"The Thousand and One Goals" -- Thus Spoke Zarathustra

  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Nietzsche
  3. » "The Thousand and One Goals" -- Thus Spoke Zarathustra

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Reply Sat 12 Dec, 2009 02:15 pm
[quote=]Evaluation is creation: hear this, you creators! Valuation itself is of all valued things the most valuable treasure.
Through valuation only is there value, and without valuation the nut of existence would be hollow. Hear this, you creators!
Change of values-that is a change of creators. Whoever must be a creator always destroys. (Z, On the Thousand and One Goals)[/quote]

What this means is that the system of valuation is the most important aspect to creation. Thus, the ultimate creators are those that can define the limits and possibilities of value for then there is a group that affirms the will to power of those who define the basis of valuation within a culture. The peoples who create these new foundational values destroy the old valuations through the process of revaluing of values. Old idols are hit with hammers to test if they will still stand.

[quote=]First, peoples were creators; and only in later times, individuals. Truly, the individuals himself is still the latest creation.
Once peoples hung a tablet of the good over themselves. Love which would rule and love which would obey have together created such tablets. (Z, On the Thousand and One Goals)[/quote]

Before the dawn of modern civilization and its early days of existence, groups of people banded together and created valuations for the whole. Goals were shared and the well being of the group was put above that of any individual. The shared love gained through finding sustenance for life wrote the foundations for valuation in society. What worked for the group became the exemplar of values.

[quote=]Joy in the herd is older than joy in the "I": and as long as the good conscience is identified with the herd, only the bad conscience says: "I". (Z, On the Thousand and One Goals)[/quote]

With the success through the proliferation of the herd, the group sensed as share sense of joy. But then the bad conscience that tended to resent the group for their lack of share effort in the projects of the group. Through this resentment of the lesser, the bad conscience began to take hold.

[quote=]Truly, in the cunning "I", the loveless one, that seeks its advantage in the advantage of many-that is not the origin of the herd, but its going under. (Z, On the Thousand and One Goals)[/quote]
Thus, these resenting individuals began to use their advantages in order to assert their own will to power; therefore, this asserting individuals began to divide the group in a whole, and others began asserting their own individual will to power creating the makings of an individual-based evaluation model. Now the unified herd of a people is split into factions vying for collected power by unifying under specific values, to which individual can add their affirmation. Through this process of affirmation and negation of value things receive their ranks through the yeas and nays of the jumbled herd.

[quote=]Good and evil have always been created by lovers and creators. The fire of love glows in the names of all the virtues and the fire of wrath.
Zarathustra has seen many lands and many peoples: Zarathustra has found no greater power on earth than the works of the lovers-"good" and "evil" are their names.
Truly this power of praising and blaming is a monster. Tell me, O brothers, who will subdue it for me? Tell me, who will throw a yoke upon the thousand necks of this beast? (Z, On the Thousand and One Goals)[/quote]
Nietzsche is spelling out the beginnings of praising and blaming that end up spelling out goods and evils. When valuation was shared fully by peoples as a whole, things that subsisted people were praised and things that brought harm to the group were blamed for strife, which in turn became goods and evils. But then as the individuals began to assert their will to power over the people, things became good and evil based on individual perspectives, and since these perspectives are often contradictory, the must be affirmed or denied by as many people as possible to become ultimate values. Thus, goals often contradict and they only way to overcome this in the name of something better is through the affirmation of a value that unifies humanity towards one goal that is shared by all individuals.

[quote=]A thousand goals have there been so far, for a thousand peoples have there been. Only the yoke for the thousand necks is still lacking: the one goal is lacking. As yet humanity has no goal.
But tell me, my brothers, if the goal of humanity is still lacking, is there not also still lacking-humanity itself?- (Z, On the Thousand and One Goals)[/quote]

Nietzsche is highlighting the fact that there have been countless goals that have been created by individuals, but these individuals have not conjured up a shared goal. In the marketplace of values, no one goal can be settled upon due to the fact that so many affirmed and negated values are contradictory, and thus, not allowing for there to be any agreement made to which are to be valued over all the other potentialities.

While the goal of living the best possible life would seem to make a logical potentiality for the shared goal, too many people live their lives affirming a life in a different place and after the current one. They live their lives as they are told in order to reap their benefits that they are promised if they do so after this life comes to an end. Thus, they affirm another life over the current and negate the value of living the best possible life in this world. Thus, even the most basic will to power shared by life manages to be negated by living beings themselves.
 
