Reading - Michael Tanner - Introduction to Nietzsche�s Twilight of the Idols/Anti-Christ

Greg Detre

Monday, 29 May, 2000

relevant to: Tutorial V: reading Mill � integrity, utilitarianism and the personal point of view

 

Nietzsche�s apparent contradictoriness

�If we possess our why of life, we can put up with almost any how. � Man does not strive after happiness; only the Englishman does that� � Maxims & Arrows no 12

the English have an important place in Nietzsche�s highly schematised demonology

�Formula of my happines: a Yes, a No, a straight line, a goal �� � Maxims & Arrows, last

�How little is needed for happiness! The note of a bagpipe. � Without music, life would be a mistake.� � Maxims & Arrows, 35

if scornful of happiness, why tell us a formula for it?

old habit of using a single term for something of which he approves (what people should mean by the term) and what he regards as its malignant shadow (what they usually mean by it)

Nietzsche�s grounds for his limitless contempt for 19thC utilitarian �happiness�:

1.     GHP = not worth having

equal distribution of happiness must �/span> watering down of its quality for anyone who possesses it

2.     suspect relationship to Christian ideas

�the poison of the doctrine of �equal rights for all�� � Anti-Christ, 43

3.     failure to draw a distinction between happiness + contentment:

the only happiness worth having is that which is the by-product of strenuous efforts in various directions - efforts undertaken without thought for the happiness they might produce

but: Mill explicitly/notoriously claimed better to be unhappy wise man than a contented fool

John Stuart Mill: or offensive clarity.� � Expeditions of an Untimely Man, beginning

but: why is it better for a utilitarian to be miserable + wise than stupid + contented?

there has been no coherent answer, because utilitarianism is the result of attempting to combine �hopelessly irreconcilable elements�:

its stress on equality among all men is an inheritance from Christianity

while its emphasis on happiness in this life negates Christianity�s basic premise

the Christian Church, in opposition to its founder (Jesus, or God???), has always been insistent on the worthlessness of the things of this world

they are transient

while: the Platonic streak in Christianity enforces that anything not eternal is without value

(�Christianity is Platonism for �the people�� � Preface to Beyond Good and Evil)

also: negative features dependent on them (ambition, pride, ruthlessness, achievement, creation itself � all intelligible only in a world in which everything passes away)

but: so are the Christian virtues of patience, fortitude + remorse

but: all predicated on future reward, just as the vices are eternally punished

since utilitarianism emerged from Christianity, it attempts to apply religious (especially Christian) values to a secular world

hence: while upholding earthly happiness, it reflects its Christian legacy in condemning contented zombies

(as does Nietzsche, but on radically different grounds)

 

even unsympathetic readers must share his amazement/indignation when they contemplate a world from which God has been eliminated but in which it is thought that we should behave just as people did, or ought to have done, when He was still a pervasive presence

we still see ourselves as creatures of a Creator

it�s very difficult view (of our own human nature) to overcome

the idea of ourselves as continuous with the rest of nature is so reductive

we can see something is amiss, but only tinker with things

holding on to concepts like �rights� and �equality�

the result: moral + spiritual vulgarity so depressing that he has to stage a one-man, non-stop demonstration of exaltation