Human Reasoning about Good and Evil - Essay Sample

Reviewed literature shows that human rationale about good and evil remains a sensitive topic of discussion basically because it involves critical religious matters that mean a lot to many believers. Fredrich Nietzsche (1844-1900), is among a few philosophers who remained firm in speaking out his mind on this topic. In his view, the West could idealize the Earth in businesses, trade, and modern Western ideas or the ideal-idols, which includes human rationale. His notion that "God is dead and has no influence over people's moral values as compared to nature" attracted a lot of criticism, but he stood his grounds. Nietzsche perceives that the existing European values failed to enhance will to power, and people need Nihilism to access new norms that give them will consist of energy. This information could help to stimulate reasoning on the constructs of moral and immoral values in the current world.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Born of a puritan family that wanted him to pursue the priesthood, Nietzsche dumped the career and sought logical truth about life through rationale. This scholar loved intellectual autonomy, and many people found it "easy to believe that he had once accepted anyone's philosophy" (Dolson 242). As a result, his presumptions based on European historical values, particularly those on humanity via "the archaeological excavations" (Oyeshile 102). This literature influenced the hypothesis that when God exists, humanity can create a favorable condition that enhances wellness because "it is no longer tenable to believe in the existence of God" (Oyeshile, 102). In this view, the human race needs atheism to substitute the embattled Supreme Being. Like other extreme philosophers, Nietzsche develops a great concern over the situation of humanity as he eliminates the general abstract, systematic, and objective-based philosophy as a delusion by perceiving that life is beyond logical presumptions. According to Oyeshile, many scholars believe that when the Christian God ceased, "the European populations remained without a universal objective" (103). Some take such juncture to unleash the excellent and free spirits to destroy the obstruction of traditional morality and allow them to make new virtues that drive prosperity.

In the view of Nietzsche, Christian beliefs dwell solely on a sacrifice of all pride, all freedom, all self-confidence of the spirit, and they attract enslavement, self-humiliation, and self-mockery. In this regard, there would be a time when popular concepts such as the God and sin model that has caused humanity significant suffering and frights would become useless. When an individual analyzes the depth of Christian ethics, he or she would be doing the same to "values in which humanity believes" (Oyeshile 103). The only visible element from these values, in Nietzsche's understanding, is some fatal abortion that fascinates. More so, there was an invention of the "God" ideology to explain life as the idea of "beyond" depreciates the only begotten life-supporting planet, Earth. Besides, the concept of the "immortality of the soul, sin and ethical person" aimed at mocking the human physical body, mislead human instincts and initiating weakness, misshapen, ill, and other negative features that need obliterating, respectively. In this context," morality thwarts the principle of selectivity generally through the issue of ethics" (Oyeshile 103). Here, the author refers to the law of natural selection that validates the survival of the fittest.

The morality of timidity or priestly ethics equals to herd morality. Oyeshile contends that the European type of morality base on the principle of herd animal ethics, which merely one category of "human values beside, before and after which higher ethical principles could have succeeded" (104). However, these ethical codes go against the idea of possibility hence establishing its status as the real ethics. In the presence of religion, these moral codes emerge in the realm of political and social spheres. Nietzsche's rejection of Christian religion materializes based on its creation of the "all people are equal before God" notion in addition to the self-humiliation of the human race, the dual that destroys the will of power. In his view, the idea of equality before God fails to explain the abilities that differentiate among people. Oyeshile further explains that human cultural history presents cultural virtues as "localized and transitory in nature" (104). In the context of the relativity of cultural ethics, Fredrich perceives that there is a blurred line between virtues, time and place, and people's basic needs that flourish them. This scenario means that no factor can make all the values immutable.

The cultural past of humanity had Aristocratic features that flourished in the initial stages of tradition before undergoing a gradual extinction due to the aging culture. For instance, Homer's era presented the Greeks as heroes who later became scientists, philosophers, and sophists during Pericles and Spartan war. More so, they became great kings and conquerors of the past world during the early Roman history before the imperial decline saw them become "helpless victims of their former superior civilization" (Oyeshile 104). However, the current race of barbarians remains free from such transformations. Either, Dolson agrees that the primary races dominated Europe to usher in a new culture but ended up the same way. This situation prevailed when the Germanic populations and initiators of the past Roman civilization embraced democracy and socialistic principles that exposed them to scientific, ethical, and artistic ventures. Nevertheless, their existence characterized moral "decadence, riches, ease, optimism, the emancipation of females, philosophy and pessimism among others" (Oyeshile 104). One can see the patterns of advanced degeneration or link morality with new and robust cultures could be the initial step towards attaining joyful wisdom.

