Discussion Qs for 5/15

In the treatises that make up On the Genealogy of Morality, Nietzsche claims that cruelty and the struggle for power play an important role in the non-moral relationships that make up contemporary morality. “Nietzsche’s genealogy of morals is thus an attempt to give a naturalistic explanation of how and why humans might have invented morality” (897). Pages 916-946 include the end of Nietzsche’s First Treatise and his Second Treatise. At the end of his First Treatise, “Good and Evil” “Good and Bad”, Nietzsche continues to discuss this idea of ressentiment. The weak members of society feel this ressentiment as a result of the stronger members of society. This idea of ressentiment is referring to the weaker members of society who blame the stronger members of society for their own inferiority and view them as the enemy as a result. “In any society in which inequality is prevalent and justice is denied, resentment will (quite properly) flourish” (899). At the end of his First Treatise, Nietzsche also discusses his concern with the two opposing valuations “good/bad” and “good/evil”, which “have fought a terrible millennia-long battle on earth; and as certainly as the second value has had the upper hand for a long time” (922).

In his Second Treatise, “Guilt,” “Bad Conscience,” and Related Matters, Nietzsche discusses a “morality of custom”, a pre-moral society, in which man’s right to inflict harm on other men emerges from man’s capacity to make promises. Nietzsche also discusses the importance of forgetfulness and its close link to making promises. According to Nietzsche, forgetfulness allows man to not become consumed with the past, which enables him to make good decisions for his future. When these promises are broken, there is a justification to inflict pain on the men who did so. Nietzsche asks the question of how did “the consciousness of guilt, the entire “bad conscience” come into the world?” (927) and goes on to answer it by implying that “bad conscience” arose as a result of men viewing themselves as sinners by turning an evil eye towards their natural inclinations. Nietzsche also goes on to explore the origins of guilt and punishment, both of which were not originally based on any sense of moral transgression or accountability. Originally, guilt simply meant that debt was owed and punishment was simply a form of ensuring repayment. Therefore, the concept of guilt is derived from the concept of debt. Nietzsche describes guilt and punishment as they occurred between the creditor and the debtor. The creditor was compensated for the harm done (failure to fulfill a promise or pay off a loan) by the debtor by the pleasure he would get from punishing or inflicting harm, pain, torture, or cruelty on the debtor, as a substitute for getting his money back. Nietzsche explains that “punishment is overladen with utilities of all kinds” (938) and in section 13 on pages 937-938, goes on to list 11 forms of punishment.

Section 13 on pages 918-919 is crucial to understanding Nietzsche and his arguments about “good” and “ressentiment”. Nietzsche uses an example of the contrast of the roles of lambs and birds of prey to further explore the idea of “good/evil”. Since birds of prey snatch up, kill, and carry off lambs, it is natural that lambs feel anger towards birds of prey and consider them to be “evil”. And from this, it is also natural, that lambs then come to consider themselves to be “good”, as opposed to birds of prey. However, as Nietzsche states, it would be ludicrous to ask a bird of prey to not kill, or for that matter, a lamb to kill. Birds of prey kill and eat lambs in order to survive, so to ask the birds of prey to not kill would essentially be prohibiting them from existing. Nietzsche holds that one ought to not consider birds of prey to be “evil” for merely utilizing their own strength and that there is no right “to hold the bird of prey accountable for being a bird of prey” (919). This examples ties into the idea of “good/bad” with the nobles and slaves. Nietzsche would say that one should not hold the nobles accountable for their own strength.

Nietzsche’s example contrasting birds of prey and lambs is demonstrative of how Nietzsche quite often uses exaggeration in an effort to explain himself. Furthermore, this passage in section 13 also demonstrates Nietzsche’s sense of humor, when he says “nothing is more tasty than a tender lamb” (918). Nietzsche’s exaggerations and humor continued to be carried on throughout his essay. Another particular example that is indicative of his writing style is in section 6 where Nietzsche discusses how making others suffer was a great joy and actually goes on to describe it as a “festival”! Therefore, it is clear that Nietzsche does in fact incorporate humor into his writing and that not everything should be read as literal, as opposed to what David Wootton claims.

I found it to be very interesting how Nietzsche tied in the relationship between memory, forgetting, promises, and responsibility in sections 1, 2, and 3 of his Second Treatise. Nietzsche begins his Second Treatise by asking the question of “to breed an animal that is permitted to promise—isn’t this precisely the paradoxical task nature has set for itself with regard to man? Isn’t this the true problem of man?” (924). Nietzsche goes on to claim that holding a promise requires the forgetfulness (a powerful memory) and a confidence about the future and one’s ability to hold the promise in the future, which forgetfulness allows one to do. Making decisions that affect one’s future is a major responsibility, which Nietzsche describes as “conscience”, which in turn leads to his discussion of “bad conscience”.

In sections 12 through 15 of his Second Treatise, Nietzsche goes into an in-depth discussion of punishment. Nietzsche claims that “today it is impossible to say for sure why we actually punish” (937). I found myself unable to agree with this claim for in my mind, it is actually very clear why we punish. I believe we punish for two reasons: one, to “get back” at the party being punished and two, to deter further actions that would need to result in punishment. Nietzsche goes on to make another claim about punishment that I strongly disagree with. Nietzsche claims that punishment does not arouse a sense of guilt, but rather the feeling of “something has unexpectedly gone wrong here” (939) and not “I should not have done that” (939). Based on my experience of being punished as a child, my response was always “I should not have done that”, or that I was in sorry, so I am in somewhat of a disagreement with Nietzsche’s theory of the effects and responses of punishment. Nietzsche’s perspective of punishment is what allows him to dismiss it as the origin of “bad conscience”.

Study Questions

1) Do you agree with Nietzsche’s claim that punishment does not elicit a response of regret? Think of specific instances in which you were punished and how you felt, would your feelings be indicative of Nietzsche’s claim or would they go against it?

2) Nietzsche dismisses punishment as the origin of “bad conscience”. What dos Nietzsche describe as the origin of “bad conscience”? (Although I did not go into it in detail in my essay, I believe this is an important part of the Second Treatise that should be considered.)

3) Throughout Nietzsche’s First and Second Treatises, there are numerous examples of his humorous and exaggerative writing style. In my essay, I have given two specific examples that are indicative of Nietzsche’s writing style, what other ones did you notice? Why do you think Nietzsche used these specific examples or exaggerations?

4) Why is it that “good/evil” has had the upper hand over “good/bad” for quite some time now?

5) How does Nietzsche derive the concept of guilt from the concept of debt? What example does he use?

Advertisement