"The feebleness of our own bodies and the inadequacy of the regulations which adjust the mutual relationships of human beings in the family, the state and society" (Freud) Freud also thinks that there’s sense of frustration in finding happiness. To him, humans were more independent and had more freedom and liberty before the existence of civilization as it limits a lot of someone’s needs and desires. “Our civilization is largely responsible for our misery, and tha... ... middle of paper ... ...e had thoughts of the ideal man stems coming from the anger about his society who treated humans as machines and animals. Freud was more like a therapist for giving every problem for the human’s unhappiness and frustration, solutions to have life that is more livable. Freud saw the inner struggle which was affected by the civilization and society, but believed that there’s potential ways to satisfy one’s self.
Bailey Ott CC April 17,2014 Who is to Decide What is Wrong or Right? Read quickly, Friedrich Nietzsche and Sigmund Freud’s interesting takes on moral imperatives can seem to have indistinguishable views, but there are differences between the two. Where you can find similarities, their explanations and techniques are different. Nietzsche is far more negative in his view of mankind. His personal pessimism might be making his view of the world pessimistic.
Overall, therefore there are highly compelling reasons to regard this to be the dominant aim of Nietzsche in writing the Genealogy. Why, however, should this be regarded as the ultimate aim of Nietzsche when writing the Genealogy of Morals? After all the primary focus of the book is upon the development of slave morality, bad conscience and the value of the ascetic ideal. The reason that helping to create a new higher man should be regarded as his highest aim is because it was, in colloquial terms, his end game. It was the culmination towards which he was working.
Having studied with fellow German philosopher Martin Heidegger, Gadamer was in particular understandably heavily influenced by Heidegger’s interest in the “question of Being”. Heidegger sought to illuminate the ubiquitous and inexpressible nature of Being that underlies our human existence, where “Being” refers to the background that precedes, conditions, and then facilitates the strict human knowledge of science. Gadamer thus aimed to develop Heidegger’s commitment to the nature of Being, especially in regards to the connection with the nature of Being and the philosophies of Plato and Augustine. As such, let us first consider Pla... ... middle of paper ... ...nd distorting, they can also be positive and clarifying and open up new insights to the realities of texts. Consider how many insights have come to light through the various interpretations of Scripture, Plato’s dialogues, and Augustine’s doctrines.
Between philosophers Nietzsche and Immanuel Kant, we can conclude that Nietzsche has different views in which a man lives his life. According to Kant, we as human beings must act and live according the moral law. However, in regards to Nietzsche, he rejects the notion that there is a moral code for everyone and insists that each individual is able to see that there is no objective morality. Nietzsche’s greatest criticism of Kant’s philosophy of moral law, stems from his emphasis and use of the idea of the “overman”, which forms his opinion on liberal democracy (Hamilton-Bleakley). In order to understand Nietzsche’s critique of Kant’s philosophy, we must first understand what it is that Kant emphasizes in his theory of morality.
Civilization tries to categorize and combine individuals by families, peoples, nations, etc, “but man’s natural aggressive instinct, the hostility of each against all and of all against each, opposes this program of civilization” (81). Nietzsche would critique Freud’s idea of man’s aggressive nature by stating that it is man’s irrational behavior that is manifested in this aggression. Nietzsche would say this is man expressing himself and finding his happy niche.
Nietzsche’s Genealogy of Morality reflects upon and questions the progression of human morality. An excerpt from the “Preface” of Genealogy of Morality on page 393, suggests that the value placed on what is considered “good” or “bad” is susceptible to evolution; there are no absolute truths in a meaning, only a will to power. Nietzsche’s philosophy is often saturated with dismantling assumptions, absolutions, and arbitrations. In this sense, when people confine their morality to assumptions and absolutions they conform to one power, one perspective, one will that wishes to dominate. This philosophy is communicated by imploring what Nietzsche says about the creation of truth in On Truth and Lies in a Non-Moral Sense and the concepts of good
Fundamental faults are pointed out in Hegelian historicism. Philosophical schools such as structuralism and determinism as well as human psychology contradict historicism. Philosophers believe that Hegel’s historicism has inherent conflicts that surprisingly fall in same dialectic argument that Hegel promotes, which somehow nullifies his philosophy. Originated and influenced by his Dialectic thought process of “thesis, antithesis, and synthesis”, Hegel believes that all societal and more importantly all human activities including culture, language, science, art, and even philosophy are defined by their past and the heart of these activities can be understood by studying their history. Hegel argues that the history of societal activity is a cumulative reaction to the events that has happened in the past.
Karl Marx, a modern German philosopher, forever altered our perception of who we are by offering a description of human nature that differs from traditional thinking. Although Marx’s theories were groundbreaking, they do not escape criticism. More specifically, differing views are offered for both the importance of labor and how our society shapes our nature. In this essay, I will be addressing these two opposing views and arguing for Marx’s description of human nature. Marx rejects the idea that human nature consists of any certain, particular activity.
It also tells the historical story of man's alienation. In the manuscript “Estranged Labor”, Marx argues that within the system of p... ... middle of paper ... ... all of these excerpts from Marx's writings and the message that I believe is of the most importance for social scientists, is the active involvement of the scientist/philosopher in changing the social world. As noted in “The German Ideology”, fighting philosophical phrases against phrases is not sufficient. We must turn our critique upon the social world and use it to bring about change. His statement that “the philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point, however, is to change it” (@,p145), so well summarises his approach that it along with “workers of the world unite” were alone selected to adorn his tomb (Francis, 2002).