s important contribution to political thought , we must examine the way he under stands the close link between immorality and idea of human betterment. Nietzsche as is often mentioned mistrusted a tragic worldview because he considered man in a significant ethical struggle usually ending in ruin or profound disappointment. He does not espouse a conventional morality defined by the antimony good/bad, but proposes a way of living ( an ethics) that is intended to better the human condition. However he sees this proposal as a rife with difficulties, making life as such a trial of suffering and pain and does not see an ultimate inevitable redemption for man but rather ultimate
While it seems as though Nietzsche explicitly denies the existence of free will, he often appeals to the notion of freedom, especially when he discloses his own ideal of humankind. According to Nietzsche, the primary force that characterizes all life is the will to power, which means that everything that exists does so with the goal of self-aggrandizement. For the purposes of this paper, the focus will be on Nietzsche’s view on what free will constitutes and his argumentation against it as well as any potential flaws in his arguments. To Nietzsche, free will refers to a concept completely different than that of its conventional definition. Not only that, he thought that the way this term was exploited in society corrupted its meaning.
Consequently, Hegel contends that Kant’s principle of morality remains merely formal because it has not justified the required content for instantiating the CI. Facing the narrow emptiness charge and broad emptiness charge, Kant’s defenders have clarified the validity of Kant’s morality by using different approaches by Kantian formalists and Kantian inspired non-formalists. The formalists defend a version of interpretation that holds that the moral law (mostly CI1)
An attempt to propose a universal moral law is invariably a denial of the fullest expression of man’s elementary vital energies. As a consequence he condemned Christianity and Judaism as worse offenders because they are both contrary to man’s basic nature and thus produced what he called botched and bungled lives and debilitates man. Hence he proposes a morality that is not based on God, but allows man to realise himself and be free of any religious caprices. He therefore proposes twofold idea of good and evil, and that is, the master morality and the slave morality. 3.3.1 Master Morality (Herren-Moral): The master morality for Nietzsche is a representation of the ascending line in man’s development, in which man seeks the attainment of the fullest level and the highest goal of his personality and the realization of the fullest potentials of the human tendency and state.
Kant argued that it was Hume's philosophy, flinched from the "dogmatism". However, in the changed context and something unlike Hume, Kant had just sense a source of moral norms. The changed context consisted in the fact that Kant does not ask how to justify all value judgments in the same way, rather than separately dealing with the so-called morality in the narrow
The goal of deontology is to find a categorical, unconditional imperative that will enable the creation of universal laws of nature, legislated by rational and free beings. The categorical imperative is formal, while the substance is decided by the person. The idea is that by a process of reasoning, one can check his intuitions and desires and see if they can become a general rule for moral behavior. Kant bases his theory on three main concepts: the good will, the duty and the law. The moral worth of an action is measured in its intention.
In his work Daybreak, Nietzsche challenges our understanding of what constitutes the self. Instead he offers a rather provocative understanding of what constitutes the self. For one to be able to understand Nietzsche’s view of the self, one has to interpret his concept of drives. So, what are drives? Properties attributed to drives show that they are unconscious entities that seek “nourishment” (to be explained below) to manifest themselves to