No More Learning

But do not let fear: matter fact, we require great deal morality, order
? immoral parable:--
this subtle way; let me speak
physiologist interested certain illness, and an invalid who wishes to be cured of that
same illness, have not the same interests. Let suppose that the illness happens morality, --for morality an illness,--and that we
subtle torment and difficulty would arise supposing we Europeans were, once, our own inquisitive
spectators and the physiologist above-mentioned
earnestly desire rid ourselves morality? Should we want to? This course irrespective the
question whether we should able do so-- whether we can be cured at all
VOL.
Should we under these circumstances
? ? I.
to
is
is
us of
at P of
? be
in a
as a
to
of
to be
in
of
of
of of -
of
!
of
in to abe
to is,
us
A
a
a is
in
in
? ? rs
226 THE WILL TO POWER.
2. THE HERD.
274.
Whose will to power is morality? --The common factor of all European history since the time of Socrates is the attempt to make the moral values
dominate all other values, in order that they
should not be only the leader and judge of life, but also of: (1) knowledge, (2) Art, (3) political
and social aspirations. "Amelioration" regarded as the only duty, everything else used as a means thereto (or as a force distributing, hindering, and endangering its realisation, and therefore to be
opposed and annihilated . . . ). --A similar move ment to be observed in China and India.
What is the meaning of this will to power on the part of moral values, which has played such a part in the world's prodigious evolutions?
Answer:-Three powers lie concealed behind it :
(1) The instinct of the herd opposed to the strong
and the independent; (2) the instinct of all
sufferers and abortions opposed the happy
and well-constituted; (3) the instinct the mediocre opposed the exceptions. --Enormous
advantage this movement, despite the cruelty,
falseness, and narrow-mindedness which has helped along (for the history the struggle morality
with the fundamental instincts life itself the greatest piece immorality that has ever
yet been witnessed earth
? ? on of
to
. .
. ).
of
is of in
of
it
of
of
all
to
? A CRITICISM OF MORALITY,
275.
227
The fewest succeed in discovering a problem behind all that which constitutes our daily life, and
"Every man should be the preoccupation of his fellows"; he who thinks in this way deserves honour: no one ought to think of himself.
"Thou shalt": an impulse which, like the
sexual impulse, cannot fathom itself, is set apart and is not condemned as all the other instincts
are--on the contrary, it is made to be their standard and their judge!
The problem of "equality," in the face of the
fact that we all thirst for distinction: here, on the
contrary, we should demand of ourselves what we demand of others. That is so tasteless and
obviously insane; but--it is felt to be holy and
of a higher order. The fact that it is opposed to common sense is not even noticed.
Self-sacrifice and self-abnegation are considered distinguishing, as are also the attempt to obey
morality implicitly, and the belief that one should be every one's equal in its presence.
The neglect and the surrender of Life and of well-being is held to be distinguished, as are also
the complete renunciation of individual valuations
and the severe exaction from every one of the same sacrifice. "The value of an action is once
to which we have become accustomed
the ages--our eye does not seem focussed for such things: at least, this seems to me to be the case in so far as our morality is concerned.
throughout
? ? ? ? 228 THE WILL TO POWER.
and for all fixed: every individual must submit to this valuation. "
We see: an authority speaks--who speaks? --
We must condone it in human pride, if man tried to make this authority as high as possible, for he
wanted to feel as humble as he possibly could by the side of Thus--God speaks!
God was necessary an unconditional sanction which has no superior, "Categorical Imperator":
or, far people believed the authority
of reason, what was needed was "unitarian
metaphysics" by means which this view could be made logical.
Now, admitting that faith God dead: the question arises once more: "who speaks? " My answer, which take from biology and not from metaphysics, is: "the gregarious instinct speaks. " This what desires to be master: hence its "thou
shalt! "--it will allow the individual exist only part whole, only favour the whole,
hates those who detach themselves from every
thing--it turns the hatred all individuals against him.
276.
The whole the morality Europe based
upon the values which are useful the herd: the sorrow all higher and exceptional men
explained by the fact that everything which distinguishes them from others reaches their con sciousness the form feeling their own
smallness and egregiousness. the virtues of
? modern men which are the causes
pessimistic
? ? of
of
of to
is
a
of in
of a
it. as
of a
of in
as as a
It
is to
in
is is
of
I
of of
in
it
as a
is
in so
? A CRITICISM OF MORALITY.
