Nietzsche Noble Morality Analysis

Nietzsche does also offer some conclusions that would seem to go against the value of noble morality such as in (Genealogy, I §17) where he talks about how Napoleon is the perfect example of the problems that occur with the noble morality with its brutal nature. These criticisms suggest as (Kaufmann, 1974, p.297) puts it that “it does not follow from Nietzsche 's "vivisection" of slave morality that he identifies his own position with that of the masters” but rather that he focuses more on the negatives of the slave morality because he believes that it a bigger threat in the current day than the noble morality.
In this regard, Nietzsche remarks, in (Genealogy, II §24) how he hopes that there can be a true examination of these values and we can perhaps take the best and most valuable of values from both noble morality with its desire to say yes to life, boldness and the lack of hatred towards others and the best from the slave morality such as the lack of brutality and the cleverness which the nobles lack.
One point that I think is useful from Nietzsche is from his critique of the way that English psychologists examine how valuable these values are where he talks about how the English psychologists do make assumptions about how compassion and selflessness is ultimately what is good and valuable in the world without questioning whether or not these assumptions are true but I disagree with Nietzsche in that I do believe that these values of compassion and selflessness are good values to work towards maximising as I will elaborate on further later in the essay. Another criticism of the English psychologists I agree with Nietzsche on is that their methods of people such as Rée where he talks about how morality came about from it originally being useful and then was habitually grained into our psyche which Nietzsche points out that why would they not still be useful. However, I do not agree with Nietzsche about his disregard for the dispassionate and naturalistic methods for trying the find the origin of our moral values but I rather believe that Rée’s explanation was incorrect but the value of values can still be found in such a manner. The first of the points that I disagree with Nietzsche is in his tendency to be favourable towards the noble morality as opposed to the slave morality because if you were to act as the noble morality would seem to recommend then the world would be a much more brutal and cruel place as even Nietzsche himself admits in (Genealogy, I §17). To defend what I believe is the lack of value in noble morality. In defending the slave morality, I would the use thought experiment of the veil of ignorance from (Rawls, 1971) where if you didn’t know whether you would be weak or strong in the world which morality would you choose to govern the world. In this thought experiment I believe that most people would choose the slave morality to govern the world as the effect that having the will of the nobles put upon the slaves seems to be much worse than the effect that the slave morality has on the world. There are also some flaws in Nietzsche’s reasoning when justifying the value of the noble morality one of these flaws is in the story of the lambs and the birds of prey as Nietzsche says that to decry the birds of prey for killing the lambs as evils is wrong because the birds of prey cannot help it as it is in their nature and they are strong. In a way, this line of argument removes them of …show more content…
There is also the question raised by the European imperialist power who are around at the time that Nietzsche is writing who while proclaim themselves as Christian who are putting their will unto people and they seem to be acting very similar to Nietzsche’s conception of the noble morality. This imperialism suggests that Christianity allows for such developments and noble morality is more prevalent than he thinks it is but Nietzsche does not seem to acknowledge this as he talks about noble morality as mostly being in the