geneology of morals

[M00se1989]

Neitzsche has always been one of my favorite philosophers. the nihilistic veiw which he took on the world allowed him to see inside man in ECCE HOMO as well. He saw two classes of morality, slave morality and and master morality. Both of which disliked the other. the master morality because the others were weak of knowledge. The slave (or pheasant) morality despised its opposition for its greed and lack of heart.

If we expand this idea we see that the greedy are there as providers for their family and their own security as well as the people under them. All over nothing. For without the weak the strong can not remain strong. Without the strong the weak would only survive without the accumulation of knowledge. They support themselves in a balance. er-go Beyond Good and Evil. In the Common Sense of the matter as the strong always being providers for the weak in one way or another.
a.
"whom do you call bad?-those who always put you to shame."
b.
"what do you consider most humane?-To spare someone of shame."
c.
"what is the seal of attained freedom?- No longer being able ashamed in front of oneself."

when words all go beyond good and evil in an (evolutionary-they all stemmed from past words/etymology), then who possesses the greatest knowledge?

the one with more or the one with less???
A.
42

B.12

c. both

 

[Dywyddyr]

The slave (or pheasant) morality despised its opposition for its greed and lack of heart.

Yeah, damn those pheasants.
Never stop whining about how downtrodden they are.

"You lookin' at me?"

 

[Light Travelling]

Ahh the pheasants are revolting again… damn chef.


Hey he’s not the only one;

“As most dabblers in Freudian dream analysis are aware, the subconscious likes a bit of word-play. Ever since the “pheasant pluckers” joke, the word “pheasant” has had an alternative, “charged” meaning to the unconscious mind (or at least that’s what Freudians would believe).

So it was no surprise to me when a recent photograph of the Queen of England strangling a pheasant, to “put it out of its misery” (it had been shot during a hunt), caused such a big stir in the UK. Of course, Freudian-psychologically speaking, the Queen wasn’t strangling a pheasant – she was strangling a peasant. That’s possibly why this story (which is otherwise quite banal) made headline status. But there’s more to this than”

http://www.anxietyculture.com/sadism.htm

 

[Light Travelling]

To the thread subject though. Good and Bad; Right and Wrong; Moral and Immoral. They don’t exist, we make it all up in our minds, which is why they vary from age to age from culture to culture and person to person.

 

[Dywyddyr]

Hmm, I looked at your link and couldn't get past the by-line I'm afraid.

Sadism in High Places
by Clare Voyens

Clare Voyens? Really?
I should have seen that coming...

Plus, of course, the added bonus of

(Clare Voyens is a TV Anxiety Aunt and part-time sex therapist)

A TV agony aunt? Always reliable for serious and considered insight , but "sex therapist" with a surname only a couple of letters away from voyeur?

Nope, I can only take so many coincidences in one day.

 

[Doreen]

In the Common Sense of the matter as the strong always being providers for the weak in one way or another.

Could we get some definitions, with examples, for what strong and weak people are.

a.
"whom do you call bad?-those who always put you to shame."

Perhaps, but also those who treat you like shit. I mean, someone getting raped repeatedly by their guard is not simply thinking the guard is bad because he is making them feel shame.

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

The whole premise is wrong to begin with. He shouldn't even be allowed to argue the matter because if anyone finds the misunderstood and misread Nietzsche (unlike the misspelled 'Neitzsche' to whom he refers) to be a 'nihilist' not only has he no understanding of 'The Genealogy of Morals' but should be banned from reading it all together.

And what is most sad is there was no one to even enlighten him to that fact until now!

I AM BECOMING WELL SICK OF THIS BLOODY PLACE AND ITS SUPPOSED INTELLIGENT COMMUNITY!!!

...And what's worse you Doreen here serving him slop!

 

[SolusCado]

To the thread subject though. Good and Bad; Right and Wrong; Moral and Immoral. They don’t exist, we make it all up in our minds, which is why they vary from age to age from culture to culture and person to person.

It isn't that they don't exist; it's that they are totally subjective. The notion of good/bad, right/wrong is a question of alignment with a code of ethics. Alignment with the code is 'good' or 'right', disalignment is wrong/bad. We as a culture have lost sight of that because so many people are in general agreement with a specific code. Nietschze attempted to go "Beyond Good and Evil" to identify a code of ethics that was simply very naturalistic, rather than the theological one that dominated in his day.

 

[SolusCado]

The whole premise is wrong to begin with. He shouldn't even be allowed to argue the matter because if anyone finds the misunderstood and misread Nietzsche (unlike the misspelled 'Neitzsche' to whom he refers) to be a 'nihilist' not only has he no understanding of 'The Genealogy of Morals' but should be banned from reading it all together.

And what is most sad is there was no one to even enlighten him to that fact until now!

I AM BECOMING WELL SICK OF THIS BLOODY PLACE AND ITS SUPPOSED INTELLIGENT COMMUNITY!!!

...And what's worse you Doreen here serving him slop!

I just joined today, and I am already frustrated at the lack of complete sentences and proper punctuation. It actually makes it difficult to follow an argument or a position because I have no idea what people are trying to say.

 

[Light Travelling]

I just joined today, and I am already frustrated at the lack of complete sentences and proper punctuation. It actually makes it difficult to follow an argument or a position because I have no idea what people are trying to say.

wecome to teh madhouse