Masterslave morality

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Masterslave morality is a central theme of Friedrich Nietzsche's works, in particular the first
essay of On the Genealogy of Morality. Nietzsche argued that there were two fundamental types
of morality: 'Master morality' and 'slave morality'. Slave morality values things like kindness,
humility and sympathy, while master morality values pride, strength, and nobility. Master morality
weighs actions on a scale of good or bad consequences unlike slave morality which weighs
actions on a scale of good or evil intentions. For Nietzsche, a particular morality is inseparable
from the formation of a particular culture. This means that its language, codes and practices,
narratives, and institutions are informed by the struggle between these two types of
moral valuation.
Contents
[hide]

1 Master morality

2 Slave morality

3 Society

4 See also

5 References

Master morality[edit]
Nietzsche defined master morality as the morality of the strong-willed. Nietzsche criticizes the
view, which he identifies with contemporary British ideology, that good is everything that is helpful;
what is bad is what is harmful. He argues that this view has forgotten the origins of the values,
and thus it calls what is useful good on the grounds of habitualness what is useful has always
been defined as good, therefore usefulness is goodness as a value. He continues explaining, that
in the prehistoric state, "the value or non-value of an action was derived from its
consequences"[1] but ultimately, "There are no moral phenomena at all, only moral interpretations
of phenomena."[2] For these strong-willed men, the 'good' is the noble, strong and powerful, while
the 'bad' is the weak, cowardly, timid and petty. The essence of master morality is nobility. Other
qualities that are often valued in master moralities are open-mindedness, courage, truthfulness,
trust and an accurate sense of self-worth. Master morality begins in the 'noble man' with a
spontaneous idea of the good, then the idea of bad develops as what is not good. "The noble
type of man experiences itself as determining values; it does not need approval; it judges, 'what is
harmful to me is harmful in itself'; it knows itself to be that which first accords honour to things; it
is value-creating."[3] In this sense, the master morality is the full recognition that oneself is the
measure of all things.[citation needed] Insomuch as something is helpful to the strong-willed man it is like
what he values in himself; therefore, the strong-willed man values such things as 'good'. Masters
are creators of morality; slaves respond to master-morality with their slave-morality.

Slave morality[edit]
Unlike master morality which is sentiment, slave morality is literally re-sentimentrevaluing that
which the master values. This strays from the valuation of actions based on consequences to the
valuation of actions based on "intention".[4] As master morality originates in the strong, slave
morality originates in the weak. Because slave morality is a reaction to oppression, it villainizes its
oppressors. Slave morality is the inverse of master morality. As such, it is characterized by
pessimism and cynicism. Slave morality is created in opposition to what master morality values

as 'good'. Slave morality does not aim at exerting one's will by strength but by careful subversion.
It does not seek to transcend the masters, but to make them slaves as well. The essence of slave
morality is utility:[5] the good is what is most useful for the whole community, not the strong.
Nietzsche saw this as a contradiction. Since the powerful are few in number compared to the
masses of the weak, the weak gain power by corrupting the strong into believing that the causes
of slavery (viz., the will to power) are 'evil', as are the qualities they originally could not choose
because of their weakness. By saying humility is voluntary, slave morality avoids admitting that
their humility was in the beginning forced upon them by a master. Biblical principles of turning the
other cheek, humility, charity, and pity are the result of universalizing the plight of the slave onto
all humankind, and thus enslaving the masters as well. "The democratic movement is the heir to
Christianity."[6]the political manifestation of slave morality because of its obsession with freedom
and equality.
"...the Jews achieved that miracle of inversion of values thanks to which life on earth has
for a couple millennia acquired a new and dangerous fascination--their prophets fused
'rich', 'godless', 'evil', 'violent', 'sensual' into one and were the first to coin the word 'world'
as a term of infamy. It is this inversion of values (with which is involved the employment of
the word for 'poor' as a synonym for 'holy' and 'friend') that the significance of the Jewish
people resides: with them there begins the slave revolt in morals."[7]

Society[edit]
This struggle between master and slave moralities recurs historically. According to Nietzsche,
ancient Greek and Roman societies were grounded in master morality. The Homeric hero is
the strong-willed man, and the classical roots of the Iliad and Odyssey exemplified
Nietzsche's master morality. He calls the heroes "men of a noble culture",[8] giving a
substantive example of master morality. Historically, master morality was defeated as the
slave morality of Christianity spread throughout the Roman Empire.
The essential struggle between cultures has always been between the Roman (master,
strong) and the Judean (slave, weak). Nietzsche condemns the triumph of slave morality in
the West, saying that the democratic movement is the "collective degeneration of man".[9] He
claimed that the nascent democratic movement of his time was essentially slavish and weak.
[citation needed]
Weakness conquered strength, slave conquered master, re-sentiment conquered
sentiment. This resentmentNietzsche calls "priestly vindictiveness", which is the jealousy of
the weak seeking to enslave the strong with itself. Such movements were, to Nietzsche,
inspired by "the most intelligent revenge" of the weak. Nietzsche saw democracy and
Christianity as the same emasculating impulse which sought to make all equalto make all
slaves.
Nietzsche, however, did not believe that humans should adopt master morality as the be-allend-all code of behavior he believed that the revaluation of moralswould correct the
inconsistencies in both master and slave morality but simply that master morality was
preferable to slave morality, although this is debatable.Walter Kaufmann disagrees that
Nietzsche actually preferred master morality to slave morality. He certainly gives slave
morality a much harder time, but this is partly because he believes that slave morality is
modern society's more imminent danger.