Or a small underground hostility and towards Christianity (and Plato), which perhaps has never once managed to cross the threshold of consciousness? But I’m told that these men are simply old, cold, boring frogs, who creep and hop around and into people, as if they were in their own proper element, that is, in a . The utility of the unegoistic action is supposed to be the origin of the praise it receives, and this origin has allegedly been ?
Or even a lecherous taste for what is odd or painfully paradoxical, for what in existence is questionable and ridiculous? Could the usefulness of such actions at some time or other perhaps just have stopped?
insight; that it was first discovered so late we can ascribe to the repressive influence which democratic prejudice in the modern world exercises concerning all questions of origin.
And this occurs in what appears to be the most objective realm of natural science and physiology, a point I can only hint at here.
The truly great haters in the world history have always been priests; likewise the most ingenious haters: other kinds of spirit hardly come into consideration when compared with the spirit of priestly vengefulness.
There still shines the most important nuance by virtue of which the noble felt themselves to be men of a higher rank.It was first released with other unpublished writings in 1901.The Will to Power Quotes The Antichrist was written in 1888, but it's publication was delayed until 1895 due to the controversial content.There I found that all of them lead back to the —that everywhere “noble” and “aristocratic” in a social sense is the fundamental idea out of which “good” in the sense of “spiritually noble,” “aristocratic,” “spiritually high-minded,” “spiritually privileged” necessarily develops, a process which always runs in parallel with that other one that finally transforms “common,” “vulgar,” and “low” into the concept “bad.” The most eloquent example of the latter is the German word “(”—and which originally designated the plain, common man, still without any suspicious side glance, simply in contrast to the noble man.Around the time of the Thirty Years War approximately, hence late enough, this sense changed into the one used now.They designate themselves simply by their superiority in power (as "the powerful," "the masters," "the commanders") or by the most clearly visible signs of this superiority, for example, as "the rich," "the possessors" (this is the meaning of 'Arya,' and of corresponding words in Iranian and Slavic).Is a book containing selectively reordered notes from Friedrich Nietzsche's notebooks, by his sister Elisabeth and Peter Gast.Is it a secret, malicious, and common instinct, perhaps one which cannot be acknowledged even to itself, for belittling humanity? The pathos of nobility and distance, as I mentioned, the lasting and dominating feeling, something total and fundamental, of a higher ruling nature in relation to a lower type, to a “beneath”— is the origin of the opposition between “good” and “bad.” (The right of the master to give names extends so far that we could permit ourselves to grasp the origin of language itself as an expression of the power of the rulers: they say “That is such and such”; they seal every object and event with a sound, and in the process, as it were, take possession of it.) Given this origin, the word “good” is from the start ).Or something like a pessimistic suspicion, the mistrust of idealists who’ve become disappointed, gloomy, venomous, and green? And if one is permitted to hope where one cannot know, then I hope from my heart that the situation with these men might be reversed, that these investigators and the ones peering at the soul through their microscopes may be thoroughly brave, generous, and proud animals, who know how to control their hearts and their pain and who at the same time have educated themselves to sacrifice all desirability for the sake of the truth, for the sake of every truth, even the simple, bitter, hateful, repellent, unchristian, immoral truth. And even then, it takes a long time until this instinct in the masses becomes master, so that moral evaluation remains thoroughly hung up on and bogged down in that opposition (as is the case, for example, in modern Europe: today the prejudice that takes “moralistic,” “unegoistic,” and “Secondly, however, and quite apart from the fact that this hypothesis about the origin of the value judgment “good” is historically untenable, it suffers from an inherent psychological contradiction.The preface begins 'This book belongs to the most rare of men.[Students, teachers, artists, and members of the general public may download and distribute this text free of charge and without permission.