Owen- Nietzsche’s Genealogy of Morals, CHAPTER FIVE «Good and Evil’, ‘good and Bad
Chapter Reflection 2
OWEN-NEITZSCHE’S GENEALOGY OF MORALS; CHAPTER V: “GOOD AND EVIL” vs. “GOOD AND BAD”
Owen-Nietzsche’s Genealogy of Morals; Chapter V: “Good And Evil” vs. “Good and Bad”
In the development of his essay, “’Good and Evil,’ ‘Good and Bad’”, Nietzsche focuses on describing the evolution of two different sets relating to the moral codes with reference to ‘master’ morality and ‘slave’ morality. In the course of making this valuable argument, the author engages in utilising the genealogical accounts of the ‘English psychologists’ through criticising the lack of historical spirit. According to Nietzsche’s description, the English psychologists tend to claim that the human concept of ‘good’ emanates from the aspect of ‘useful’ in spite of the tendency of people to forget the initial association (Owen, 2014).
In this context, it is ideal to demonstrate the fact that Nietzsche engages in making valuable argument since the account by the English psychologists lacks historical spirit in two critical respects. In the first instance, the account tends to project the individual preoccupation of the psychologists with the utility regarding the subject of their inquiry, thus, platform for the growth and development of the theoretical anachronism with reference to the history of morality. This influences the perception of the psychologists to conceive the goodness of a deed from the point of view of the recipient of the action rather than the executioner of the deed.
In his case, Nietzsche believes that the goodness of the action should be an initial definition from the perception of the actor (Owen, 2014). In the second instance, the psychologists tend to offer the impression that the moral concept of the ‘good’ is singular, as well as fixed through ignoring the historicity of the preoccupation of the English psychologists with their utility. It is ideal to demonstrate that Nietzsche’s analysis relates to the humanity’s present evaluation of what is good as historically contingent (Owen, 2014). Evidently, it is ideal to tell the story regarding how, as well as why individuals or human beings tend to have specific moral code on the actions they engage in during daily encounters.
Categorically, the essay provides the platform for Nietzsche to narrate substantive story in which he argues on the influence of the present moral code as a product of the resentment among the Jews. The claim is critical in presenting two challenges to the German audience. In the first instance, the argument is crucial in implying that the morality pervading modern Europe relates to the morality of the slaves, as well as the weak, thus, hardly a flattering indictment. Secondly, the argument demonstrate the fact that values in question emanate from the Jewish background, thus, resentment against anti-Semitic Christians who believe that they values are distinctive leading to neglect of the other values. Similarly, Nietzsche’s distinction concerning morality of the weak and the morality of the strong comes out as racist. Consequently, the author seems to depict diverse groups of human beings as diverse in certain contexts.
Conclusively, I believe that Nietzsche engages in the presentation of a good argument in the development and presentation of the essay. In this context, the author uses diverse illustrations and techniques, which are ideal in making the values of communication and argument effective and efficient in the achievement of the goal and target. From the findings of this reflective essay on the chapter, I tend to agree with the arguments by Nietzsche on the issues of good and evil, as well as good and bad. This is because of the ability of the author to engage in the presentation and illustration of the historical aspect of his arguments unlike the aspects of the English psychologists. These attributes make the arguments convincing in accordance with the expectations of the target audiences.
Owen, D., 2014. Nietzsche’s Genealogy of morality. Routledge.