Born during a time of great cultural transformation, German native Friedrich Nietzsche grew to become a remarkably well known philosopher throughout the world (Wicks, Robert). Living during the European transition from blindly believing in Christianity to blindly believing in science, Nietzsche believed that humans would, in their necessity for finding something exceptionally meaningful to fill the void created by the lack of a deity, turn to violent nationalism and other such dangerously biased ideologies (SparkNotes Editors). He labels this as nihilism, for yes indeed traditional concepts no longer mattered to the new sprung society, however Nietzsche is describing a secular nihilism, not an absolute nihilism, and therefore he perpetuates his own preset ideology of believing in something greater than what there is (SparkNotes Editors). Nietzsche developed many influential ideas during his journey to his Overman concept: will to power, subjectivity of truth, eternal recurrence, and going beyond good and evil (Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm). At the same time, he takes more of an attacking stance against the religion of Christianity, saying that it promotes the rejection of life on Earth, as it promotes the devaluation of life, the restriction and regulation of the pleasures of life, and the resentment of those who do not follow and accept the prior concepts; he believes this due to the nature of the belief in an afterlife, a superior life beyond this one, and Christianity’s adopted nature of rejecting this world and the rejection of those who embrace it (The Antichrist). Nietzsche was raised into a Christian family though, as his father was a Lutheran pastor (Wicks, Robert). In his early twenties during his academic studies, he studied and rejected his originally indoctrinated faith (Wicks, Robert), but some remnants followed, as is visible in his concept of the Overman (Thus Spoke Zarathustra). The Overman is Nietzsche’s new image for humanity, believing that humans are not the final destination, but just the bridge between animal and Overman (Thus Spoke Zarathustra). Nietzsche made many valid points regarding humanity’s collective idiosyncrasies and perpetual habits, yet he mislabels nihilism, and still clings to the subconsciously indoctrinated necessity to believe in a greater spiritual power.
Will to power; this is Nietzsche’s main driving force behind practically everything he states. He explains that the will to power is the will for either independence or for domination; the will to hold power over oneself or over others. The will to power is his central basis for the actions, behaviors, and mannerisms of humanity, “This will is stronger than the will to survive, as martyrs willingly die for a cause if they feel that associating themselves with that cause gives them greater power, and it is stronger than the will to sex, as monks willingly renounce sex for the sake of a greater cause” (SparkNotes Editors). Nietzsche has a deeper reasoning behind the will to power, as he views the world and the universe as in a constantly dynamic state of flux, and so therefore in conjuncture with his ideas of subjective truths, the ever constantly changing wills therefore change realities for the individual as well (Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm).
Nietzsche expresses the insightful statement that truths are subjective based upon the perception of the individual. While some critics argue that Nietzsche claims that there are many truths and just many ways to perceive the truths (SparkNotes), most will state that Nietzsche denounces universal truths, claiming them to be perspective based and then accepted by the individual, and then the subjectively created truths can be further perceived in a multitude of ways by more individuals, a standpoint easily supported by his statement: “You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist” (BrainyQuote). Nietzsche believed that accepting a concept of objective truth would only continue the ancient ways of humanity, in which humans rule over each other in conforming, corrupt, destructive ways, and so therefore claimed all forces supporting objective truth, be them of any orient, to be life denying (his main argumentative complaint against Christianity) and he diametrically opposed them. His views on subjective realities formulated his arguments against blind nationalism, dogmatic religion, expansive militarism, and other forms of public manipulation and human oppression. Yet, denouncing nationalism and religion diametrically opposed accepted truths by the society Nietzsche found himself absorbed in. Therefore, his claim evolved into another thesis which questioned the very fabrics of morality and ethics at their cores (Beyond Good And Evil).
