Nietzsche Morality

  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Ethics
  3. » Nietzsche Morality

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Reply Wed 14 Apr, 2010 11:31 am
I feel like Nietzsche is going to be my best bet to argue with because all the other philosophers I've mentioned have either been proven wrong many times or have said things that make since, ya know? Would I be too far off If I tried arguing that the warrior morality and the priest morality are in fact experienced by everyone at certain point in life although your ego inside allows to make a choice? If I'm correct then Nietzsche says people possess one of two DIFFERENT kinds of morality. One is the herd priest morality, and the other is the warrior morality. I think if Nietzsche doesn't understand why warrior morality is no more evil than a hawks killing nature and the morality associated with it then he should take into consideration that all hawks are indistinguishable moral wise, whereas human morals are almost never shared with one another yet we can accurately predict the morals (and even possible actions) of someone by the way that they talk and dress. Also, if warrior morality is the true morality then why does every country that perfectly exemplifies this anarchist view fail miserably?
 
amist
 
Reply Wed 14 Apr, 2010 12:20 pm
@CW146428,
Quote:
I think if Nietzsche doesn't understand why warrior morality is no more evil than a hawks killing nature and the morality associated with it then he should take into consideration that all hawks are indistinguishable moral wise, whereas human morals are almost never shared with one another yet we can accurately predict the morals (and even possible actions) of someone by the way that they talk and dress.


Irrelevant, Nietzsche is a Determinist and doesn't believe in free will. He explicitly states this in Beyond Good and Evil.

Quote:
Also, if warrior morality is the true morality then why does every country that perfectly exemplifies this anarchist view fail miserably?


>Countries
>Anarchism

If an anarchist view is being upheld, and a country is 'failing', I think that technically counts as a success.
 
jack phil
 
Reply Wed 14 Apr, 2010 01:29 pm
@CW146428,
Yes, the guy that follows orders is independent, and the man who listens only to god is the herd. Glad no one has proven N wrong!

That being said, I really like N. You just have to turn him upside down. He didn't make any qualms about it, though. See, The Antichrist.
 
Reconstructo
 
Reply Wed 14 Apr, 2010 01:37 pm
@CW146428,
CW146428;151869 wrote:
I feel like Nietzsche is going to be my best bet to argue with because all the other philosophers I've mentioned have either been proven wrong many times or have said things that make since, ya know? Would I be too far off If I tried arguing that the warrior morality and the priest morality are in fact experienced by everyone at certain point in life although your ego inside allows to make a choice? If I'm correct then Nietzsche says people possess one of two DIFFERENT kinds of morality. One is the herd priest morality, and the other is the warrior morality. I think if Nietzsche doesn't understand why warrior morality is no more evil than a hawks killing nature and the morality associated with it then he should take into consideration that all hawks are indistinguishable moral wise, whereas human morals are almost never shared with one another yet we can accurately predict the morals (and even possible actions) of someone by the way that they talk and dress. Also, if warrior morality is the true morality then why does every country that perfectly exemplifies this anarchist view fail miserably?


Nietzsche is a deep guy, but he also lived a detached life. He does brilliantly call out the hypocrisy and cowardice in much religion, but at the same time...he lived according to spiritual ideals not so different from Christianity's, but w/o the hypocrisy. He's something like Luther, except he's a radical humanist (?) (He probably wouldn't like the term...) He himself didn't care about money, didn't conquer anyone, just walked, read, thought, had excellent manners. Disliked anti-Semites, nationalism, beer. What a complex character, our dear Herr Nietzsche. In my mind, he was at his best in Beyond Good and Evil, in his attack on the prejudices of philosophers. Smile
 
ValueRanger
 
Reply Wed 14 Apr, 2010 02:39 pm
@CW146428,
Relative to a cow, humans are born with a greater range of base-to-high behavior potential, genetically imprinted/encoded (nature vs. nurture dialectic) from one generation to the next. One can easily apply "warrior" behaviors to base, visceral actions, while "priestly" can be mapped to higher evolved states (Maslow maps aesthetics in this higher range, so the myriad of religions that propagate around the world, have their counterpart in essential needs, such as visceral, physiological values, in the lower section of the hierarchy. Compare to Kundalini Yoga's Chakras, and Spiral Dynamics).

Nietzsche is simplifying a myriad of potential behavior matrices that reduces multidimensional probabilities, to linear A-or-B (your "warrior" to "priest" range). When you dumb down, and accurately map the six degrees of separation between the poles, you can make more money, and translate more sustainable value as an author.

The IMF can do the same, while taking away the higher ranges of understanding, and thereby keep you dumbed down to their monetary tracts that skew value exchange, heavily in their favor. Hint: this unbalancing behavior is exactly the kind of unethical entrenchment that needs to be unseated, therefore, educating the ignorant to higher understanding is paramount to avoiding massive collapses of civilizations.
 
 

 
  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Ethics
  3. » Nietzsche Morality
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.02 seconds on 04/05/2020 at 07:34:26