Who Was Friedrich Nietzsche? God, Morality and the Will to Power
By the BrainSnail editorial team. How these articles are written and checked, and how to tell us when one is wrong.
A German professor of classical languages who lost his health at thirty-four, spent a decade writing in boarding houses across Switzerland and Italy, collapsed into insanity at forty-four and died having sold almost nothing has become the most quoted and most misquoted philosopher of the modern age. His work is aphoristic rather than systematic, deliberately provocative, and easy to read in fragments and misunderstand badly, which is what happened to it in the fifty years after his death.
A short life in poor health
Born in 1844 in Saxony, the son of a Lutheran pastor who died when the boy was four, he was an exceptional student and was appointed to a chair of classical philology at Basel at the age of twenty-four, before finishing his doctorate. His first book, on the origins of Greek tragedy, argued that Greek art arose from the tension between order and ecstatic disorder, and it damaged his academic reputation because it read as speculation rather than scholarship. Migraine, eye trouble and stomach illness forced him to resign in 1879, and the following ten years, moving between Sils-Maria, Genoa, Nice and Turin on a small pension, produced almost everything he is read for. In January 1889 he collapsed in a street in Turin, reportedly while embracing a horse being beaten, and spent his last eleven years insane and cared for by his mother and then his sister, dying in 1900.
The death of God
The line everyone knows is not a boast. It appears in a passage in which a madman runs into a market place with a lantern crying out for God, is laughed at by the unbelievers standing around, and tells them that they have killed him and do not grasp what they have done. The point is diagnostic rather than triumphant: Europe had, through science and critical history, stopped genuinely believing in the Christian God, and had not noticed that the entire structure of value, meaning and purpose which rested on that belief was therefore unsupported. His fear was what would fill the space. He expected two centuries of nihilism, the condition in which nothing is worth anything because the old guarantee is gone, and he regarded the confident secular replacements of his day, nationalism, socialism, faith in progress, as religious structures with the label changed.
Where morality came from
His most sustained book, on the genealogy of morals, asks not whether our moral values are true but how they came to be ours, on the assumption that they have a history and that the history is not flattering. He proposes that an older aristocratic scheme, in which good meant strong, noble and flourishing and bad meant its opposite, was overturned by what he calls a revolt in morals, in which the powerless, unable to act, reinterpreted their condition as virtue:
- •Weakness becomes meekness, inability to retaliate becomes forgiveness, and obedience becomes humility
- •The strong are recast not as admirable but as evil, and good is redefined as their opposite
- •The engine of the change is ressentiment, a long-nursed resentment that cannot discharge itself in action and turns creative instead
- •The result is a morality that values pity, equality and self-denial, and treats the instincts of vitality as sin
- •His objection is not that this is false but that it is life-denying, and that it produced a culture of guilt turned inward
What he offered instead
Three ideas carry the positive side. The will to power is his proposal that what drives living things is not survival or pleasure but the expansion and expression of their own capacity, which in a person can be turned into art, thought or self-mastery as readily as into domination. The eternal recurrence is a test rather than a cosmology: imagine a demon telling you that you must live this exact life again, in every detail, endlessly, and ask whether you would receive it as a curse or as the best news you ever heard, a question designed to measure how much of your life you actually affirm. The overman is what might come after, a person who creates values rather than inheriting them, and who is presented in his most famous book through a prophet who is himself repeatedly mocked and undercut. He did not describe such a person, and the absence is deliberate, since a described ideal would be another inherited value.
The sister, and the damage
His work was seized by the German far right and read as a licence for cruelty and racial domination, and this was possible because of Elisabeth Forster-Nietzsche. His sister was an antisemite and German nationalist who had helped found a colony in Paraguay on those principles, and after his collapse she took control of his manuscripts and his estate. She assembled unpublished notes into a book he never wrote, edited and suppressed selectively, forged letters, and cultivated the Nazi leadership, who visited her archive and attended her funeral. The distortion is documented in detail, since the notebooks survive. His actual texts break with Wagner over antisemitism, mock German nationalism repeatedly, call antisemites a class he wants nothing to do with, and describe the state as the coldest of all cold monsters. The scholarly recovery, led after 1950 by Walter Kaufmann, has undone the worst of it, but the popular association has been slower to die.
The takeaway
The German philosopher who wrote in aphorisms from a decade of illness argued that Europe had stopped believing in God without confronting the collapse of meaning that followed, and that its morality of humility and pity had grown from the resentment of the powerless rather than from any eternal truth. Against that he set the will to power, the test of eternal recurrence and the idea of a person who creates values rather than inheriting them. His sister edited and forged his legacy into something usable by the Nazis, which the surviving notebooks disprove in detail.