Nietzsche wrote an entire book titled Beyond Good and Evil, the second essay in a chain, where he explains his desire to revaluate morality, and thus be able to go beyond the concepts of “good” and “evil”, and root them back to the will to power. Nietzsche argued that morality is not definitive, and is ever changing just as individuals are ever changing, just as the universe is always changing. Not only that moralities are ever changing, but they are constantly interpreted in a multitude of different ways, and that the moralities can be traced back to his doctrines of the will to power over others and oneself. For example; murder can be in part traced back to the will to have complete power over another person, while at the same time it can be the will to power oneself to do such an act. So, Nietzsche debates the concepts of good and bad things, based on two fundamental concepts: truths are subjective, and humans have an innate will to gain power over themselves and others. Based upon these concepts, Nietzsche realized that since the public would need to eventually rally behind a morality code, and with the morality of Christianity nullified in his mind, he saw it fit for the intellectuals to conceptualize the future; “All sciences are now under the obligation to prepare the ground for the future task of the philosopher, which is to solve the problem of value, to determine the true hierarchy of values” (BrainyQuote). This however opens another potentially critical hole into his philosophies; when truths are personally subjective, what right does anyone have to decide what the morality rules are, when morality is itself subjective and not definitive? “There are no facts, only interpretations” (BrainyQuote) Nietzsche once said, so therefore he would truly not have any right to impose his philosophies on the world like all those before him whom he saw as wrong. For the comprehension capabilities in a more modern context; abortion is viewed as both good and evil by members of society, and can be derived back to different wills. Pro-choice supporters would claim that it is the woman’s will to power her own body and her own life, while pro-life supporters would claim that it is the unfair and lethally oppressive powering over an unborn child, and by others the will of the individual to place themselves above the realms of power from the natural world and the traditional regulation of humanity. The doctrine of subjective truths therefore justifies that none of the listed views or views not mentioned are the correct views, the only views, or the views which must be accepted and abided by everyone. So thus, would Nietzsche’s views dictate that he could not impose his will unto the world? The doctrines of the will to power can be used to argue against such a presumption, as Nietzsche has the personally acceptable ability to attempt to make his philosophies the accepted view of the world, as he may exercise the will to power others with his philosophy, yet it appears to be a more noble cause on his part. Nietzsche’s philosophy, if indoctrinated into the place of the philosophies and standards of his day, would open society into a realm of acceptance for opposing opinions to a degree in which individuals in society would openly admit that this is not a black and white constant world, but one in a dynamically altering shade of grey with no definitive truths which are constantly transforming into new stages (Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm).
Living during the time when science was finally being accepted by the public, and the totalitarian version of Christianity was being slowly discarded by the public (Wicks, Robert), Nietzsche sought to further eliminate the old ways which denied the ideologies he believed in: loving life, living it to the fullest, denying good and evil, denying absolute truths (SparkNotes Editors). Nietzsche had a secular version of nihilism, as in his mind it only applied to religion due to the fact that when science replaced god, it did not come along with a new code of morality, and thus he correctly feared that people would turn to nationalism or racism to feed their need to devote themselves to something, and he knew that this would lead to the same vile acts that were once committed by Christians, now committed by nations of people. This premonition lead him to develop his concept of the Overman, this idea that humans will become some ultra-being, a creature that has a superior conscience and unrestricted instincts, as he valued natural instincts, and despised the way religions and governments suppress natural instincts under their collective will to conform people to its desires. Nietzsche believed that the Overman would be an individual who accepted everything in life, and viewed this path leading to personal betterment, and that these events, both viewed as good and bad today, would continue repeating forever, in a theory called eternal recurrence. Eternal recurrence is the idea that all things will repeat, like the old saying “History repeats itself” except that Nietzsche does not simply mean that the same exact event will happen over and over again, but rather the mentalities behind actions will perpetuate the class of actions, along with the repetition of uncontrollable factors that repeat in a general sense and have no way of definite prevention or elimination without a complete circumvention of all things natural and real. So Nietzsche believed that his conceptualized Overman would be the best route for society to take, eliminating nihilism, and adopting a life-affirming philosophy of idealistic optimism towards all that life could give out (SparkNotes Editors). But, Nietzsche fails to come to the real conclusion of absolute nihilism. Nihilism is the belief that nothing matters, and so absolute nihilism is the belief that literally nothing matters. What a religion says doesn’t matter. What a government says doesn’t matter. What people think doesn’t matter. Nothing matters on the grand scale, because in the end we all reach the same end, death, and nobody knows what happens after that. People speculate, people hypothesize, people pick and choose what to believe, but in the end it’s all a mystery and so whatever anyone says or believes or decides doesn’t matter in the end except (and this is critical in understanding Nietzsche’s fault) what matters to the individual. This means that what the individual believes, what the individual thinks, what the individual values is most certainly important, because those things all greatly influence the life of the individual. Nietzsche tries to denounce nihilism in its entirety (SparkNotes Editors), and replace it with another ideology for the masses to emcrace (Thus Spoke Zarathustra), but he fails to see that nothing matters at all to an individual except for what the individual believes matters. Something Nietzsche could have used to help him develop even further in his philosophy would have been if he had realized that people can and will believe in and value whatever they desire, and no one can change that fact. One might be able to change just what the individual believes, but not that people will choose what to believe if given the opportunity, and even if the belief is indoctrinated into the person, they will spin off their own concepts of the belief, and make their own beliefs, because that is what people do. Nihilism states that it doesn’t matter what the people think, because it truly doesn’t.
