Writing on Neitzche
The great historians of morality did an exceptional job to fain dominate this field of morality. Because of this, it is an honor to acknowledge and appreciate the work they did to uphold whatever they did to modern morality. However, these historians lacked the sense of history itself. Their ignorance of historical sense was well-pronounced and made them less beneficiary to the historical spirits. They mainly focused their thoughts on the old and unhistorical ways. This way of thinking was very common in the old philosophers whom they succeeded. Their lack of knowledge in tracing morals is evident from the arising of the question to prove the genesis of judgment and ideas of ‘good.’
Originally, humans referred to ‘good’ as an act of selflessness to the people they granted the necessities and those who needed it. In the process, they forgot the appreciation for the act of ‘good’ and the selflessness it had. This was because of the crop in habit of doing good and getting praises of goodness. Praises of being good gave them a better feeling that and made them show some act of hidden goodness in them.
This derivation initially portrayed entailed all the idiosyncratic and typical traits shown by the English psychologists. They had utilities and forgot the habits and errors. This assembling led to the formation of a system, the system of values. These values led to higher men branding themselves with great pride and still practiced to date. This value of pride made men think that it was some sort of privilege. Because of the growth in pride and arrogance among men, it would be better if the pride is cut low and ‘The Values’ lose some parts of its values.
Is the process of de-valuing these values attained? The first argument that pops up on this issue is, the real concept of the term ‘good’ is sought and stationed at the place it should not be. The initial origin of the term ‘good’ did not come from the people who originally showed goodness. The specific group of people in society has, however, classified themselves as ‘good.’ The most powerful people in the communities, the aristocrats, the high-stationed individuals, and those that consider themselves high-minded are the ones that have always felt to be good and that their actions are always good.
In contradiction to this, members of low social class, those that lacked sophistication, and those with low minds were not considered as ‘good’ people and their actions were not considered good either. It was from these factors that those who considered themselves ‘good’ sought to come up with values that would profit them and people of their kind. To coin these values, they opted to incorporate utilities. Utility standpoint is like an alien when individuals have to deal with excess values that are supreme. The sadness created by the gap brought by high groups of people in a society and deterioration in nobility is evident. These differences are the foundation of the reversals of bad and good.
Master’s power to make final decisions and seal occasions are authoritative that they even take possession of events. It is from these selfish acts that the genesis of the term ‘good’ is distant from having legitimate connections to the actual act of goodness. This deterioration in aristocratic morals has led to the reversal of selfishness and selflessness among the human race. This sixth sense requires significant time to be effectively dominant, and it took some time before those instincts attained the dominance they got. Evaluation of morality was put on a break and stopped by the antithesis as observed in Europe. Most prejudice that did not value ego or that had less ego and took morals as concepts to measure the equivalence of values are currently in power and rules the modern world with forces mostly related to fixed and inflexible ideas and are more often thought to have some disorders and sickness in the brain.
From the article explaining the origin of good and bad as per Nietzsche’s’ philosophy, it is evident that ‘good’ initially existed and referred to the act of goodness itself rather than the individuals that portrayed the action. This term has however been contradicted in the modern world and is mostly associated with the selfish in the society who came up with values that only credited themselves and the people of their kind, losing the actual meaning of the term, ‘good.’
Works Cited
“The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Genealogy of Morals, by Friedrich Nietzsche.” Gutenberg, www.gutenberg.org/files/52319/52319-h/52319-h.htm.