Beyond Good and Evil

by Friedrich Nietzsche

SUPPOSING that Truth is a woman—what then? Is there not ground for suspecting that all philosophers, in so far as they have been dogmatists, have failed to understand women—that the terrible seriousness and clumsy importunity with which they have usually paid their addresses to Truth, have been unskilled and unseemly methods for winning a woman?

It seems that in order to inscribe themselves upon the heart of humanity with everlasting claims, all great things have first to wander about the earth as enormous and awe-inspiring caricatures: dogmatic philosophy has been a caricature of this kind—for instance, the Vedanta doctrine in Asia, and Platonism in Europe. Let us not be ungrateful to it, although it must certainly be confessed that the worst, the most tiresome, and the most dangerous of errors hitherto has been a dogmatist error—namely, Plato’s invention of Pure Spirit and the Good in Itself.

(for Christianity is Platonism for the “people”),

Which of us is the Oedipus here? Which the Sphinx?

For example, truth out of error?

Asked and answered: The scientific procress. Every wrong hypothesis is removed which brings us closer to the truth by elimination. Calculatus eliminatus, according to the Cat in the Hat.

The fundamental belief of metaphysicians is the belief in antitheses of values.

I believe this means the value is something like Good and the Antithesis is Evil. part of his argument will be that good and evil are not necessarily dimetrically opposed.

“de omnibus dubitandum.”

Essentially, everything must be doubted.

the greater part of the conscious thinking of a philosopher is secretly influenced by his instincts,

The falseness of an opinion is not for us any objection to it:

Which is a deep flaw in his thinking.

To recognize untruth as a condition of life; that is certainly to impugn the traditional ideas of value in a dangerous manner, and a philosophy which ventures to do so, has thereby alone placed itself beyond good and evil.

No, it has simply ignored good and evil. In doing so, it is evil in that evil is an absence of good. Any idea of goodness connects a person to the welfare of larger society. His argument focuses only on the Ubermensch doing what grows the greatness of the Ubermensch and puts no demands on them. That's evil. He doesn't transend good and evil, he chooses evil.

whereas, in fact, a prejudiced proposition, idea, or “suggestion,” which is generally their heart’s desire abstracted and refined, is defended by them with arguments sought out after the event.

Sounds like Nitzche should use this to examine his own thoughts.

Indeed, to understand how the abstrusest metaphysical assertions of a philosopher have been arrived at, it is always well (and wise) to first ask oneself: “What morality do they (or does he) aim at?”

What is Nitzche aiming at? It seems he desires to create a moral system which is almost useless as if applies only to the rare and exceptional "Great Man." I present as an option he is being like Machiavelli when he wrote The Prince: sucking up to powerful people

In the philosopher, on the contrary, there is absolutely nothing impersonal; and above all, his morality furnishes a decided and decisive testimony as to who he is,—that is to say, in what order the deepest impulses of his nature stand to each other.

Including Nitzche.

He, the old school-teacher of Samos, who sat concealed in his little garden at Athens, and wrote three hundred books, perhaps out of rage and ambitious envy of Plato, who knows! Greece took a hundred years to find out who the garden-god Epicurus really was. Did she ever find out?

Apparently, there is absolutely no evidence supporting this clear an homenim attack.

there is perhaps some slight admixture of satiety and scorn, which can no longer endure the bric-a-brac of ideas of the most varied origin, such as so-called Positivism at present throws on the market;

Positivism seems strongly connected to the arguments being made. It sought to understand sociology like physics, making a person into a piano key as expressed by the Underground Man in Notes from the Underground. Of course Positivism fails to understand emotional needs and motivation because they are not observable. Sociology has moved on and does focus on the feelings and emotions of people instead of feigning that all human behavior can boil down to reason.

It is certainly not the least charm of a theory that it is refutable; it is precisely thereby that it attracts the more subtle minds.

He is wrong. Non-falsifiable. theories are useless.

It seems that the hundred-times-refuted theory of the “free will” owes its persistence to this charm alone; some one is always appearing who feels himself strong enough to refute it.

Also a bogus statement. From our perspective, we have free will. We are agents that make choices. if an omniscient God knows what we will choose, that's immaterial from our perspective. From Nitzche's, God is dead so the deterministic aspects of omniscience don't apply.

