Friedrich Nietzsche would have described Father Lazarus’ asceticism as an expected way of life considering the constant oppression of the church. Nietzsche believed that the church asked its people to constantly sacrifice three things: the company of other people, luxurious foods, and sex. He believed that the church was constantly pushing against these things and restricting people from indulging in them. As a person, Nietzsche probably thought Father Lazarus was insane, but would have understood that he was doing what his church asked of him. Father Lazarus was following the instructions of his church, simply taking orders, blindly following the path that Christ has left before him. Nietzsche would have criticized Father Lazarus repeatedly …show more content…
Nietzsche would have considered Father Lazarus’ asceticism as a waste of time and energy on achieving a foolish goal. To Father Lazarus, an ascetic life would lead him closer to God. But to Nietzsche, someone who believed that God was dead or has simply never existed, Father Lazarus’ life would be pointless. What is the point of living a life full of stress and suppression of basic wants and desires all for a god that is not even real? The whole concept would sound foolish to Nietzsche, in spite of the fact that he recognized asceticism in religion already. Nietzsche believe that those who lived ascetic lives were “surrounded by such a lavish growth of nonsense and superstition” (Nietzsche, Good and Evil, 60) and thus were absurd and achieved nothing.
William James believed that asceticism was based in the “general good intention” (James, Varieties, 384) and that it could eliminate evil in the world. James believed that asceticism was over-all useless, but understood it as a way for religious people to eliminate the negativity in their lives. James would have understood Father Lazarus’ ascetic life just the same way. In the long run, the way that Father Lazarus is living is pointless, but good for
…show more content…
He would inform Lazarus that his way of life, although well-intended, is a waste of time and energy. James would consider Father Lazarus’ life as beneficial to only him. Father Lazarus, all by himself in the cave on the side of a mountain, did little if anything to benefit the rest of the world, and that is why James would have considered him irrelevant. James believed that asceticism was good in its nature, but did little to actually benefit anyone. He preferred the idea of a more moderate life, one that did not isolate people from the rest of the world (how can an isolated human being help anyone else?). He believed that one person’s ascetic life left “the general world unhelped and still in the clutch of Satan” (James, Varieties, 385) and was therefore
We have grown weary of man. Nietzsche wants something better, to believe in human ability once again. Nietzsche’s weariness is based almost entirely in the culmination of ressentiment, the dissolution of Nietzsche’s concept of morality and the prevailing priestly morality. Nietzsche wants to move beyond simple concepts of good and evil, abandon the assessment of individuals through ressentiment, and restore men to their former wonderful ability.
He would not have to worry about being like his father and drinking all of the time as well as worry about if he does in fact drink and argue with their mother hitting his kids because he is angry. As people grow in the world they learn from the people who are close to them. Therefore, if his father had received the necessary help he needed at an early age, then James would have never found himself in the situation he was in. There is also the fact that he would not have to worry about someday placing his kids in an unhealthy environment due to the fact that he was not in a stable home setting. Furthermore, unless he makes a change in his life and realizes the mistakes his father made and learn from them this cycle of life within his family will continue on until one day some decides that enough is
The article Christianity Isn’t Spiritual by John Garvey focuses on the distance between Christian’s belief in the resurrection of the dead and how they conduct their lives. He also discusses the Nicene Creed and touches on the idea of hypocrisy.
In philosophy “Nihilism” is a position of radical skepticism. It is the belief that all values are baseless and nothing is known. The word “Nihilism” itself conveys a sense of abolishing or destroying (IEP). Nietzsche’s work and writings are mostly associated with nihilism in general, and moral nihilism especially. Moral nihilism questions the reality and the foundation of moral values. Nietzsche supported his view on morality by many arguments and discussions on the true nature of our inner self. Through my paper on Moral Nihilism, I will explain 5 major arguments and then try to construct a deductive argument for each, relying on Nietzsche’s book II “Daybreak”.
Nietzsche: Philosophizing Without Categorizing. How are we to philosophize without "Ism?" For, although defining a person in terms of an Ism is dangerous--both because it encourages identification of the individual with the doctrine and because it denies her the possibility of becoming that, as a human, she is heir to--grouping people according to a doctrine to which they subscribe is a convenient mental shortcut. Although grouping people into verbal boxes entails the danger of eventually seeing all of the boxes as equal, or similar enough to make no difference, the necessity of seeing the totality of a single human being is impossible. And although the qualities of my existence, or anyone else's existence (an individual's isness), are constantly undergoing a process, both conscious and unconscious, of revaluation and change, the change is usually not great enough over short lengths of time to qualify as noticeable.
The book Ecce Homo seems to be an account of Nietzsche establishing a validation of his whole being. This whole book is an opportunity for him to critique himself, and he finds himself more than superb. ."..I have been told how getting used to my writings spoils ones taste. One simply can no longer endure other books, least of all philosophical works" (719). This writing is his way of not becoming perpetually problematic. He wants to make very clear that he is the pivot point around which all change will come and that his goal is to have all things established and idolized ruined. "Whoever uncovers morality also uncovers the disvalue of all values that are and have been believed: he no longer sees anything venerable in the most venerated..." (790). The review of his various works is a way to make sure that the reader cannot accuse him of being something he is not and therefore test the reader's true understanding of his nature. His ideal reader would be one that was strong enough to understand the boldness of an immoralist.