Reconstructo
 
Reply Sat 12 Dec, 2009 04:35 pm
@Theaetetus,
Tricky question:

If a person derives more personal pleasure from a life of fantasy and escapism than from a life of engagement, is it noble for him to take the path that offers him less pleasure?

Of course the word "pleasure" is by no means simple. We trade sensual pleasures for the pleasure of self-regard all the time. For instance, by not stealing or by eating with moderation.

This is coming from a true fan of Nietzsche, for whom Nietzsche is easily one of the most important, if not most important, philosopher. Did not Nietzsche himself live the life of a dreamer, writing books that fewer and fewer people read? He began to describe himself as being born posthumously. He's such a strange strange case.

I agree that the affirmation of particular values is a central question. And this is why rhetoric is more of the essence than logic, words being the tools we use in the pursuit of values -- which are manifested themselves in words. Truth is indeed a mobile army of metaphors.

Will a humanity that does not believe in afterlife accept a common goal? Or does the lack of an afterlife make us hedonist, trading our finite time for as much pleasure as possible. Shaw tackles this in Back to Methuselah. Our short life spans plus a rejection of the afterlife gives many of us a every-man-for-himself attitude.

respectfully
recon
 
Quinn phil
 
Reply Sat 12 Dec, 2009 04:56 pm
@Theaetetus,
Quote:
If a person derives more personal pleasure from a life of fantasy and escapism than from a life of engagement, is it noble for him to take the path that offers him less pleasure?


I, not having much experience with life at all, am humble even through saying this: I believe that an enjoyable life amongst "real" friends is more satisfying then a dreamworld alone. No matter what you dream, and how you dream it, you will come across real-world problems. First that comes to mind would be my family's dissapointment in my not 'making something worthy of myself.' It takes a strong mind not to ponder on outside thoughts, especially if they concern you in a negative way.

Some other things that will inevitably hit you: Means of comfort, employment, bills, loneliness, hygiene, survival (etc...). Basically, I think we're here so that we can interact with eachother to form new things. Whether it be architects forming new buildings and designs; Philosopher forming new ideas; or Chefs forming new delicacies. One who stays in isolation, attempting to escape the world, can only observe and build upon what is with himself.

But here's another interesting thing, that sort of just hit me. When you attempt to go to sleep at night, you start thinking of the world differently then you do when you're awake and around friends. For example, if your dog died, and everybody had witnessed him die, you would try to be tough around your friends. You might cry to show that you're in pain. Then you do whatever it is you do when a dog dies, like bury him.

However, when you're alone and in bed: The lights are turned off, your friends are gone. It's just you and your mind. Your thoughts are the only thing that can keep you occupied, so you begin thinking more predominately then when you were awake, and able to see things. You start thinking about all the good times you had with your dog, and how he began showing signs of dying. This is when you really become sad, when you're by yourself. When noone else is around to share mourning with.

I believe that this is why Nietzsche is such a great thinker. He didn't have very much to occupy himself, accept for his mind. The same way we are the moments before we fall to sleep.
 
Reconstructo
 
Reply Sat 12 Dec, 2009 05:13 pm
@Theaetetus,
Right, and therefore the metaphor "dreamer" is appropriate, although one may indeed dream about reality, about the reality beneath reality.

Personally, being happily married, I would never deny the value of a life of interaction. Of course it should be noted that Nietzsche was extremely cultured. His spent his life in the company of both living and dead brilliant minds/hearts (to include the musical element and those whose value to us is not so much their concept as their emotional disposition..)
 
Theaetetus
 
Reply Sat 12 Dec, 2009 07:08 pm
@Reconstructo,
Reconstructo;110678 wrote:
Tricky question:

If a person derives more personal pleasure from a life of fantasy and escapism than from a life of engagement, is it noble for him to take the path that offers him less pleasure?

Of course the word "pleasure" is by no means simple. We trade sensual pleasures for the pleasure of self-regard all the time. For instance, by not stealing or by eating with moderation

Well, I think this is where the doctrine of the eternal recurrence comes into play. The individual seeks joy in the affirming the moment in eternity. Thus, the affirmation becomes the hardest idea because it doesn't just involve affirming the moment, but everything that occurs before, and everything that will occur after.

Reconstructo wrote:

.

This is coming from a true fan of Nietzsche, for whom Nietzsche is easily one of the most important, if not most important, philosopher. Did not Nietzsche himself live the life of a dreamer, writing books that fewer and fewer people read? He began to describe himself as being born posthumously. He's such a strange strange case.


