Table of Contents
Friedrich Nietzsche’s “On the Genealogy of Morals” is, at its core, a genealogical study of the origins and evolution of human morals. In this work, Nietzsche examines the historical development of two opposite sets of morality—the “master” morality and the “slave” morality—and argues that the latter has come to dominate modern thought. How has slave morality come to rule modern thought?
Slave Morality
For Nietzsche, the answer is that, in the modern world, morality is the product of Christianity, which he considers to be the modern incarnation of the master morality. Nietzsche suggests that Christianity has come to dominate the modern world because it has fundamentally shifted the balance of power between the dominant and the subordinate classes. This shift in the balance of power between the classes is what ultimately accounts for the development of modern morality. And Nietzsche argues that this shift has occurred because of Christianity’s influence on the ruling classes of Western civilization.
Nietzsche maintains that Christianity is not an entirely new religion, but rather a re-articulation of an older religion, which had already begun to appear in the ancient world before Christianity- namely, a religion that focused on the relationship between the individual and society. In other words, Nietzsche maintains that Christianity is an updated version of an older religion that emphasized the social nature of morality.That older religion is called monotheism.
In the ancient world, monotheism was one of the earliest religions to emerge, and it was this religion that provided the ideological basis for the rise of the Western world and its subsequent dominance. Christianity is, in Nietzsche’s view, the modern incarnation of monotheism.
Courage as a Value
The first section of the work is devoted to an examination of the concept of “good and evil.” Nietzsche observes that, in most cultures, there is a dividing line between those things which are seen as good (e.g., courage, honor, strength) and those things which are seen as evil (e.g., cowardice, weakness). He then goes on to argue that these values are not objective reality but rather are constructs created by human beings. In other words, what one culture deems as good may be seen as evil by another culture. values are relative, not absolute.
Let us think of an example. Consider the concept of courage. In one culture, courage is seen as a value, while in another culture, courage is viewed as evil. However, courage is, in essence, the same in both cultures. This is because courage is the result of a will to power, the ability to overcome fear, and the willingness to act.
Thus, in both cultures, the concept of courage is the same. But what makes courage evil in one culture and good in another is the meaning that the culture gives to courage. In other words, what makes courage evil is the way that one culture defines courage as evil. A modern example of this is the difference between the U.S. and the Soviet Union.
The Soviets consider the U.S. to be evil because they view the U.S. as a threat to their power. The U.S. considers the Soviets to be evil because the Soviets are threatening to the U.S. power. In the first case, the Soviets have defined courage as evil. In the second case, the U.S. has defined courage as evil. But when it comes to each country’s respective actions, courage is seen as good in both countries.
The same courage that is seen as evil in one country is seen as good in another country. In the same way, good and evil are relative. Thus, ‘courage’ cannot be an absolute value in itself. And like couage, other values are determined by the culture in which they are defined, and in the particular context in which they are employed.
A Genealogy of Good and Evil
In the second section, Nietzsche turns his attention to the history of the concepts of “good and evil.” He traces these concepts back to their origins in two different types of morality—the “master” morality and the “slave” morality. The master morality was developed by the strong and powerful (the aristocrats), who defined themselves as good and everyone else as evil. The slave morality, on the other hand, was developed by the weak and powerless (the slaves), who defined themselves as good and everyone else as evil.
Nietzsche argues that it is the slave morality which has come to dominate modern society. Think of how in the modern world, victims are seen as the good and villains as evil. The United States, for example, defines itself as a victim and its enemies as evil.
In Section Three, Nietzsche looks at how altruism fits into all this. He defines altruism as “the unselfish concern for the welfare of others.” Altruism is often thought of as a positive moral virtue but Nietzsche argues that it is actually a destructive force which leads to “nihilism”—the belief that life has no meaning or purpose. In support of this argument, Nietzsche examine various historical figure such as Jesus Christ and Buddha— both of whom preached altruistic philosophies—and observes that their teachings have led to centuries of suffering for millions of people. In other words, altruism is not an expression of concern for the welfare of others but rather a self-destructive force which ultimately leads to the destruction of all values.
Nietzsche concludes that the only way to overcome the destructive force of altruism is to develop a new morality—a morality based on the values of the strong and powerful, not the weak and powerless. In the section on the ‘higher man’ Nietzsche offers a number of examples: the tyrant, the merchant, the warrior and the artist. The tyrant is the person who takes what he wants without regard for the needs of others; the merchant is the person who uses others to make money; the warrior is the person who seeks to conquer other people and the artist is the person who creates works of art which are of value.
These three groups have the potential to destroy the concept of altruism because they show how the strong can achieve success without concern for the welfare of others. However, if the strong are truly to achieve success then they must be willing to subordinate themselves to the needs of others. In the section on ‘higher woman’ Nietzsche offers a similar argument: women are the opposite of the tyrant, the merchant and the warrior. Women are the ones who are willing to give up their own desires and needs in order to take care of the needs of others. They are the ones who will sacrifice their own desires for the good of the family, the community or the nation.
In conclusion, Nietzsche asserts that it is time for humanity to move beyond the slave morality and develop a new set of values which will allow us to create a better future for ourselves. He also advocates for a revaluation of our concept of altruism so that we can see it for what it truly is—a destructive force which causes more harm than good.