Nietzsche’s Account of Power in on the Genealogy of Morals Essay Example

debt. This connection is made by Nietzsche through the German words schuld meaning guilt, and schulden meaning debts. Nietzsche posits that the moral idea of guilt stems from the material concept of debt. As he says in GM; 4, "But how did that other 'somber thing,' the consciousness of guilt, the 'bad conscience' come into the world?...the moral concept of guilt is founded in the material concept of debt."

According to Nietzsche, guilt is not derived from a sense of remorse or apology. Instead, he argues that guilt originates from indebtedness in the relationship between buyer and seller, creditor and debtor. This feeling arises when one owes something to another person and intends to pay the debt only out of fear of consequences rather than genuine desire to prevent harm. Therefore, Nietzsche posits that guilt stems from self-preservation rather than conscience, which differs greatly from contemporary beliefs about guilt. Although there are linguistic similarities between words related to guilt and debt, they do not prove that the concept of guilt emerged from debt alone. To understand the origins of guilt properly, it is essential first to explore the roots of debt.

People have a natural inclination to pay their debts due to the potential negative consequences of not doing so. Creditors may use cruelty and physical pain as a means of collecting payment, particularly if the debtor lacks assets to offer in exchange. This situation compromises the debtor's autonomy by making their body the sole form of compensation available. The question arises as to why creditors would resort to such extreme measures and whether they recover any losses from them. To comprehend this dynamic, we must first

examine the initial relationship between creditor and debtor.

Nietzsche argues that the idea of a promise originated from the relationship between a creditor and debtor. The debtor had to promise to repay their debt, creating a need for memory. Failure to honor the promise resulted in punishment where the creditor could take control of the debtor's body, wife, freedom or life as a substitute for payment. This punishment acted as a deterrent and encouraged debtors to repay their debts. The guilt from punishment is meant to awaken in the guilty individual.

According to GM; 14, the guilty person who is being discussed is the debtor. The purpose of punishment is to make the debtor realize that they have failed the creditor and their behavior is not acceptable. Nietzsche's claim in GM; 8 suggests that humans consider themselves as animals that measure values and evaluate, making it understandable why the fear of the consequences of failing to pay debt to a creditor exists. Therefore, based on the debtor's debt evaluation, the creditor can determine an equivalent form of cruelty to impose on the debtor's body.

In seeking compensation for harm caused, our desire for payment is not driven by a belief that the wrongdoer could have behaved differently and should be punished. Rather, this stems from a primitive notion of justice based on the concept of equivalent exchange. This compensatory approach is focused on addressing suffering rather than holding the perpetrator accountable for their actions. Whether we have suffered physical, emotional, or material harm, we seek payment for the injustice inflicted upon us. Even if the debtor has no means to provide financial restitution, they still possess

their body as a means for compensation. Consequently, committing an act of cruelty against them allows us to alleviate the injustice they have caused as creditors. Therefore, the mere fact that a debt is owed to us bestows upon us both a justification and authorization for cruel treatment.

According to Nietzsche, the relationship between a debtor and creditor is similar to any human relationship where one holds power over another. The debtor is the powerless individual while the creditor is the one with the power. The contract between debtor and creditor can be compared to the relationship between a man and woman in love or two team mates working on a project. Nietzsche believed that punishing debtors by inflicting pain was enjoyable for the creditor as it gave them pleasure to make others suffer. He stated that "to see others suffer does one good" and that punishment was a festive occasion. (GM; 5-6)

According to Nietzsche, humans had an inherent desire to inflict pain upon others when they were not yet ashamed of their cruelty. This analysis of human behavior suggests that punishment serves as a front that allows people to fulfill their sordid need for inflicting pain. Thus, it is predominantly the desire to cause pain, and not just the attempt to extract compensation from a debtor's failure, that motivates this behavior. Nietzsche's account of power is central to understanding this motivation. While he claims that cruelty is used by creditors as a means of gaining compensation from debtors, there may be alternative explanations for this phenomenon.

