Nietzsche's Moral and Political Philosophy First published Thu 26 Aug, 2004 Nietzsche's moral philosophy is primarily critical in orientation: he attacks morality both for its commitment to untenable descriptive (metaphysical and empirical) claims about human agency, as well as for the deleterious impact of its distinctive norms and values on the flourishing of the highest types of human beings (Nietzsche's “higher men”). His positive ethical views are best understood as combining (i) a kind of consequentialist perfectionism as Nietzsche's implicit theory of the good, with (ii) a conception of human perfection involving both formal and substantive elements. Because Nietzsche, however, is an anti-realist about morality, he takes neither his positive vision, nor those aspects of his critique that depend upon it, to have any special epistemic status, a fact which helps explain his rhetoric and the circumspect character of his “esoteric” moralizing. Although Nietzsche's illiberal attitudes (for example, about human equality) are apparent, there are no grounds for ascribing to him a political philosophy, since he has no systematic (or even partly systematic) views about the nature of state and society. As an esoteric moralist, Nietzsche aims at freeing higher human beings from their false consciousness about morality (their false belief that this morality is good for them), not at a transformation of society at large.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nietzsche-moral-political/
^^^^^ CB; The above is the abstract from the article Ravi linked to the list a while ago. Eubulides objects to arguments for the superiority of Marx to Nietzsche, so lets say there are fundamental differences which make it logically and practically difficult to be a Nietzschean Marxist, pace Lunarcharsky and other Nietzschean Bolsheviks.
Others might have another interpretation, but to me is seems the above commentator is saying that N. is consciously and explicitly trying to be a philosopher who interprets the world and does _not_ attempt to change it. Evidently, he is speaking to just a few good men who are of the superman type, encouraging them not to adhere to Christianity's meek value side ( Christianity also has an aggressive side.)
The wikipedia notes on Nietzche assert that he was an anti-nihilist, and that he had some agreement with Jesus actual practice and advocacy of forgiveness, as opposed to the history of Christianity after Jesus, starting with the changes introduced by the Apostle Paul. N. thought of Jesus as an "idiot" in a good sense of that word, out of touch with the world, turned inward.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Anti-christ_%28book%29
The Redeemer type Nietzsche criticized Ernest Renan's attribution of the concepts genius and hero to Jesus. Nietzsche thought that the word idiot best described Jesus. With an antipathy toward the material world, Jesus was " at home in a world undisturbed by reality of any kind, a merely 'inner' world, a 'real' world, an 'eternal' world'
.The kingdom of God is within you'
." [56] According to Nietzsche, the redeemer type is determined by a morbid intolerance of pain. Extreme sensitivity results in avoidance of the world. Also, any feeling of resistance to the world is experienced as pain. Even evil is therefore not resisted. "The fear of pain, even of the infinitely small in pain, — cannot end otherwise than in a religion of love
."[57] Jesus was a distorted version of the redeemer type. The first disciples, in their Gospels, described him as having Old Testament characteristics such as prophet, Messiah, miracle–worker, moral preacher, etc. Dostoevsky could have revealed his sickliness and childishness.[58] According to Jesus, " the kingdom of heaven belongs to 'children'
."[59] Everyone has an equal right to become a child of God. His spirituality is infantile, a result of delayed puberty. Jesus does not resist or contend with the world because he doesn't recognize the importance of the world. His life is its own kingdom of God at every moment. Early Christians used Semitic concepts to express his teaching, but his anti–realism could just as easily have been a characteristic of Taoism or Hinduism. Nietzsche asserted that the psychological reality of redemption was " [a] new way of life, not a new faith."[60] It is " [t]he deep instinct for how one must live, in order to feel oneself 'in heaven'
."[61] The Christian is known by his acts. He offers no resistance to evil, He has no anger and wants no revenge. Blessedness is not promised on conditions, as in Judaism. The Gospel's glad tidings are that there is no distinction between God and man. There is no Judaic concern for sin, prayers, rituals, forgiveness, repentance, guilt, punishment, or faith. "[E]vangelic practice alone leads to God, it is God!" "[I]t is only in the practice of life that one feels 'divine,' 'blessed,' 'evangelical,' at all times a 'child of God.' "[62] There were two worlds for the teacher of the Gospel's glad tidings. The real, true world is an inner experience of the heart in which all things are blessedly transfigured (Verklärung), eternalized, and perfected. The apparent world, however, is only a collection of psychological symbols, signs, and metaphors. These symbols are expressed in terms of space, time, history, and nature. Examples of these mere symbols are the concepts of "God as a person," "the son of man," "the hour of death," and "the kingdom of heaven."[63] Jesus did not want to redeem anyone. He wanted to show how to live. His legacy was his bearing and behavior. He did not resist evildoers. He loved evildoers. Nietzsche has Jesus tell the thief on the cross that he is in Paradise now if he recognizes the divinity of Jesus' comportment.[64]
[edit] History of Christianity
[edit] Opposite development Nietzsche saw a world–historical irony in the way that the Christian Church developed in antithetical opposition to the Evangel and the Gospel of early Christianity.[65] The fable of Christ as miracle–worker and redeemer is not the origin of Christianity. Christianity's history is a " progressively cruder misunderstanding of an original symbolism ": the death on the cross.[66] Christianity became more diseased, base, morbid, vulgar, low, barbaric and crude. "As the Church, this morbid barbarism itself finally assumes power — the Church, that form of mortal hostility to all integrity, to all loftiness of soul, to discipline of spirit, to all open–hearted and benevolent humanity. — Christian values — noble values
."[67] Nietzsche expressed contempt for his contemporaries because they mendaciously called themselves Christians but did not act like true Christians. Modern people act with worldly egoism, pride, and will to power in opposition to Christianity's denial of the world. Nietzsche considered this falseness to be indecent. Unlike past ages, his contemporaries knew that sham and unnatural concepts such as "God," "moral world–order," "sinner," "Redeemer," "free will," "beyond," "Last Judgment," and "immortal soul" are consciously employed in order to provide power to the church and its priests.[68] "[T]here was only one Christian, and he died on the cross."[69] " [O]nly Christian practice, a life such as he lived who died on the cross, is Christian." Thereafter, the opposite kind of life was called Christian. Belief in redemption through Christ is not originally Christian. Genuine, original, primitive Christianity is not a faith. It is state of being that consists of " a doing, above all a not–doing of many things
."[70] Jesus' wanted his death on the cross to be an example of how a person can be free from resentment, revenge, and rebellion. The disciples, however, wanted revenge against the Jewish ruling class and high priests who had delivered him to Pilate. They elevated Jesus into being the Messiah and Son of God and promised future judgment and punishment in the kingdom of God.[71] This was in opposition to Jesus' doctrine that everyone could be a child of God and experience Heaven in their present lives by acting in a gentle, loving manner.
[edit] Paul and eternal life The apostles claimed that Jesus' death was a sacrifice of an innocent man for the sins of the guilty. But " Jesus had done away with the concept 'guilt' itself — he had denied any chasm between God and man, he lived this unity of God and man as his 'glad tidings'
."[72] In order to claim that there is life after death, the apostles ignored Jesus' example of blessed living. Paul made immortality the main point in 1 Corinthians 15:17 when he said " if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain." "Paul himself even taught personal immortality as a reward."...