After decades of studying Nietzsche, I have adopted the habit of referring two the two sets of _moral prejudices_ (as per one translation of _GOM)_ as _sovereign_ and _priestly_ morality so as not to beg the question and spoil the punchline, at least at first.

A Freeman takes freedom, gracefully or by force, as necessary. Only a slave expects freedom to be granted and enforced by authority.

I can’t wait till this channels blows up. This video is an amazing analysis 🔥📈📈📈. Geneology of morals is by far one of the most important subjects nobody knows about.

This is a good comprehensive treatment of master and slave morality, but I’d like to make a recommendation. It would be helpful if you would include relevant references to Nietzsche’s writings in the description in case listeners want to probe more deeply into the subject of your presentation.

00:17 📜 Nietzsche's concept of master and slave morality is a significant and complex idea in Western philosophy. 02:50 🧠 Nietzsche examines morality from a perspective beyond good and evil, focusing on understanding human beliefs and values as indicative of human nature. 07:47 🏛 Nietzsche distinguishes between noble (master) morality based on power and lower class (slave) morality rooted in fear and external orientation. 11:38 💡 The origins of good and evil, according to Nietzsche, have a double pre-history: one from the noble classes and the other from the oppressed. 20:11 🌐 Modern morality is a synthesis of master and slave morality, with mutual misunderstanding and tension between the two origins, primarily in Western civilization. 21:47 🧐 Nietzsche discusses the dual prehistory of modern morality, which is derived from the master and slave moralities. 23:40 🤔 Nietzsche emphasizes that master morality values honesty and associates it with power, while slave morality emphasizes pity and utility. 31:13 😓 Slave morality is characterized by suspicion, skepticism, and values such as pity, patience, humility, and friendliness, focusing on utility and the relief of suffering. 35:22 🤨 Nietzsche criticizes utilitarianism and Kantian ethics, seeing them as rooted in slave morality and incompatible with the master morality. 41:32 📚 Nietzsche explores the etymological origins of words for good and bad, showing how they evolved in relation to aristocratic and common concepts. These key takeaways provide insights into Nietzsche's discussion of the dual prehistory of modern morality, the characteristics of master and slave moralities, and the linguistic origins of moral concepts. 44:20 🇩🇪 Nietzsche explores the etymological connection between "goot" (good) and "got" (god) in German, highlighting their resemblance. 45:02 🧐 Nietzsche's analysis of Greek language and morality shows a dichotomy between the aristocrats (good) and the commoners (bad) based on social, political, and economic factors. 46:55 🕊 Nietzsche discusses the priestly caste's role in managing the collective psyche of society through religious laws and scriptures. 48:15 💪 The ascetic values of the priestly caste, including abstaining from vices, demonstrate their moral strength and influence over the nobility. 50:36 📚 Kaufman compiles aphorisms from Nietzsche's previous works that support his analysis in "Genealogy of Morality," making research for this episode easier. 53:36 😡 Nietzsche highlights the competition and opposition between the priestly caste and the aristocratic caste, leading to the development of slave morality and priestly vengefulness. 55:14 🔥 Nietzsche discusses the influence of figures like Tertullian and Thomas Aquinas in shaping Christian thought, particularly in their celebration of the concept of hell. 59:49 🇯🇴 Nietzsche argues that the Jews played a significant role in the development of slave morality, emphasizing the influence of Jewish culture on European values. 01:03:19 😠 Nietzsche introduces the concept of resentment, which arises when individuals are powerless to stop harm and desire revenge, leading to a spiraling negative state of mind. 01:04:44 🔄 Slave morality's creative power emerges when resentment turns into values, contributing to the spiritualization of revenge and the idea of divine justice. 01:06:23 🧔 Nietzsche emphasizes the priestly morality's creative act of remaking the world into a moral battleground with redemption as the ultimate good, highlighting the revenge element present in it. 01:07:07 🚫 Nietzsche's inquiry into morality is non-moral in nature, as he views both master and slave moralities as necessary and morally neutral phenomena. 01:07:47 🦁 Nietzsche compares master and slave moralities to the moral perspectives of a predator and a prey animal, emphasizing the conflicting values and how they are not inherently right or wrong. 01:09:24 🦓 Nietzsche explores the conflict between the good of the lion (predator) and the good of the gazelle (prey) and how these values cannot always be reconciled. 01:10:20 🤔 Nietzsche suggests that in some cases, conflicting values cannot be resolved, and the deciding factor is conflict rather than moral judgment or compromise. 01:11:16 🗣 Nietzsche criticizes the separation of the doer from the deed and the concept of free will, arguing that one's actions are an expression of their character and nature. 01:13:21 🔒 Nietzsche points out that language and grammar lead to the separation of actions from the doer, creating a false concept of free will and moral accountability. 01:14:46 🦹 Nietzsche highlights how vengeful and hateful emotions exploit the belief in free will and moral accountability, leading to blame for one's nature. 01:17:48 🦁 Nietzsche argues that to understand the history of morality, one must study it as a natural phenomenon without including moral prejudices, even the belief in a neutral substratum between the doer and the deed. 01:19:27 🌟 Nietzsche acknowledges the inner conflict between opposing moral ideas as a mark of a higher and more spiritual nature. 01:20:54 🗳 Nietzsche prefers a liberation from essentialist prejudices and outer-directed moral orientation, favoring self-creativity and the creation of personal values as free spirits.

