Good and Evil Theme Analysis

Nietzsche explores the historical and cultural origins of moral ideas—like “good,” “bad,” and “evil”—in his On the Genealogy of Morals. Nietzsche argues that although most modern Europeans assume that being kind, compassionate, patient, and gentle are fundamentally “good,” while being violent, cruel, and craving power are fundamentally “evil,” this is a relatively recent idea. Ancient Greek and Roman cultures, for instance, recognized that aggression is part of human nature, and they consequently embodied a “warrior” moral code that championed these values as part and parcel of what it means to be human. In such cultures, some people are born with natural or social privileges (meaning they are born into a “noble” position where they can better express their power), but there’s no true concept of evil. A person can be foolish, unlucky, or ill-fated if things don’t work out for them, but they are never considered evil. The Judeo-Christian doctrine articulates a completely different—and, to Nietzsche, worse—approach to morality. Oppressed people who have no outlet to exert their power start to demonize their “masters,” or the powerful people in society, out of “resentment” and to depict them as evil. This means that all the aspects of humanity that were once considered good (such as aggression) become pathologized as evil, and the traits of the weak (such as being patient, meek, obedient, and gentle) are reconceptualized as good. The modern European conception of such behavior as intrinsically or fundamentally good is thus a fabrication. Nietzsche ultimately thinks that people shouldn’t take European (Christian) moral beliefs—or “slave morality”—at face value, because such morals problematically command people to stifle their natural human instincts and become “weak,” resentful, and “miserable.”

Nietzsche argues that historically, being good used to mean being powerful. And while it was possible to be bad (i.e., less good or less powerful), there was no concept of “evil” before Judeo-Christian values arrived on the scene. Nietzsche traces the etymology of the word “good” in several languages to show that it originates from the word for “noble,” meaning that prior civilizations considered the actions of the most powerful people in society, the nobility or aristocracy, as good. In cases where a particular culture’s concept of good includes a racial or ethnic component—such as “noble blond”—it similarly exposes that the most powerful people, typically conquerors, are associated with the word good. Historically, powerful people haven’t been meek, gentle, and obedient but the opposite: they are warriors who freely act out their natural human instincts to be aggressive, exert power over others, conquer territory, feel masterful, and experience life with depth and joy. Early historical cultures acknowledge that some people are less powerful, or less good, but they never consider such people to be fundamentally evil. Ancient Greek and Roman cultures embody the warrior approach to morality, and they even honor their enemies as heroic and noble warriors. Ancient cultures like these acknowledge that a person can be born with fewer natural gifts, or a lower social position, meaning that some people are “common,” “foolish,” or unlucky because they have fewer opportunities to express their power. However, there’s no true concept of evil in these cultures. Even their deities strive to exert power over each other. A person who’s unlucky is thought to have been dealt a bad hand by the gods, but there’s nothing within them that makes them fundamentally evil.

Nietzsche thinks that the modern European moral code—which advocates being patient, kind, loving, and nonviolent in accordance with Judeo-Christian doctrine—has no intrinsic worth, because it emerges from the resentment of oppressed people in history who demonize their masters’ powerful behavior as evil. For Nietzsche, oppressed people who have no outlet to express their power feel resentful toward their masters. They then begin to revolt and develop their own moral code that depicts powerful behavior as evil. Oppressed and disenfranchised people simultaneously lionize the opposite of powerful behavior—namely, gentle, patient, and obedient behavior—as morally good. This, to Nietzsche, is most evident in early Christian doctrine that emerges from figures like Jesus of Nazareth towards the end of the Roman Empire. Nietzsche argues that Europeans absorb Christian ideals into their moral values to such an extent that ideals like patience, obedience, self-restraint, and love—even for one’s enemies—become so entrenched into the cultural consciousness that even non-religious people tend to assume such behaviors are intrinsically good. This, for Nietzsche, is where “democratic” ideas get their force, which is why he’s skeptical about democracy.

To Nietzsche, the modern conception of good people as gentle, kind, obedient, and rational and evil people as violent, cruel, and savage emerged out of a resentful need to demonize history’s powerful people, and it has no intrinsic worth. For Nietzsche, the Christian approach to morality is fundamentally problematic because it advocates that people hold themselves back from expressing aggression, which is a fundamental human instinct. Christian values thus demand that people try to be something “unnatural,” which makes them miserable. Moreover, a person can never be as good as the Christian God, meaning they consider themselves fundamentally unworthy, which makes them suffer. Ultimately, Nietzsche explores the historical origins of concepts like good and evil to show that modern Europeans shouldn’t assume that their society captures fundamental truths about the nature of good and evil. In fact, to Nietzsche, European culture does the exact opposite, since it characterizes behavior like aggression, power, and cruelty as evil, when such behavior is—in fact—natural and human, and it was once considered healthy and good.