One
thing that was significant in today’s reading, which we also touched on in
class of Friday, was the nature imagery that Nietzsche employs. I found the
imagery regarding animals especially interesting. In all the examples, the
animal uses its natural instincts in order to survive, which is opposite to the
reasoning that weak men use to justify slave morality. In slave morality, men
in a position of power decide that characteristics of those with less power are
evil, and thus, they themselves are good. Nietzsche uses animal imagery to invalidate
the world of weak men.
The
major example of animal imagery was in section 13, where Nietzsche compares
weak man to a lamb being preyed upon by a bird of prey. He writes:
“That lambs bear
ill-will towards large birds of pretty is hardly strange: but is in itself no
reason to blame large birds of prey for making off with little lambs” (29). The
weak man resents its predator (which, in this metaphor, is a man who is good
because he does not hide nor feel ashamed of his strength). However, objectively,
the birds of prey are not being vindictive in their appetite, but rather
following their natural instincts. Those natural instincts are to do whatever
they have to in order to provide for their immediate needs. The weak man,
however, does not follow his nature. Nietzsche then goes on to assert that the
weak man maintains “no belief with greater intensity than that the strong may freely choose to be weak,
and the bird of prey to be lamb—and so they win the right to blame the bird of
prey for simply being a bird of prey” (30). In this quotation it is even
clearer that the weak man is turning away from his nature and creates a world
that is not based on intrinsic human characteristics. In this way, Nietzsche is
showing that the weak man’s world is not valid.
Nietzsche uses predator-prey animal
images to assert that the world that weak men have created for themselves is
invalid. He compares natural man to a predator, and contrasts that with the
weak man who actively chooses to be the prey so he can blame the predator. By
showing that weak men turn away from their natural state, Nietzsche invalidates
the world of weak men.
Discussion
Question: Although Nietzsche implies that the natural state is the one to which
all men should belong, he also writes that in the wilderness, men “regress to the
innocence of the predator’s conscience…capable of high spirits as they walk
away without qualms from a horrific succession of murder, arson, violence, and torture”
(26). How can you reconcile this quotation with the lamb-bird of prey imagery?
Emma, I think your observations are valuable to understanding the text, but I interpreted the quote on page 26 differently than you. As I understood it, this was Nietzsche's way of introducing what he believes to be the natural state of humans. I think the use of the word "horrific" to describe the actions of these men, is an expression of current social attitudes rather than Nietzsche's opinion.The movement into the wilderness and the associated innocence seems to represent freedom from the societal constraint. This becomes evident as Nietzsche acknowledges the "predator beneath the surface of all these noble races" slightly farther down the page (26).
ReplyDeleteI think Emma makes a good point in bringing to the light the use of nature imagery to illuminate the truth behind weakness. In the preface, Nietzsche says that "we have no right to any isolated act whatsoever," which relates to the interconnected fates of the lamb and the bird of prey (4). Through the lamb/bird metaphor, he seeks to show that weak men seek to put themselves in the position of weakness essentially so that they can show that the stronger man is bad, however the stronger man is simply doing what is natural. Thus, the action of the bird against the lamb is not 'bad,' it is simply not in the interest of the lamb.
ReplyDeleteI think that the quote that Emma points out in the discussion question parallels Nietzsche's lamb-bird of prey metaphor. The innocence refers to the predator's lack of remorse when hunting their prey, as he suggests that the predators "bear them no ill-will at all, these good lambs- indeed, [they] love them: there is nothing tastier than a tender lamb," (29). This point proves that predators have no bad intent in hunting the lambs, such as the noble men have no bad intent when asserting their power. Their actions are simply in their nature, a quality which Nietzsche admires.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Kyra that Nietzche’s description of strong men’s ability to “walk away without qualms from a horrific succession of murder, arson, violence, and torture” (26) is not are critique of these actions but merely an observation. The passage which Emma draws quotation for the question from asserts that “There is no mistaking the predator beneath the surface of all these noble races, the blond beast roaming lecherously in search of booty and victory” (26). This seems to be part of the same argument that Emma explores in the body of her post, as it argues for a (extremely simplistic) naturalistic view of humanity, comparing them to animals.
ReplyDeleteIn addition, this article could also be considered a critique of the “English-philosophers” morality. If humans had an inherent morality, as argued by “English-philosophers” at the time, they would not be able to walk away from immoral actions with no sense of guilt. That they are able to do this is used to support Nietsche’s basic argument against moral absolutism, and transition into his naturalistic view of predator-prey relations in human societies.
I think lachlan touched on an important point that nietzsche's analysis of the animal metaphors is extremely simplistic. To me this is clearly intentional given nietzsche's misgiving for kantian reasoning and analysis of which he is convinced has led humanity astray in its cleverness. For Nietzsche a return to the simplistic nature of humanity, to the master morality, would not be a regression but a progression towards "a man who justifies mankind" (28). This ironically confronts the methodology that i've been raised under that to become most human we must become animalistic and not depend on logos. On a side note does anyone else find all of the sarcasm hilarious?
ReplyDelete