Nietzsche- Discussion Starter

Nietzsche talks about slave morality versus master morality in Essay 1, and defines the difference between bad and evil. It was the good people themselves who didn't take into account utility who were the ones who defined good; when they became aware of the contrast between themselves and "lower" people, they saw good vs. bad. Bad in different languages (he often brings up words in other languages to compare their translations and implications) means plain and simple, while good means noble/privileged/the truthful. So the noble/master morality thinks of themselves as happy and good, and sees lower people as the bad, but they don't really care about the outside world - their goal is to affirm themselves in their happiness. When they see bad it doesn't affect them much because they think of it as a contrast to show even more clearly that they are superior. Slave morality, on the other hand, was made of people who see a hostile outside world and resents it. Their moral valuations are reversed. They think of themselves as poor and wretched, and see the happy powerful people as evil. Jesus is described as the ultimate seduction of slave morality because He reinforces the idea that love will be given to the poor.

These both distort reality and the way we see the world. Which one do you think is more dangerous and which do you think is further from the truth? Master morality helps you to appreciate life and the good things but can lead you to feel contempt toward lower people. Slave morality helps you get through the tough times because you remind yourself of the light at the end of the tunnel, but leads you to resenting a lot of things/not really being happy.

To quickly explain good vs. bad and good vs. evil (this is how I understood it but I hope we can talk about all these things I'm trying to explain because I'm not 100% sure how right I am!!), bad is the opposite of good - eg. pure vs. impure. So someone pure is someone who washes themselves, doesn't eat bad food, doesn't sleep with "dirty women" and bad is the opposite - someone who doesn't do that. Or, the nobles are good and excellent, and those who are not the nobles are bad. Good vs. evil is different because what the noble man thinks of as good is the resenting person's idea of evil. When Nietzsche describes it this way, is he trying to say that evil is based on the intention? Bad seems to be what is or isn't, whereas evil seems to be resenting or envying another person's satisfaction or enjoyment.

Also, do you believe in the original idea that people thought egoistic and self-beneficial actions were good even if they harmed others, because they were useful to themselves? They thought this way because they were habitually praised for this, so they felt even better because they thought it was good. This reminds me of how you would train an animal but would a human be able to just apply reason or would their sense of right and wrong not exist if they lived in isolation/a strange world and were just never taught?