noble
bane although generally mild and easily tamed, a raccoon will fight valiantly against great odds if cornered. 000124
...
marjorie How noble one must be to conquer themselves. The honor, the glory, the mundane rooted out into the open.. the horrorifying ideals of past times hurled to the ground in a whirl of dust and ashes as they burn.. your fingertips like molten lava reach deep to take my heart and help me conquer myself... 000129
...
camille Respectfully establishing a high moral character. 000129
...
me What Is Noble?
257.

Every elevation of the type "man," has
hitherto been the work of an
aristocratic society and so it will
always be--a society believing in a
long scale of gradations of rank and
differences of worth among human
beings, and requiring slavery in some
form or other. Without the pathos of
distance, such as grows out of the
incarnated difference of classes, out
of the constant out-looking and
down-looking of the ruling caste on
subordinates and instruments, and
out of their equally constant practice
of obeying and commanding, of
keeping down and keeping at a
distance--that other more
mysterious pathos could never have
arisen, the longing for an ever new
widening of distance within the soul
itself, the formation of ever higher,
rarer, further, more extended, more
comprehensive states, in short, just
the elevation of the type "man," the
continued "self-surmounting of man,"
to use a moral formula in a
supermoral sense. To be sure, one
must not resign oneself to any
humanitarian illusions about the
history of the origin of an aristocratic
society (that is to say, of the
preliminary condition for the
elevation of the type "man"): the truth
is hard. Let us acknowledge
unprejudicedly how every higher
civilisation hitherto has originated!
Men with a still natural nature,
barbarians in every terrible sense of
the word, men of prey, still in
possession of unbroken strength of
will and desire for power, threw
themselves upon weaker, more
moral, more peaceful races (perhaps
trading or cattle-rearing
communities), or upon old mellow
civilisations in which the final vital
force was flickering out in brilliant
fireworks of wit and depravity. At the
commencement, the noble caste was
always the barbarian caste: their
superiority did not consist first of all
in their physical, but in their
psychical power--they were more
complete men (which at every point
also implies the same as "more
complete beasts").

258.

Corruption--as the indication that
anarchy threatens to break out
among the instincts, and that the
foundation of the emotions, called
"life," is convulsed--is something
radically different according to the
organisation in which it manifests
itself. When, for instance, an
aristocracy like that of France at the
beginning of the Revolution, flung
away its privileges with sublime
disgust and sacrificed itself to an
excess of its moral sentiments, it was
corruption:-- it was really only the
closing act of the corruption which
had existed for centuries, by virtue of
which that aristocracy had abdicated
step by step its lordly prerogatives
and lowered itself to a function of
royalty (in the end even to its
decoration and parade-dress). The
essential thing, however, in a good
and healthy aristocracy is that it
should not regard itself as a function
either of the kingship or the
commonwealth, but as the
significance and highest justification
thereof--that it should therefore
accept with a good conscience the
sacrifice of a legion of individuals,
who, for its sake, must be suppressed
and reduced to imperfect men, to
slaves and instruments. Its
fundamental belief must be precisely
that society is not allowed to exist for
its own sake, but only as a foundation
and scaffolding, by means of which a
select class of beings may be able to
elevate themselves to their higher
duties, and in general to a higher
existence: like those sun-seeking
climbing plants in Java--they are
called Sipo Matador, --which
encircle an oak so long and so often
with their arms, until at last, high
above it, but supported by it, they can
unfold their tops in the open light,
and exhibit their happiness.

259.

To refrain mutually from injury, from
violence, from exploitation, and put
one's will on a par with that of others:
this may result in a certain rough
sense in good conduct among
individuals when the necessary
conditions are given (namely, the
actual similarity of the individuals in
amount of force and degree of worth,
and their co-relation within one
organisation). As soon, however, as
one wished to take this principle
more generally, and if possible even
as the fundamental principle of
society, it would immediately disclose
what it really is--namely, a Will to
the denial of life, a principle of
dissolution and decay. Here one must
think profoundly to the very basis
and resist all sentimental weakness:
life itself is essentially appropriation,
injury, conquest of the strange and
weak, suppression, severity,
obtrusion of peculiar forms,
incorporation, and at the least,
putting it mildest, exploitation;--but
why should one for ever use precisely
these words on which for ages a
disparaging purpose has been
stamped? Even the organisation
within which, as was previously
supposed, the individuals treat each
other as equal--it takes place in
every healthy aristocracy--must
itself, if it be a living and not a dying
organisation, do all that towards
other bodies, which the individuals
within it refrain from doing to each
other: it will have to be the
incarnated Will to Power, it will
endeavour to grow, to gain ground,
attract to itself and acquire
ascendency--not owing to any
morality or immorality, but because
it lives, and because life is precisely
Will to Power. On no point, however,
is the ordinary consciousness of
Europeans more unwilling to be
corrected than on this matter; people
now rave everywhere, even under the
guise of science, about coming
conditions of society in which "the
exploiting character" is to be
absent:-- that sounds to my ears as if
they promised to invent a mode of life
which should refrain from all organic
functions. "Exploitation" does not
belong to a depraved, or imperfect
and primitive society: it belongs to
the nature of the living being as a
primary organic function; it is a
consequence of the intrinsic Will to
Power, which is precisely the Will to
Life.--Granting that as a theory this
is a novelty--as a reality it is the
fundamental fact of all history: let us
be so far honest towards ourselves!

260.