229
gloominess; the mediocre, like the herd, are not
troubled much with questions or with conscience --they are cheerful. (Among the gloomy strong
men, Pascal and Schopenhauer are noted examples. ) The more dangerous a quality seems to the herd,
the more completely it is condemned.
277.
>**
The morality of truthfulness in the herd.
"Thou shalt be recognisable, thou shalt express
thy inner nature by means of clear and constant signs--otherwise thou art dangerous: and sup
posing thou art evil, thy power of dissimulation is absolutely the worst thing for the herd. We
despise the secretive and those whom we cannot identify. --Consequently thou must regard thyself
as recognisable, thou mayest not remain concealed from thyself, thou mayest not even believe in the possibility of thy ever changing. " Thus, the in
sistence upon truthfulness has as its main object
the recognisability and the stability of the individual.
As a matter of fact, it is the object of education
to make each gregarious unit believe in a certain
definite dogma concerning the nature of man:
education first creates this dogma and thereupon exacts "truthfulness. "
278.
Within the confines of a herd or of a com
munity--that is to say, inter pares, the over-estima tion of truthfulness is very reasonable. A man
? ? ? ? 230
THE WILL TO POWER.
must not allow himself to be deceived--and con sequently he adopts as his own personal morality that he should deceive no one --a sort of mutual obligation among equals | In his dealings with
the outside world caution and danger demand that he should be on his guard against deception:
the first psychological condition of this attitude
would mean that he is also on his guard against
his inner self. Mistrust thus appears as the source of truthfulness.
2. 79.
A criticism of the virtues of the herd--Inertia
is active: (1) In confidence, because mistrust makes suspense, reflection, and observation necessary.
(2) In veneration, where the gulf that separates power is great and submission necessary: then,
so that fear may cease to exist, everybody tries to love and esteem, while the difference in power
is interpreted as a difference of value: and thus the relationship to the powerful no longer has any
thing revolting in (3) the sense truth.
know one's self on the same level with all, feel
? What truth? Truth that
things which causes the smallest amount mental exertion (apart from this, lying extremely fatiguing). (4) sympathy. relief
all feel, and accept belief which current; something passive
already
beside the activity which appropriates and continually carries
into practice the most individual rights valua tion (the latter process allows no repose). (5)
explanation
? ? a of
is In
In
to of of
it
is
to
In
of
to
of
as
is is is a
It
is
it. us
? whether be above something which
beneath its general level, antagonistic and dangerous
dealing with the ex
A CRITICISM OF MORALITY.
231
impartiality and coolness of judgment: people
scout the strain of being moved, and prefer to be detached and "objective. " (6) In uprightness:
people prefer to obey a law which is to hand rather than to create a new one, rather than to command themselves and others: the fear of commanding--it
is better to submit than to
rebel. (7) In toleration: the fear of exercising a right or of enforcing a judgment.
28O.
The instinct of the herd values the juste milieu and the average as the highest and most precious
of all things: the spot where the majority is to be found, and the air that it breathes there. In
this way it is the opponent of order rank; regards climb from the level the heights the same light descent from the majority the minority. The herd regards the exception,
? itself. Their trick
ceptions above them, the strong, the mighty, the
wise, and the fruitful, persuade them be come guardians, herdsmen, and watchmen--in fact,
become their head-servants: thus they convert danger into thing which useful. the
middle,
nothing; here there not much room even for misunderstandings; here there equality; here man's individual existence not felt as reproach, but the right existence; here con
fear ceases: here man alone with
? ? as
a is
a
a to
toas
toinit
is is
is
is
all
In a
to
of
to a
is
a in
is or
it
as
a
to
? THE WILL TO POWER.
232
tentment reigns supreme. Mistrust is active only
towards the exceptions; to be an exception is to be a sinner.
28 I.
compliance with our communal instincts,
we make certain regulations for ourselves and
forbid certain acts, we do not course,
common reason, forbid certain kind of "exist
ence," nor certain attitude mind, but only particular application and development this
"existence" and "attitude of mind. " But then the idealist virtue, the moralist, comes along and
says: "God sees into the human heart! What matters that ye abstain from certain acts: ye
are not any better on that account! " Answer: Mr. Longears and Virtue-Monger, we do not
want be better all, we are quite satisfied
? with ourselves, all we desire
harm one another--and that
certain actions when they take
that we should not
why we forbid particular direction
--that say, when they are against our own
interests: but that does not alter the fact that
when these same actions are directed against the enemies our community -- against you, for
pay them sufficient honour. We educate our children
instance--we are loss know how
up them; we develop them the fullest extent. Did we share that "god-fearing" radicalism which your holy craziness recommends, we were green
horns enough condemn the source those for
bidden "acts" by condemning the "heart" and
them,
the "attitude mind" which recommends
? ? of to
if of
totoais of is
to
of
to
it
If, in
at a
to
of
a in
is to
of at
a
a
of
? A CRITICISM OF MORALITY.
