classic transcript

 

Morality as Anti-Nature

 

1

 

THERE is a time with all passions when they are merely fatalities, when they drag their victim down with the weight of their folly - and a later, very much later time when they are wedded with the spirit, when they are 'spiritualized'.  Formerly one made war on passion itself on account of the folly inherent in it: one conspired for its extermination - all the old moral monsters are unanimous that 'il faut tuer les passions'. [The passions must be killed.] The most famous formula for doing this is contained in the New Testament, in the Sermon on the Mount, where, by the way, things are not at all regarded from a lofty standpoint.  There, for example, it is said, with reference to sexuality, 'if the eye offend thee, pluck it out': fortunately no Christian desires merely in order to do away with their folly and its unpleasant consequences - this itself seems to us today merely an acute form of folly.  We no longer admire dentists who pull out the teeth to stop them from hurting.... On the other hand, it is only fair to admit that on the soil out of which Christianity grew the concept 'spiritualization of passion' could not possibly be conceived.  For the primitive Church, as is well known, fought against the 'intelligent' in favour of the 'poor in spirit': how could one expect from it an intelligent war against passion? - The Church combats the passions with excision in every sense of the word: its practice, its 'cure' is castration.  It never asks: 'How can one spiritualize, beautify, deify a desire?' - it has at all times laid the emphasis of its discipline on extirpation (of sensuality, of pride, of lust for power, of avarice, of revengefulness). - But to attack the passions at their roots means to attack life at its roots: the practice of the Church is hostile to life ...

 

 

2

 

The same expedient - castration, extirpation - is instinctively selected in a struggle against a desire by those who are too weak-willed, too degenerate to impose moderation upon it: by those natures which need La Trappe, [The abbey at Soligny from which the Trappist order - characterized by the severity of its discipline - takes it name.] to speak metaphorically (and not metaphorically - ), some sort of definitive declaration of hostility, a chasm between themselves and a passion.  It is only the degenerate who cannot do without radical expedients; weakness of will, more precisely the inability not to react to a stimulus, is itself merely another form of degeneration.  Radical hostility, mortal hostility towards sensuality is always a thought-provoking symptom: it justifies making certain conjectures as to the general condition of one who is excessive in this respect. - That hostility, that hatred reaches its height, moreover, only when such natures are no longer sufficiently sound even for the radical cure, for the renunciation of their 'devil'.  Survey the entire history of priests and philosophers, and that of artists as well: the most virulent utterances against the senses have not come from the impotent, nor from ascetics, but from those who found it impossible to be ascetics, from those who stood in need of being ascetics ...

 

 

3

 

The spiritualization of sensuality is called love: it is a great triumph over Christianity.  A further triumph is our spiritualization of enmity.  It consists in profoundly grasping the value of having enemies: in brief, in acting and thinking in the reverse of the way in which one formerly acted and thought.  The Church has at all times desired the destruction of its enemies: we, we immoralists and anti-Christians, see that it is to our advantage that the Church exists.... In politics, too, enmity has become much more spiritual - much more prudent, much more thoughtful, much more forbearing.  Almost every party grasps that it is in the interest of its own self-preservation that the opposing party should not decay in strength; the same is true of grand politics.  A new creation in particular, the new Reich for instance, has more need of enemies than friends: only in opposition does it feel itself necessary, only in opposition does it become necessary.... We adopt the same attitude towards the 'enemy within': there too we have spiritualized enmity, there too we have grasped its value.  One is fruitful only at the cost of being rich in contradictions; one remains young only on condition the soul does not relax, does not long for peace.... Nothing has grown more alien to us than that desideratum of former times 'peace of soul', the Christian desideratum; nothing arouses less envy in us than the moral cow and the fat contentment of the good conscience.... One has renounced grand life when one renounces war.... In many cases, to be sure, 'peace of soul' is merely a misunderstanding - something else that simply does not know how to give itself a more honest name.  Here, briefly and without prejudice, are a few of them.  'Peace of soul' can, for example, be the gentle radiation of a rich animality into the moral (or religious) domain.  Or the beginning of weariness, the first of the shadows which evening, every sort of evening, casts.  Or a sign that the air is damp, that south winds are on the way.  Or unconscious gratitude for a good digestion (sometimes called 'philanthropy').  Or the quiescence of the convalescent for whom all things have a new taste and who waits.... Or the condition which succeeds a vigorous gratification of our ruling passion, the pleasant feeling of a rare satiety.  Or the decrepitude of our will, our desires, our vices.  Or laziness persuaded by vanity to deck itself out as morality.  Or the appearance of a certainty, even a dreadful certainty, after the protracted tension and torture of uncertainty.  Or the expression of ripeness and mastery in the midst of action, creation, endeavour, volition, a quiet breathing, 'freedom of will' attained.... Twilight of the Idols: who knows? perhaps that too is only a kind of 'peace of soul' ...

