'Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day. But when I follow at my pleasure the serried multitude of the stars in their circular course, my feet no longer touch the earth.'
 
HomeCalendarFAQSearchMemberlistRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 An explanation of slave morality as dislocated self-valuing

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 4153
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Will to Power

PostSubject: An explanation of slave morality as dislocated self-valuing   Sun Nov 13, 2011 8:00 am

I propose that slave morality be understood as consciousness disconnecting from the organisms self-valuing. A being can no longer rely, in its actions of acquisition of power, on what it is – it is forced to re-determine what it is in terms of the lack, the gap left by the removal of its self-valuation. Since a gap has no content, the identification is shifted to that which has caused the gap, the enemy. A moral slave determines itself in terms of what it hates, by positing itself as not-that. It posits, or attempts to posit, a self-value by establishing a sense of power over the entity that it blames for the loss of its self-value.

As it is still exerting its will to power, it still operates as an entity, a subject, so it is in fact still grounded in a self-valuing. What has been lost is the connection between self-valuing and consciousness. Consciousness has detached from nature, what results can be described as disintegration of value. As long as slave-morality persists, as the unconsciously self-valuing entity persists in its behavior of willing to power on the terms of another entity, as it tries to establish a conscious self-valuing as the negative of what it perceives as powerful (but evil), it operates directly against its natural, innate self-valuing, and this must result in decay.

I think that slave morality can not be inherited, that every new-born being has a master-morality, by which I mean that its consciousness is rooted in a self-valuing. (For example, the mother is valued in terms of the self, that is why we have the Freudian complex of interpreting the mother / parent as the self).

By the genetic passing-on and cultural / physical sustainment of forms of weakness / unhealth, it becomes more likely that a conscious being strays into slave-morality. If the being is both physically unhealthy and immersed in a culture where slave-morality is the norm, it is likely that it abandons its “child-like” master-morality and becomes a value-decaying, alike to its cultural environment. I think of the modern Islamic world, which morality is rooted in the rejection of the west (not to say that the west presently holds a master morality, but it serves as the standard of hated enemy by rejecting of which the morality is largely defined). Breaking out of this cycle, “salvation” could only occur through impulses of a freshly, life affirming nature such as is operative in children.

It seems likely that the teachings of Jesus Christ (whether this is only a metaphorical figure or if he really lived is not important) were aimed to remedy a similar condition operative in the Jews under Roman oppression – a re-establishment of self-valuing by taking on a infant-like perspective. “Render unto Caesar what is his” – his value – have for yourself what is yours – your value: “divinity” –i.e. your self-valuing

Nietzsche had good reason to say that the last Christian died on the cross, because much of Christianity as a culture was a continuation of the self-denying/ignoring against which a “spiritual rebirth” was proposed a remedy. It continued to focus on the enemy, on Evil, even if it politically overcame all enemies, and succeeded so in including in this negativity-standard against which it set its efforts, the things that naturally sustain positive valuing – beauty, strength, pleasure, the ‘good things in life’.

It seems that ultimately such a reverse valuing must come to an end, as the acting consciousness of resentment erodes the unconscious self-valuing on wich it rests to such a point that it can no longer be sustained. Physical reserves are exhausted, the psychological driving force is no longer sustained sufficiently to act aggressively-destructively, the active anti-ethics are no longer possible, nihilism is the result. Depending on the circumstances in wich the organism finds itself, this may lead to, in natural, nurturing conditions of culture, a gradual recovery of natural, positive valuation, conscious self-valuation, master morality – in less favorable circumstances, death seems the only outcome.

Now the will to power is dependent on self-valuing (the standard-setting interpreted as the root/ground of the subject), so where self-valuing is sabotaged by consciousness, as is the case where slave-morality takes hold, will to power remains operative only until it exhausts its resources, it wills the entity to death. The energy is transferred to vital subjects / structures. In such a case the will to power is not aimed at power of the subject, but rather at a transferring of power from the subject. The subject wills himself

Can the will of an entity possessed of a slave morality still be called a will to power? Can it still be called a will? What is more, can we still speak an entity? I think that the answer is: only in as far as it is unconscious. And this makes it clear how (and that, which is a departure from Nietzsches “all is blood” dogma) we may begin to dispel slave-morality.

