One of Nietzsche's most famous ideas is his fantasy of an 'Übermensch'—a more than 'human-all-too-human' being who is to serve as our new ideal. But this idea, too, is rather sketchy and limited to a single book, the prologue of Nietzsche's pseudo-biblical epic, Thus Spoke Zarathustra. (p. 66)
This is Solomon saying pretty much exactly what I just said before, so not much help there. So maybe the best way for us to get a clearer picture of what Nietzsche's talking about, we should start with what we know and then follow that up in the comments with what we're still confused about, or issues that arise.
So far, here's what I know about the ubermensch:
The ubermensch is a living embodiment of Nietzsche's life-affirming philosophy. His (yes, his, not her) consciousness and actions are rooted in "master" or life-affirming principles. As such, he creates values rather than follows them. This leads to an interesting conundrum for Nietzsche's readers; by reading or following the philosophy that Nietzsche outlines, we no longer create our own values, instead following ideas set out by someone else. This is part of the "slave morality" that Nietzsche so steadfastly rails against in Beyond Good and Evil (which we did read from). At this point slave morality is primarily derived from religion, specifically Judeo-Christian doctrine. To Nietzsche, this doctrine is based in ressentiment, which is essentially a deep-seated form of resentment or hatred toward true power. This is best depicted in the beattitudes:
3Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
4Blessed are those who mourn,
for they will be comforted.
5Blessed are the meek,
for they will inherit the earth.
6Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
for they will be filled.
7Blessed are the merciful,
for they will be shown mercy.
8Blessed are the pure in heart,
for they will see God.
9Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they will be called sons of God.
10Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.11Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. 12Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.
This doctrine runs completely counter to Nietzsche's argument for life-affirmation; rather than embrace life as it is on earth, religions like this look toward the afterlife for fulfillment.
So from this we get the idea that Nietzsche isn't giving us a prescriptive philosophy—that is, he's not telling us how we should act. Instead, he's focusing on what he believes will happen. Someday humans as they are (weak, slavish beings) will die off and a race of ubermenschen will arise. This group will have no reason to read Nietzsche; therefore, these writings are meant to explain what's going to happen and why we should accept—or even embrace—it. We should be happy that the world will become the domain of the strong.
I'll end with a few quotes from Thus Spoke Zarathustra that give a good view of this ideal:
And Zarathustra spoke thus to the people:"I teach you the overman. Man is something that shall be overcome."Behold, I teach you the overman. The overman is the meaning of the earth. Let your will say: the overman shall be the meaning of the earth! I beseech you, my brothers, remain faithful to the earth, and do not believe those who speak to you of otherworldy hopes! Poison-mixers are they, whether they know it or not. Despisers of life are they, decaying and poisoned themselves, of whom the earth is weary: so let them go.Once the sin against God was the greatest sin; but God died, and these sinners died with him. To sin against the earth is now the most dreadful thing, and to esteem the entrails of the unknowable higher than the meaning of the earth.
1 comment:
Even though we didn't read it in class, I purused Dostoevsky's The Grand Inquisitor and there seem to be some striking parallels between it and Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Now, I have never read any of Zarathustra, so I'm just going on the samples that you offered in your blog.
Both works seem to offer the assessment that the Judeo-Christian doctrine will meet its end because the weak and slavish beings are going to die out. They will discover that their earthly needs far outweigh their supposed spiritual needs. In Dostoevsky, the Grand Inquisitor imprisons Christ and, as his title implies, interrogates Him on a variety of topics. His main beef with JC seems to be that Christianity asks WAY too much of human beings. Only someone like Christ could possibly live up to these lofty standards: "But I ask again, are there many like Thee?"
According to the Inquisitor, the masses are going to get tired of striving for these goals and settle instead on what they can readily obtain on Earth: "But Thou didst think too highly of men therein, for they are slaves, of course, though rebellious by nature" ... "I swear, man is weaker and baser by nature than Thou hast believed him!" Here we see the breaking-down of Christianity.
Finally, the Inquisitor argues that humans desire "the craving for universal unity" and that "too well they know the value of complete submission". His argument here is that humans will get tired of trying to play catch-up with the tiresome standards of Christianity and will ultimatley give in and obey those in power on Earth. For "[t]hey will be convinced that we are right, for they will remember the horrors of slavery and confusion to which Thy freedom brought them."
Although there are obvious fundamental differences, both philosophers seem to be warning of the inevitable deterioration of the Christian religion due to the slavish and weak nature of its practitioners.
Post a Comment