Nietzsche could have developed his concepts and passed them onto society more easily if instead of rejecting nihilism completely, he took it to a universal and not a secular level, then nobody who understood the concept of universal nihilism would blindly follow any potential deity, and nobody would blindly accept what their political party would spew as rhetoric, because people would realize that nothing matters unless they make it matter, so they would have actually thought and analyzed what was given to them and seen exactly what it was that they valued. Had the world embraced a concept of universal nihilism, it is quite likely that both world wars would have been avoided, as not only would the public have opposed the causes in the beginning, but the governing bodies involved would have most likely been far less prone to become angry at each other for being of this or that creed, or because a person from that country killed another from a different state. Yet, had Nietzsche’s concept of Overman taken over the public conscience, then humans would be far more concerned with personal betterment than conquering others, however it all comes down to the fact that neither of these things happened, and it is doubtful that humanity will ever reach these points or any points like them. Even the man who resented biased, blind faith held onto his own self-made biased, blind faith created by his subconscious mind; an entity that he was almost undoubtedly unaware of; the driving entity behind everything that anyone and everyone does.
Nietzsche was brought up in the Christian faith (Wicks, Robert), and so an imprint was left on his subconscious mind; believe in something greater than this life, something bigger and better and constantly out of reach but so close to grasp that one can almost touch it before it slips away back into the black foggy haze. But what is this haze? It is the subconscious mind trying to protect itself and the conscious mind from colliding, because it has a system in place to entertain the little, meager conscious mind with the things it desires. Yet had Nietzsche just realized that his whole conscious mind only accounted for ten percent of his entire mind, and had he realized that he could actually link up his conscious and subconscious minds to see what was going on behind the curtain, and to grasp true reality, Nietzsche would have seen that his Overman principle was just another manifestation of a god. “Faith: not wanting to know what is true” he wrote (BrainyQuote). We are all god, as the subconscious mind manifests itself in the form of a deity or multiple deities that either it created itself or it adopted from the outside world. But since we are all god, none of us are god to anyone but ourselves, and therefore we make our own morals, create our own ethics, invent our own rules, set our own values, and we all create lives based upon our own dogma. If humans would take this concept into consideration, then there could theoretically be a peaceful world. However in a realistic sense, humans would again prove to be incurably corruptible, and thus take the will to power over others and the will to power over themselves to a whole new dimension of destruction; realizing what is happening, why the person is doing it, and still deciding to do it. Truly, this is a dangerous world as is, and any drastic change adopted either with this concept or those of Nietzsche could drastically alter humanity for the better or for the worse, but like all evaluations of matters similar to this, we simply do not and cannot know.
Thus Spoke Zarathustra is Nietzsche’s great fiction depicting his Overman principle. The plot is about the character Zarathustra, symbolic of Nietzsche himself, coming to philosophical realizations while self-secluded in the mountains (which Nietzsche also did) and then trying to spread the ideas to society. Zarathustra first says to himself after encountering a Saint he meets in the forest who condemns humanity “Could it be possible! This old saint in the forest hath not yet heard of it, that God is dead!” (This Spoke Zarathustra 21). He then proceeds to gain a few followers while attempting to re-educate the public from the now needless worship and belief in a deity when they now can worship and believe in themselves, and in the process gain personal power over themselves and infinitely becoming better people.
