Analysis of Nietzsches Genealogy - Book Report/Review Example

NIETZSCHE'S GENEALOGY Philosophy is the critical examination of grounds for fundamental beliefs and an analysis of the basic concepts employed in the expression of such beliefs. Philosophical inquiry is a central element in the intellectual history of many historical civilizations.1 The amorphous state of ideas in philosophy makes it interesting and difficult to assimilate at the same time. It is this amorphousness which gives the ideas an ability to be interpreted in more than one way. Nietzsche's genealogy is no different and fully embodies the multi-interpretation ability. The great writer's work in which genealogy is fully explored is "Genealogy of Morals". His main concern is the existing inability of human beings to get out of the given "morality box". He emphasizes that if man intend to progress into future he require a change in his own understanding. He has therefore deliberated about the evolution of morality. "Nietzsche attempts to unmask the motives that underlie traditional Western religion, morality, and philosophy deeply affected generations of theologians, philosophers, psychologists, poets, novelists, and playwrights. He thought through the consequences of the triumph of the Enlightenment's secularism, expressed in his observation that "God is dead," in a way that determined the agenda for many of Europe's most celebrated intellectuals after his death2. This paper delves in his work by:- 1. Understanding Genealogy and Morals and its link in Nietzsche perspective. 2. Analyzing the three essays of "Genealogy of Morals" 3. Synthesizing the Analysis of all three essays to determine the efficacy of genealogical approach. UNDERSTANDING GENEALOGY AND MORALS LINKAGE Genealogy as a discipline is defined as "study and tracing of family pedigrees. This involves the collection of the names of relatives, both living and deceased, and establishing the relationships among them based on primary, secondary and/or circumstantial evidence or documentation, thus building up a cohesive family tree."3 This implies that genealogist has to "collect oral histories and preserve family stories to discover ancestors and living relatives. Genealogists also attempt to understand not just where and when people lived but also their lifestyle, biography, and motivations. This often requires - or leads to - knowledge of antique law, old political boundaries, immigration trends, and historical social conditions"4 in short extensive research and data collection is required to be productive in genealogy. Foucault said "genealogy is gray, meticulous, and patiently documentary. It operates on a field of entangled and confused parchments, on documents that have been scratched over and recopied many times. ... Genealogy, consequently, requires patience and knowledge of details and it depends on a vast accumulation of source material. Its "cyclopean monuments" are constructed from "discreet and apparently insignificant truths and according to a rigorous method"; they cannot be the product of "large and well-meaning errors." In short, genealogy demands relentless erudition."5 The question arises that why should one look for the fact that who his/her ancestors were The only reason at an individual level is the pleasure of ascertaining one's identity. However, three important points / limitations (if you dare to call it so) are associated with genealogy which is:- 1. The genealogy has a fixed nature for obvious reasons i.e. you cannot change your fore father!!!! 2. It is the fixed nature and inability to effect any change in the pedigree that the results are held in reverence. 3. Extensive research to ascertain the facts which if go wrong has the danger of falling into a creation of "false" history. It is these limitations which Nietzsche tries to circumvent in order to find the roots of morality. Before proceeding further on genealogy let us see what we mean by morality. The dictionary meaning of morality is "a system of ideas of right and wrong conduct: religious morality; Christian morality or Virtuous conduct / rule or lesson in moral conduct". Since Nietzsche targeted Christian morality it would be relevant to include morality definition as per Catholic Encyclopedia which states "Morality is antecedent to ethics: it denotes those concrete activities of which ethics is the science. It may be defined as human conduct in so far as it is freely subordinated to the ideal of what is right and fitting." 