 

___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Thrasymachus
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3599
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : Will to Power

PostSubject: Re: An explanation of slave morality as dislocated self-valuing   Wed Nov 16, 2011 1:21 pm

Fixed Cross wrote:
I propose that slave morality be understood as consciousness disconnecting from the organisms self-valuing. A being can no longer rely, in its actions of acquisition of power, on what it is – it is forced to re-determine what it is in terms of the lack, the gap left by the removal of its self-valuation. Since a gap has no content, the identification is shifted to that which has caused the gap, the enemy. A moral slave determines itself in terms of what it hates, by positing itself as not-that. It posits, or attempts to posit, a self-value by establishing a sense of power over the entity that it blames for the loss of its self-value.

As it is still exerting its will to power, it still operates as an entity, a subject, so it is in fact still grounded in a self-valuing. What has been lost is the connection between self-valuing and consciousness. Consciousness has detached from nature, what results can be described as disintegration of value. As long as slave-morality persists, as the unconsciously self-valuing entity persists in its behavior of willing to power on the terms of another entity, as it tries to establish a conscious self-valuing as the negative of what it perceives as powerful (but evil), it operates directly against its natural, innate self-valuing, and this must result in decay.

Yes. Consciousness detaching from self-valuing-intending and -activity, this is a great way of conceiving this. This completes the setting of Will to Power into its proper context, as now the source of the distinction between so-called slave- and master-morality comes into focus.

Willing in terms of a void, gap or negation, this thought needs further exploration, I feel. For one, I can imagine this taking place with respect to what is the perceived or intuited source of the gap, but also it seems possible that one might will in a relative vaccuum of "depleted" or "grayed" self-valuings, or that self-valuing might simply becomes more unconscious, thus pushing consciousness generally down into a more unconscious sphere, decreasing overall cognitive and perceptive capacity. This might explain how some people are relatively "zombie-like" with respect to how their thinking-feeling seems to simple and automated, like a robot, programed and largely heuristical, composed of closed "solutions" to encountered situations. They seem to lack something essential, spirit, soul, whatever we cal it. Self-valuing that is suppressed through consciousness disconnecting from it might lead to overall loss of consciousness itself, in all areas, and not just to a consciousness possessed of slavish morality.

I also wonder if it is truly impossible to will or value the gap in itself, or "in the gap" itself. It seems to me that certain phenomena, for example post-modernism, might be explanable at least partly in light of valuing-activities that have become able to value "negative as such", gap- or disconnectivity-as-such. I only wonder whether and to what extent "gap valuing" is actually possible, as opposed to simply valuing/willing at/toward/with respect to the "evil" other from which the fact of the gap is seen/sensed to have arisen.

Quote :
I think that slave morality can not be inherited, that every new-born being has a master-morality, by which I mean that its consciousness is rooted in a self-valuing. (For example, the mother is valued in terms of the self, that is why we have the Freudian complex of interpreting the mother / parent as the self).

By the genetic passing-on and cultural / physical sustainment of forms of weakness / unhealth, it becomes more likely that a conscious being strays into slave-morality.

I agree, a preponderance of conditions leading to the likelihood of adopting slavish morality at the expense of self-valuing. But some of this could be inherited, at least a tendency or potential for slavishness could be present genetically speaking. But I think the large part of this influence, including of genes and their activation, would probably be entirely environmental.

Quote :
If the being is both physically unhealthy and immersed in a culture where slave-morality is the norm, it is likely that it abandons its “child-like” master-morality and becomes a value-decaying, alike to its cultural environment. I think of the modern Islamic world, which morality is rooted in the rejection of the west (not to say that the west presently holds a master morality, but it serves as the standard of hated enemy by rejecting of which the morality is largely defined). Breaking out of this cycle, “salvation” could only occur through impulses of a freshly, life affirming nature such as is operative in children.