233
that would mean condemning our very existence, and with it its greatest prerequisite--an attitude
of mind, a heart, a passion which we revere with
all our soul. By our decrees we prevent this
attitude of mind from breaking out and venting
itself in a useless way--we are prudent when we
prescribe such laws for ourselves; we are also
moral in so doing. . . . Have you no idea--how
ever vague--what sacrifices it has cost us, how much self-control, self-subjection, and hardness it
has compelled us to exercise? We are vehement in our desires; there are times when we even feel as if we could devour each other. . . . But the
"communal spirit" is master of us: have you observed that this is almost a definition of
morality?
282.
The weakness of the gregarious animal gives
rise to a morality which is precisely similar to
that resulting from the weakness of the decadent
man: they understand each other; they associate
with each other (the great decadent religions always rely upon the support of the herd). The
gregarious animal, as such, is free from all morbid characteristics, it is in itself an invaluable creature; but it is incapable of taking any initiative; it must have a "leader"--the priests understand this. . . . The state is not subtle, not secret enough; the art of "directing consciences" slips
its grasp. How is the gregarious animal infected with illness by the priest?
? ? ? ? 234
THE WILL TO POWER.
283.
The hatred directed against the privileged in
body and spirit: the revolt of the ugly and bungled souls against the beautiful, the proud, and
the cheerful. The weapons used: contempt of beauty, of pride, of happiness: "There is no such
thing as merit," "The danger is enormous: it is right that one should tremble and feel ease," "Naturalnes-s evil; right oppose all that
even 'reason'" (all that anti
natural elevated the highest place).
again the priests who exploit this condition,
natural
? and who win the "people" over "The sinner" over whom there
heaven than over "the just person. "
struggle against "paganism" (the pang con science, measure for disturbing the harmony
the soul).
The hatred of the mediocre for the exceptions,
and the herd for its independent members. (Custom actually regarded "morality. ") The revulsion feeling against "egotism": that
only worth anything which done "for another. " "We are all equal";--against the love dominion, against "dominion" general; --against privilege;--against sectarians,
free spirits, and sceptics;--against philosophy force
opposing - mechanical and automatic
instincts); categorical morality,
philosophers themselves
imperative," the essential nature
"general
and universal. "
"the
themselves. more joy
This the
? ? in
is
of
(a
is in
is to
ill
It ofisof is
of
a is
is
as
of
of is
in
is
at
to
is
it
to
? -
A CRITICISM OF MORALITY
284.
235
The qualities and tendencies which are praised: peacefulness, equity, moderation, modesty, rever
ence, respectfulness, bravery, chastity, honesty, fidelity, credulity, rectitude, confidence, resigna tion, pity, helpfulness, conscientiousness, simplicity, mildness, justice, generosity, leniency, obedience, disinterestedness, freedom from envy, good nature, industry.
We must ascertain to what extent such qualities are conditioned as means to the attainment of
certain desires and ends (often an "evil" end); or as results of dominating passions (for instance,
intellectuality): or as the expressions of certain states of need--that is to say, as preservative measures (as in the case of citizens, slaves, women, etc. ).
In short, every one of them is not considered
? "good" for
approximates
"society"
ends the latter, necessary for their preserva
own sake, but rather because standard prescribed either by by the "herd," means the
tion and enhancement, and also the result
an actual gregarious instinct the individual;
these qualities are thus the service an instinct which fundamentally different from these
antagonistic, selfish, and pitiless the outside world; full
states virtue. For the herd
love dominion and feelings mistrust, etc. the "herdsman" this antagonism comes
the fore: must have qualities which are the reverse those possessed by the herd.
? ? of
of
of
he
of
is
or
of In a
to
.
of
of
is
in
as
as a
to
a as
of
in
it is
of
to
it
to its
? however, Inen.
THE WILL TO POWER.