6 We will not complicate the issue by going in the discussion of ethics per se, but should realize that the emphasis is on "ideal of what is right and fitting" and this is the ground in which Nietzsche tread. Dwelling there to find out that who decides the "ideal of what is right and fitting" and how man has reached to that ideal. In order to find that Nietzsche find it relevant to move back in history to find out the formulation of declared "right and fitting". This is where Nietzsche has to take the help of genealogy but trying to circumvent its above mentioned limitations. Resultantly, Nietzsche's genealogy might not have an extensive data so that it should not fall in the "false history" also it does not hold the morality of the past in reverence thus not fixated. Nietzsche therefore, is dealing with genealogy in completely different way however, the approach can be objected by any one strictly sticking to the core "genealogy definition". GENEALOGY OF MORALS The Crux of First Essay: Good and Evil The first essay is about differentiation of Good and Evil. Nietzsche is of the opinion that the basic instinct of man is "power" which he call "will to power". This will to power leads to the subjugation of the ones who are weak. Therefore the basic instinct which was supposed to be good is "Will to Power". But as the weak find it uncomfortable they construed against the domination of the virtue of "good i.e. being powerful" and brought their weaknesses of humbleness, selflessness and equality as virtues. This reversal of "virtue" is what changed the basic instinct of being powerful, dominating and ability to articulate own destiny into vice and the helplessness of the weak which was the vice in itself was turned inside out and turned into the virtue of equality, humanity and selflessness. Nietzsche describes the turn as follows:- "While every noble morality develops from a triumphant affirmation of itself, slave morality from the outset says No to what is "outside," what is "different," what is "not itself"/ and this No is its creative deed. This inversion of the value positing eye - this need to direct one's view outward instead of back to oneself- is of the essence of ressentiment: in order to exist, slave morality always first needs a hostile external world; it needs, physiologically speaking, external stimuli in order to act at all - its action is fundamentally reaction."7 Therefore, what had been characterized as bad is actually what good is and this transformation is in the words of Bergmann "a lame after thought". That is why to Nietzsche morality is linked with history and "only that which has no history is definable. This is the reason that concepts of morality are "best connected to each other by 'family resemblances,' and there are no antecedently specifiable limits to what can count as sufficient 'resemblance' to make the term morality correctly applicable".8 Critique Nietzsche has described the two types as one instinct of being powerful being called as "masters" and the other that of "slaves". Masters being superior to slaves as they are powerful and more talented in all matters. According to Nietzsche these slaves have inverted the virtue of the strong into vice and their vice as virtue. However, the argument of Nietzsche negates itself with this assumption as the ability of slaves being "creative and self affirming, namely by inverting the master's values and inventing a new moral valuation"9 indicate their superior intelligence than their master. The "slave mentality" can be interpreted in two more ways which are different as to what Nietzsche saw. Nietzsche despised the "slave mentality" and called it the reason of the stale mate of human's progress but not realizing that:- 1. The feeling10 which has been generated in slave by being overcome or subordinated by the powerful, originates from the same basic instinct of being powerful. So the desire of being powerful is common between "master" and "slave". As per Nietzsche the slave construed the situation in order to subdue the authority of "master"; had he not acted on the instinct to get powerful and maintain the balance of power he would have maintained the status quo. Nietzsche also argue that the actions show that what you are therefore by that standards also the actions taken by "slave" to subdue the master is what we can categorize as the struggle to get power. With this in view can we really segregate the two instincts within "slave" and "master" 2. Conversely, what if the "slave mentality" is yet another "basic instinct" of a human being. The reason is that if we all have "will to power" then the will to dominate is natural as is the effort to dominate. Therefore, some element has to dominate being superior to the other at one point of time. Now the other part which had been dominated still possesses the instinct of "will to power" and should strive for taking back its position. There can be only one way for doing that being better than the ones who dominate. History shows that such turn over of being in power is what had been happening. That is why it is said that only permanent thing is "change itself". But in the process the group striving for power has discovered a new instinct which is a "slave instinct". Therefore, when they regain power they are equipped with both the basic instincts where as the one who has been recently subdued is experiencing a new dimension of instinct i.e. slave instinct. The survival of humanity with both the instincts and the continuous changing of the "powerful quarters" indicate that in the course of evolution of morality man has come to know both the mentalities