When people inquire what my religion is, the answer I would want to give, but don't is Nietzschean. The reason I usually respond with that "I'm not religious" or "atheist" is that maybe only 3 out of a hundred know of the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche. Out of those three one of them knows of Nietzsche solely from his critics, one learned him for the sole purpose of reinforcing his pre-existing biases, and one is made a serious attempt to grasp his ideas. I think I was first introduced to Friedrich Nietzsche from the television show made by Gene Roddenberry Andromeda. At this point though I was fascinated with the culture of the human subspecies called Nietzschean who were single minded in devotion to their children, strive for the supremacy of their family and extended families, rejected all ideas for which their is no evidence for, fully embrace Darwinist nature of life, they are over achieving super parents. It wasn't until I read Steven Covey 7 habits of effective people who introduced my to psychologist Victor Frankl who wrote a book called Mans Search for Meaning which I is one of the best books ever written. Its is a inspiring journey into human character and his personal experiences of being a prisoner in a Nazi concentration camp. Where their is life their is hope. It was in Victor's book I was shown a view of Nietzsche that is practical and spiritually enriching as well. My favorite book from Nietzsche is Thus Spoke Zarathustra. I have read it maybe twenty times and listen to the prologue most nights before I go to sleep. Thus spoke Zarathustra was written in a biblical style, but it is not dogmatic. He praises those "free spirits" who are able to let go of their preconceived beliefs when they prove incorrect, with out it effecting their self worth. One theme is to test your beliefs and eliminate your prejudices and biases, because the reality is most people believe what they believe not because of scientific inquiry, but because those were the first ideas they were exposed too. Christians are Christian not because they read the bible and accepted the validity of its arguments, but because the first ideas they were exposed to were Christian ideas. Our belief systems are imprinted onto us and rarely freely chosen. These belief systems are completely circumstantial, if they were born in Saudi Arabia they be Muslim, if your born in the Philippines you'd likely be Christian. In Thus Spoke Zarathustra it is acknowledged that their are errors and biases in Zarathustra's sermons, but he encourages you to reevaluate them. No faith required. Zarathustra the character is a Nietzschean role model. He rejects the supernatural and embraces philosophical naturalism. He is benevolent to those who disagree with him. He thinks natural world/reality and family are sacred. Zarathustra holds that our duty is to the generations to come, and we should aspire to raise the next generation to be more competent than their ancestors. He promotes a healthy lifestyle and living sustainably and simply.
Here is the first couple paragraph from Thus Spoke Zarathustra which I think exemplify the aims and attitude of Nietzschean philosophy;
When Zarathustra was thirty years old, he left his home and the lake of his home, and went into the mountains. There he enjoyed his spirit and solitude, and for ten years did not weary of it. But at last his heart changed,—and rising one morning with the rosy dawn, he went before the sun, and spake thus unto it:
Thou great star! What would be thy happiness if thou hadst not those for whom thou shinest!
For ten years hast thou climbed hither unto my cave: thou wouldst have wearied of thy light and of the journey, had it not been for me, mine eagle, and my serpent.
But we awaited thee every morning, took from thee thine overflow and blessed thee for it.
Lo! I am weary of my wisdom, like the bee that hath gathered too much honey; I need hands outstretched to take it.
I would fain bestow and distribute, until the wise have once more become joyous in their folly, and the poor happy in their riches.
Therefore must I descend into the deep: as thou doest in the evening, when thou goest behind the sea, and givest light also to the nether-world, thou exuberant star!
Like thee must I GO DOWN, as men say, to whom I shall descend.
Bless me, then, thou tranquil eye, that canst behold even the greatest happiness without envy!
Bless the cup that is about to overflow, that the water may flow golden out of it, and carry everywhere the reflection of thy bliss!
Lo! This cup is again going to empty itself, and Zarathustra is again going to be a man.
Thus began Zarathustra's down-going.
2.
Zarathustra went down the mountain alone, no one meeting him. When he entered the forest, however, there suddenly stood before him an old man, who had left his holy cot to seek roots. And thus spake the old man to Zarathustra:
"No stranger to me is this wanderer: many years ago passed he by. Zarathustra he was called; but he hath altered.
Then thou carriedst thine ashes into the mountains: wilt thou now carry thy fire into the valleys? Fearest thou not the incendiary's doom?
Yea, I recognise Zarathustra. Pure is his eye, and no loathing lurketh about his mouth. Goeth he not along like a dancer?
Altered is Zarathustra; a child hath Zarathustra become; an awakened one is Zarathustra: what wilt thou do in the land of the sleepers?
As in the sea hast thou lived in solitude, and it hath borne thee up. Alas, wilt thou now go ashore? Alas, wilt thou again drag thy body thyself?"
Zarathustra answered: "I love mankind."
"Why," said the saint, "did I go into the forest and the desert? Was it not because I loved men far too well?