It seems likely that the teachings of Jesus Christ (whether this is only a metaphorical figure or if he really lived is not important) were aimed to remedy a similar condition operative in the Jews under Roman oppression – a re-establishment of self-valuing by taking on a infant-like perspective. “Render unto Caesar what is his” – his value – have for yourself what is yours – your value: “divinity” –i.e. your self-valuing

It seems like environmental construction is most important, because perhaps none or a very very small number of humans would be capable of withstanding the onslaught against their self-valuing regardless of the strength of this onslaught itself. Humans are vulnerable and impressionable, we are highly shaped by our environment. In this sense unhealth and cultural decay of values-ideals-norms rooted in self-valuing represents a very real destruction of countless individual minds who lack strength to sufficiently combat this decaying. To a large extent strength for sustaining one's self-valuings in difficult environs is a cultivated strength we build ourselves, and of course the catch-22 is that often the environs themselves prevent the cultivating of such strength, which often takes a lot of time and effort and a congruence of sufficiently beneficial life-conditions.

But before we can really begin constructing new more rational and benevolent societies, what mankind really needs now is more Christs, new and more potent (re-)insertions of 'master-ethical' principles, what it needs is images-ideals-edifices-paradigms rooted firmly in self-valuing. But not ONLY in self-valuing, also in contingent valuings as well, in an improved capacity for valuing-as-such. This is why perspectives that only focus on the individual self, at exclusion of that self's relationships to its others, are inadequate. We do not need narcissism or egoism or isolationism, we need to increase capacities for self-discernment as well as other-discernment. Man needs to see himself situated within complex and vital relations, between himself and others, between himself and societies, between himself and the environment, between himself and the/a future. Each of these, the capacity for relating-as-such, needs to be strengthened, encouraged, nurtured, made to be willed more fully and more consciously.

Perhaps we simply can begin by opposing every attempt at and encouragement to unconscious willing/intending? I will need to think on this some more.

Quote :
Nietzsche had good reason to say that the last Christian died on the cross, because much of Christianity as a culture was a continuation of the self-denying/ignoring against which a “spiritual rebirth” was proposed a remedy. It continued to focus on the enemy, on Evil, even if it politically overcame all enemies, and succeeded so in including in this negativity-standard against which it set its efforts, the things that naturally sustain positive valuing – beauty, strength, pleasure, the ‘good things in life’.

Yes.

We need new, better Christs. We need Christs that affirm valuation itself, for its own sake, and not for the sake of otherworldly metaphysics. Granted, humans have only recently attained the psychological complexity and conscious awareness necessary to will affirmative values without appeal to otherworldliness - Christ had no choice but to teach from the context he did, whereas we are "luckier" as we sit in a new context where valuing absent God becomes possible.

Quote :
It seems that ultimately such a reverse valuing must come to an end, as the acting consciousness of resentment erodes the unconscious self-valuing on wich it rests to such a point that it can no longer be sustained. Physical reserves are exhausted, the psychological driving force is no longer sustained sufficiently to act aggressively-destructively, the active anti-ethics are no longer possible, nihilism is the result. Depending on the circumstances in wich the organism finds itself, this may lead to, in natural, nurturing conditions of culture, a gradual recovery of natural, positive valuation, conscious self-valuation, master morality – in less favorable circumstances, death seems the only outcome.

Death, or a constant ever-present decaying that never quite leads to death. A stasis of decay and destitution, perhaps. This would be a relative loss of almost all emotional and conscious potency, imagining, will, and the adoption of a more mechanical and closed pathos that literally drowns itself in distraction and mindless, soul-less work. Corporate CEO's come to mind here, as does the typical wage-slave worker who goes every day to the factory, mindlessly performs the same tasks without feeling or hope, and returns home to drink himself into a stupor or turn off to TV or other useful distractions, only to repeat this cycle without end or fail. This sort would be an example where a relative stasis has been attained, self-valuation perhaps cannot realisticaly sink any lower, or rather the separation between self-valuings and consciousness cannot get any larger, so the body-mind effects a certain 'balance', this gap rests on the relative consistency of one's life-situations and the lack of anything which might shake or disrupt this stagnant consistency.

