Herbert Spencer's tea-grocer's philosophy: total absence of an ideal
save that of the mediocre man.
Fundamental instinct of all philosophers, historians, and
psychologists: everything of _value_ in mankind, art, history, science,
religion, and technology must be shown to be _morally valuable_ and
_morally conditioned,_ in its aim, means, and result. Everything is
seen in the light of this highest value; for instance, Rousseau's
question concerning civilisation, "Will it make man grow better?"--a
funny question, for the reverse is _obvious,_ and is a fact which
speaks _in favour_ of civilisation.
[Footnote 8: TRANSLATOR'S NOTE.--This is doubtless a reference to a
passage in a letter written by Goethe to Herder, on 7th June 1793,
from the camp at Marienborn, near Mainz, in which the following
words occur:--"_Dagegen hat aber auch Kant seinen philosophischen
Mantel, nachdem er ein langes Menschenleben gebraucht hat, ihn von
mancherlei sudelhaften Vorurteilen zu reinigen, freventlich mit dem
Schandfleck des radikalen Bösen beschlabbert, damit doch auch Christen
herbeigelockt werden den Saum zu küssen?--_("Kant, on the other hand,
after he had tried throughout his life to keep his philosophical cloak
unsoiled by foul prejudices, wantonly dirtied it in the end with the
disreputable stain of the 'radical evil' in human nature, in order that
Christians too might be lured into kissing its hem.") From this passage
it will be seen how Goethe had anticipated Nietzsche's view of Kant;
namely, that he was a Christian in disguise.]
383.
_Religious morality.--_Passion, great desire; the passion for power,
love, revenge, and property: the moralists wish to uproot and
exterminate all these things, and "purify" the soul by driving them out
of it.
The argument is: the passions often lead to disaster--therefore, they
are evil and ought to be condemned. Man must wring himself free from
them, otherwise he cannot be a _good_ man....
This is of the same nature as: "If thy right eye offend thee, pluck it
out." In this particular case when, with that "bucolic simplicity,"
the Founder of Christianity recommended a certain practice to His
disciples, in the event of sexual excitement, the result would not be
only the loss of a particular member, but the actual castration of the
whole of the man's character.... And the same applies to the moral
mania, which, instead of insisting upon the control of the passions,
sues for their extirpation. Its conclusion always is: only the
emasculated man is a good man.
Instead of making use of and of _economising_ the great sources of
passion, those torrents of the soul which are often so dangerous,
overwhelming, and impetuous, morality--this most shortsighted and most
corrupted of mental attitudes--would fain make them _dry up._
384.
_Conquest over the passions?_--No, not if this is to mean their
enfeeblement and annihilation. _They must be enlisted in our service_:
and to this end it may be necessary to tyrannise them a good deal (not
as individuals, but as communities, races, etc.). At length we should
trust them enough to restore their freedom to them: they love us like
good servants, and willingly go wherever our best interests lie.
385.
_Intolerance on the part of morality_ is a sign of man's _weakness_:
he is frightened of his own "immorality," he must _deny_ his strongest
_instincts,_ because he does not yet know how to use them. Thus the
most fruitful quarters of the globe remain uncultivated longest: the
power is lacking that might become master here....
386.
There are some very simple peoples and men who believe that continuous
fine weather would be a desirable thing: they still believe to-day
in _rebus moralibus,_ that the "good man" alone and nothing else than
the "good man" is to be desired, and that the ultimate end of man's
evolution will be that only the good man will remain on earth (and that
it is only to that end that all efforts should be directed). This is
in the highest degree an _uneconomical_ thought; as we have already
suggested, it is the very acme of simplicity, and it is nothing more
than the expression of the _agreeableness_ which the "good man" creates
(he gives rise to no fear, he permits of relaxation, he gives what one
is able to take).
