Up@dawn 2.0 (blogger)

Delight Springs

Tuesday, May 4, 2021

Fredrich Nietzsche - Self realization (self-overcoming).

 

Brandon Lienhart       

Phil Oliver

Section 4

4/27/2021

Friedrich Nietzsche: Self-Realization

Nietzsche first sparked interest in the idea of self-overcoming after discovering the works of Herbert Spencer; a sociologist who famous for his hypothesis of social Darwinism. Spencer also coined the term “survival of the fittest”.  Nietzsche would mostly agree with Spencer’s hypothesis, however two of his ideas regarding the very nature of evolution he was opposed to. The first being that Nietzsche disagreed with Spencer’s idea that evolution resulted in the inevitable progress of life. He expresses his belief in his book, The Anti-Christ, Nietzsche; where he quotes “Mankind surely does not represent an evolution toward a better or stronger or higher level, as progress is now understood. This “progress” is merely a modern idea, which is to say, a false idea. The European of today, in his essential worth, falls far below the European of the Renaissance; the process of evolution does not necessarily mean elevation, enhancement, strengthening.” I believe that Spencer was suggesting life will continue to thrive and adapt to new circumstances and environments. While Nietzsche was suggesting that progress in his terms has not yet been achieved by mankind.

The second idea of Spencer’s that Nietzsche disagreed with was the idea that all organisms ultimately strive after self-preservation. In the words of Gregory Moore, Spencer had said “The ultimate end of all conduct is the prolongation and increase of life- in other words, the preservation of the individual organism and the species to which it belongs”. Nietzsche opposed this view mostly due to his assumption that Darwin shared the same idea that Spencer had. The idea that all an organism’s behavior was aimed at self-preservation, and it was this false assumption that led him to disagree with Darwin and favor his own view of evolution based on the will to power. However, according to Darwinian evolution, an organism does not explicitly aim at survival, only that the advantages of certain behavior are naturally selected for survival; and this is where I believe Nietzsche misunderstood. Nietzsche was against the idea that a will to live or drive to survive was the fundamental drive within all organisms. You can see this in his book Twilight of the Idols where Nietzsche refers to himself as “anti-Darwin” due to his rejection of the idea that organisms seek above all else the perpetuation and prolongation of their existence.

In his book Beyond Good and Evil Nietzsche elaborates on his issue with this view “Physiologists should think twice before positioning the drive for self preservation as the cardinal drive of an organic being. Above all, a living thing wants to discharge its strength – life itself is will to power -: self preservation is only one of the indirect and most infrequent consequences of this.”. In the will to power Nietzsche states “It can be shown that every living thing does everything it can not to preserve itself but to become more.” Showing his belief in self- overcoming start to form. To say that as will to power all things have a insatiable desire to manifest power is to say that they have an insatiable desire for unending growth.

In order to grow and expand and thus fulfill the fundamental desire of life itself, Nietzsche thought it was first necessary to desire something – an individual who sits around without a care in the world is an individual who will remain stagnant.  “One must need to be strong”, Nietzsche tells us, “otherwise one will never become strong.” He therefore believed that an individual must set a lofty goal that they desire to attain above anything else, and especially above what he thought to be the petty desire to feel satisfactory, as Nietzsche put it: “That something is a hundred times more important than the question of whether we feel well or not: basic instinct of all strong natures…In sum, that we have a goal for which one does not hesitate…to risk every danger, to take upon oneself whatever is bad and worst: the great passion.” (the will to power). When someone sets a goal, and strives with all their will to attain this goal through pain, suffering and being mocked or whatever adversity comes their way only then have they met the preconditions for growth to increase ones power according to Nietzsche. Nietzsche states in the will to power, “human beings do not seek pleasure and avoid displeasure. What human beings want, whatever the smallest organism wants, is an increase of power; driven by that will they seek resistance, they need something that opposes it – displeasure, as an obstacle to their will to power, is therefore a normal fact; human beings do not avoid it, they are rather in continual need of it.”

In conclusion it is important to note that Nietzsche didn’t think the ideally powerful individual was a physically strong individual or even an individual with power over others – psychological and spiritual strength represents the ultimate power, he thought, and it matters more than one has power over one’s own self rather than power over others. And to achieve power over one’s own self, Nietzsche thought it necessary to set a lofty goal and strive with all one’s might to achieve such a goal. In doing so, an individual will live a life of self-overcoming, and thus fulfill one’s purpose as a manifestation of the will to power.

 

           

 

Works Cited

Fredrich Nietzsche “The Will to power”

 Fredrich Nietzsche “Beyond good and evil”

Fredrich Nietzsche “ The Anti-Christ”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfyCzLbcAvk

1 comment:

  1. Nietzsche was surely misled by Spencer, to the extent that they both endorsed something like social Darwinism and "survival of the fittest" thinking applied to human society. Darwin was not a social Darwinist, evolution is not a rationale for cruelty. "Poor Nietzsche's antipathies," Wm James called his various ranting critiques of modernity. And yet, Nietzsche saw himself as a life-affirming philosopher. The question, then, is WHOSE lives did he affirm? He clearly was no democrat, no utiliarian friend of the greatest happiness for the greatest number.

    I do agree, his value to us as a thinker is in his example of "self-overcoming," of persevering to achieve goals in spite of serious obstacles and impediments. The best spin we can put on his work is that he did not advocate domination and overcoming of other people, but of one's own weaknesses and fallibilities.

    ReplyDelete