236
The mortal enmity of the herd towards all
order of rank : its instinct is in favour of the
leveller (Christ). Towards all strong individuals (the sovereigns) it is hostile, unfair, intemperate, arrogant, cheeky, disrespectful, cowardly, false, lying, pitiless, deceitful, envious, revengeful.
285.
My teaching is this, that the herd seeks to maintain and preserve one type of man, and that it defends itself on two sides--that is to say,
against those which are decadents from its ranks (criminals, etc. ), and against those who rise superior to its dead level. The instincts of the herd tend to a stationary state of society; they merely preserve. They have no creative power.
The pleasant feelings of goodness and benevol
ence with which the just man fills us (as opposed to the suspense and the fear to which the great innovating man gives rise) are our own sensations of personal security and equality: in this way the gregarious animal glorifies the gregarious
nature, and then begins to feel at ease. This judgment on the part of the "comfortable" ones
rigs itself out in the most beautiful words--and thus "morality" is born. Let any one observe,
the hatred of the herd for all truthful
286.
? Let us not deceive ourselves | When a man hears the whisper of the moral imperative in his
? ? ? man
conscious the opposite feelings,--that
A CRITICISM OF MORALITY.
237
breast, as altruism would have him hear he shows thereby that he belongs the herd. When
say, when he sees his danger and his undoing disinterested and unselfish actions,--then he
does not belong the herd. 287.
the herd should rule within the herd--but not
beyond it: the leaders the herd require fundamentally different valuation for their actions,
do also the independent ones the beasts prey, etc.
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS CONCERNING MORALITY.
My philosophy aims
new order rank: not individualistic morality. " The spirit
? 288.
human pride--The "Free-Will" theory anti
Morality regarded
attempt establishing
religious. Its ultimate object right upon man regard himself
his highest states and actions: growing feeling pride.
bestow the the cause
form the
Man feels his power his "happiness"; they say: there must will behind these states--
*TRANSLATOR'S NOTE.
--Here broad distinction be tween Nietzsche and Herbert Spencer.
? ? is a
it
of a
to
to
be
of
a to
as
is of
of
is as to a
at
of
of a of
a
is
as an
of or
at
as 3.
at an
in is to
is
it,
? 238
THE WILL TO POWER.
otherwise they do not belong to him. Virtue is an attempt at postulating a modicum of will, past or present, as the necessary antecedent to every exalted and strong feeling of happiness: if the
will to certain actions is regularly present in consciousness, a sensation of power may be inter
preted as its result. This is a merely psychological
Point of view, based upon the false assumption
that nothing belongs to us which we have not
consciously willed. The whole of the teaching of responsibility relies upon the ingenuous psycho
logical rule that the will is the only cause, and
that one must have been aware of having willed
in order to be able to regard one's self as a cause. Then comes the counter-movement--that of the
? moral-philosophers.
These men still labour under
the delusion that a man is responsible only for what he has willed. The value of man is then
made a moral value: thus morality becomes a
causa prima; for this there must be some kind of principle in man, and "free will" is posited as
prima causa. The arrie`re pense? e is always this:
If man is not a causa prima through his will, he must be irresponsible,--therefore he does not
come within the jurisdiction of morals,--virtue or vice is automatic and mechanical. . . .
In short: in order that man
may respect himself he must be capable of becoming evil.
289.
Theatricalness regarded as the result of "Free Will" morality. It is a step in the development
? ? ? A CRITICISM OF MORALITY,
239
of the feeling of power itself, to believe one's self to be the author of one's exalted moments (of one's
often the expression of an imperfect and often morbid constitution. Personal perfection regarded as determined by will, as an act of consciousness, as reason with dialectics, is a caricature, a sort of self contradiction. . . . Any degree of consciousness renders perfection impossible. . . . A form of
theatricalness. )
29O.
The moral hypothesis, designed with a view to justifying God, said: evil must be voluntary
(simply in order that the voluntariness of goodness might be believed in); and again, all evil and suffering have an object which is salvation.
The notion "guilt" was considered as some thing which had no connection at all with the ultimate cause of existence, and the notion "punishment" was held to be an educating and beneficent act, consequently- an act proceeding from
a good God.
The absolute dominion of moral valuations over
all others: nobody doubted that God could not
be evil and could do no harm--that is to say,
perfection was understood merely as moral per fection.