The explanation provided suggests that individuals do not desire to cause harm to others but rather prefer to prevent

harm being inflicted upon themselves. The concept can be linked to the creditor-debtor relationship, where the punishment for failing to repay loans, involving pain induction, is a deterrent for those contemplating defaulting. Due to the innate avoidance of pain, individuals will likely avoid conduct that may lead to pain being inflicted upon them. As a result, they endeavor to honor their loan agreements, preventing creditors from experiencing the distress of default. This implies that the threat of physical pain serves as an incentive for debtors to fulfill their commitments.

According to this interpretation, Nietzsche's claim that "To see others suffer does one good, to make others suffer even more" (GM; 6) is not consistent with his view of power and the inherently violent nature of human behavior. Another perspective on the debtor-creditor relationship, which many philosophers would agree with, suggests that people do not solely desire to inflict pain upon others. However, this explanation does not address Asceticism, the practice of inflicting pain on oneself as a form of pleasure.

The reason why people tend to pay their debts in the debtor-creditor relationship is to avoid punishment, as human behavior is inclined towards avoiding pain and preserving oneself. The pursuit of pleasure characterizes most of human life activities, including professional choices, social circles, and leisure pursuits. However, there needs to be a solution that reconciles the contradicting cases of cruelty towards others and asceticism, where inflicting pain is a human pursuit.

According to Soll (1994; 184), the source of power lies in the act of being cruel. He believes that asceticism is a form of self-cruelty, where individuals actively seek behaviors that cause themselves pain. However,

Nietzsche views this ideal as a contradiction, referring to it as "simple absurdity" and representing life against life.

According to Nietzsche (GM III; 13), despite claims to the contrary, asceticism is a commonly observed human behavior. However, there is a conflict between asceticism's teachings and the natural instinct of humans to avoid pain and seek self-preservation. Soll (1994; 183) describes Nietzsche's two paradoxes that address this issue: the vital paradox and the hedonistic paradox. Essentially, Nietzsche resolves this contradiction by acknowledging that humans have a desire for both power and its exercise.

Regardless of the medium used, it is the act of utilizing power that provides satisfaction. The vital and hedonic paradoxes have a common thread - both involve contradictions in how we seek pleasure and betterment. Seeking pain for pleasure, known as the vital paradox, is essentially life against life. Pursuing pain is an attempt to gain something, yet by causing harm to oneself, one is ultimately depleting their own life. Ultimately, seeking improvement may lead to a decrease in one's quality of life.

According to Nietzsche, there is a psychological misunderstanding of something that cannot be accurately understood or described initially. This misunderstanding pertains to the relationship between pain and life fulfillment. Ultimately, the answer to this enigma lies in the fact that humans instinctively strive for optimal conditions that enable them to exert their full strength and achieve the most powerful feeling possible. This conclusion is in line with Nietzsche's consistent emphasis on an individual's will to power. In accepting this perspective, it becomes apparent that purposefully causing oneself pain does not contradict our desire for life. Instead, it is an exercise of power rather

than a threat to our own lives. (GM III; 13, 7)

According to Nietzsche, the will to live requires asceticism. He believes that the ascetic ideal arises from the protective instinct of a deteriorating life that strives to preserve itself and struggle for survival. As he states in GM III; 13, "Hedonistically described, asceticism is characterized by behavior that finds its satisfaction in its own suffering, by desire that finds its pleasure in its own pain." This concept is known as the hedonistic paradox, which suggests that enjoying pain is the aim of ascetic behavior. (1994; 182).

The concept of hedonism centers around the notion that pleasure is the ultimate good and desirable objective in human life. It involves evaluating the degree of satisfaction derived from different actions. When an individual inflicts pain on themselves, they inevitably experience that same discomfort. However, there exists a paradox regarding self-inflicted pain since a considerable portion of our existence is devoted to avoiding suffering by safeguarding ourselves against harm, seeking medical treatment and education, all with the aim of minimizing or preventing any present or future unease. Thus, asserting that individuals purposefully seek out agony appears contradictory.

According to Soll (1994; 182), the pleasure principle is often considered to involve avoiding pain, which is seen as a fundamental aspect, or even the most fundamental aspect of it. However, despite this widely accepted view, Nietzsche argues through the concept of the ascetic ideal that humans have a desire to cause themselves pain. He suggests that the planet Earth is an ascetic one and is inhabited by disgruntled and arrogant creatures who enjoy inflicting pain on themselves as much as possible (GM III;11).