 

 

4

 

- I formulate a principle.  All naturalism in morality, that is all healthy morality, is dominated by an instinct of life - some commandment of life is fulfilled through a certain canon of 'shall' and 'shall not', some hindrance and hostile element on life's road is thereby removed.  Anti-natural morality, that is, virtually every morality that has hitherto been taught, reverenced and preached, turns on the contrary precisely against the instincts of life - it is a now secret, now loud and impudent condemnation of these instincts.  By saying 'God sees into the heart' it denies the deepest and the highest desires of life and takes God for the enemy of life.... The saint in whom God takes pleasure is the ideal castrate.... Life is at an end where the 'kingdom of God' begins ...

 

 

5

 

If one has grasped the blasphemousness of such a rebellion against life as has, in Christian morality, become virtually sacrosanct, one has fortunately therewith grasped something else as well: the uselessness, illusoriness, absurdity, falsity of such a rebellion.  For a condemnation of life by the living is after all no more than a symptom of a certain kind of life: the question whether the condemnation is just or unjust has not been raised at all.  One would have to be situated outside life, and on the other hand to know it as thoroughly as any, as many, as all who have experienced it, to be permitted to touch on the problem of the value of life at all: sufficient reason for understanding that this problem is for us an inaccessible problem.  When we speak of values we do so under the inspiration and from the perspective of life: life itself evaluates through us when we establish values.... From this it follows that even that anti-nature of a morality which conceives God as the contrary concept to and condemnation of life is only a value judgement on the part of life - of what life? of what kind of life? - But I have already given the answer: of declining, debilitated, weary, condemned life.  Morality as it has been understood hitherto - as it was ultimately formulated by Schopenhauer as 'denial of the will to life' - is the instinct of décadence itself, which makes out of itself an imperative: it says: 'Perish!' - it is the judgement of the judged ...

 

 

6

 

Let us consider finally what naivety it is to say 'man ought to be thus and thus!'  Reality shows us an enchanting wealth of types, the luxuriance of a prodigal play and change of forms: and does some pitiful journeyman moralist say at the sight of it: 'No! man ought to be different'? ... He even knows how man ought to be, this bigoted wretch; he paints himself on the wall and says 'ecce homo'!... [Behold the man!] But even when the moralist merely turns to the individual and says to him: 'You ought to be thus and thus' he does not cease to make himself ridiculous.  The individual is, in his future and in his past, a piece of fate, one law more, one necessity more for everything that is and everything that will be.  To say to him 'change yourself' means to demand that everything should change, even in the past.... And there have indeed been consistent moralists who wanted man to be different, namely virtuous, who wanted him in their own likeness, namely that of a bigot: to that end they denied the world!  No mean madness!  No modest presumption! ... Insofar as morality condemns as morality and not with regard to the aims and objects of life, it is a specific error with which one should show no sympathy, an idiosyncrasy of the degenerate which has caused an unspeakable amount of harm! ... We others, we immoralists, have on the contrary opened wide our hearts to every kind of understanding, comprehension, approval.  We do not readily deny, we seek our honour in affirming.  We have come more and more to appreciate that economy which needs and knows how to use all that which the holy lunacy of the priest, the diseased reason of the priest rejects; that economy in the law of life which derives advantage even from the repellent species of the bigot, the priest, the virtuous man - what advantage? - But we ourselves, we immoralists, are the answer to that ...