Regarding the creation of ethic concepts by moralists and traditionalists, it becomes clear that morality has no necessary codes that drive it. According to Oyeshile, the world has experienced many modalities; hence, one could only think philosophically about ethics by first recognizing its diverse state and the notion that it has "a history similar to other phases of human culture" (105). In such a situation, one can offer a tentative natural history commonly called the genealogy of morals as the issue of discussion. Basing on this choice, the transvaluation of virtues or immoralism becomes the far-reaching conclusion. At this point, it becomes possible to argue that Western culture has from the past continued to shape the world as it gradually grows alongside its tortured tension accompanied by a severe catastrophic experience.

Western culture cannot reflect despite its decadence and hypocritical features. In Dolson's views, the traditional authorities that could tame the population towards morality lack "an effective concept of curb their bad excesses" (241). Instead, these authorities are perpetuating the past features of the superior ancestral commands, namely the constitution, the law, or right. In some cases, they seek herd maxims like the elements of the commonweal or the first servants of their masses. According to Oyeshile, the tremendous and spiritually independent or an influential intellectual could appear dangerous, as those elements that can "elevate people above the herd concept and threatens the neighbor becomes evil" (105). The society, therefore, cherishes those who are willing to conform and submit to the prevailing norms.

The variation between slave morality and master morality is the influencing factor for Nietzsche's issue of the natural history of ethics and the fundamental principle behind immoralism. In Sogolo's understanding, the ruling class or Aristocratic are the creators of topics and guidelines of "societal morality depending on the prevailing time" (15). The master morality has become foreign and disturbing in the face of the general population. Its firm principle which requires that an individual's duties limited to one's equals hence could act towards those in lower levels of the hierarchy towards the foreign entities as one wishes. Moreover, the values of such an action are beyond virtues and vices.

Empirical evidence has presents that in all the more significant and diverse cultures, there are efforts to mediate between slave and master moralities. Either, the proper segregations of virtues must have emerged from the influencing group or the subject, dependents, and slaves of every degree. This arena is the Alfa of the popular obstructers of virtues and vices. Here, an evil "person's feelings have power, danger, terribleness, and strength, which limits the development of contempt" (Oyeshile 105). Literature from the Slave morality shows that the evil ones always inspire fear while that from the master morality, the good associates with horror as the evil ones perpetuate contempt.

Concerning the issue of truth, it emerges that untruth, dishonesty, or lies are activities of life in which one resists the common virtuous feelings in a vulnerable concept. Either the philosophy that tries such a situation could place itself beyond values and vices. Oyeshile exhausts that such a philosophy is "autocratic in nature and the most spiritual will to influence" (106). When one embraces an unfree will, it could lead to misuse of the cause and effect because such person, as exemplified by natural scientists, could wrongly reify the cause and effect. Besides, Sogolo states that the utilization of the origin and influence within the context of concept purity, could mean conventions fictions, to be precise, with an objective of "communication and designation rather than for explanation" (25). Within itself," there is no causal link of psychological non-freedom or necessity because their consequences operate beyond the boundaries of the cause hence the absence of the rule of law. The purpose and effect are people's conjecture, and the unfree will remains the mythology, but in a real sense, it refers to strong and inferior intentions. Oyeshile perceives that it is ethically a prejudice to say the truth is superior to the appearance and that the definition of the world has happened in the "intelligible nature is purely a will of power" (106). Many scholars view power as a singular and valid concept of assessing the significance of every global event.

Conclusively, the optimization of human reasoning to explain good and evil has presented scholars with hurdles due to the sensitivity of the topic. However, scholars like Nietzsche stood firm to articulate their minds about the creation and applicability of good and evil on humans. According to this literature, the traditional definition of right and crime has flaws, and there is a need to embrace the positive new virtues.

Works Cited

Dolson N. Grace. The Influence of Schopenhauer upon Friedrich Nietzsche. Published by: Duke University Press. The Philosophical Review, Vol. 10, No. 3 (May 1901), pp. 241-250. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2176260, 1901.

Oyeshile A Olatunji. Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil: A Morality of Immoralism.4 January 2012. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/276710, 2012

Sogolo, G. 'On the Autonomy of the Moral Agent.' African Philosophical Inquiry, Vol. 1, No. 1, January, pp. 43-52. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-94-009-3773-4_13,1987.