But I am more interested in how a master-ethics perspective might be regained after long periods of its loss to slave-morality. It would seem that society could be designed with mechanisms build-in for promoting this change. I think some such mechanisms must already exist, Yoga, self-help groups, etc. come to mind. But these are perhaps not strong or fully conscious enough, not forceful enough, not imposing enough on the "normal" status quo. Society needs to develop and further IMPOSE these mechanisms upon people. Along with this would be a way for identifying where and more precisely how these mechanisms might be best applied to people's benefit, since not all people would have need for such imposition, and those who are in need of it would have this need in varying sort of ways.

Quote :
Now the will to power is dependent on self-valuing (the standard-setting interpreted as the root/ground of the subject), so where self-valuing is sabotaged by consciousness, as is the case where slave-morality takes hold, will to power remains operative only until it exhausts its resources, it wills the entity to death. The energy is transferred to vital subjects / structures. In such a case the will to power is not aimed at power of the subject, but rather at a transferring of power from the subject. The subject wills himself

Did you mean to add something here after "The subject wills himself ..." ? In any case, this perspective indeed explains willing to power, that some willings are more self-oriented and leading to health than others. An even subtler take here on this relationship and explanation of self-valuing activity goes further to explain how narcissistic and ego-driven perspectives that lack proper appreciation and cultivation of relations-to-otherness also fail to lead to more powerful, comprehensive and healthy willing.

Quote :
Can the will of an entity possessed of a slave morality still be called a will to power? Can it still be called a will? What is more, can we still speak an entity? I think that the answer is: only in as far as it is unconscious. And this makes it clear how (and that, which is a departure from Nietzsches “all is blood” dogma) we may begin to dispel slave-morality.

Yes, absolutely. This insight is crucial. Nietzsche's approach is hereby rescued and resuscitated.

 

___________
"Since the old God has abdicated, I shall rule the world from now on." --Nietzsche

"It would be wise to exercise caution with one's wishes." --Penny Royal AI

Odinwar <---[truth]---> Jeraz

Peace. War. Love. Wordz


Back to top Go down
View user profile Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 4153
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Will to Power

PostSubject: Re: An explanation of slave morality as dislocated self-valuing   Mon Nov 21, 2011 7:52 pm

Capable wrote:
Willing in terms of a void, gap or negation, this thought needs further exploration, I feel. For one, I can imagine this taking place with respect to what is the perceived or intuited source of the gap, but also it seems possible that one might will in a relative vaccuum of "depleted" or "grayed" self-valuings, or that self-valuing might simply becomes more unconscious, thus pushing consciousness generally down into a more unconscious sphere, decreasing overall cognitive and perceptive capacity. This might explain how some people are relatively "zombie-like" with respect to how their thinking-feeling seems to simple and automated, like a robot, programed and largely heuristical, composed of closed "solutions" to encountered situations. They seem to lack something essential, spirit, soul, whatever we cal it. Self-valuing that is suppressed through consciousness disconnecting from it might lead to overall loss of consciousness itself, in all areas, and not just to a consciousness possessed of slavish morality.
Yes, this is a plausible explanation. Also in combination with the examples you give later on, this calls to mind the fact that the lower functions of the organism are not what one would necessarily call conscious. Eating, drinking and sexuality are in fact means to engage in a state of being where consciousness can be suspended. In these states, it is possible, even with a completely defective morality/mentality, to life as a self-valuing. And we see that such activities are in fact often considered as the highest goods by such automatons.


Quote :
I also wonder if it is truly impossible to will or value the gap in itself, or "in the gap" itself. It seems to me that certain phenomena, for example post-modernism, might be explanable at least partly in light of valuing-activities that have become able to value "negative as such", gap- or disconnectivity-as-such. I only wonder whether and to what extent "gap valuing" is actually possible, as opposed to simply valuing/willing at/toward/with respect to the "evil" other from which the fact of the gap is seen/sensed to have arisen.
It seems to be very difficult. Recently I've been attending a few museum- and gallery openings, where of course the art was post-modern in nature, and I am consistently appalled by the dry-ness of the objects on display. These seems to be no sap in them whatsoever. As hard as one tries to value what is placed in the space that has come into our field of consciousness as forbidding subjective/positive/affective valuation, what one values is ones own interest, ones own brave efforts to 'make sense' out of nothing. This is perhaps what is most admirable about out present art-scene -- the critics. They, when neither the artist nor the passive audience is capable, are the ones who give, bestow meaning. In them we perceive that not all is lost, that there is still a will to value-as-self-value.

