Beyond Right Or Wrong

Negatyfus · August 19, 2008, 9:12pm

Hi,

First a small introduction, since I think this is actually my first post ever here. I always think too much, and some outside help or philosophical insight would have helped me greatly, but I think I just felt I never had the structure of thought to put what I needed to say into appropriate words and paragraphs. I’m not sure that I do now, but I want to try. I need to, because over the years I have had recurring personal philosophies. From somewhere deep down, I suppose I need some intellectual input on them.

I do not have much philosophical background, so if you have suggestions for good works that expand on some ideas, that’d be helpful. That said, I really like Nietzsche’s writing.

I’m going to try to put into words something about social expectations and whether those fall into Right or Wrong. Seems that so many times I end up in the Wrong and with a feeling of shame, those (in my experience) most useless and destructive set of emotions (what philosopher has written much about this?). What is seen as Wrong in this case cannot be a universal Wrong.

What is at one time commonly seen as inappropriate behaviour is, after all, only a human creation and not inherently evil; good and evil are human constructs and not a measure of universal morality. Being imprisoned by such constructs will rob one of one’s ultimate freedom by acting upon his sense of conscience; but conscience, too, is only man-made and burned deeply into our way of thinking, part of the way ethics and these so-called “morals” (if I may use such an disgusting word for the unnatural values that we are taught today) are educated during the upbringing of a child. And so we learn how to fear what is within us, and accept what is seen as commonly acceptable-- by everyone except for ourselves. But for social interaction to function properly, it seems, this is a necessary requirement.

I feel too dependent on other’s views and (excuse me if I stray too much into the realm of psychology) I feel that this causes self-harm. I have always felt like an individual; but I feel upbringing and education have gotten the best of me. Somewhere in this story I can place myself in Zarathustra, maybe as one of his friends.

Does this make sense at all?

realunoriginal · August 19, 2008, 9:17pm

[i][b]Nihilist!!!

Where’s my pitchfork!?[/b][/i]

(Welcome to Hell!)

shorelinetrance · August 19, 2008, 9:42pm

makes total sense, a lot of people feel like you.

“no such thing as moral absolutism, you can only judge a moral act by how useful it is!” i’m pretty sure nietzsche said that, but i cannot recall the full quote.

Negatyfus · August 20, 2008, 11:09am

Oh joy, most people act like I’m crazy and an outcast when I talk like this. And maybe I am, because I’ve never really felt like I fit in, anyway. How can I? I’d have to blindly walk the middle path of and disregard my individuality (it seems that most people do). “Useful” is an interesting word in your last (paraphrased) quote, because I think it not only pertains to how useful it is to yourself, but also is in connection with those around you. This is, I think, why acting within the established social structures and ethics is needed to get ahead in one’s thinking, or I’d need to retreat into seclusion somewhere.

Not very viable in today’s overcrowded world, I’m afraid.

Kriswest · August 20, 2008, 11:23am

Everyone wears a mask or two. the trick is realizing where you are under the masks. You do not act the same around your parents as you would around friends. Nor do you behave the same way with an employer as you would friends. Each social setting you will slip into another mask. some one you dislike will cause you to slip another mask on. These masks are a part of you but, they are not you. That is not educated into us it is a natural instinct for survival. All social creatures do this one way or another. We react different to each niche of humans. Some reaction is learned but, some is instinctual.
Morals and ethics are just a part of a social mask dance that we do for survival. You nor I would probably be alive if this dance did not work. It works for other creatures and so it works for us. All social creatures have their versions of morals and ethics. It would be unnatural if a social species had none.

Negatyfus · August 20, 2008, 12:36pm

It sounds like I need to get my collection of masks in order, because it may be cause for some social discord in some situations. But also, while I sound like a relativist, the sometimes aggressive masks I run into may have too much of an influence on my own behaviour and mood. So I might I have the right idea, but I am conditioned to react according to what my mind has learned during upbringing, education, social conditioning, etc. Those are opposing ideas and therefore I feel out of balance and unhappy because of it.

Kriswest · August 20, 2008, 12:39pm

That is a part of maturing. Some folks never feel comfortable within themselves, others don’t really care, others blindly accept and then others understand and truly mature. Its all a matter of really learning and knowing yourself.

Negatyfus · August 20, 2008, 3:37pm

Then I’m much too late with this maturing thing. But I also (have to) believe that change is possible, although difficult. I think I will read some Nietzsche again.

No one answered my hidden question: what philosophers have written about shame, or is this more at home in psychology?

Impenitent · August 20, 2008, 3:47pm

nietzsche talks a good bit about shame… (as do most moralists from the greeks and medievals to the idealists)

-Imp

Negatyfus · August 20, 2008, 6:11pm

Humm, haven’t found much about shame by Nietzsche in the handful of books that I’ve read of him. Will do some research. I do have the complete works of Plato lying around somewhere.

realunoriginal · August 20, 2008, 6:17pm

Are you ex-Christian?

I’m interested to hear if you are … just an estimated guess though.

Mr_Reasonable · August 20, 2008, 6:31pm

Hey, just because a person like Nietzsche doesn’t mean that they were molested by a priest, or that they hate thier parents.

Negatyfus · August 20, 2008, 7:22pm

Haha, I’d be interested in hearing why you’d think that. Is it common for ex-Christians to struggle with concepts like this? I can only imagine they do. To answer your question, I was raised Christian, but that was a long time ago. I think I lost my faith when as a child I was lying in bed hungry and prayed for a cookie, only to find that my parents downstairs wouldn’t give it to me. I decided that it didn’t work right then.

