Nietzsche's beyond good and evil

[Damags]

So I'm currently reading Nietzsche's "Beyond good and evil", and I have one main question. He keeps talking about how the masses obey a sort of general reason, which actually does not benefit them so much, and how philosophers should in fact overcome this regular reason to reach a sort of state which transcends the simple dichotomies between affirmation and negation. I find it hard to concile this view with his other one, which states that in fact nothing can be absolutely (through science, reason...) asserted about the world, because overcoming "regular reason" is precisely a sort of affirmation.

Does he mean that only one's passions and will to power are worthy, and that they should be the leitmotiv of the "higher" practical reason, and not the care of asserting "true" and "absolute" judgements about the world ? In sum, a deeply pragmatic and relativistic philosophy, which in fact does pretend to truth precisely on the point where it is asserted that one's own desires and will to power are true ?

[Nick_A]

Hello Damags

As I see it, Nietzsche invites us to doubt our usual concepts. What if what we normally call “good” is actually evil as it pertains to Man’ becoming master of himself or "higher man"? What if what we call good only serves the purpose of turning Man into a herd creature as opposed to his potential for “higher Man?” Nietzsche wrote:

“What if a regressive trait lurked in “the good man,” likewise a danger, an enticement, a poison, a narcotic, so that the present lived at the expense of the future? Perhaps in more comfort and less danger, but also in a smaller-minded, meaner manner? … So that morality itself were to blame if man never attained the highest power and splendor possible for the type man? So that morality itself was the danger of dangers?” (On the Genealogy of Morality)

Higher human beings possess the will to power. They can become masters of themselves and actualize their goals.

In contrast the herd is composed of two types: the “last man’ or the mediocre man and the slave or the weak sickly human being who blindly follows.

Natural law invites us to glorify higher man as the “good” but herd morality suggests we glorify mediocrity as the “good.”

You’ve raised a question I’ve always considered from the Platonic concept of the Beast which Simone Weil elaborated on as the “Great Beast” The Great Beast is really the same as Nietzsche’s herd.

Herd morality seeks to pull the higher down towards the lower while natural man seeks to actualize the higher. From this view we can ask if compassion for example is a good or an evil?

From Wiki

Master–slave morality is a central theme of Friedrich Nietzsche's works, in particular the first essay of On the Genealogy of Morality. Nietzsche argued that there were two fundamental types of morality: "master morality" and "slave morality". Master morality values pride and power, while slave morality values things like kindness, empathy, and sympathy. Master morality weighs actions on good or bad consequences (i. e., classical virtues and vices, consequentialism), unlike slave morality, which weighs actions on a scale of good or evil intentions (e. g., Christian virtues and vices, Kantian deontology).
For Nietzsche, a particular morality is inseparable from the formation of a particular culture, meaning that a culture's language, codes and practices, narratives, and institutions are informed by the struggle between these two moral structures (see valuation).

From this perspective we really cannot discuss beyond good and evil until we decide what they are. Nietzsche suggests we have it backwards and just oppose natural law.

Does he mean that only one's passions and will to power are worthy, and that they should be the leitmotiv of the "higher" practical reason, and not the care of asserting "true" and "absolute" judgements about the world ? In sum, a deeply pragmatic and relativistic philosophy, which in fact does pretend to truth precisely on the point where it is asserted that one's own desires and will to power are true ?

So IMO you’ve described Nietzsche accurately. There is nothing higher than natural law. Do you believe Master morality as a good is superior to slave morality as described above? If not, why not? I think these are important questions anyone concerned with objective human meaning and purpose must open themselves to.

[Damags]

In fact, Nietzsche's praise of higher reason in "Beyond Good and Evil," that one which strives to surpass common reason (entrenched in automatized judgements of value) seems to me to incarnate reflection itself, even more so time itself. Put differently, higher reason is as much an experience of the unfolding of time itself, of one's own inner movements, as it would be a productive exercise. In this sense, Nietzsche unknowingly advocates against modern materialist consumerism and today's omnipresent "fast pace."

[Nick_A]

In fact, Nietzsche's praise of higher reason in "Beyond Good and Evil," that one which strives to surpass common reason (entrenched in automatized judgements of value) seems to me to incarnate reflection itself, even more so time itself. Put differently, higher reason is as much an experience of the unfolding of time itself, of one's own inner movements, as it would be a productive exercise. In this sense, Nietzsche unknowingly advocates against modern materialist consumerism and today's omnipresent "fast pace."

In your opinion what is a person to do when they begin to experience that their reason is only a means for justify and expand on life in Plato's cave? A person begins to see that they are a slave to materialism and commercialism. They begin to understand what Nietzsche meant by "wretched contentment". They feel the need for a higher quality of reason and emotion but their habits deny this new need. What are they to do?

https://www.theperspectivesofnietzsche. ... nuber.html

What is the greatest experience you can have? It is the hour of the great contempt. The hour when your happiness, too, arouses your disgust, and even your reason and your virtue.

The hour when you say, 'What matters my happiness? It is poverty and filth and wretched contentment. But my happiness ought to justify existence itself.'

The hour when you say, 'What matters my reason? Does it crave knowledge as the lion his food? It is poverty and filth and wretched contentment.'

The hour when you say, 'What matters my virtue? As yet it has not made me rage. How weary I am of my good and my evil! All that is poverty and filth and wretched contentment.'