Nietzsche: Genealogy of Morals

Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm. (1956). The birth of tragedy and The genealogy of morals ([1st ed.). Garden City, N.Y.,: Doubleday.


The Genealogy of Morals is broken down into four sections: 1.) Preface; 2.) “Good and Evil,” “Good and Bad”; 3.) “Guilt,” “Bad Consciousness,” and Related Matters; and 4.) What do Ascetic Ideals Mean?

He begins the preface by deriding those who continuously are looking for more and more knowledge to solve their problems because they do not spend time to examine themselves. “Our treasure lies in the beehives of our knowledge” (149). He then goes on to snidely make the claim, “As for the rest of life—so=-called “experience—who among us is serious enough for that? Or has time enough?” (149).

This book is a snide, rude and polemical attack (both polemic and attack are different translations for its subtitle) that attempts to use a distinct methodology to write history. As opposed to other authors who focus on the fact of history, be it material or ideational, this account focuses on cultural symbols as the starting ground for building and telling a historical story. Etymology plays an important role in explaining concepts. Symbols, mostly religious in nature, help Nietzsche tell his story about the trajectory that morality has taken throughout history.

In the first essay, Nietzsche examines the roots of good/bad and good/evil. He uses etymology to derive the base of good as being noble and the base of bad as being common, plebian. Good is synonymous with activity, health, strength, etc. Bad is a synonymous with the antonyms of the terms in the previous sentence.

Nietzsche also uses the priestly class as a tool for the development of his history. The priestly class derived from the noble class and stood above the slave class. However, because of their natural constraints, they were never able to engage in the “good” that the noble class so enjoyed. They were impotent in battle, constrained by moral law, and thus lashed out against the nobility.

He writes that the Jews created the slave revolt in morality, which is a revolt that begins by saying, “no” to the other, the one who stands in opposition. All of the action on the part of the slave is reactionary; they require an object to stand against themselves (171).

The weak are weak, but they claim superiority because they do not act as vengefully as the strong. However, the strong act as they do because they must, just like the bird of prey attacks, kills and eats the lamb. The bird of prey is not castigated because it is naturally inclined to eat lamb, no, it is understood that this is a natural expression of the circle of life.

In the second essay, Nietzsche addresses guilt and bad consciousness. He claims that humans are distinct from other animals in that they are able to make promises to one another. This is the beginnings of a system of credit and debt. Those who owe others and who can not pay are punished.

Additionally, because we have an understanding of those who came before us, our ancestors, we feel like we owe them for our existence, though it is impossible to pay them for this. This is one reason that we construct a god that we can worship and to whom we can offer gifts. Gods were also invented so that the spectacle of punishment did not go unobserved. It’s all much more complicated than that, but that’s all I’ll say for now.

In the third essay, Nietzsche explains that it is human nature to avoid a void and to search move towards a goal. Will eventually becomes to be represented by the ascetic ideal, which is represented by poverty, humility and chastity. The Ascetic ideal is the way forward, the remaining essence left over from the classical period for the philosopher.

The book, as stated earlier, is written as a polemic, or an attack and does provoke the reader in many places. Nietzsche looks as if he embraces cruelty, misogyny, anti-Semitic thought, war, etc. However, it may be more helpful to read him as providing a descriptive reading of history using a genealogical methodology, with hyperbole thrown in for show. If he is read from this perspective, he provides an account of history that is critical of modernity and liberalism in the sense that they attempt to obscure realities of the interaction of beings operating within nature. They search for knowledge and have forgotten about experience.