Now I love God: men, I do not love. Man is a thing too imperfect for me. Love to man would be fatal to me."
Zarathustra answered: "What spake I of love! I am bringing gifts unto men."
"Give them nothing," said the saint. "Take rather part of their load, and carry it along with them—that will be most agreeable unto them: if only it be agreeable unto thee!
If, however, thou wilt give unto them, give them no more than an alms, and let them also beg for it!"
"No," replied Zarathustra, "I give no alms. I am not poor enough for that."
The saint laughed at Zarathustra, and spake thus: "Then see to it that they accept thy treasures! They are distrustful of anchorites, and do not believe that we come with gifts.
The fall of our footsteps ringeth too hollow through their streets. And just as at night, when they are in bed and hear a man abroad long before sunrise, so they ask themselves concerning us: Where goeth the thief?
Go not to men, but stay in the forest! Go rather to the animals! Why not be like me—a bear amongst bears, a bird amongst birds?"
"And what doeth the saint in the forest?" asked Zarathustra.
The saint answered: "I make hymns and sing them; and in making hymns I laugh and weep and mumble: thus do I praise God.
With singing, weeping, laughing, and mumbling do I praise the God who is my God. But what dost thou bring us as a gift?"
When Zarathustra had heard these words, he bowed to the saint and said: "What should I have to give thee! Let me rather hurry hence lest I take aught away from thee!"—And thus they parted from one another, the old man and Zarathustra, laughing like schoolboys.
When Zarathustra was alone, however, he said to his heart: "Could it be possible! This old saint in the forest hath not yet heard of it, that GOD IS DEAD!"
God is dead, is a theme of Zarathustra. Not that God ever lived, just that with the secularization of culture for Christians. God as a frame of reference for our values and priorities is breaking down. With out a frame of reference to determine your values/priorties that transcends your existence and gives you a sense of significance your likely to follow the priorities and values you had when you were a toddler. The values of instant gratification, and avoidance of stress and boredom. Zarathustra gift to mankind is a new healthier frame of reference from which we can redefine our values and priorities in the face of the death of God.
Another aspect of Nietzschean philosophy is the herd. The herd I think is best understood in terms of social conformity and identity politics. Your "herd" is that to which people identify with. It can be race, religion, nationality, ideology, linguistic group, lifestyle or any number of things. The herds moral guidance is the their social norms and the pursuit of entitlements for their herd, so they can be in the Orwellian sense "all herds are equal but our herd is more equal than others". Nietzsche calls them herds because they are grouping up for security and protection. The uniting factors of the members of a herd are often quite superficial to justify the level of emotional investment and consistently undervalues individual character/initiative/responsibility. Their beliefs/attitudes are a product of group membership versus scientific inquiry, they are popular biases versus evidence based positions. The herds shared beliefs/attitudes is so vital to group cohesion that investigating its validity is threatening to it, and you will likely offend the herd. The herd does not particularly appreciate the free speech of others unless it is in support of the herd. People of the herd haven't yet developed a more secure self concept that is necessary for the development of the psychological individual (individuated) as a being distinct from the superficial, collective psychology of the herd. The herd is mass in-group/out-group thinking, where as the individuated keeps their in-group limited to their deeper relations like family and friends and their out-group is large and including everyone else. You need nothing more in common than superficial skin color or shared lifestyle to be in a herds in-group. Evolutionarily in-group bias makes sense only if it is as large as a 4th degree relatives and some respected friends. You should need more than shared skin color to get into a in-group. As Nietzscheans you have to actually earn a our loyalty and friendship. The benefits of being in a herd is protection and belonging. The costs are the opportunity costs of pursuing group goals versus family goals. There is also the opportunity costs you incur in the quality of your decisions. Loyalty to the herd and supremacy the herd is your primary concern in decision making, not rational/objective inquiry. The herd prefers centralized decision making versus the de-centralized decision making of individual choice.
A major idea of Nietzschean philosophy is the will to power. This idea is often overstated by the herd as implying domination/oppression and status seeking, and they aren't necessarily wrong, just really over stating it. Nietzsche through the character Zarathustra places more emphasis on personal growth through self mastery and self efficacy. Its investing in yourself to become more competent to cope with the challenges of life. I think that this implied when Zarathustra passes on opportunities to dominate and/or lead the herd. Zarathustra actually is very tolerant of the herd and benevolently wants to pass on what he has learned for the benefit of the herd. When some of the herd rejects/gets offended by his message he simply states "I am not the mouth for their ears". The will to power applied according to Zarathustra's example results in a sense of optimism about life that inspires you to establish and guide the next generation. Psychologist Eric Erickson called this generativity. Their is a psychological aspect to the will to power, but their is a physical aspect as well. The physical aspect of the will to power I think is best understood as neg-entropy the opposite of entropy. A good explanation of neg-entropy is in physicist Erwin Schrödinger essay "What is life?". Neg-entropy describes the tendency/will for living things to concentrate energy/power. Striving for the will to power is investing your efforts into increasing your and your families competence to cope with the challenges of life and utilizing sources of energy/power to apply to your families goals.
Genealogy of morals is a book that Nietzsche introduces the idea of master/slave morality. Master morality is the morality that is typical of leaders and heroes of pre-christian polytheistic Europeans. Its is the moral values of the heroes that is exemplified in Homers Iliad and Odyssey and the epic poems of Beowulf. People of this period would appease their gods with offerings and such with the hopes of being repaid with some fortune or at worse avoid bad fortune. Successful leaders receive more fortune and they easily concluded they must have been favored by the gods. Your moral code when approved by the gods led to success and prosperity. The poor and unsuccessful were not favored by the gods, and their behavior wasn't worth emulating. Certain themes in the Iliad and the Odyssey kind of paint a picture of a code that was approved by the Gods and constituted a Master morality such as;
Wrath. King Agamemnon dishonors Achilles which results in Achilles Wrath which nearly cost Agamemnon the war. A warning about abusing your power.
Nostos. Which means returning home to your family. One type of victory, which emphasizes the importance of home/family.
Kleos. The other type of victory which means glory or fame. To achieve something great so that you will be remembered beyond your life span. The Odyssey was about Odysseus achievement of Kleos through a successful Nostos.
Timê. Which is respect/honor, the concept denoting the respectability an honorable man accrues with accomplishment (cultural, political, martial), per his station in life whether its a soldier, king or a husband and father. Its about always doing your best at whatever you are doing.
Fate. The future is predetermined and set, even the gods can't change it. Men and their gods continually speak of heroic acceptance and cowardly avoidance of one's slated fate.
Xenos. Which means guest-friend. It guided their behavior towards strangers because they thought strangers could be gods or goddesses in disguise, so they were always kind and respectful to strangers, because if it was a god, they could be blessed by that god or goddess. Every friend and ally began as a stranger.
They valued the acquisition and application of knowledge (wisdom), the perseverance in the face of obstacles and set backs (courage), strength against the excesses that sabotage our goals (self control) and the retaliation against behavior that harms their community (justice).
Slave morality is based on Nietzsche concept of Ressentiment which is hostility towards the successful members of society (the Masters). Directed at the masters which the slaves identifies as the cause of their frustration. They don't have the favor of the gods which may result in feelings of weakness or inferiority and perhaps jealousy in the face of the masters. They generate a rejecting/justifying value system, or morality, which attacks or denies the values and behavior of the more successful group. To delegitimize their status and success. This value system is then used as a means of justifying one's own weaknesses by identifying the source of envy as objectively inferior (Aesops sour grapes), serving as a defense mechanism that prevents the resentful individual from addressing and overcoming their insecurities and challenges. The ego creates an enemy in order to insulate itself from culpability. Where master morality values that which allows them to realize there potential, slave morality values equality of outcomes ( which is distinct from equality of opportunities) and compassion for compassion's sake.
Amor fati and the eternal recurrence are another couple of interesting concepts of Nietzsche's. Amor Fati means the love of fate. I think of it as refusing to view yourself as a victim. Its an attitude of embracing setbacks and tragedy as temporary and opportunities to grow and learn. I think of Victor Frankl experiences in the concentration camps when think about Amor Fati. As Nietzsche says "What doesn't kill me makes me stronger." The eternal recurrence is a thought experience that tests your love of fate. Its a test of your psychological resilience and whether you find life meaningful. The eternal recurrence is the idea that your life will repeat itself over and over with out changing. If you could courageously accept this fate joyously then you have lived well.
My second favorite idea of Nietzsche is the idea of the "Last Man". The Last Man is the ultimate consequence of slave morality and herd mentality. They have achieve everything they have aspired for. They are united as one herd. They are all equal. No one is above average in competence and no one wants to be. The below average are brought up to be average but no higher. I'm picturing the book Harrison Bergeron by Kurt Vonnegut. The thing is that they are the Last Man because they are the last generation of people where aspiring to improve their competence has been completely bred out of them. That when the inevitable challenges life throws at us, they will be unable to adapt and persevere. An average competency to cope with the challenges of life may not cut it.
Now my favorite idea of Nietzsche is the Ubermensche. The Ubermensche is the result of generations of parents who raise their children to be more competent than themselves. They didn't settle for average or even normal. They led sustainable lives, meaning the met their needs with out sacrificing their children's ability to meet their needs. The Ubermensche are a future generation of people so competent they handle anything life could possibly throw at them. They aren't driven towards equality, but continuous self improvement. They aren't motivated by compassion as much as they are motivated by the welfare of their children and yet to be born descendants.