Nietzsche explains that the Overman is not an ignorant state, but an acceptance state that bad things will happen in life. The truths about good and evil are subjective in the eye of the beholder, and therefore the goal of Overman would be to accept those things less favorable in the public eye and view them as regular aspects of life. Therefore they cause positive outcomes for someone who accepts such aspects of life to be eternally recurring and decide to have the effects make the most positive imprints on the Overman. Even when the bleakest of events in the eyes of most of Nietzsche’s contemporaries occur, Nietzsche’s Overman would embrace these events and grow from them. Essentially, Nietzsche’s Overman is the ideal human who will take every circumstance endure it, and accept that like events will happen multiple times in the future and most importantly, allow personal growth and resilience to develop from the events, molding the Overman into a stronger, more enduring individual with new self-proclaimed values and ideals with which he can help better himself and others (Thus Spoke Zarathustra).
As one of the most revolutionary and influential philosophers within the past two centuries, Friedrich Nietzsche deserves substantial merit and respect for his research into humanity and its mannerisms, conversely Nietzsche must be carefully analyzed and understood to thoroughly comprehend where he went astray in his philosophies and the startling conclusion it leaves humanity. Nietzsche indeed had many valuably notable theses regarding humanity: eternal recurrence, subjectivity of truth, the state of good and evil; but there are certainly his points of failure as well: rejection of nihilism, and faith in the Overman. Indeed even his doctrine on the will to power is faulted, incurably and irreversibly. It has been proven throughout all of human history that the concept of eternal recurrence is evident in a generalized sense of events from the significance on a global scale to individually significant events. For example: genocide has been recorded time after wretched time throughout all known history; from the Canaanites to the Syrians; and occurrences continually reappear in individual lives. Mindsets behind ideas continue the perpetual mannerisms and idiosyncrasies of human beings. Nietzsche claims that the entire concept of truth is in itself a false conception, due to the fact that truth is a perception. Truths are evidently subjective perspectives from the individual’s own observation, and therefore cannot be claimed to be absolute, universal, or any other euphemistic term to describe a perspective which someone wishes to impose upon the world without substantially irrefutable evidence. Due to this understanding, the biased terms of good and evil are thus comprehensibly also neutralized and nullified as objective. Rather it is seen that good and evil should be objected by the societies, and rather accepting the concepts that moralities are subjective ethical decisions based upon the perceptive, and often narrow sighted, observations of the individual. Good and evil should therefore not be taught to the masses as the simplistic notion that the world is a black and white environment with no need for discernment, but rather that good and evil are to be decided by the individual based upon the well researched and informed observations of the world, life, and humanity. Granted, certain concepts should be conserved for the promotion of a better world, but truly only the notion of acceptance and love should be in any sense enforced, as it endorses the overall wellbeing of all people and the inclusion of all in society-made rights. This is where Nietzsche began to fail. He automatically rejected the concepts of nihilism, failing to begin to recognize the true potential power it would have on humanity. Due to his rejection of nihilism, he invented his own impossibly idealistic figure, a new god-like superlative image to become, to follow, and to conform to be as close to as possible. This creation became his god, the product of his own subconscious mind to perpetuate what had been imposed on him from birth: the belief in something beyond what is truly here, directly contradicting his statement, “I conjure you, my brethren, remain true to the earth, and believe not those who speak unto you of superearthly hopes! Poisoners are they, whether they know it or not” (Thus Spoke Zarathustra 22). Nietzsche justified his Overman based upon his principle of the will to power. Nietzsche is not wrong when he traced back every action and desire back to the will to power, however he is irrevocably incorrect when claims that everything is a product of the will to power. Nietzsche was somehow able to draw every action made by humanity back to the will to power, back to the desire to either power oneself or to power others. It is completely sensible, but is it correct? The fact of the matter is, the will to power is another example of perspective truths. The truly ground breaking, foundational reality is that anything can be construed, manipulated, and traced back to anything. It is completely possible to read the exact same event in two polar opposite views. So certainly Nietzsche could trace everything back to the will to power, but that isn’t the right answer. This is his ultimate downfall, humanity’s ultimate downfall: there is no right answer.
