insight that supported more for his claims about the significantly linguistic

Insight that supported more for his claims about the

This preview shows page 2 - 4 out of 5 pages.

insight” that supported more for his claims about the significantly linguistic and cultural division of the notions “good” and “bad”. The notions of “good” and “bad” came not only from the superiority of power that the nobles and the rich possessed, but also from “a typical character trait”(GM:1.5): “truthfulness”. Nietzsche claims that the nobles and wealthy man of Greek civilization called themselves “the truthful”. He mentions that “the word coined for this, ethlos, means according to its root one who is, who possesses reality, who is real, who is true” (GM:1.5). With that being said, he believes “the true one is the truthful one” (GM:1.5), and because “the powerful” were the ones who decided themselves to be the “true” one, they are “the truthful”, and in reverse, the commoners and the poor were deemed “the untruthful”. The same thing applies to the striking similarity in Latin between the words “malus” (bad) and “melas” (dark, black) to refer to the black haired inhabitants of the Aryan soil, whose rulers were the blonds, who were called fin- “the distinguishing word of the nobility, in the end, the good, noble, pure one, originally blond- headed one, in contrast to the dark, black-haired occupants” (GM:1.5). To Nietzsche, there was a large and significant contrast between how people viewed what was “good” and “bad”, as well as the difference between the nobles, the rich, the powerful and the commoners, the poor, and the weak. The aforementioned pre-moral concept of “good and bad, was threatened, if not replaced, by the concept of “good and evil” when the priestly caste devised the terms “pure” and “impure”
Image of page 2
Essay 1- On the Genealogy of Morality- Nietzsche and reversed the flow of thought about what was “good” and what was “bad”. Nietzsche discusses the universally symbolical concept of those two words that the priests invented, that is: “the ‘pure one’ is from the beginning simply a human being who washes himself, who forbids himself certain foods…, who abhors blood…”(GM:1.6). Nietzsche deems such so called “abhorrent” behaviors were labeled with the rich and the powerful in this thought transition. The rich, therefore changed into the “bad”, or the “evil”, because they took part in the “impure” activities, an indication of power to Nietzsche. On the other hand, the priests, along with the poor, or the low-ranked, are deemed now the “good”, because they had clean and “pure” spirits, although Nietzsche believes that was due to the fact that “they are the most powerless”(GM:1.7) to engage in such “impure” actions. That is to say, “the miserable alone are the good; …, the only
Image of page 3
Image of page 4

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 5 pages?

  • Spring '14
  • AnnikaK.Thiem
  • Ressentiment

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture