Nietzsche's On The Genealogy Of Morality

In his work, “On the Genealogy of Morality,” Nietzsche questions and critiques society’s accepted moral judgments based on the historical influences of how these concepts have been developed. In the beginning of the First Essay in this work, Nietzsche writes, “Now for me, it is obvious that the real breeding-ground for the concept ‘good’ has been sought and located in the wrong place by this theory: the judgment ‘good’ does not emanate from those to whom goodness is shown! Instead it has been ‘the good’ themselves, meaning the noble, the mighty, the high-placed and the high-minded, who saw and judged themselves and their actions as good, I mean first-rate, in contrast to everything lowly, low-minded, common and plebeian. It was from this

According to these psychologists, “unegoistic acts were praised and called good by their recipients, in other words, by the people to whom they were useful” (11). As a result of this, an act that was “good” and an act that was “useful” became one in the same, and this idea of what is good or bad is habitually taught to younger generations. Over time, this made people conclude that certain acts are inherently good or bad; acts or things have an inherent meaning and once such meaning is conceived it is ultimately permanent. Morality, for these psychologists, was traded as sacred due to the assumption of a higher power setting a standard for our values and morality, be it God, religion, tradition, et cetera. Nietzsche fiercely rejects this theory, believing that neither the recipients of goodness nor a higher power, did not define “good.” On the contrary, according to Nietzsche, it was the “good” themselves – those carrying high power – who subsequently held control to define the term “good” and the value it

This idea of the will to power contributes to the master and slave relationship of morality and the history of the origins of values and morality. With the concept of “will to power” in mind, anything that has attached meaning suggests that something – or rather some “will” – has dominated it and assigned a certain meaning or means of interpretation. Due to the dynamic nature of the world and our environment, Nietzsche argues that we are unable to understand anything, or where it originated, if we are to assume it has always held the same meaning throughout time and therefore has been only dominated by one “will.” The idea of an absolute truth is ridiculous for Nietzsche, as one “will” cannot eternally dominate. As time progresses, things and actions develop different meanings, suggesting that different “wills” have dominated it and its subsequent associations. To remain free, then, one must reject the absolute truth of the dominator and we must assign meaning and morality for ourselves. Hence, Nietzsche’s theory of the origin of values is that morality is ever-evolving and changing, and looking historically at the path it has taken may shed light as to how morality and