This implies that the pleasure derived from causing pain exceeds the pleasure lost when experiencing it.

The assessment of gains and losses in pleasure must be hedonistically evaluated. However, Nietzsche rejected this process and the idea of hedonism entirely (Soll, 1994; 184). Instead, he believes that the pleasure gained or lost from an action is unimportant compared to the power felt. Nietzsche shifts from pleasure to power as the primary motivator for behavior. This means that achieving pleasure or avoiding pain is not life's primary objective; exercising power is. Consequently, motivations for inflicting pain on oneself or others hold no distinction.

According to Soll, the exercise of power is equally related to both asceticism and cruelty. However, in asceticism, one exerts power over oneself. The primary ambition in asceticism is not pleasure or pain avoidance, so the satisfaction derived from it is not based on experiencing pain but on the process of being powerful over something. This is why people may choose to be cruel. To understand what motivates cruelty, Soll analyzes the relationship between power and cruelty. Nietzsche focuses only on the manifestation of power as cruelty, which makes this analysis essential.

As such, this is the embodiment of the most potent manifestation of power. Nietzsche's emphasis on cruelty stems from the subjugation of another's independence through cruelty. The entire process will now be thoroughly examined. Nietzsche asserts that "it is morally wrong to take pleasure in others' suffering and even worse to deliberately cause it, but humans often engage in such behavior" (1994; 172). Hence, there is a need to comprehend why this occurs, and this justifies Nietzsche's assertion that inflicting pain and being cruel provides

the greatest pleasure. To find pleasure in another's pain is to be cruel.

According to the doctrine of psychological hedonism, individuals derive pleasure from various experiences, but it fails to explain why people enjoy the suffering of others. It states that the fact that people relish the agony of others can be utilized to comprehend behavior, but it doesn't offer a resolution. Nietzsche proposes a different philosophy called the will to power, which explains how someone can derive gratification from the pain of another person. Soll uses a genealogical approach to trace the emergence of the concept of debt and the penalty for non-payment, eventually concluding that the pleasure gained from someone else's anguish is inexplicable. On the other hand, Nietzsche claims that the satisfaction for the creditor is derived not from the debtor's torment but from having power over them.The source of pleasure is no longer rooted in pain, but in the recognition of one's own power. Therefore, what brings pleasure is the act of creating or performing, rather than the specific outcome of that action.

Nietzsche believed that punishing a debtor is pleasurable for the creditor as it serves as an extraordinary counterbalance to their loss. This pleasure does not stem from cruelty but from exerting power over another individual. Exhibiting autonomy and demonstrating power through cruelty is considered the most effective way, though it is not the only means of doing so.

The text suggests that the best way to exert power over others is by weakening their independence, which results in them becoming dependent and vulnerable. This loss of autonomy allows for domination and control to take place. While being cruel isn't the only

way to demonstrate one's power, it is considered the most effective approach. Furthermore, being a creditor has given people who were not born into positions of power an opportunity to acquire it and exercise authority over others.

As per Nietzsche, the ultimate delight is derived from wielding power. During the feudalistic medieval period, power predominantly rested in the hands of the nobility and clergy while commoners were restricted to leading their families. This authority was exercised through patriarchal displays of masculinity; yet when it became monotonous, they sought out alternative means within society which paved way for creditor-debtor associations as a means to increase their dominance.

Although some individuals may never reach the status of creditor, they may still exercise their power by being cruel to themselves if they have no family or are vulnerable. This allows individuals to feel like they are imposing power on someone, even if it is themselves. The option of being powerful over oneself and inflicting pain can create a sense of power even in those who may not have the opportunity to exercise power over others.

Therefore, the concept of asceticism relates to the idea of finding pleasure in pain. The contradiction of avoiding and pursuing pain as two life goals is resolved through this "simple absurdity." According to Soll (1994; 185), some individuals find pleasure in inflicting pain, which is their only pleasure. These actions make them feel powerful. Even for those who lack power over others, they can still exercise their individual sovereignty by being powerful over themselves, even at the cost of experiencing pain.