in him at the same time. Only one taking over the other according to the situation. So declaring one preferable over the other is as if selecting one eye out of the two according to their utility!!!!! It is said that Paul Ree was wrong to follow the English tendency in describing the history of morality in terms of a linear development11. This means that the entire humanities actions had always been in a single direction there had been no change of ideas or morals on the basis of different experience they are going through in struggles, change in attitudes, desires and disguises.12 Nietzsche deliberation into morality was supposed to address the issue and to some critics it did. However to me, it did not. On the other hand it generated the linearity in two dimensions namely:- 1. All human beings at the start of evolution of morality possessed the characteristic of Will to Power which Nietzsche want to get revived. If this will to power is not taken as constant in all human beings than the entire genealogical effort of Nietzsche neutralize. The reason is that if from the start some have Will to Power and some don't than there should not have been any struggle for taking ascendancy amongst each other. That is to say that slave will be happy as slaves and masters as masters. Therefore considering all humans, at the time of evolution of morality, to have Will to Power of same intensity is linearity in itself. 2. The other linearity which Nietzsche has introduced is that the human beings through out history kept on possessing that Will to Power irrespective of the change in circumstances, situation and physical environments. This is almost the same as that of mentioned by Paul Ree. Therefore, Nietzsche instead of addressing the linearity pointed out by Paul Ree introduced an additional one. The Crux of Second Essay: Bad Conscience . This essay covers that how the "bad conscience" is developed. As mentioned in the first essay that the "slave" is deprived of manifesting his "will to power" towards the "masters" thus his energies are turned against himself inwardly and "the instinct of cruelty that turns back after it can no longer discharge itself externally." 13The conscience is basically the ability to shoulder responsibility in abiding by the customs associated with a society. Such mores are customs of punishment and retribution for misdeeds so that men are compelled by memory to continue to abide by them. 14 Resultantly the mores so developed elates an individual to a status where he can have a control over his own will15 and a morality of his own. It is the standard of this morality within him that he use to judge the other beings associated with him. This self created standard and ability to have a control over oneself along with an ability to assess the others is what is called "conscience". However, when this conscience is applied in a community set up than it drives individuals towards a responsibility to maintain a peace in the society. If the member of society commits himself in disturbing the peace of society than he has to be subjected to punishment and that is what the basic instinct is revenge and desire of justice. Actually it does not happen as such. The collective psyche of the community tend to have a relatively "presumed balanced" approach between the disturber of peace and the one who got disturbed. That is where the concept of mercy is introduced which is totally opposite to "will to power" (basic instinct) and the resultant longing to punish / revenge. Result - development of "bad conscience". This bad conscience makes the man unable to discharge his will to power ,dominate, punish and revenge to the outside world therefore he turns to the one on whom he has a control i.e. himself. This tends to lead him in punishing himself feeling self pity and moves on the self sacrifice and self denial. Nietzsche explains:- In this psychical cruelty there resides a madness of the will which is absolutely unexampled: the will of man to find himself guilty and reprehensible to a degree that can never be atoned for; his will to think himself punished without any possibility to the punishment becoing equal to the guilt; his will to infect and poison the fundamental ground of things with the problem of punishment and guilt so as to cut off once and for all his own exit from his labyrinth of "fixed idea": his will to erect an ideal - that of the "holy God" - and in the face of it to feel the palpable certainty of his own absolute unworthiness".16 Critique The main thrust from above account is that the collective thinking of a community gives birth to the feeling of pity and mercy for the wrong doer. The point to ponder is that the community is formed by the combination of "masters" and "slaves". Or in other words it is formed by the ones who are in power or the ones feeling to be in power through community and the ones striving to come in power. Those who are overall at the helms of affairs in the community tending to have their supreme basic instinct of will to power at its maximum. Therefore, how come