The relativity of good, evil, and truth

“And I— I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference.” Robert Frost

Friedrich Nietzsche’s Beyond Good and Evil challenges fundamental assumptions about morality, truth, and the nature of human existence. Nietzsche critiques conventional moral values and offers a new, radical approach that suggests good and evil are not universal concepts but are instead subjective, culture-based constructs.

He argues that perspectives shape our understanding of truth and encourages readers to embrace individualism, challenge societal norms, and recognise the fluidity of moral values across different times and places.

This essay explores these insights, focusing on Nietzsche’s critique of conventional morality, the embrace of individualism, and the recognition that truth is not absolute, but relative and perspectival.

Nietzsche’s central assertion in Beyond Good and Evil is that concepts of good and evil are not absolute but are rather products of human interpretation shaped by culture and time. Nietzsche critiques traditional moral systems—particularly Christian morality—arguing that they are based on a herd mentality that suppresses individuality and creativity.

He contends that these moral values have been constructed to maintain social order and control rather than to reflect any inherent truth about human nature.

For Nietzsche, the notion of good and evil is not an objective reality but is fluid, varying according to the perspectives of individuals and societies. As Nietzsche writes, “The noble type of man experiences itself as determining values; it does not need approval; it judges, ‘what is injurious to me is injurious in itself’; it knows itself to be that which first accords honor to things; it is value-creating.” Here, Nietzsche distinguishes between the “noble” individual, who creates and determines their own values, and the “slave” or “herd” morality that is externally imposed.

Nietzsche contrasts this with what he terms “master morality,” which is the morality of the strong, creative individual who determines values based on their own will to power. Master morality, in Nietzsche’s view, is rooted in the affirmation of life and the pursuit of personal greatness

The noble person, free from the influence of societal approval, determines what is good or evil based on personal experience and judgment, rather than conforming to preordained societal norms.

This view parallels the philosophies of other great thinkers who have questioned traditional moral systems. Jean-Paul Sartre’s existentialism, for example, emphasises the subjective creation of values.

Sartre argues that existence precedes essence, meaning individuals must define themselves through their actions and decisions (Sartre, 1943). Nietzsche similarly calls for an individual to create their own values, rejecting inherited moral systems. This critique of universal morality encourages an open, adaptable approach to understanding ethics, suggesting that what is good or evil is shaped by context, rather than being absolute or fixed.

Nietzsche’s challenge to conventional morality is perhaps one of his most provocative contributions. He argues that traditional values - such as those espoused by Christianity - are based on a “slave morality” that seeks to subjugate and control the individual.

This morality, according to Nietzsche, praises qualities like humility, meekness, and self-sacrifice, which benefit the herd but inhibit the flourishing of the individual.

Nietzsche contrasts this with what he terms “master morality,” which is the morality of the strong, creative individual who determines values based on their own will to power. Master morality, in Nietzsche’s view, is rooted in the affirmation of life and the pursuit of personal greatness.

This morality is not about serving others or adhering to rules, but about asserting one’s own will and creating new meanings.

Nietzsche’s critique of conventional morality has influenced a wide array of thinkers, including Friedrich Hayek, who emphasized the dangers of collectivism and central planning, suggesting that individuals, rather than societies, should determine their moral and economic values (Hayek, 1944).

This philosophical position aligns with Nietzsche’s belief that individuals must resist the pressures of societal conformity and instead cultivate their own personal set of values.

One of the key themes of Beyond Good and Evil is the importance of individualism. Nietzsche encourages individuals to break free from the societal constraints that limit personal freedom and creativity. For Nietzsche, the ideal person is one who creates their own identity and values, rather than relying on the inherited morals and beliefs of the society they live in.

In Nietzsche’s view, the greatest form of individualism is the ability to recognise one’s own will to power and act in accordance with it. The “will to power” is a fundamental concept in Nietzsche’s philosophy, referring to the inherent drive in individuals to assert and enhance their own power and influence. This drive is not just about physical domination, but about the desire to create, innovate, and shape one’s environment according to one’s own desires and needs.

