Most of the times Nietzsche understands “morality” as the set of values typical of the European society of his days. In this sense, it is safe to say that Nietzsche opposes morality and that genealogy serves the ultimate goal of undermining it. However, it is legitimate to envision for genealogy a scope for application which goes beyond the particular morality of 19th century Germans. Accordingly, my claim is that in Nietzsche European morality represents just one possible form of morality. Nietzsche himself seems to claim that he is focusing his attacks only on a specific instance of morality – one among possible others. So for example, in the preface to On the Genealogy of Morals he claims that the object of the book is the value of …show more content…
'2 Morals are therefore normative codes according to which we orientate ourselves in the context of different spheres of life.
Assuming that Schacht 's interpretation is correct, I believe that his analysis bear strong similarities with the view of morality I adopted in the first chapter. On one hand, Schacht’s talk of “spheres of life” leads to transcend our often restricted understanding of morality as including simply the realm of ethical rights and duties, or as being focused on explaining why and how we should act in order to live morally. In Schacht’s sense, morality rather seems to include the mores of the Latin or the ethoi of the Greek. In other words, our family of norms is the set of values we live by in all the different situations we come across in our existence, including many areas of life that the restricted understanding of morality would not consider as relevant. Furthermore, to understand these mores/ethoi as moral standards or imperatives to which we have to conform is to understand only a side aspect of them. In fact, more than simply being moral rules directing our behaviour, these customs constitute our un-reflected habits – that is, the way in which we automatically express ourselves in a particular context - , often being normative on a very unconscious level.
Lear’s
Friedrich Nietzsche was a German philosopher who wrote a book called On the Genealogy of Morals. This book is comprised of three different essays, and the first essay is titled “’Good and Evil,’ ‘Good and Bad.’” Rather than going straight into what Nietzsche talks about in his first essay, it would be better to start off by breaking down the title of his book. The Oxford English Dictionary defines genealogy as “an account of one’s descent from an ancestor or ancestors, by enumeration of the intermediate persons.” From this definition, we can see that genealogy and history are closely related, and that history is going to play a big part in Nietzsche’s writings. In his first essay, Nietzsche discusses his theory of the origin of morality.
Masters and slaves are constantly discussed throughout Nietzsche’s work, but the connection between them is discussed best in his book On the Genealogy of Morality. The first of the three essays outlines two alternate structures for the creation of values, which is credited to masters and the other to slaves.
Morals guide a person's standards of behavior or beliefs concerning what is and is not acceptable for them to do. A morals can be for all of society or an individual`s beliefs. Morals play a role in our innocence. Innocence
Palmer describes moral norms as those which govern human behavior and character development. Moral norms serves as standards by which a worldview requires, prohibits, or allows behaviors and the development of character traits of one’s personality and thinking (pg.49). Aesthetic norms are ones which allow human beings to make judgments about what is considered beautiful, pleasing, or sublime (pg.50).
When thinking about morality, it is necessary to consider how aspects from both nature and nurture, along with free will, may form ones moral beliefs and dictate ones moral actions. To understand how moral beliefs as well as actions formulate and operate within individuals and societies, it is imperative that a general definition of morality is laid out. Morality, then, can be defined as ones principles regarding what is right and wrong, good or bad. Although an individual may hold moral beliefs, it is not always the case that moral actions follow. Therefore, in this essay I aim to provide an explanation that clarifies the two and in doing so I also hope to further the notion that one’s moral framework is a product of all three factors; nature, nurture, and free will. The first part of this essay will flush out what exactly morality it and how it manifests similarly across individuals and differently across individuals. Contrariwise, I will then explain how morality manifests similarly across societies and differently across societies. Alongside presenting the information in this order, I will trace morality back to primordial times to showcase how morality has evolved and developed since then, not only from a nature-based standpoint, but also from a
morality permits each of us a sphere in which to pursue our own plans and goals.
