← Writing archive

tnuaag

Source: public/assets/writing/philosophy/tnuaag.txt · philosophy

The Nietzschean Übermensch as a gardener
Amour Propre as the failure of the Nazis, and self-determining freedom.

Introduction:

In this article, I will examine an often overlooked part of Nietzsche's concept of power through his observation of strength in those who seek not to rule. First, I will analyze a key passage from Nietzsche's notebooks that challenges common interpretations of his "will to power." Then, I will connect this to Rousseau's concept of amour propre (the mindset that self-esteem can only be found by gaining the approval of others) to explore how external validation and social pressures can enslave us. From there, I will examine how these philosophical insights apply to contemporary issues, particularly focusing on market forces and body image in modern society. Finally, I will argue that true self-determining freedom and the path of any wannabe Übermensch requires not just independence from external constraints, but an intimate understanding of oneself and active choice to be enslaved.

Nietzsche’s “inward weakness” and Rousseau's amour-propre:

The following passage is from Nietzsche's notebooks (nachlass, on the will to power):

"I have found strength where one does not look for it: in simple, mild, and pleasant people, without the least desire to rule—and, conversely, the desire to rule has often appeared to me a sign of inward weakness: they fear their own slave soul and shroud it in a royal cloak (in the end, they still become the slaves of their followers, their fame, etc.) The powerful natures dominate, it is a necessity, they need not lift one finger. Even if, during their lifetime, they bury themselves in a garden house!"

I find a consistent reflection within Nietzsche that power and strength is the tearing of the self from it's invisible dominators, or at least recognizing and choosing which dominators to be subject to. One such dominator he talks of often such as in this exerpt, and one I see most people deal with, is the impact of others views on the self's aspirations and identity/self-esteem. This is much reminiscent of Rousseau's reflection on amour propre - where the voice of the authentic is drowned out by the passions induced by our dependence on others. I would argue this pride, this gratification through the other is the hardest dominator to realise, and perhaps impossible to eradicate. Still, although one of the most important maturities we can have is to realise that life is grey, still greater than this is to realise not all grey is one shade. To be able to see, and understand, and analyse the impact something has should be highly important to us. I think the ideal for Rousseau and myself here is an intimate contact with oneself: his idea of le sentiment de l'existence. As for those who cannot, they must be bound by the arbitrary desires imposed by amour propre. They are subjugated, even in their highest dreams. That is the inward weakness that is talked of in Nietzsche's texts and the downfall of some of those "with the desire to rule."

This isn’t just some word salad, I promise (or at least it has real application):

This unreflective inward weakness, that I believe all or most humans are born with and struggle with, results in very real consequences, for both the individual and the society in which we live. For example, in a society in which market forces are a dominant force (the entirety of human society, and perhaps rightly so based on history), one terrible downside is found in marketing and advertising tactics that utilise triggering our most base external dominators, first to grab attention, then to maximise profits (sell more of what they want to sell). This is part of the reason I think we tend towards sexualisation within media, and as "sex sells," we tend to produce more of what sells, and as we reinforce what sells, it spirals towards a balance of what is just barely acceptable (of course, the world is multi-dimensional and such a model only works, barely, to describe certain goods, such as clothing). So in a society in which market forces are a dominant force, due to this inward weakness, we outsource of our choices to uncaring market forces. For example, although the sexual liberation of women and in specific of women's clothing was on whole perhaps a desirable thing due to the greater freedom and opportunities it brought to women, there has been a concerning disregard for the evidence that more sexualised clothing leads to a plethora of negative outcomes in terms of body image, self sexualisation, and views of women and exacerbates mental disorders (the studies are specifically for women, and I can believe this holds for men too, but this is a greater issue for women than men by the statistics). This of course is not an advocation of the suppression of women (or indeed anyone's) right to choose, only pointing out that the increased "freedom" for women to play into societal forces that commodify their fears is not only not empowering, but causes negative effects. The biggest pushback against this has been the body positivity movement, but it seems both anecdotally and statistically that it has had little cultural effect on changing this. More on this later. This is an issue that comes partly from a lack of understanding what the proper ideal of freedom "actually" means (or at least a healthier ideal of freedom in my opinion).

The solution:

So how do we get out of this inescapable identity trap? Or what might be better at least? To Rousseau, and implicitly in Nietzsche's nachlass, we have the idea of "self determining freedom," wherein Rousseau crystallizes this ideal through freedom as being when you decide what to do for yourself, and what concerns you, rather than being shaped by external influences and views. This is why for Nietzsche, it is a reevaluation of all values, not a destruction and condemning to the fire of all values. Evidently this is beyond the simple negative liberty of doing whatever you want without the interference of others, which if anything is more a conformity to modern society. Self determining freedom demands the breaking of the hold of all external impositions, including the way our base desires are manipulated and thus manipuate us, and deciding for oneself alone. It is authentic self determining freedom that seems to be the first step, or at least a contigent step on the road of the will to power in the Nietzschean ideal. This is not just as simple as it sounds however, again, perhaps the most important part of this is cultivating great self-awareness, and the wisdom that you are a lens seeing itself, a lens that may be overlooking what it cannot see as underlying assumptions. But the use of even this can be potent: taking us back to the example earlier, if the body positivity movement added a little Nietzschean insight about choosing their dominators, they would understand: they are fighting for more women's bodies to be viewed as valuable, but they should instead be fighting for women to be valued as more than bodies to view! Indeed, some may do already; this is an example, and it's entirely possible it's not an original insight. But the general insight holds, true liberation, no matter however paradigm breaking you think it is, must be based in an intimate and honest engagement with ourselves and be ready to fight tooth and nail for the truth and our own betterment, instead of easy to dip into social forces.

Some conclusions to be drawn:

Most of the Nazi "thinkers" that aspired after Nietzsche's ideals were/are unable to even make it past one of the first steps lol.

Those who dominate others or aspire to dominate others may just be charlatans who need to take a good look at themselves, and those who take a good look at themselves may reach higher, no matter their station. Or a little more pithy:

The Übermensch could be a gardener.

Unless you are actively choosing, you are probably going to end up an amalgamation of market forces, some quirks those close to you like, and hairballs, which doesn't sound that nice. At least get rid of the hairballs and the market forces bad stuff.

You can get rid of bad stuff by first understanding what that “bad stuff” actually is, what you actually are (the what you are in a causal sense, if not a mystical soul-like final sense), by being in intimate contact with yourself.

If you even want to be an Übermensch (based on a dead theory of evolution and a superiority complex), because you think others will think it's cool or Nietzsche said so, you will never be an Übermensch, so think a little.