29 I.
How false is the supposition that an action must depend upon what has preceded it in
perfection)
and to have willed them. . . . (Criticism: all perfect action is precisely un conscious and not deliberate; consciousness is
? ? ? ? 240
THE WILL TO POWER.
consciousness! And morality has been measured in the light of this supposition, as also crimin ality. . . .
The value of an action must be judged by its
the utilitarians: to measure it knowing that origin.
results, say
according to origin involves the impossibility
ahead, perhaps.
stages
Who can tell what an action and sets motion? As stimulus?
But do we know its results? Five
provokes
powder-magazine Utilitarians are simpletons. And finally,
As the spark which fires
they would first all have
know what useful; here also their sight can travel only over
? five stages so. They have no notion the great economy which cannot dispense with evil. We do not know the origin the results:
has an action, then, any value
We have yet the action itself consider: the
states consciousness that accompany the yea nay which follows upon its performance: does the value an action lie the subjective states
which accompany it? (In that case, the value music would measured according the pleasure
displeasure which occasions gives the composer.
which Obviously feelings
value must accompany sensation power, restraint, impotence--for instance, freedom
lightsomeness. Or, putting the question differently:
physio logical terms? could be the expression
could the value an action be reduced
completely free constrained life? --Maybe its biological value expressed this way.
? ? is
or
of
. . .
its in
it
it, . ) in a
in
F
a .
. . .
of . of
ofit or or
of
orto of be
of
or
it .
of
in
to it,
to . or
us to .
a
to
or of of
is P
? unknown.
A CRITICISM OF MORALITY,
24 I
then, an action can judged neither the
light its origin, nor its results, nor its accom paniments consciousness, then its value must be
292.
morality
The re-establishment "Mature": an action itself quite devoid value; the whole question
this: who performed it? One and the same "crime" may, one case, be the greatest privi lege, the other infamy. As matter fact,
the selfishness the judges which interprets an
amounts denaturalisation separate an action from man;
contempt against "sin";
are actions which are good bad themselves.
293.
The concept "reprehensible action" presents
with some difficulties. Nothing that happens can be reprehensible itself: one would not dare
eliminate completely; for everything
bound up with everything else, that exclude one part would mean exclude the whole.
reprehensible action, therefore, would mean
reprehensible world
And even then, reprehending would
the consequence VOL.
whole.
reprehensible world even
reprehensible. And attitude mind that
direct hatred believe that there
? action (in regard whether was useful
relation degree them).
author) according
harmful themselves (or likeness unlikeness
? ? I.
in is it
of .
all or in of
. . .
to
asous toitinto
to toin is is or a, A It
If, of
to
it its in to
.
in
of inas toof a
. .
an be a a to in or its of
Q ofofa
be
or to
. toto
. in a
of
is as in
? THE WILL TO POWER.
242
condemns everything, would be the affirmation of everything in practice. . . . If Becoming is a huge ring, everything that forms a part of it is of equal
value, is eternal and necessary. --In all correlations of yea and nay, of preference and rejection, love
and hate, all that is expressed is a certain point
of view, peculiar to the interests of a certain type of living organism: everything that lives says yea
by the very fact of existence.
2. 94.
Criticism of the subjective feelings value. -- Conscience. Formerly people argued: conscience
condemns this action, therefore this action reprehensible. But, matter fact, conscience condemns an action because that action has been
condemned for long period time: all conscience does to imitate: does not create values. That
which first led to the condemnation of certain
actions, was not conscience: but the knowledge (or the prejudice against) consequences.
The approbation conscience, the feeling well
being, "inner peace," the same order emotions the artist's joy over his work--it proves nothing. Self-contentment proves no
more favour that which gives rise than
its absence can prove anything against the value
the thing which fails give rise We are
far too ignorant able judge the value
our actions: this respect we lack the ability
? regard things objectively.
condemn an action, we do not do judges,
Even when we
? ? so as
to of it.
to it,
of
of
to of of
in to
be .
it
its
to to
as a
in
as
of
is
of .
a of
is of
its
of
of
is
of
of
.
? with
A CRITICISM OF MORALITY.
243
but as adversaries. . . . When noble sentiments accompany an action, they prove nothing in its
favour: an artist may present us with an absolutely insignificant thing, though he be in the throes of
the most exalted pathos during production.
were wiser regard these sentiments misleading: they actually beguile our eye and our power, away
from criticism, from caution and from suspicion, and the result often that we make fools our selves they actually make fools us.
295.