Nietzsche believes that the pursuit of power, in this sense, is a fundamental human instinct that drives personal growth, creativity, and the formation of new values.

Nietzsche’s philosophy of individualism has influenced modern existentialist thinkers such as Albert Camus and Simone de Beauvoir. Camus, in his essay The Myth of Sisyphus, suggests that individuals must create meaning in an otherwise meaningless world, an idea that echoes Nietzsche’s call for self-definition (Camus, 1942). For both philosophers, the emphasis is on the individual’s ability to create their own values and navigate the world on their own terms.

Nietzsche also argues that suffering is an essential aspect of the human experience and should not be avoided but embraced as a means of personal growth. For Nietzsche, suffering is not a punishment or a consequence of sin, as many religious traditions would suggest, but a necessary process for self-overcoming and creativity. In his view, individuals who seek to avoid suffering are also avoiding the opportunity to become stronger and more resilient.

Nietzsche’s ideas about suffering resonate with the thoughts of other philosophers, such as Friedrich Schiller, who viewed suffering as an essential part of the human condition, shaping character and personal growth (Schiller, 1795). Similarly, in the modern psychological domain, Viktor Frankl’s concept of “tragic optimism” suggests that finding meaning in suffering is key to overcoming life’s difficulties (Frankl, 1946).

Nietzsche’s perspective aligns with this, proposing that it is through hardship and struggle that individuals develop their true potential.

Nietzsche is also highly critical of dogmatic thinking, which he sees as a barrier to intellectual growth and creativity. Dogmatism, according to Nietzsche, stifles new ideas and enforces conformity, preventing individuals from questioning established beliefs. He urges people to remain intellectually flexible, to embrace doubt, and to constantly challenge their assumptions.

This critique of dogmatism is seen in the works of later philosophers such as Karl Popper, who warned against the dangers of closed systems of thought and advocated for “falsifiability” as the hallmark of scientific theories (Popper, 1934). Like Nietzsche, Popper believed that rigid adherence to dogma could prevent intellectual progress and inhibit the discovery of new truths.

One of the key lessons in Beyond Good and Evil is the importance of perspective in shaping one’s understanding of truth.

Nietzsche argues that there are no objective, absolute truths. Instead, truth is shaped by the perspectives of individuals, cultures, and historical contexts. He writes, “There are no facts, only interpretations,” emphasising that each person’s perspective influences how they understand the world.

This view aligns with postmodern philosophy, particularly the work of Michel Foucault, who argued that knowledge and truth are constructed through power relations within society (Foucault, 1971). Foucault’s theory of power-knowledge echoes Nietzsche’s belief that truth is not an inherent property of the world but is instead constructed through human interactions and societal frameworks.

Nietzsche’s insights into the relative nature of truth and morality are increasingly relevant in the contemporary era, particularly in the context of the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR). As technological advancements and global interconnectedness continue to reshape our world, individuals are confronted with a plurality of perspectives that challenge conventional truths and moral frameworks.

In this context, Nietzsche’s call for intellectual openness and the embrace of diverse viewpoints offers a valuable guide for navigating an increasingly complex world.

In the 4IR era, individuals must recognise the fluidity of truth and morality and develop the ability to engage with diverse perspectives. By doing so, they can cultivate a more nuanced understanding of the world, free from the constraints of rigid dogma and societal conformity.

Friedrich Nietzsche’s Beyond Good and Evil offers profound insights into the relativity of morality, the importance of individualism, and the role of perspective in shaping truth. His ideas encourage a critical examination of traditional moral values and call for a more open, flexible approach to understanding the complexities of human existence.

As individuals navigate the challenges of the 4IR era, Nietzsche’s lessons offer a pathway to greater personal freedom, creativity, and intellectual growth. In the words of the poet Robert Frost, “Two roads diverged in a wood, and I— I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference.”

The choice to embrace individuality, to question conventional norms, and to create one’s own values can lead to a life of greater fulfillment and meaning, no matter the era.

* Rahman M Mahbub is a Professor & the Head of the Department of English, City University, and an academician, author, translator , researcher and poet. He can be contacted at [email protected]