The ascetic individual resorts to self-mutilation as a means of attaining power, once

there is no one else to harm. This, however, only occurs when inflicting pain on others is not possible. Nietzsche has disregarded the contradiction of self-infliction of pain as a source of pleasure by rejecting the idea that avoiding pain is the ultimate motive for human behavior. Instead, pursuit of power is the primary motivator for our actions.

According to Nietzsche, the ultimate human goal is power. This pursuit of power is essential for self-preservation, as possessing power allows us to maintain our humanity, rather than avoiding pain. When focusing on individual power, the idea of life against life may arise, but by inflicting pain upon oneself, one is actually enhancing their existence through a feeling of empowerment. This highlights the difference between physical and mental strength, with Nietzsche valuing the latter more highly. He would prefer to endure mental pain in order to experience a sense of power rather than physical pain.

Despite the fact that humans must experience pain to enhance their feelings of power, the pursuit of power remains a priority over the pleasure principle. Therefore, the degree of pain that one accepts has little impact on their decision to seek power. As a result, an ascetic's first method would be to abuse others because the abuser does not suffer the consequences of being abused themselves.

Soll (1994; 186) suggests that causing harm to oneself can create a unique feeling of power in enduring what one typically seeks to avoid. However, this notion is contradictory since we lack the ability to prevent unwanted occurrences from happening to us. Consequently, this contradiction weakens our power instead of bolstering it. Thus, relinquishing some power is necessary

for us to gain power.

Despite the apparent paradox, Nietzsche suggests that the self is not a unity but rather a society of selves. According to Soll (1994; 186), this means that the self being the abuser can separate from the self being abused. Essentially, Nietzsche argues that an asceticism practicing self's behavior can have an impact on other members of the community of selves. However, it is unclear how this ascetic act affects the general welfare of the community in terms of power dynamics. The loss of power experienced by the abused self may partially negate the power gained by the abusing self through inflicting pain.

The abused self experiences a loss of power due to its inability to defend against the abuser, which leads to ongoing pain and further erosion of control. While this may be viewed as a selfless act by surrendering autonomy for the greater good of the community, it ultimately prevents achieving Nietzsche's universal goal of ultimate human power. Therefore, individuals who sacrifice themselves in this way cannot attain this end within the community.

Despite the sensation of power gained through asceticism, exerting control over others outweighs this feeling. This is due to the weakening and loss of power experienced through ascetic acts. Nietzsche's proposed solution to the contradiction of asceticism fails to address this power imbalance, leaving us powerless in situations where multiple selves are present. The abusive self's power is undermined by the abused self's loss of power, making it difficult to prevent unwanted occurrences.

The statement implies that self-denial is not as beneficial as exerting power over others. Nietzsche redefined the ascetic ideal to be a pursuit of power instead

of pleasure, which is commonly associated with Hedonic theories. He determined that individuals strive to increase their autonomy by causing pain to themselves or others in order to gain strength.

The previous paragraph posited that self-abuse can lead to a decrease in power, making it difficult to avoid pain. Power is a key motivator for human behavior, but the inability to protect oneself from pain weakens this drive. Asceticism ultimately hinders our ability to gain power by causing us to lose it when we fail to shield ourselves from pain. Therefore, inflicting pain on others may be the most effective way of achieving power through violence as it circumvents the suffering one would otherwise experience themselves.

The enjoyment of power comes from a sense of empowerment rather than cruelty, as it reinforces one's autonomy and self-worth. However, the pursuit of power can lead to mistreatment of others in order to intensify this sensation.

Two references offer understanding into Nietzsche's morality views. The first is in Basic Writings of Nietzsche, edited by Peter Gay and published by The Modern Library in 2000. Here, Nietzsche explores "On the Genealogy of Morals." The second reference is in Nietzsche, Genealogy, Morality edited by R. Schact and published by the University of California Press in 1994. In this work, I. Soll delves into Nietzsche's thoughts on cruelty, asceticism, and the shortcomings of hedonism.