Nietzsche's ideas to modern society - Essay Example

? Order No# 537394 Topic: Nietzsche's ideas to modern society The height of the mountain is 25, 0000 feet. One stands the top of it and surveys it. He is the monarch of all that he surveys. The other gentleman stands at the height of 10,000 feet on the same mountain. He too surveys the scenic beauty around it. He too is the monarch of all that he surveys. He understands what he sees from his level, not of the level of the one who is commanding more height. He may say whatever he sees is correct. Similar is the position of Nietzsche. His assertion that “every religion and morality “is founded on a general principle of "do this and that, refrain from this and that---then you will be happy!"—absolutely right! But such an assertion of any religion is only the part of the truth, not the whole truth! One step of a ladder does not make a complete ladder! Nietzsche is making a mind-level argument. Every mind-level argument has a mind-level counter-argument, and therefore it can never be the basis to arrive at truth! One has to transcend the mind to get at the principles of true religious morals (spirituality). In that state, an individual ravels in bliss, all dualities, cease, the Realized Soul practicing any religion will arrive at the same conclusion; for the Truth is one without the second! Sensory pleasures and distractions are not to be condemned; only their true nature and limitations needs to be properly understood. Morality is not a path away from life as propounded by Nietzsche. It is living appropriately by understanding the true meaning and objectives of human life. The conflicts begin when the mind-level pundits, preachers and mullahs argue. Each one of them is speaking from the level of his spiritual progression and it is but natural that they will not agree with each other. From their levels, they will never be able to! The child is taught A, B, C…….first. Gradually its level of knowledge increases, and one day the same child may get a Doctorate. He will then laugh at his initial levels of knowledge, how assiduously he practiced the syllables once! Preaching morals doesn’t mean to restrict one’s freedom to think beyond those morals or restrict freewill. Add dynamism to the free-will. He is the master. Remove dynamism from the free-will. He is the slave. Actions of free will contribute to dynamism without destruction. The weak-surrender and free-will cannot exist together. Can light and darkness remain at one place? When the light is switched on, the darkness has to go. No option is given to it whether to go or not. Similarly an individual, who knows the proper connotation of free will and acts accordingly, can do no wrong, even when he is gets the moral counseling from any other sources. He knows for certain -- that which is not practical cannot be religious either. Morality is the powerful and paradoxical force that dominates contemporary life. Nietzsche fails to judge morality in the correct perspective when he asserts (Nietzsche, 1998, p.23) “All naturalism is morality, i. e. every healthy morality, is governed by a vital instant—one or other life’s decree is fulfilled through a specific….” Nietzsche’s method of interpretation and reach about the merits of morality itself is wrong. Just because counterfeit $500 is available in the market (their legal value is zero), one cannot term the original $500 currency as fake. Preaching morals, and telling to do this and not to that, is a process. Morals are not dropped from the heaven. It can at best be termed as the collective wisdom from practical experience of the Realized Souls. Just as a doctor or an engineer attains the professional degree after studying hard for a number of years, similar is the moral/spiritual practice. It is a ladder of progress to be climbed step by step, carefully. Highest reach of perfection is an attainable reality. Human beings live every minute of the existence amidst various temptations of life. With force and suppression, one can build an artificial barrier against passion and negative tendencies. Their outward flow can be checked for some time. The permanent solution for this malady can be found through various moral/spiritual practices. Conceiving good internal thoughts is one of them; company of the good people is another option. What are spiritual congregations where morality is generally preached? In that assembly, a unique power is created, it lays the foundation for a powerful internal fortress, to thwart the power of the evil attractions and receive the essence of the moral principles enunciated. Every individual has the power of discrimination. How can Nietzsche assume that one will accept the moral preaching meekly and why should one? No religion preaches the meek surrender. No religion is meant to weaken the personality and the inner strength of the man. When someone tells you to follow certain principles, he doesn’t in any way rob the essential freedom not to follow him. Nietzsche takes a grim view of the moralists, which is not necessary. Human intellect is not that insignificant. He has no business to assert that the study of the human intellect is a constant struggle, and declare it as futile. Life is to be lived in its trials, tribulations, duty and beauty. Ask the fish why it is happily living amidst the turbulent waves in the ocean. It enjoys that struggle. According to Nietzsche, “The Church and mortality say, ‘a race, a people is destroyed by vice and extravagance.”(p.27) But in what context it has been said, is the issue. The statement is not absolute. The conclusion of Nietzsche to say that the judgments made by philosophers like Socrates and Plato cannot be true, as they merely express symptoms, is untenable. If Nietzsche were to study those symptoms, and proceed further, that would be a credit for the genius of his thinking. He must find the cure, if he mentions the disorders or leave it for others to tackle that area. The fox cannot be right when it says that the grapes are sour, when it fails to reach to the heights, where the bunch dangles! No need to take a grim view about the passion. No one tells to destroy it, and if some religious texts proclaim thus, the concerned individual has every right to arrive at one’s own interpretation. Excess of anything is bad. For example, coffee--Consume one cup….good. Take the second cup…okay….the third cup….difficult to tolerate…..the fourth cup….probably one will vomit! The same coffee…..what happened? Passion also needs to be understood in that context. Too much sex, too much alcohol, too much drugs….all these things are bad and if morality says so, what’s wrong in it? All the desires that are given by nature are to be exercised within their limitations, giving due respect to the laws of nature. Deny passion is not to deny reality, as Nietzsche makes out the case. The need is moderation. In religion/spirituality this type denial is known as detachment. Mind constantly evaluates the objects, but a genuine religious man knows the value of the mind! He has transcended the negative tendencies and passions, not subdued them. The subdued mind will rise again. But a mind that is controlled with proper procedures based on moral and spiritual principles will follow the dictates of the human conscience. As for Nietzsche’s views about the secular aspects of religion, he is absolutely right. His contention that all of secular existence is a struggle between different individuals for the feeling of power is perfect. One can see it in the day to day competition of individuals to assert superiority, and confront the opposition. A thing or a situation assumes meaning because there is some individual to dominate it. A thing may have different moral meanings at different times. A moral issue may affect an individual in a particular style at a particular time. There is always scope for rethinking and amendments. What is moral today may be viewed in an entirely different perspective after some period. Conclusion Nietzsche’s explanation of morality can be compared to the exercise of explaining a fruit, without tasting it. What is important is experiencing directly to get at the truth. When an argument begins with wrong premises, its further steps are bound to be wrong and the final conclusion absolutely wrong! That is the position of Nietzsche when he articulates about morality. No moralist will tell one to walk back. The wise saying goes, do not run away to an ashram (hermitage) on the hills; create an ashram where you are! A moral/spiritual individual views life in its totality and not in parts. He knows that reason cannot penetrate the truth all by itself. It is only used as a tool to a limited extent. When intellectuals discuss and comment upon the subject of morality/spirituality, all such confusions are bound to happen. Nietzsche is an intellectual--a philosopher. His problems of understanding are to be sympathized, rather than condemned. By knocking at the portals of the mind, Nietzsche will not be able to understand the true meaning of morality. He has to transcend the mind, to experience the profound realms beyond the mind. Works Cited Nietzsche, Friedrich (Author), Large, Duncan (Translator); Twilight of the Idols: or How to Philosophize with a Hammer (Oxford World's Classics); Oxford University Press, USA, June 25, 1998 Read More