I have been throwing this idea around with my buddy for a while and I think we still have a few pieces of the puzzle missing.
We have been trying to figure out what a ‘leader of slaves’ would be classified as. I am not talking of the original masters who dominated the slaves but the new leaders of the slaves in a slave morality run society which we now live. I am speaking of those such as pope’s and the like who clearly advocate slave morality (as Christianity etc) and yet they are LEADING so what does that make them? I was at aloss at first and began making up my OWN classifications such as slave-master, but one of my tutors said that Nietzsche may have viewed these religious figures as ‘higher men’. I am still looking for good source material on this. They clearly arent overmen as they are using cunning and good- evil morality etc to lead the others.
Also what are the main distinctions between the Higher man and the Overman as from what little I have read so far on the surface they seem similar, and if you could point me to any links/books it would be most helpful. Thanks
Those that lead the slaves, in the context you’re refering to, are still the embodiment of a slave morality, and hence, still called slaves. Why? Because the Pope, or whoever is leading them, still possess the attributes of a slave morality. i.e. They cannot affirm their own existence, it can only be affirmed, or made bearable, through controlling populations, through introjecting them with (false) ideals and morals that are nothing but a facade that helps releive the herd of existential anxiety. These ideas and morals cover over, quite faslely, the inherent harshness of existence. Idealism and morality is only a construct of the weak; those who turn their heads of the harsh, brutal nature of the world.
As for your second question, ‘higher’ men possess almost the opposite characteristics of the slave; courage, independence, acceptance of existence in all its harshness. The Ubermensch, on the other hand, is the end result of one’s will to power; it is when the world’s meaning totally mirrors the will of willer. The ’ higher’ men do not possess the willpower to have the world totally mirror themselves.
Perhaps you could read The Mask of Enlightenment by Stanley Rosen.
You mean, who influenced Nietzsche in coming up with his idea of the Ubermensch? (Sorry, your sentence is a bit incoherent).
He stands at a time when metaphysics was starting to be exposed as a load of bullocks. Once the all-encompassing theories of metaphysics fold, all that is left to ground meaning in is the subjective realm. Nietzsche then equates force with value as an attempt to salvage some meaning in existence, (although it is coming out now that Nietzsche purposely posited the will to power as a noble lie. But to comment on that would be going off on a tangent). Therefore, the more power or force of will one possesses, the closer to the Ubermensch one becomes. When one becomes the will to power incarnate, then they possess the power to command themselves and command the world around them mirror their will. Simply put, the higher the feeling of power, the closer to the Ubermensch one becomes.