Humanity is always concerned with knowledge, so obsessed with knowing the truths and facts, but the only truth is that there are no truths. In the end, it is all theoretical. Religious speculation is just that: speculation. Now certainly it can be argued that science has more definitive proof for its theories, but they are still theories at their base foundations. The theist does not know that there is a deity. The chemist does not know that there are glutons holding an atom together. Mathematically and theoretically speaking, it all works out, but they are theoretical. It is simply not possible at this point in time to answer knowingly the question “Is there a god?” nor can anyone honestly answer with one-hundred percent confidence the question “Is String-Theory correct?” for while these theories are both entirely plausible, there is not enough evidence to support either to even claim them to be probable, let alone proven.
At the end of Nietzsche’s life, he went into what can only be accurately described as insanity and dementia. On the third of January, 1889, common folklore states that Nietzsche witnessed a public flogging of a horse in Turin, and ran to its aide to protect the defenseless creature from its tormentors. Immediately afterwards he sank into a state of complete incoherence with himself and the world as he rapidly declined into an abyss (Wicks, Robert). While yet again this event can be interpreted as the will to power, it seems that Nietzsche now realized that there is no definitive “why” behind anything, and that it is all speculation on the part of the observer. Nietzsche once wrote “Whoever battles with monsters had better see that it does not turn him into a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.” (BrainyQuote) and it seems that Nietzsche had indeed become the same monster he was battling, and was taken into the abyss by the continual mutual stare. Therefore, nihilism yet again comes into play. Nothing is known, and only presumed, so therefore it is not correct to claim these presumptions to be absolute and undeniable universal truths. Therefore, how much does it matter? Hardly at all it would appear, as humans have never known, do not know now, and have no proof of knowing in the future. Individuals may make certain aspects important to themselves, but the imposing of these personally subjective views onto the world is corrupt and oppressive. Before his decline towards death, Nietzsche said “Does wisdom perhaps appear on the earth as a raven which is inspired by the smell of carrion?” (BrainyQuote). This indeed appears to be the case with the world, as the philosophers all tend to be drawn to the tragic rotting death, and in their inspection, they consume it, are covered in it, and become it themselves.
The total character of the world, however, is in all eternity chaos--in the sense not of a lack of necessity but a lack of order, arrangement, form, beauty, wisdom, and whatever names there are for our aesthetic anthropomorphisms...Let us beware of attributing to it heartlessness and unreason or their opposites: it is neither perfect nor beautiful, nor noble, nor does it wish to become any of these things; it does not by any means strive to imitate man... Let us beware of saying that there are laws in nature. There are only necessities: there is nobody who commands, nobody who obeys, nobody who trespasses... But when will we ever be done with our caution and care? When will all these shadows of God cease to darken our minds? When will we complete our de-deification of nature? When may we begin to "naturalize" humanity in terms of a pure, newly discovered, newly redeemed nature? (The Perspectives Of Nietzsche: Nietzsche Quotes)
Works Cited
"Friedrich Nietzsche." BrainyQuote.com. Xplore Inc, 2013. 8 May 2013.
Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm, and Helen Zimmern. Beyond Good and Evil. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus, 1989. Print.
Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm. The Antichrist. New York: Arno, 1972. Print.
Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm. The Birth of Tragedy. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2000. Print.
Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm, and Thomas Common. Thus Spoke Zarathustra: A Book for All and None. University Park: Pennsylvania State University, 1999. 1999. Web. 8 May 2013.
Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm, Walter Arnold. Kaufmann, and Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche.On the Genealogy of Morals. New York: Vintage, 1967. Print.
SparkNotes Editors. “SparkNote on Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900).” SparkNotes.com. SparkNotes LLC. 2005. Web. 6 May 2013.
"The Perspectives of Nietzsche: Nietzsche Quotes." Nietzsche Quotes:. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 May 2013.
Wicks, Robert. "Friedrich Nietzsche." (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). N.p., 21 Mar. 2013. Web. 08 May 2013