Enter here The ear splitting crackle from a whip is heard as a master shouts orders to a slave. This to most people would make them comfortable. The idea of slavery is one that is unsettling to most people. This is because most people feel it is unmoral or morally wrong to own another human being. However Nietzsche would not necessarily believe this because he did believe in a morality that fits all. Ethics and morality are completely objective and cannot be one set of rules for everyone. Ethics and morality that are more strictly defined are for the weak, the strong do not need a set of rules because they can take care of themselves.
“Has he got lost? Did he lose his way like a child? Or is he hiding? Is he afraid of us? Has he gone on a voyage? Emigrated?” No the madman says; “we have killed him – you and I. All of us are his murderers” This exchange encapsulates the aphorism that underpins much of Nietzsche’s thought; that “God is dead”. But what does this mean - What is Nietzsche telling us by claiming that we have murdered God? This essay is going to attempt to try and understand what Nietzsche argues has changed and what hasn’t with the death of God and to examine his critique of 19th century morality in the context of the 21st century politics and see if he offers a constructive alternative to the way we engage in political discourse.
For him, “life itself is essentially appropriation, injury, overpowering of what is alien and weaker, suppression, hardness, imposition of one’s own forms, incorporation and at least, at its mildest, exploitation.” That is to say, our desire for power is unavoidable and an inherent part of our nature. On the other hand, the abnegation from “injury, violence, and exploitation and placing one’s will on a par with that of someone else” (instead of propagating one’s own will over others’) is “a will to the denial of life [and] a principle of disintegration and decay.” If one considers life and the act of living itself as the will to power, then master morality’s affinity to honour strength and self-promotion would be the more compelling morality for Nietzsche. This is not precisely the case however, as master morality lacks a certain subtlety as opposed to the act of enslaving oneself, which can be an “indispensable means of spiritual discipline and cultivation.” In any case, Nietzsche’s appreciation of the advantages of master morality is not as intuitive of a sentiment as it is to other modern
Others still have pity for the poor and needy etc. Nietzsche dislikes religion especially Christianity because it encourages and promotes slave morality. Nietzsche says that we should be striving towards master morality, but Christianity has the completely opposite values to those of the master morality. For example, religion wants us to be like slaves and give things up instead of trying to be great. He talks about a slave revolt in morality, which leads to the dominance of slave values over master values.
I believe had he not had the determination to succeed in his life, he would not be where he is today. We have learned that our own individual personality can drive our sense of direction. The choices James made during his childhood were not his fault, he did not have the parental guidance during his developmental stage. Amazingly, he conquered all obstacles to become successful. References Boeree, C. G. (1997).
He believed that since they were older and had more knowledge “they ought to know” ( Hughes, para. 2 ) the events that would occur during the religious revival, thus he presumed his aunt spoke the truth. As children, they were taught to trust and respect their elders, thus, Langston in his younger years followed the orders of his aunt; the lies fed to him in his adolescent years destroyed his virtues. He was disappointed and “ashamed” ( Hughes para. 11 ) once he recognized that Jesus would not reveal himself. His disappointment conveyed the parallelism and repetition of “nothing” ( Hughes para. 7 ). Specifically when he realized that “nothing happened” ( Hughes para. 7 ) during the religious revival he started to doubt himself and reflect how foolish his actions were. The shift in the narrative emphasized that he no longer believed in his religious salvation and punishment for his sins. He “got up” ( Hughes para. 12 ) from his placement in his sins while the rest of the children had confirmed so easily; Hughes could not understand the figurative language of the salvation. Hughes expected to physically see Jesus because of the adults in his life have enlightened him that he would, although they manipulated him to believe he would be
In the same way, his attitude toward the afterlife is positive and confident in Phaedo. To clarify, he explains what he feels will happen as a human descends into the Underworld. He explains, when someone dies their “guardian spirit” leads them to a certain place and after being judged they are guided to the Underworld. Then, those who lived unjust lives will be shunned and none will want to travel with them. But since he has lived a just life and has no attachment to his body he will be fine thus explaining his positivity and confidence toward the
Throughout the course Nietzsche’s lifespan his attitude towards truth and religion has shifted various times. He first left his Christian beliefs and changed his major from theology to Philology in order to search for truth. He did not want to have faith without knowing what he was having faith in beforehand. By his thirties Nietzsche started to interpret that people were making up myths and stories in order to keep themselves in denial from the truth of life, thus giving a different meaning. When Nietzsche starts writing “Beyond Good and Evil” Nietzsche again changes his views and describes truth as a woman and philosophers are truth’s unwanted men in her life who are going about her in all the wrong ways, asserting and
James was an authoritarian parent. He was controlling, in-charge and no one questioned him. He would play the role of the doting father. When his children made mistakes, he made a point to criticize them. He often compared them to other kids that he felt were “more perfect.” When his often unspoken expectations were not met he would yell and scream striking fear into his entire family. “He’s not a warm, fuzzy kind of guy, and he’s not going to inspire feelings of intimacy. But when his system works, he can boast about one thing: His recruits tend to obey” (Dewar).