Every select man strives instinctively for a citadel and a privacy, where he is free from the crowd,

The use of 'every' is questionable and the addition of 'select' seems weaselly or prone to cherry picking.

(I do everything to be “difficultly understood” myself!)—and

He is being a bit obscure and hard to understand. He makes not reasonable argument for his position but chooses to pretend difficulty understanding him is he intentional and intended to laugh at others. He sounds like the Underground Man.)

But how could the German language, even in the prose of Lessing, imitate the tempo of Machiavelli, who in his “Principe” makes us breathe the dry, fine air of Florence, and cannot help presenting the most serious events in a boisterous allegrissimo,

Highlited just to point out the origins of Nietzsche's thoughts in The Prince. the themes are recognizable.

One must know how to conserve oneself—the best test of independence.

Here, he presents a list of rules without any explanation or justification. He is clearly presenting his own biases and prejudices as if they are some revealed truth. I will note this is an accusation he made of other philosophies which appear to have thought more seriously on morality than he has.

One must renounce the bad taste of wishing to agree with many people.

Here, we might have some virtue but also some folly. We share our ideas with other people as a sounding board. We will be invested in our clever ideas while others may see the flaws. Ergo, you should want people to agree with you. Like most things, this can be taken too far.

And how could there be a “common good”! The expression contradicts itself; that which can be common is always of small value.

What a idiot. Pennies are common and of small value but you can collect quite a few of them if you are determined. Small goods are still good. also, the common good isn't a small good, it is a sort of good that helps all (good in common) or a good which is often needed (frequently found good.) He doesn't stop to ask himself, "could I be wrong?" or "how would I know if I were wrong?"

In the end things must be as they are and have always been—the great things remain for the great, the abysses for the profound, the delicacies and thrills for the refined, and, to sum up shortly, everything rare for the rare.

This is exactly what his philosophy sounded like to me: a defense of selfishness or, to put it more clearly, a morality consisting if immorality.

What they would fain attain with all their strength, is the universal, green-meadow happiness of the herd,

Nietzche lacks empathy. He believes he is better than everyone else and shouldn't need to be troubled with their feelings or rights. Problem is the herd which he wishes to dismiss are still free to act collectively. His advise about the Ubermensch is simply stupid lack of foresight into repercussions.

This latter doubt is justified by the fact that one of the most regular symptoms among savage as well as among civilized peoples is the most sudden and excessive sensuality, which then with equal suddenness transforms into penitential paroxysms, world-renunciation, and will-renunciation, both symptoms perhaps explainable as disguised epilepsy?

Someone's racist.

Once on a time men sacrificed human beings to their God, and perhaps just those they loved the best—to this category belong the firstling sacrifices of all primitive religions,

This is another false statement.

For those who are strong and independent, destined and trained to command, in whom the judgment and skill of a ruling race is incorporated,

Nitzche might not have been a Nazi but he sounds like a Nazi.

religion is an additional means for overcoming resistance in the exercise of authority—as

Well, he does have a point there.

67. Love to one only is a barbarity, for it is exercised at the expense of all others. Love to God also!

Nietzsche is a terrible source to consult on love. His overman only loves himself and lives in isolation!

“I did that,” says my memory. “I could not have done that,” says my pride, and remains inexorable. Eventually—the memory yields.

For some people, this happens. If it happens, however, you need to work on your psychological fitness. Your pride should not be allowed to edit your memory. A proud person can accept what they have done. A self-deprecating person has to hide from their choices.

76. Under peaceful conditions the militant man attacks himself.

This one makes little sense unless you assume Nietzsche created in bursts of mania followed by crippling depression. Manic-depressive cycles. When HE lacked a mania episode (peaceful conditions), HE attacked himself. He then assumes everyone is like him. His philosophy is autobiographical.

79. A soul which knows that it is loved, but does not itself love, betrays its sediment: its dregs come up.

Self-Defeating Behavior. See also: the Underground Man. However, given how inward-turned N is, it probably references his failed relationship with Lou Salomé, who didn't love him back. He loved her, and when she didn't love him, he saw her 'sediment.' He does not otherwise seem like a very good source for advice on love. Still, even if he doesn't mean it, he might have said something that can be taken out of context and used.