We are heirs to the conscience-vivisection and
self-crucifixion two thousand years: these two practices lie perhaps our longest efforts becoming perfect, our mastery, and certainly our subtlety; we
have affiliated natural propensities with heavy conscience.
An attempt produce an entirely opposite
state affairs would be possible: that say, affiliate all desires beyond, all sympathy with things which are opposed the senses, the
intellect, and nature--in fact, all the ideals that have existed hitherto (which were all anti-worldly),
heavy conscience,
296.
? The great crimes psychology:
(1) That all pain and unhappiness should have been falsified by being associated with what wrong (guilt). (Thus pain was robbed its innocence. )
? ? of
is to
of
is
It
in
is
to a
of
. . .
to
its as
of a
to
of
at in a
of
to
? 244
THE WILL TO POWER.
(2) That all strong emotions (wantonness,
voluptuousness, triumph, pride, audacity,
ledge, assurance, and happiness in itself) were branded as sinful, as seductive, and as suspicious.
(3) That feelings of weakness, inner acts of cowardice, lack of personal courage, should have
decked themselves in the most beautiful words,
and have been taught as desirable in the highest degree.
(4) That greatness in man should have been given the meaning of disinterestedness, self-sacrifice
for another's good, for other people; that even in
the scientist and the artist, the elimination of the
individual personality is presented as the cause of the greatest knowledge and ability.
(5) That love should have been twisted round to mean submission (and altruism), whereas it is in reality an act of appropriation or of bestowal,
resulting in the last case from a superabundance in the wealth of a given personality. Only the
wholest people can love; the disinterested ones, the "objective" ones, are the worst lovers (just
ask the girls! ). This principle also applies to the
love of God or of the "home country": a man
must be able to rely absolutely upon himself. (Egotism may be regarded as the pre-eminence of
the ego, altruism as the pre-eminence of others. )
(6) Life regarded as a punishment (happiness as a means of seduction); the passions regarded
as devilish; confidence in one's self as godless. The whole of psychology is a psychology of obstacles,
a sort of barricade built out of fear; on the one hand we find the masses (the botched and bungled,
know
? ? ? ? A CRITICISM OF MORALITY.
245
the mediocre) defending themselves, by means of against the strong (and finally destroying them
their growth on the other hand, we find all the instincts with which these classes are
best able prosper, sanctified and alone held honour by them. Let any one examine the Jewish priesthood.
297.
The vestiges the depreciation Nature through moral transcendence: The value of disinterested
ness, the cult altruism; the belief reward
the play natural consequences; the belief "goodness" and genius itself, the one, like the other, were the result disinterestedness; the continuation of the Church's sanction of the life of
the citizen; the absolutely deliberate misunder standing history (as means educating up
morality) pessimism the attitude taken up
towards history (the latter just much result the depreciation Nature, that
pseudo-justification history, that refusal see history the pessimist sees it).
? 298.
"Morality for own sake. "--this
an im
portant step
itself appears final value.
religion has generally become saturated with it: as, for instance, the case Judaism. likewise goes through phase which separates itself
the denaturalisation
morals: this phase
? ? it a
as
of
it
of
as if
of
in
of of
as its
in
. .
in a
of inof
);
Inof as Itis as
in a
of
is
or of
of
to
in
aof .
to is
in ato inin in
in it,
? 246
THE WILL TO POWER.
from religion, and in which no God is "moral" enough for it: it then prefers the impersonal ideal. . . . This is how the case stands at present.
"Art for Art's sake": this is a similarly dangerous principle: by this means a false contrast is lent to things--it culminates in the slander of reality ("idealising"
into the hateful). When an ideal is severed from reality, the latter is debased, im poverished, and calumniated. "Beauty for Beauty's
sake," "Truth for Truth's sake," "Goodness for Goodness' sake. "--these are three forms of the evil
eye for reality.
Art, knowledge, and morality are means:
instead of recognising a life-promoting tendency in them, they have been associated with the
opposite of Life--with "God,"--they have also been regarded as revelations of a higher world, which here and there transpires through them. . . .
"Beautiful" and "ugly," "true" and "false,"
"good" and "evil"--these things are distinctions and . antagonisms which betray the preservative
and promotive measures of Life, not necessarily of man alone, but of all stable and enduring
organisms which take up a definite stand against
their opponents. The war which thus ensues is
the essential factor: it is a means of separating things, leading to stronger isolation. .