With a more educated eye one learns to desire exactly the reverse--that
is to say, an ever greater _dominion of evil,_ man's gradual
emancipation from the narrow and aggravating bonds of morality, the
growth of power around the greatest forces of Nature, and the ability
to enlist the passions in one's service.
387.
The whole idea of the hierarchy of the _passions_: as if the only right
and normal thing were to be led by _reason_--whereas the passions are
abnormal, dangerous, half-animal, and moreover, in so far as their end
is concerned, nothing more than _desires for pleasure...._
Passion is deprived of its dignity (1) as if it only manifested
itself in an unseemly way and were not necessary and always the
_motive force_, (2) inasmuch as it is supposed to aim at no high
purpose--merely at pleasure....
The misinterpretation of passion and _reason,_ as if the latter were
an independent entity, and not a state of relationship between all
the various passions and desires; and as though every passion did not
possess its quantum of reason....
388.
How it was that, under the pressure of the dominion of an ascetic
and _self-effacing morality,_ it was precisely the passions--love,
goodness, pity, even justice, generosity, and heroism, which were
necessarily misunderstood?
It is the _richness of a personality,_ the fullness of it, its power
to flow over and to bestow, its instinctive feeling of ease, and its
affirmative attitude towards itself, that creates great love and great
sacrifices: these passions proceed from strong and godlike personalism
as surely as do the desire to be master, to obtrude, and the inner
certainty that one has a right to everything. The _opposite_ views,
according to the most accepted notions, are indeed common views; and if
one does not stand firmly and bravely on one's legs, one has nothing to
give, and it is perfectly useless to stretch out one's hand either to
protect or to support others....
How was it possible to _transform_ these instincts to such an extent
that man could feel that to be of value which is directed against
himself, so that he could sacrifice himself for another self! O the
psychological baseness and falseness which hitherto has laid down the
law in the Church and in Church-infected philosophy!
If man is thoroughly sinful, then all he can do is to hate himself. As
a matter of fact, he ought not to regard even his fellows otherwise
than he does himself; the love of man requires a justification, and it
is found in the fact that _God commanded it._--From this it follows
that all the natural instincts of man (to love, etc.) appear to him
to be, in themselves, prohibited; and that he re-acquires a right to
them only after having _denied_ them as an obedient worshipper of God.
... Pascal, the admirable _logician_ of Christianity, _went as far as
this_! let any one examine his relations to his sister. "Not to make
one's self loved," seemed Christian to him.
389.
Let us consider how dearly a moral canon such as this ("an ideal")
makes us pay. (Its enemies are--well? The "egoists.")
The melancholy astuteness of self-abasement in Europe (Pascal,
La Rochefoucauld)--inner enfeeblement, discouragement, and
self-consumption of the non-gregarious man.
The perpetual process of laying stress upon mediocre qualities as being
the most valuable (modesty in rank and file, Nature converted into an
instrument).
Pangs of conscience associated with all that is self-glorifying and
original: thus follows the unhappiness--the _gloominess_ of the world
from the standpoint of stronger and better-constituted men!
Gregarious consciousness and timorousness transferred to philosophy and
religion.
Let us leave the psychological impossibility of a purely unselfish
action out of consideration!
390.
My ultimate conclusion is, that the _real_ man represents a much
higher value than the "desirable" man of any ideal that has ever
existed hitherto; that all "desiderata" in regard to mankind have
been absurd and dangerous dissipations by means of which a particular
kind of man has sought to establish _his_ measures of preservation
and of growth as a law for all; that every "desideratum" of this
kind which has been made to dominate has _reduced_ man's worth, his
strength, and his trust in the future; that the indigence and mediocre
intellectuality of man becomes most apparent, even to-day, when he
reveals a _desire_; that man's ability to fix values has hitherto been
developed too inadequately to do justice to the actual, not merely
to the "desirable," _worth of man_; that, up to the present, ideals
have really been the power which has most slandered man and power, the
poisonous fumes which have hung over reality, and which have _seduced
men to yearn for nonentity_....