Friedrich Nietzeche - Assignment Example

Friedrich Nietzsche The master morality is the attitude in which the good and bad tend to be equivalent to noble and contemptible accordingly. The good-bad identifies that hierarchy of people, and the noble masters are the common entities in the society (Oliver and Pearsall 211). Notably, the noble people recognize the moral duties towards those persons of equal status. In this respect, the noble people do not mind about how they treat the inferior persons. Hence, the good person rightly induces fear in the people below their status, and respects the equals.

Such morality exhibits gratitude, as well as, vengeance. On the other hand, slave morality embraces the standards of what is beneficial to the powerless. The morality holds that the independent and strong people possess evil attributes (211). In effect, the slave morality advances virtues such as humility, sympathy, and kindness. Thus, the two types of morality have remarkable differences.The master morality gives the masters a sense of fullness, including ability, wealth, and power. In this respect, the noble people perceive themselves as the originators of value, and can decide on what is good or bad.

Such masters do not need the outside force to affirm their goodness because they believe devotion for greatness is in them (212). Thus, Nietzsche thinks that master morality is superior because it emphasizes strength, freedom, power, and egoism, and concern less with the externals. The morality evokes fear, inflicts suffering, and exploits the people in the lower order. In essence, the masters consider the non-masters in the society contemptible. To them, the non-masters are secondary and insignificant.

Nietzsche thinks that religion and democracy fall under slave morality because the two tend to ease the suffering of the people. The expression of the slave morality adheres to the moral standards inherent in religion and democracy. Hence, the religion and democracy exemplify the same ideology as in slave morality. In effect, the religion and democracy exhibit the ideology of herd, majority, and convention contained in the slave morality. Similarly, religion and democracy embrace values such equality, pity, and humility that typify slave morality.

Thus, Nietzsche uses the values to classify religion and democracy under the slave morality. In my opinion, relativistic morality cannot be defended. The relativistic morality tends to exaggerate the extent of diversity among cultures. Notably, the superficial differences among the cultures mask the underlying shared agreement. I believe that the core set of universal values exist, which any human culture should endorse in order to flourish. The moral agreements that unite humanity are greater than the morals held by a certain culture.

For instance, different cultures may have varied opinions regarding what is morally valuable in issues such as the death penalty. Some cultures might view the death penalty as morally right while others refute the capital punishment. In this respect, the relativistic morality contains logical fallacy, and assumes that moral rightness is an issue that centers on obedience to the cultural values. I contend that there is no basis to appraise and judge according to particular values inherent in a certain culture.

A kind of non-relative standard must exist in order to have fair judgments based on universal values and agreements. Work CitedOliver, Kelly and Pearsall, Marilyn. Feminist Interpretations of Friedrich Nietzsche. Pennsylvania: Penn State Press, 2010. Print.