Macmillan

Schopenhauerrepresents
problemswhich
BEYOND GOOD AND EVIL 95
selveswith moralityas a science: theywanted to givea basis
to
"
morality and
every philosopherhitherto has believed
that he has givenit a basis;moralityitself, however,has
been regardedas something"given." How far from their
awkward pridewas the seeminglyinsignificant problem"
leftin dust and decay" of a description of forms of morality,
notwithstanding that the finesthands and senses could hardly
be fine enough for it! It was preciselyowing to moral philosophe
knowing the moral facts imperfectly, an arbitrary
epitome,or an
"
accidental abridgement perhaps as
the moralityof their environmentțheirposition, church,
their Zeitgeist, their climate and zone
" it was precisely because
they were badly instructed with regardto nations,
to know
eras, and past ages, and were by no means eager
about these matters, that they did not even come in sight
of the real problemsof morals "
themselves by a comparisonof many kinds of morality. In
only disclose
every "Science of Morals" hitherto, strange as it may sound,
the problem of moralityitselfhas been omitted;there has
been no suspicionthat there was anythingproblematicthere!
That which philosophers called "givinga basis to morality,"
and endeavoured to realise, has, when seen in a rightlight,
proved merely a learned form of good faith in prevailing
morality,a new means of its expression, consequentlyjusta
matter-of-fact within the sphere of a definite morality,yea,
in its ultimate motive,a sort of denial that it is lawful for
and this moralityto be called in "
question
in any case the
reverse of the testing,analysing,doubting,and vivisecting
of this very faith. Hear,for instance, with what innocence
" almost
worthy of honour "
his
own task,and draw your conclusions concerningthe scientificness
of a "Science" whose latest master stilltalks in
the strain of children and old wives: "The principle," he