Nietzsche was concerned with a genealogical project to determine the birth of values through an assessment of the historical. He was able to conclude morality as phenomena that has “become” and was not always evident, as it is motivated “by the drive for preservation” and “the intention to achieve pleasure and avoid displeasure” as he states in the chapter Deconstruction of Metaphysics in his book Nietzsche and
Friedrich Nietzsche’s “On the Genealogy of Morality” includes his theory on man’s development of “bad conscience.” Nietzsche believes that when transitioning from a free-roaming individual to a member of a community, man had to suppress his “will to power,” his natural “instinct of freedom”(59). The governing community threatened its members with punishment for violation of its laws, its “morality of customs,” thereby creating a uniform and predictable man (36). With fear of punishment curtailing his behavior, man was no longer allowed the freedom to indulge his every instinct. He turned his aggressive focus inward, became ashamed of his natural animal instincts, judged himself as inherently evil, and developed a bad conscience (46).
“What is the Purpose of Morality?” discusses the importance of morals, as well as defines what morals are. Throughout the text, the author makes the argument, and demonstrates through the incorporation of other texts, that the success of a society depends on how ethical that society is in nature (37). Morality keeps society together in an orderly fashion, resolves conflicts, and differentiates what is right from what is wrong (43). The author does acknowledge that morals limit human nature, but that this is for the benefit of society, because it suppresses any internal evil (42).
The link between morality and human nature has been a progressive reoccurring theme since ancient times (Prinz, 2008). Moral development is a characteristic of a person’s general development that transpires over the course of a lifetime. Moral development is derived by a wide variety of cultural and demographic factors that appear to influence morally relevant actions. Turiel (2006) defined morality as an individuals “prescriptive judgments of justice, rights, and welfare pertaining to how people ought to relate to each other.” Individuals’ moral judgments are frequently considered to be a product of culturally specific controls that provide a framework for behavioral motivations that are sensitive to the effects of gender, education, religion and politics (Banerjee, Huebner & Hauser, 2010). While several approaches have been utilized to examine the interaction of multivariate contributors to fundamental moral differences such as: disputes about family life, sexuality, social fairness, and so on, research has suggested that ideological considerations have provided a potent and diverse explanation for the polarization of contrasting views (Weber & Federico, 2013).
Morality only exists if we believe in God; therefore if God doesn’t exist there is no morality. There have been so many evil acts committed in the name of God that it is difficult to maintain that a belief in God equates to morality. There are situations that happen every day where decisions are made based off of human rights that contradict the word of God. Morality comes from within, it is an understanding of right versus wrong and the ability to choose what is right. Knowing all this a belief in God is not a requirement for a person to be moral. (Mosser, 2011)
Referring to morality from an individual point of view, each person has strong beliefs about what is wrong and what is right. Moreover, morals differ from person to person and may be due to difference in culture. Morality also results from basic human emotions i.e. love, hate, honesty, greed, sins etc (Psychology Today).
Would you describe a dog as capable of being evil? Or a cat? Or a chimpanzee? Most likely you could not. We humans belong to the taxonomic kingdom of Animalia and are therefore animals. Our species has evolved from animals that looked and acted more like the modern chimpanzee than we do. So at what point did we go from being creatures of instinct do developing the concept of morality? A great deal of literature has been written about morality, examples of which can be located in fiction and non-fiction as well as in scientific, theological and philosophical fields. Specific examples include the bible, as well as the writings of Plato (c. 424-348 BCE), Niccolò Machiavelli (1469-1527) and John Steinbeck (1902-1968). Morality is a trait that
An employee of a specific business doing what they are told so that they will not be scolded and eventually fired.
Morality refers to the concept of proper human action in terms of "right and wrong," also referred to as "good and evil. According to Hobbes (1994:11), morality is simply a declaration of rules and beliefs that are considered absolute guides for human behaviour. According to Hare (1981:27), “Morality is a system of principles and judgments based on cultural, religious, and philosophical concepts and beliefs, by which humans determine whether given actions, are right or wrong.” Moral values and graciousness, in the past, were prominent in most teenagers. Every individual has capacity for growth. But a seed cannot grow without nurturing. And farmers don’t get to neglect their crops. So moral values has to be inculcated from infancy. Many years