In a tour through the many finer and
coarser moralities which have
hitherto prevailed or still prevail on
the earth, I found certain traits
recurring regularly together, and
connected with one another, until
finally two primary types revealed
themselves to me, and a radical
distinction was brought to light.
There is master-morality and
slave-morality; --I would at once
add, however, that in all higher and
mixed civilisations, there are also
attempts at the reconciliation of the
two moralities; but one finds still
oftener the confusion and mutual
misunderstanding of them, indeed
sometimes their close
juxtaposition--even in the same man,
within one soul. The distinctions of
moral values have either originated
in a ruling caste, pleasantly conscious
of being different from the ruled--or
among the ruled class, the slaves and
dependents of all sorts. In the first
case, when it is the rulers who
determine the conception "good," it is
the exalted, proud disposition which
is regarded as the distinguishing
feature, and that which determines
the order of rank The noble type of
man separates from himself the
beings in whom the opposite of this
exalted, proud disposition displays
itself: he despises them. Let it at once
be noted that in this first kind of
morality the antithesis "good" and
"bad" means practically the same as
"noble" and "despicable";--the
antithesis "good" and "evil" is of a
different origin. The cowardly, the
timid, the insignificant, and those
thinking merely of narrow utility are
despised; moreover, also, the
distrustful, with their constrained
glances, the self-abasing, the
dog-like kind of men who let
themselves be abused, the mendicant
flatterers, and above all the liars:--it
is a fundamental belief of all
aristocrats that the common people
are untruthful. "We truthful
ones"--the nobility in ancient Greece
called themselves. It is obvious that
everywhere the designations of
moral value were at first applied to
men; and were only derivatively and
at a later period applied to actions; it
is a gross mistake, therefore, when
historians of morals start with
questions like, "Why have sympathetic
actions been praised?" The noble type
of man regards himself as a
determiner of values; he does not
require to be approved of; he passes
the judgment: "What is injurious to me
is injurious in itself"; he knows that it
is he himself only who confers
honour on things; he is a creator of
values. He honours whatever he
recognises in himself: such morality
equals self-glorification. In the
foreground there is the feeling of
plenitude, of power, which seeks to
overflow, the happiness of high
tension, the consciousness of a wealth
which would fain give and
bestow:--the noble man also helps
the unfortunate, but not--or
scarcely--out of pity, but rather from
an impulse generated by the
super-abundance of power. The
noble man honours in himself the
powerful one, him also who has
power over himself, who knows how
to speak and how to keep silence,
who takes pleasure in subjecting
himself to severity and hardness, and
has reverence for all that is severe
and hard. "Wotan placed a hard heart
in my breast," says an old
Scandinavian Saga: it is thus rightly
expressed from the soul of a proud
Viking. Such a type of man is even
proud of not being made for
sympathy; the hero of the Saga
therefore adds warningly: "He who
has not a hard heart when young, will
never have one." The noble and brave
who think thus are the furthest
removed from the morality which
sees, precisely in sympathy, or in
acting for the good of others, or in
desinteressement, the characteristic
of the moral; faith in oneself, pride in
oneself, a radical enmity and irony
towards "selflessness," belong as
definitely to noble morality, as do a
careless scorn and precaution in
presence of sympathy and the "warm
heart."--It is the powerful who know
how to honour, it is their art, their
domain for invention. The profound
reverence for age and for
tradition--all law rests on this
double reverence,--the belief and
prejudice in favour of ancestors and
unfavourable to newcomers, is
typical in the morality of the
powerful; and if, reversely, men of
"modern ideas" believe almost
instinctively in progress and the
"future," and are more and more
lacking in respect for old age, the
ignoble origin of these "ideas" has
complacently betrayed itself thereby.
A morality of the ruling class,
however, is more especially foreign
and irritating to present-day taste in
the sternness of its principle that one
has duties only to one's equals; that
one may act towards beings of a
lower rank, towards all that is
foreign, just as seems good to one, or
"as the heart desires," and in any case
"beyond good and evil": it is here that
sympathy and similar sentiments can
have a place. The ability and
obligation to exercise prolonged
gratitude and prolonged revenge
both only within the circle of
equals,--artfulness in retaliation,
raffinement of the idea in friendship,
a certain necessity to have enemies
(as outlets for the emotions of envy,
quarrelsomeness, arrogance--in fact,
in order to be a good friend)a: all
these are typical characteristics of
the noble morality, which, as has
been pointed out, is not the morality
of "modern ideas," and is therefore at
present difficult to realise, and also
to unearth and disclose.--It is
otherwise with the second type of
morality, slave-morality. Supposing
that the abused, the oppressed, the
suffering, the unemancipated, the
weary, and those uncertain of
themselves should moralise, what
will be the common element in their
moral estimates? Probably a
pessimistic suspicion with regard to
the entire situation of man will find
expression, perhaps a condemnation
of man, together with his situation.
The slave has an unfavourable eye for
the virtues of the powerful; he has a
scepticism and distrust, a refinement
of distrust of everything "good" that is
there honoured--he would fain
persuade himself that the very
happiness there is not genuine. On
the other hand, those qualities which
serve to alleviate the existence of
sufferers are brought into
prominence and flooded with light; it
is here that sympathy, the kind,
helping hand, the warm heart,
patience, diligence, humility, and
friendliness attain to honour; for
here these are the most useful
qualities, and almost the only means
of supporting the burden of
existence. Slave-morality is
essentially the morality of utility.
Here is the seat of the origin of the
famous antithesis "good" and "evil":
--power and dangerousness are
assumed to reside in the evil, a
certain dreadfulness, subtlety, and
strength, which do not admit of being
despised. According to
slave-morality, therefore, the "evil"
man arouses fear; according to
master-morality, it is precisely the
"good" man who arouses fear and
seeks to arouse it, while the bad man
is regarded as the despicable being.
The contrast attains its maximum
when, in accordance with the logical
consequences of slave- morality, a
shade of depreciation--it may be
slight and well-intentioned--at last
attaches itself to the "good" man of
this morality; because, according to
the servile mode of thought, the good
man must in any case be the safe man:
he is good-natured, easily deceived,
perhaps a little stupid, un bonhomme.
Everywhere that slave-morality
gains the ascendency, language shows
a tendency to approximate the
significations of the words "good" and
"stupid."--A last fundamental
difference: the desire for freedom, the
instinct for happiness and the
refinements of the feeling of liberty
belong as necessarily to slave-morals
and morality, as artifice and
enthusiasm in reverence and
devotion are the regular symptoms of
an aristocratic mode of thinking and
estimating.--Hence we can
understand without further detail
why love as a passion--it is our
European specialty--must absolutely
be of noble origin; as is well known,
its invention is due to the Provencal
poet-cavaliers, those brilliant,
ingenious men of the "gai saber," to
whom Europe owes so much, and
almost owes itself.

261.

Vanity