I think the most common mistake people make about the geneology, that they view master and slave morality as metaphisical ideals, rather than historical phenomena that occured at a certain point in human history. Like for example if they try to analyze morals in popculture or politics or whatever in a Nietzschean way, they often come to conclusions like: Sith=master morality, Jedi=Slave morality. But in reality both come from contemporary morality, so they are both a mix of the 2 + the addentum, that came over like 2k years of "mixing".

I'm very impressed with your ability to keep all of your information in a nice discernible order. I'm doing the same thing with my own articles

Thanks. I think there's been about 30 new subscriptions since I started watching your channel about a week ago. Your presentations are so well thought out and researched you absolutely deserve hundreds of thousands of subscribers. A lot for a philosophy channel I know, but I hope you get there. I'll be keeping an eye out for new videos as they come out : )

Thanks for your amazing work.

Another great video mate🎉🎉🎉🎉

I've NEVER heard Nietzsche's Master vs Slave morality explained in this way, as such I think I've never actually understood Nietzsche. I hope there are more parts to your interpretation of The Genealogy of Morals

You are amazing ...thankyou so much. Totally greatful for your golden articulation and clarity. I love to listen to your voice when I fall asleep at night also, very easy on the ears!!! 😉

"Bad" as opposed to "good" by Nietzsche can be quite misleading. The adjective ""schlecht" meant in his time also common (like a commoner in opposition to a noble man). Nowadays "schlecht" really means bad (not good or even evil) in opposition to "schlicht" as common or ordinary. Originally these words had the same meaning. In German in its old meaning it is still used in a jugdement "schlecht und recht" to characterize a piece of work. It mens for exemple that an essay is just acceptable (not good and not bad).

I cannot express enough gratitude i have for how helpful these lectures have been for me. I'm so glad i stumbled across this goldmine. Im still a noob in my overall understanding and perspective of philosophy, as I've only recently started my journey up the mountain, thanks in part to you, so i really appreciate the breadth of your explanations! Im currently reading Russels history of western philosophy and then i think ill get into Homer and the pre-platonics.

Subtly good badass Nietzsche commentary!

What do the priestly persona and the knightly persona share in common? Is it not that they are, indeed, personas? Each, a learned persona layered over an innate character? Each, a contrived ideology layered over an inborn instinct? Might it be that, albeit a subjective valuation, both personas are afflicted with the same pathology? The pathology borne of conflating one's self with its mere representation in status? The substance of their being with its hollow symbolic shell? If so, could a return to tribal symbiosis between individuals who are not personas, but authentic characters, be a most fitting resolution? What first emerged? The tyranny of the group waged against the individual, or the dictatorship of the despot over the group? As the sheep bah their call, the lone coyote responds with howls.

Twilight of the Idols was named as a take-off of the Wagner Opera in the ring cycle Twilight of the Gods. He takes aim at several philosophers and ideas. I’d agree with the smashing with the hammer 🔨 idea more than the tuning fork one. Second chapter called The Problem With Socrates where he takes jabs at him. Takes jabs at Kant, Descartes, Schopenhauer, Spinoza, the Stoics and others throughout his works. Wagner certainly not spared either. He not only digs into their ideas but attacks their character and physical appearance. Also, Nietzsche does IMO, make a stand on morality in that he wants to get back to the Amor Fati and end morality that sees nature or as he calls it the gulf between our natural instincts as bad. He calls this complete oppression of our instincts decadence. Wants to end decadence. Spells it using French. Being a philologist and all. Had to get his money’s worth out of that degree I guess even though at this point he’s not a professor but a philosopher.

thank you

Comparing competition between species with inter species conflict is dubious

What's the name of the professor Kaufmann quotes at 45:00 ? Found it Gerald F. Else. Thanks for your work, as always!

Art is not a gilted mirror to be admired it is a hammer with in which you can reshape it with my favourite 😸 although it's taken from a Japanese poem about a portrait hanging in the empire s 🦄 room by. Duo foo thanks great show 😊 Wales

To know if you are slave or the Master is simple. Slaves took the safe and effective. Master didn't.

I think it is entirely untrue to say the Master morality contains no moral obligation. sure it doesn't have the same obligations that people today colloquially associate with morality and virtue but it certainly has its own obligations. To even be considered a moral system in the most abstract sense I think in fact it has to have obligation, otherwise it cannot be a shared system. (The very inability to identify this obligation because it is so radically different from ours is to be fully blinded by our own frame of reference. The Slave is compelled by the ideal of compassion and self-sacrifice, the Master is compelled by honor). I do not think it can be denied that for the Masters, even in the archetypal sense, they are compelled to act in certain ways in order to stay in the positive category of their moral dichotomy, that is within the Good. A good Master may not have to be kind or give alms to the poor, or show mercy but he absolutely is obliged to be brave, to be strong, to honor his oaths, to support and defend bonds of kinship, and do not bring disgrace upon his lineage. Whether in mythopoetic verse or in the actual histories of real anecdotal individuals he repeatedly see those in the class of Masters condemned if they ever act with cowardice, are too weak to carry out their duty, are deceitful in a circumstance where it's understood that is not acceptable, violate their oaths, do not carry through on promised allegiances, dishonor their family, etc. What is the compunction to avoid all these sorts of actions if not a moral obligation?

The archetype of the Age of Pisces - that is, of Christianity - includes an acceptance of oppression, suffering, slave thinking.as devout homage to the divine. Thiis era started to end in the 1700s but it's not over yet. Just thought I'd throw something "irrational" into this well done discussion

1:18:00 If there is no "doer", thus the is no one "responsible" for its actions, if the entity cannot not have done otherwise?? The "doer" as a linguistic invention, a tool, a misrepresentation of nature and thus of reality, a ghost that we think is real bc of grammar??

What aspects of master morality does he criticise, if any?

So must the Lion lay down with the Lamb ?

What does Nietzsche want millions of people to believe exactly? Does he concede that the majority with always be resentful & majority rules?

If Master and Slave morality are essentially two sides of the same coin, I wonder if they can ever be synthesized to an acceptable degree

If there's no self, no free will, what the hell is Nietzsche talking about in talking about 'free spirits'? What difference does it make which morality dominates when we're determined to just act out whatever drives are in us, when there's no self to decide between anything, much less the master and slave morality. Your interpretation makes no sense at all.

We’ve returned to the year 10,000 BC. The good are the intelligent, the beautiful, the competent the capable the anointed the noble the powerful. The evil are afraid, but really mostly beneath consideration. The evil are judgemental distrustful, weak, incapable, inconsequential. We need a Christian revival. . .

Criticizing judaism isn’t antisemitic and ashkenazis are not semitic.

Are we Gods? That is the question...

the more i learn about nietzsche the more i disagree with him. i find myself thinking "what is he talking about? - did he just make that shit up?"

𝕬𝖑𝖘𝖔 𝕾𝖕𝖗𝖆𝖈𝖍𝖙 𝕹𝖎𝖊𝖙𝖟𝖘𝖈𝖍𝖊