Nietzsche and the Morality Critics - The University of Texas at Austin

More documents

Recommendations

Info

268 Ethics January 1997ticular circumstances to which such attitudes might be relevant. YetNietzsche is typically concerned with the underlying (ideal-typical) attitude-or"spirit -of MPS, rather than the particular rules of conduct.3. Let us say that that which MPS has a "pro" attitude toward isthe "Pro-Object," while that which MPS has a "con" attitude towardis the "Con-Object." Keeping in mind that what seems to have intrinsicvalue for Nietzsche is "human excellence"-the sort of excellence quacreative genius exemplified by Goethe and Nietzsche, for example-wecan say that Nietzsche's criticisms consist of two parts:a) With respect to the Pro-Object, Nietzsche argues either (i) thatthe Pro-Object has no intrinsic value (in the cases where MPSclaims it does) or (ii) that it does not have any or not nearly asmuch extrinsic value as MPS treats it as having; andb) With respect to the Con-Object, Nietzsche argues only that theCon-Objects are extrinsically valuable for the cultivation of humanexcellence and that this is obscured by the "con" attitude endorsedby MPS.In other words, what unifies Nietzsche's seemingly disparate criticalremarks-about altruism, happiness, pity, equality, Kantian respectfor persons, utilitarianism, and so on-is that he thinks a culture inwhich such norms prevail as morality will be a culture which eliminatesthe conditions for the realization of human excellence, the latter requiring,on Nietzsche's view, concern with the self, suffering, a certainstoic indifference, a sense of hierarchy and difference, and the like.Indeed, when we turn to the details of Nietzsche's criticisms of thesevarious norms we find that, in fact, he focuses precisely on how theyare inhospitable to human excellence. I want to illustrate this pointhere with just one example.According to Nietzsche, the "spirit" of MPS is that happiness isgood and suffering bad.43 What, one wonders, could be harmful aboutthis sort of seemingly innocuous valuation? An early remark ofNietzsche's suggests an answer:Are we not, with this tremendous objective of obliterating all thesharp edges of life, well on the way to turning mankind intosand? Sand! Small, soft, round, unending sand! Is that your ideal,you heralds of the sympathetic affections? (D, 174)In a later work, Nietzsche says, referring to hedonists and utilitarians,"Well-being as you understand it-that is no goal, that seems to us an43. One problem with this view is that its endpoint-the abolition of sufferingand the reign of happiness-is an impossibility because Nietzsche holds that "happinessand unhappiness are sisters" (GS, 338), that we must have both in order to have either.Although the unity of apparent opposites is a recurring theme in Nietzsche, it is notcentral to his objection to this aspect of MPS. A useful discussion of this theme can befound in Nehamas, pp. 209-11.This content downloaded on Tue, 12 Mar 2013 14:02:16 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Leiter Nietzsche and the Morality Critics 269end, a state that soon makes man ridiculous and contemptible" (BGE,225). By the hedonistic doctrine of well-being, Nietzsche takes theutilitarians to have in mind "English happiness," namely, "comfort andfashion" (BGE, 228),44 a construal which, if unfair to some utilitarians,may do justice to our ordinary aspirations to happiness. In a similarvein, Nietzsche has Zarathustra dismiss "wretched contentment" as anideal (Z, pref. 3), while also revealing that it was precisely "the lastmen"-the "most despicable men"-who "invented happiness" in thefirst place (pref. 5).Thus, the first part of Nietzsche's objection is this: happiness isnot an intrinsically valuable end; men who aim for it-directly orthrough cultivating the dispositions that lead to it-would be "ridiculousand contemptible." Note, of course, that Nietzsche allows that hehimself and the "free spirits" will be "cheerful"-they are, after all,the proponents of the "gay science" (cf. GS). But the point is that such"happiness" is not criterial of being a higher person, and thus it is notsomething that the higher person-in contrast to the adherent ofMPS-aims for.But why is it that aiming for happiness would make a person sounworthy of admiration? Nietzsche's answer appears to be this: becausesuffering is positively necessary for the cultivation of humanexcellence, which is the only thing, on Nietzsche's view, that warrantsadmiration. Nietzsche writes, for example, thatThe discipline of suffering [Die Zucht des Leidens], of great suffering-doyou not know that only this discipline has created allenhancements of man so far? That tension of the soul in unhappinesswhich cultivates its strength.... [W]hatever has beengranted to [the human soul] of profundity, secret, mask, spirit,cunning, greatness-was it not granted to it through suffering,through the discipline of great suffering? (BGE, 225; cf. BGE,270)Now Nietzsche is not arguing here that-in contrast to the view ofMPS-suffering is really intrinsically valuable; the value of sufferingis only extrinsic: suffering-"great"9 suffering-is a prerequisite ofany great human achievement.45 Nietzsche's attack, then, conforms to44. Nietzsche no doubt construes the doctrine thus uncharitably because he thinksthat the "British utilitarians ... walk clumsily and honorably in Bentham's footsteps"and that they have "not a new idea, no trace of a subtler version or twist of an old idea"(BGE, 228). Mill, of course, was at pains to develop a subtler hedonistic doctrine thanBentham's, though it is an open question whether in the process he does not pour allthe content out of the notion of "pleasure." In any event, Nietzsche drew no distinctionbetween Bentham and Mill-referring to the latter (in an especially intemperate spirit)as "the flathead John Stuart Mill" (WP, 30).45. Compare GS, pref. 3: "Only great pain is the ultimate liberator of the spirit....I doubt that such pain makes us 'better'; but I know that it makes us more profound."This content downloaded on Tue, 12 Mar 2013 14:02:16 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Page 1 and 2: Nietzsche and the Morality CriticsA
Page 3 and 4: Leiter Nietzsche and the Morality C
Page 11 and 12: andLeiter Nietzsche and the Moralit
Page 13: Leiter Nietzsche and the Morality C
Page 16 and 17: 264 Ethics January 1997descriptive
Page 18 and 19: 266 Ethics January 1997understandin
Page 22 and 23: 270 Ethics January 1997the model sk
Page 24 and 25: 272 Ethics January 1997plainly stri
Page 26 and 27: 274 Ethics January 1997ture-like ou
Page 28 and 29: 276 Ethics January 1997In the last
Page 30 and 31: 278 Ethics January 1997and social s
Page 32 and 33: 280 Ethics January 1997response mad
Page 34 and 35: 282 Ethics January 1997Nietzsche ob
Page 36 and 37: 284 Ethics January 1997trained alwa

Nietzsche and the Morality Critics - The University of Texas at Austin

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?