that they develop the instinct of mercy or pity. How come the ones with "will to power" succumb to the lowly beings One has to think, is the analogy used by Nietzsche right or self defeating What if it is not the slave instinct of "mercy" which leads to the decision of leaving rather it is the pleasure which the powerful enjoys in granting bail to the weak which leads to mercy. Resultantly, this mercy does not lead to "bad conscience" but in fact it enhances and nourishes the will to power. That is the action of forgiveness is not an out come of bad conscience but is a chance created to become more generous, magnanimous and "feel power factor" for the present and future. If this approach is adopted than the idea of development of "bad conscience" stands cancelled altogether. The self pity or selflessness is a way to being powerful, a transitional period and another way of exercising power on others. Self pity is the first stage to the path and selflessness is the final stage. Selflessness, negating one's interest, is a method in which the influence on the surroundings and people is achieved by creating a vacuum within. This vacuum so created by dropping one's interest or putting other's interests foremost to one's own is a way of sucking (attracting) the people to submission, ultimately achieving the goal of the basic aim of instinct of "will to power". The aim here is not to negate the great writer's theory altogether but to see the same reasons with a different lens. The Crux of Third Essay: Ascetic Ideals In view of Nietzsche ascetic has different meanings for every one depending on the pedestal on which one stands to see it : In case of artists they mean nothing or too many things; in the case of philosophers and scholars something like a sense and instinct for the most favorable preconditions of higher spirituality; in the case of women a touch of morbidezza in fair flesh in the case of the physiologically deformed and deranged (the majority of mortals) and attempt to see themselves as "too good" for this world, a saintly form . In the case of priests the distinctive priestly faith, their best instrument of power in the case of saints, finally, a pretext for hibernation their repose in nothingness, their form of madness.17 In each case, the pursuit of ascetic ideas demonstrates that man has begun to degenerate.18. The self denial is because of the inward turning of will to power. This leads to the feeling of nothingness which is contrary to the basic instinct of the man. Therefore, man drifts away characteristically away from his very essence. Critique When seen in context of Nietzsche understanding of asceticism it is evident that self denial and nothingness is not what human should be seeking for. The man instinctively follows the will to power and it is the stymied of this ability that has led him to the meaningless direction of self denial and nothingness. However, one should see that this desire of self denial and nothingness in another perspective. It is well known that those who seek such a desire do so to establish a connection with some Supreme Power. It is not to indulge in degradation but instead it is done to get closer to a Supreme Power to gain more power through the proximity of Supreme Power. In fact in this sense it is the following of the same will to power instinct. SYNTHESIS OF ANALYSIS Before we proceed to synthesize our above analysis we should briefly synthesize as to how three essays of "Genealogy of Morals" are connected. In the first essay writer tried to establish the genesis of "good" and "bad". He gave the concept of "master" and "slave" mentality and moved on to deduce that "slave" mentality managed to switch the meaning of "good" and "bad". The active characteristic of "will to Power" was demonized and replaced by weaker characteristics of humbleness, forgiveness, pity and selflessness. The inversion of the "good" and "bad" sense leads to the creation of a feeling which pollutes the conscience to evolve "bad conscience". This "bad conscience" is what further directs the people to asceticism, degrading and devaluating oneself. Nietzsche emphasize that this state of asceticism is not natural and original. It is the misdirected effort of the man. He reiterates that to improve upon the condition of the man he has to have a fresh look upon his view of self. In words of Nietzsche:- So we are necessarily strangers to ourselves, we do not comprehend ourselves, we have to misunderstand ourselves, for us the law "Each is furthest from himself" applies to all eternity - we are not " men of knowledge" with respect to ourselves.19 Having said so about the three essays and completing the individaul essays critic in above paras from here on it is intended to view the concept in entirety and synthesis the critic as well. The genealogical approach which Nietzsche adopted and for the subject it has adopted is difficult to comprehend and deal with. The major factor lacking in the entire discourse of "Genealogy of Morals" is lack of consideration of complexity of human society. Society