Friedrich Nietzsche's Theory of Ressentiment as the Driving Force behind Value Judgments of Good and Evil

Friedrich Nietzsche's Theory of Ressentiment as the Driving Force behind Value Judgments of Good and Evil

Introduction

Friedrich Nietzsche, the 19th-century German philosopher, is renowned for his radical reevaluation of morality and his exploration of human psychology. One of his central and provocative claims is that the concept of "ressentiment" serves as the underlying driving force behind value judgments of good and evil in human society. Nietzsche's argument challenges conventional notions of morality, offering a perspective that probes deep into the human psyche. While his theory of ressentiment sheds light on certain aspects of moral evaluations, its convincing power is subject to scrutiny due to its oversimplification of complex human behaviors, its limited applicability to all moral systems, and its potential to overlook genuine moral concerns.

Main Part

Ressentiment, a term Nietzsche coined, refers to a complex emotional state born from feelings of powerlessness, envy, and suppressed desires. According to Nietzsche, those who are unable to directly assert their will to power resort to a passive-aggressive reaction: they invert their desires, devaluing what they cannot attain and labeling it as evil, while praising their own powerlessness as good. This inversion of values leads to the creation of moral systems where qualities like humility, meekness, and self-sacrifice are celebrated as virtuous, while strength, assertiveness, and ambition are condemned as vices.

Nietzsche's argument gains some initial traction in its ability to explain certain historical and cultural instances. He points to the Judeo-Christian tradition where qualities associated with weakness and submission are glorified, while qualities related to dominance and assertion are vilified. The meek shall inherit the Earth, and the first shall be last, as encapsulated in biblical teachings, reflect the inversion Nietzsche proposes. Similarly, feudal societies valorized qualities of aristocratic nobility and disparaged the labor of commoners, thereby establishing a moral hierarchy rooted in ressentiment-driven values. In these contexts, Nietzsche's theory seems to convincingly unravel the hidden dynamics shaping moral judgments.

However, the convincing power of Nietzsche's theory wanes when confronted with the complexity and diversity of human moral systems. Nietzsche's theory tends to be overly deterministic, reducing the intricate tapestry of human morality to a singular psychological motive. Human moral judgments are often influenced by a multitude of factors, including cultural, historical, psychological, and even rational considerations. While ressentiment might explain certain instances of moral inversion, it fails to account for the rich interplay of these various factors. For instance, the Enlightenment era introduced rationalist philosophies that aimed to ground morality in reason rather than emotion, challenging the ressentiment-driven moral frameworks of the past. This suggests that while ressentiment might play a role, it cannot be the sole driving force behind all value judgments.

Furthermore, Nietzsche's theory encounters difficulties when applied to moral systems that do not fit the ressentiment model. Eastern philosophies, such as Taoism and Confucianism, prioritize balance, harmony, and self-cultivation, without overt displays of power dynamics or inverted values. These moral systems derive from different cultural and historical contexts, emphasizing virtues that do not neatly align with ressentiment-based explanations. Nietzsche's theory might struggle to convincingly account for the moral diversity present across the globe.

Another challenge to Nietzsche's theory arises from its potential to overlook genuinely altruistic and empathetic moral concerns. While Nietzsche suggests that virtues such as selflessness and compassion emerge from ressentiment-driven values, one could argue that these virtues can also arise from a genuine desire to alleviate suffering and promote communal well-being. Nietzsche's theory seems to neglect the possibility that certain moral judgments stem from an authentic, empathetic response to the needs of others, rather than being merely the result of power dynamics and emotional suppression.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Friedrich Nietzsche's argument that ressentiment serves as the driving force behind value judgments of good and evil presents a thought-provoking perspective on the complexities of human morality. While it offers valuable insights into historical instances of moral inversion and power dynamics, its convincing power is limited by its oversimplification of human behavior, its applicability to diverse moral systems, and its tendency to downplay genuinely altruistic motives. Nietzsche's theory should be viewed as a lens through which we can analyze certain moral dynamics, rather than an exhaustive explanation for all moral judgments. Understanding the interplay of ressentiment with other factors is crucial to comprehending the multifaceted nature of morality across different cultures and eras.

References

Nietzsche, Friedrich. "On the Genealogy of Morality." Translated by Walter Kaufmann, Vintage Books, 1989.

Nietzsche, Friedrich. "The Antichrist." Translated by H.L. Mencken, CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2017.

Nietzsche, Friedrich. "Thus Spoke Zarathustra." Translated by Walter Kaufmann, Penguin Classics, 1978.

Leiter, Brian. "Nietzsche on Morality." Routledge, 2002.

Solomon, Robert C. "Nietzsche: A Collection of Critical Essays." Anchor Books, 1973.

Kaufmann, Walter. "Nietzsche: Philosopher, Psychologist, Antichrist." Princeton University Press, 1974.

Schacht, Richard. "Nietzsche." Routledge, 2013.

Solomon, Robert C., and Kathleen M. Higgins. "The Age of German Idealism." Routledge, 2003.

Nietzsche, Friedrich. "The Will to Power." Edited by Walter Kaufmann, Vintage Books, 1968.

Leiter, Brian. "Nietzsche's Theory of the Will." In "Nietzsche: A Critical Reader," edited by Peter Poellner, Blackwell Publishing, 1995.

Philosophy, HAPI

PHIL2300 Phenomenology and Existentialism

First Essay Questions Semester 2 2023

Essay length: 1700 (1600-1800) words. Weight: 45%.

NB: The word count includes quotations, references, and discursive notes, but not the bibliography.

Answer ONE of the following questions.

Friedrich Nietzsche: How convincing are Nietzsches arguments that ressentiment is the driving force behind the value judgments of good and evil?

Edmund Husserl: What is the significance of the epoch in Husserls formulation of phenomenology? Is it possible and/or desirable to perform the epoch?

Edmund Husserl: What is the relationship between the sciences and the lifeworld, as Husserl sees it? Is he right about that relationship?

Martin Heidegger: How does Heidegger distinguish between Being, human being, and other beings? Is it legitimate to make these distinctions?

Hannah Arendt: Explain and evaluate Arendts account of the relationship between the vita contemplativa and the vita activa.

6. Hannah Arendt and Geoffrey Adelsberg: Can Arendts account of forgiveness deal with the problems that Adelsberg raises concerning forgiveness in the context of ongoing harms?

Note: information about essay writing and further readings can be found on the Blackboard site under assessment.

Due: Friday 22nd September 2pm

Please submit your essay through Turn-it-in. Only one submission is allowed. Make sure you receive confirmation of submission.

Late penalty: 10% per day to a maximum of 7 days.

Assoc. Prof. Marguerite La Caze

m.lacaze@uq.edu.au