But seriously, I have thought and talked a lot about Christianity, mostly with Christians, because I find it fascinating how people can bring themselves to believe it and how much effort has been put into twisting it into something that actually is defensible by intellectuals. I am with Nietzsche in The Antichrist, but not as vehemently; I put some trust in the notion of perspective is reality and so I can understand how it is possible that another person has (to me) totally strange and different views.

Impenitent · August 20, 2008, 7:27pm

read twilight of the idols and the gay science…

-Imp

gib · August 20, 2008, 8:06pm

I’ve always been ambivalent about the whole nihilistic approach to morality. I don’t really doubt that the conventional understanding most people have of morality is really a psychological fabrication (there is no Right and Wrong in the outer world), but I hold reservations about doing away with morality all together as a response to that. I think the key is to do what you feel and not what you believe to be an overarching principle of morality looming over everyone’s heads. So go ahead and give to the poor if it makes you feel better. Do it because you want to, not because “you should”. Just don’t make the mistake of taking your amoral stance and treating it like a principle with just as much authority over your life as the moral principles you set out to reject in the first place. If something makes you feel guilty, consider whether you need to fight the guilt (just because you feel guilt is unnecessary) or to let the guilt guide your actions (because it will make you feel better).

In fact, I’m inclined to believe that if we recognized morality for the fabrication it is, and followed our hearts instead of the rules, we’d probably behave more morally. It brings to mind that part in Zarathustra when the tight rope walker falls to his death, and dying on the ground questions whether his whole life was in vein having failed so. Zarathustra comes up to him and consoles him. He tells him that he has succeeded, for he has made his life’s ambition danger, and he has taken on danger. Danger has now come to collect its dues but only because the tight rope walker has had his fill, not because he is being cheated of fulfilling his aspirations. This reveals the way Nietzsche thought. In rejecting morality, he is not throwing out compassion. Zarathustra shows genuine compassion by comforting the dying tight rope walker in the midst of his self-doubting. He wants to help him die in peace.

(of course, in the end, Zarathustra rejects all of society and lives out the rest of his life only with the animals)

Nietzsche also shows compassion in his actual life. Just before he suffered the first bout of syphilis symptoms (and I mean seconds before), he was overwhelmed with sorrow for a horse he saw being beaten by its rider. He quickly rushed to the horse and stroked him as one would a child who is hurt.

It goes to reinforce the common impression that those who are obsessed with morality in principle are probably the most judgmental and guilt-inflicting souls around (think Victorian style school teachers), whereas those who are not so obsessed are more often enlightened souls and display a great deal more tolerance and compassion for the differences of others.

realunoriginal · August 20, 2008, 9:34pm

Yes, I believe ex-Christians do struggle with concepts like this / that, whichever ones you’re talking about.

Oh shi- Smears!..

I figured out God didn’t exist when I asked Him to smite my enemies down before me and all I got was silence. Then I realized that He was just telling me, “Go do it yourself, you ignorant little shit!” So, I realized that he also exists in addition to not existing. And then I became a philosopher…

I can’t stand hypocrisy; this doesn’t bode well with Christianity when they cling to their lies so vehemently. Fight fire with fire.

Sauwelios · August 21, 2008, 10:04am

There are actually two distinct kinds of shame: aidos and aiskhyne in Greek, “modesty” and “disgrace”. I relate these to what I’ve called “negative beauty” and “positive ugliness” respectively.

My concept of negative beauty derives directly from Nietzsche:

“Custom and beauty. – In favour of custom let it not be kept quiet that in whomever subjects himself to it completely and wholeheartedly and from the very beginning, the organs of attack and defense – the corporeal as well as the spiritual ones – atrophy: that is to say, he becomes increasingly more beautiful! For it is the exercise of those organs and of the attitude that corresponds to them that keeps ugly and makes uglier. For this reason the old baboon is uglier than the young, and the female young baboon is most akin to man: thus the most beautiful. – From this one should draw a conclusion regarding the origin of the beauty of women!”
[Nietzsche, The Dawn, section 25, entire, my translation.]

The Greek word aiskhyne derives from a verb meaning “to disfigure”. It’s evidently related to aiskhros – “ugly” in the sense of “disfigured”.

The exercise of one’s organs of attack of defense, and of the attitude that corresponds to them, disfigures one’s negative beauty (supposing one had such beauty in the first place, and was not ugly in the negative sense: ugly out of weakness). Thus Zarathustra says:

“Ye are ashamed of your flow, and others are ashamed of their ebb.”
[TSZ, Of War and Warriors.]

Shame of one’s ebb is aidos, modesty, bashfulness; shame of one’s flow is aiskhune. Thus Nietzsche says:

“Bashfulness. – Women’s bashfulness generally increases with their beauty.”
[Human, All Too Human, section 398.]

Now Nietzsche’s heart was with the positively ugly rather than with the negatively beautiful:

“And from no one do I want beauty so much as from thee, thou powerful one: let thy goodness be thy last self-conquest.
All evil do I accredit to thee: therefore do I desire of thee the good.
Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings, who think themselves good because they have crippled paws!”
[TSZ, Of the Sublime Ones.]

Whereas in Of War and Warriors (in Part I of TSZ) Zarathustra spurred the positively ugly to “take the sublime about you, the mantle of the ugly!”, in Of the Sublime Ones (in Part II) he spurred these ugly ones, cloaked in the sublime, to overcome even their need for such cloaks, by becoming positively beautiful. I paraphrase:

“All ugliness do I accredit to thee: therefore do I desire of thee the beautiful.
Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings, who think themselves beautiful because they have atrophied organs of attack and defense!”