is taken as a system in which humans are the subsystems. Different societies are progressing and developing according to the surroundings and the subsystems within it. Whereas, the subsystems in turn interact with each other and with other systems. This interrelatedness of system and subsystem develop the complexity. This complexity is present and had always been present in societies. However, Nietzsche has not taken this complexity into account. He has supposed that the individual's "will to power" is constant in all the individuals throughout the history. The effect on the individual due to the changing environments and the level of interaction due to his expansion of communication is either not taken care of or thought not worthy of any importance by Nietzsche. This simplicity is evident from the linearity of the approach adopted in this genealogy. The linearity of existing of "will to power" in all the humans at the time of inception of human history and then the linearity of its existence throughout history indicate the simplicity which Nietzsche adopted for his genealogy. Whereas, as had been discussed genealogy require thorough collection of data and deliberation. In this context "Nietzsche genealogy" falls short of "the essence of genealogy". This simplicity of the human character by Nietzsche is the reason that he got blinded of the possibility of two base morals instead of one. Or even if we do not take the analogy of two base morals the possibility of virtue of "slave mentality" as a means to instigate base moral is not explored. Another important factor which Nietzsche does not consider in his genealogical discourse is texture of community or society. With the texture we mean the way it is being formed. The community is formed by the individuals. In these individuals the customs, traditions and decisions are made by the powerful. The "powerful" representing the ones who are the ones driven by "will to power". Therefore, the mentality of such a community dominated by the "powerful" should be termed as "will to power by community" and should be closely related to "will to power" of an individual. This implies that any traditions or customs evolved by a community dominated by the powerful is if not exactly than at least closely related to that of an individual with an intention of "will to power". This connotation is not considered in genealogy. To summarize one can say that a different angle to what Nietzsche has described genealogy is that even if we admit the linearity of 'will to power' in all human beings eventually two classes would emerge which may be termed as "masters" and "slaves" or rulers and ruled. If the society is considered as a system then the system has to respond to the actions done by the individuals which are component of it. Therefore, when the two components of societies interact the system has to go in a flux and seek stabilization thus giving rise and fall of one class over the others. Resultantly masters become slaves and slaves turn into masters. This is evident from the history of rise and fall of nations. The paper has covered the areas where Nietzsche has avoided treading. It is evident that the discourse in "Genealogy of Morals" lacks the depth and breadth of comprehensiveness. However, Nietzsche has covered a dimension of morality and might have deliberately avoided the other parallel or crossing paths. What has been felt after completing the thorough investigation on Nietzsche's genealogy (to the extent possible in the length of this essay) is that such a use of the word genealogy is more of semantic value than a procedural implementation. REFERENCES - Bergmann, Frithjof. "Nietzsche's Critique of Morality." Reading Nietzsche. Ed.R.Solomonand K.Higgins. Oxford: University Press, 1988. - CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA Morality - Carsten Korfmacher, On the Significance of Genealogy in Nietzsche's Critique of Morality Aporia vol . 12 number 1-2002 - Danto, Arthur. "Some Remarks on The Genealogy of Morals." International Studies in Philososphy 18, no 2 (1986) - Foucault, Michel.1977."Nietzsche, genealogy, History" In Language, Counter-Memory Practice: Selected Essays and Interviews, edited by D.F.Bouchard. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.) - Geuss, Raymond. Morality, Culture, and History. Cambridge: University Press, 1999. - Michel Foucault, "Nietzsche, Genealogy, History," in Foucault, Language, Counter-memory, Practice. Donald F. Bouchard, Ed. (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1977) - Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Genealogy of Morals and Ecce Homo. Walter Kaufmann, trans.p.15 - Nietzsche, Friedrich."From The Dawn." In The Portable Nietzsche. Walter Kaufman trans ed. 1977 p.76 - Nietzsche, Friedrich." Encyclopdia Britannica. Encyclopdia Britannica 2007 Ultimate Reference Suite. Chicago: Encyclopdia Britannica, 2007. - "philosophy." Encyclopdia Britannica. Encyclopdia Britannica 2007 Ultimate Reference Suite. Chicago: Encyclopdia Britannica, 2007. - Wikipedia- Genealogy Read More