What you have is a genius that the could see into the psyche of modern times struggling with this idea of an infinite life and the idea of the eternal life--they thought that we only have one and in the grand scope of things, do not really matter.

Reconstructo wrote:

I agree that the affirmation of particular values is a central question. And this is why rhetoric is more of the essence than logic, words being the tools we use in the pursuit of values -- which are manifested themselves in words. Truth is indeed a mobile army of metaphors.

Values cannot be voiced in logic. Because of the way logic works, life denying values can also be affirmed as a set of propositions leads to a conclusion.

Reconstructo wrote:

Will a humanity that does not believe in afterlife accept a common goal? Or does the lack of an afterlife make us hedonist, trading our finite time for as much pleasure as possible. Shaw tackles this in Back to Methuselah. Our short life spans plus a rejection of the afterlife gives many of us a every-man-for-himself attitude.


I think Nietzsche would say yes, but for all the wrong reasons. He believed in Lamarckism, the idea that intelligence, character, reason, and the such, were passed down the genetic line. Since this is not really true, there would need to be a revaluation of the idea of a genetic line. Without that sort of value, I wonder what other purpose there would be (a genetic line could also be the transformation of valuations over time).
 
Reconstructo
 
Reply Sat 12 Dec, 2009 07:18 pm
@Theaetetus,
I too noticed his Lamarckism. I think he over-estimated the truth of "blood tells." I completely agree that values cannot be voiced in logic. Instead we use rhetoric/logic in defense of these non-logical values.

What I love about Nietzsche is how well he examined motive in relation to theory. He suggested that we look to the ethic of a philosopher in order to understand the rest of him. Just as Marx might say "follow the money." Nietzsche perhaps would say "follow the sense of power."

Nietzsche's conception of truth is so radical that I think not everyone gets it. It's dynamic and ironic down to its bones. Would you agree? Or that's how I interpret it....
 
jgweed
 
Reply Sun 13 Dec, 2009 08:01 am
@Theaetetus,
"Joy in the herd is older than joy in the "I": and as long as the good conscience is identified with the herd, only the bad conscience says: "I"."

As long as herd values, one of the strengths of which is their ancient origin so as to become almost natural, are allowed to dominate, they will tend to suppress any kind of heroic individualism that dares to struggle to find itself.
One of the more subtle ways the herd defends its way of life is to define psychological health in such a way that a questioning individual questions himself and his questioning. In conjunction with this passage, one should remember N's aphorisim: "He who thinketh differently, goeth voluntarily to the madhouse."
 
Theaetetus
 
Reply Sun 13 Dec, 2009 11:52 am
@Reconstructo,
Reconstructo;110725 wrote:

What I love about Nietzsche is how well he examined motive in relation to theory. He suggested that we look to the ethic of a philosopher in order to understand the rest of him. Just as Marx might say "follow the money." Nietzsche perhaps would say "follow the sense of power."

For someone that was rather unpolitical, N stumbled on some great truisms for the relationships of power. His interpretation of the psyche and its relationship to power.

Reconstructo wrote:
Nietzsche's conception of truth is so radical that I think not everyone gets it. It's dynamic and ironic down to its bones. Would you agree? Or that's how I interpret it....


I agree totally. He denies an absolute objective truth, but seems to suggest a sort of objective truth. It reminds me of Heraclitus and the idea that you cannot step in the same river twice. While there is no absolute objective truth, there is an objective truth that is fluid and changes as its components rearrange.
 
jgweed
 
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2009 08:48 am
@Theaetetus,
One of N's insights was to attempt to explain everything as Will to Power (and not just in a political sense). To be consistent he explained philosophy and different philosophies as examples, including his own.
This view would seem to imply that there is a group WTP as well as an individual WTP, and that both manifest themselves in many different ways when viewed from many different perspectives, and that these strivings often found themselves in conflict.
 
Theaetetus
 
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2009 09:41 am
@Theaetetus,
It seems that N praises the herd when it acts in unison for some goal higher than itself. But N also shows strong disdain for the pettiness and and unnecessary competitiveness within the herd. Then there is also the flipside of that as well that the conformity and laziness of individuals is criticized--although they are needed to an extent to form herds in the first place.

What N exceeded at is finding these contradictions between the self and the herd in the actions and decisions of both, and then exploring the psychology of the conflict.
 
 

 
  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Nietzsche
  3. » "The Thousand and One Goals" -- Thus Spoke Zarathustra
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.02 seconds on 12/08/2021 at 07:52:16