81. It is terrible to die of thirst at sea. Is it necessary that you should so salt your truth that it will no longer—quench thirst?

This is exactly what I think N does. He salts his philosophy with autobiographical elements betraying his own intuition and biases to such an extent that it cannot provide quality of life. He is doomed to his mania and depression cycles because he mistakenly takes it as a virtue of the overman.

83. Instinct—When the house is on fire one forgets even the dinner—Yes, but one recovers it from among the ashes.

90. Heavy, melancholy men turn lighter, and come temporarily to their surface, precisely by that which makes others heavy—by hatred and love.

Remember, he seems to use love to mean a creative spirit and energy, not relationships. He repeated stresses that the ideal man should be a loner. Therefore, here he seems to be talking about how the effort to be creative can seem heavy to normal people, but a manic / depressive cylcing person needs that charged burst of creative energy to feel lighter. Addendum: His failed relationship with Lou Salomé might be read into several of the aphorisms. He might have been talking about love after all.

102. Discovering reciprocal love should really disenchant the lover with regard to the beloved. “What! She is modest enough to love even you? Or stupid enough? Or—or—”

Lou Salomé... He *needed* her to reject him, or she would have been a mortal and attainable love which he probably would have ruined. By rejecting him, she caused him pain, 'hatred and love,' which caused him suffering, which he needed for a mania creation surge. (Unfortunately, tinged with misogyny.)

108. There is no such thing as moral phenomena, but only a moral interpretation of phenomena.

120. Sensuality often forces the growth of love too much, so that its root remains weak, and is easily torn up.

125. When we have to change an opinion about any one, we charge heavily to his account the inconvenience he thereby causes us.

135. Pharisaism is not a deterioration of the good man; a considerable part of it is rather an essential condition of being good.

136. The one seeks an accoucheur for his thoughts, the other seeks some one whom he can assist: a good conversation thus originates.

The Accoucheur was a surgeon, not just a male midwife. Midwives couldn't use medical tools, which required a doctor. This doesn't really factor into how the quote uses the term. Here we have someone wanting to deliver a idea and someone wanting to help deliver it (Accoucheur).

139. In revenge and in love woman is more barbarous than man.

140. Advice as a riddle.—“If the band is not to break, bite it first—secure to make!”

Terrible, manipulative advice for anyone attempting to sustain a genuine human relationship. Sooner or later, relationships will have a naturally occurring test with out such a manipulative attitude. Addendum: He tested Lou Salomé with an unconventional unrealistic expectation of a relationship. She rejected him. His resentment (ressentiment) of that seems to explain much of his misogyny.

142. The chastest utterance I ever heard: “Dans le veritable amour c’est l’ame qui enveloppe le corps.”

144. When a woman has scholarly inclinations there is generally something wrong with her sexual nature. Barrenness itself conduces to a certain virility of taste; man, indeed, if I may say so, is “the barren animal.”

Another personal jab at Lou. Neitzsche's bitterness and ressentiment shine. Read up on Lou, she lived more like the Ubermensch than Neitzsche.

146. He who fights with monsters should be careful lest he thereby become a monster. And if thou gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will also gaze into thee.

147. From old Florentine novels—moreover, from life: Buona femmina e mala femmina vuol bastone.—Sacchetti, Nov. 86.

Let's pretend this is a penis joke and move on ... "A good woman and a bad woman both want a stick."

149. That which an age considers evil is usually an unseasonable echo of what was formerly considered good—the atavism of an old ideal.

Rarely does this hold. Apparently, Romans felt Pity and Humility were bad. We can also remember the recent quote about beating wives with a stick. I don't have many examples of what N asserts. Lacking examples sufficient to support usually, I rule this false for the most part.

153. What is done out of love always takes place beyond good and evil.

The Manic State: Manic behavior is often impulsive, reckless, and fails to consider consequences. The person believes they are operating under a special exemption from normal rules. This is Nietzsche. He cannot reign in his mania, a 'will to power' or urge to create he often calls love. Ergo, he creates a system that calls this the highest good and excuses his inability to control these moods.