Postmodern art comes very often in the form of 'criticism of society', which to me is a lower form of criticism, a more resentful, judgmental, pathetic form than the criticism of the artwork that is the criticism. Perhaps through this by-way, criticism of criticism, valuation finds a way to be possible in the context of art.


Quote :
Quote :
I think that slave morality can not be inherited, that every new-born being has a master-morality, by which I mean that its consciousness is rooted in a self-valuing. (For example, the mother is valued in terms of the self, that is why we have the Freudian complex of interpreting the mother / parent as the self).

By the genetic passing-on and cultural / physical sustainment of forms of weakness / unhealth, it becomes more likely that a conscious being strays into slave-morality.

I agree, a preponderance of conditions leading to the likelihood of adopting slavish morality at the expense of self-valuing. But some of this could be inherited, at least a tendency or potential for slavishness could be present genetically speaking. But I think the large part of this influence, including of genes and their activation, would probably be entirely environmental.
We agree, environment is very likely the greatest influence here, but it is indeed thinkable that there is a genetic derangement possible, where people are born without the tendency to self-value. That the miracle/accidental genius of the code of self-valuing is undone by an enduring onslaught of dissociative permutations.

Quote :

It seems like environmental construction is most important, because perhaps none or a very very small number of humans would be capable of withstanding the onslaught against their self-valuing regardless of the strength of this onslaught itself. Humans are vulnerable and impressionable, we are highly shaped by our environment. In this sense unhealth and cultural decay of values-ideals-norms rooted in self-valuing represents a very real destruction of countless individual minds who lack strength to sufficiently combat this decaying. To a large extent strength for sustaining one's self-valuings in difficult environs is a cultivated strength we build ourselves, and of course the catch-22 is that often the environs themselves prevent the cultivating of such strength, which often takes a lot of time and effort and a congruence of sufficiently beneficial life-conditions.

But before we can really begin constructing new more rational and benevolent societies, what mankind really needs now is more Christs, new and more potent (re-)insertions of 'master-ethical' principles, what it needs is images-ideals-edifices-paradigms rooted firmly in self-valuing.
I feel that this is true. In a sense, philosophers have to become "actors" -- we must not only be communicators, but also examples. How different this is from Kant, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche -- we can simply not permit going insane (at least not finding our end as such), or isolating completely from all social realms -- as much as these realms "suck" in more than one meaning of the word, they suck because there are no true signifiers.

But the point is of course that there should be a kind of small multitude of such "Christs", which means that we may have to do the work of making it possible to become such a figure. Possibly there are parallel processes, in ways similar to this one, in other parts of the world, where the cultivation of an attainable master morality is in progress. But we must take seriously the notion of spreading this idea in several forms, accessible to different minds, and inspiring to action.

Quote :
But not ONLY in self-valuing, also in contingent valuings as well, in an improved capacity for valuing-as-such. This is why perspectives that only focus on the individual self, at exclusion of that self's relationships to its others, are inadequate. We do not need narcissism or egoism or isolationism, we need to increase capacities for self-discernment as well as other-discernment. Man needs to see himself situated within complex and vital relations, between himself and others, between himself and societies, between himself and the environment, between himself and the/a future. Each of these, the capacity for relating-as-such, needs to be strengthened, encouraged, nurtured, made to be willed more fully and more consciously.
Yes!
Perhaps here we may begin to speak concretely of isometries.

Quote :
Perhaps we simply can begin by opposing every attempt at and encouragement to unconscious willing/intending? I will need to think on this some more.
Let us not begin by opposing, but by proposing.
Opposition breeds too much rebelling, too much stubbornness.
We must propose new means at conscious willing, for which indeed notions pertaining to "isometries of the soul" as they exist between humans may be necessary.

Quote :
Quote :
Nietzsche had good reason to say that the last Christian died on the cross, because much of Christianity as a culture was a continuation of the self-denying/ignoring against which a “spiritual rebirth” was proposed a remedy. It continued to focus on the enemy, on Evil, even if it politically overcame all enemies, and succeeded so in including in this negativity-standard against which it set its efforts, the things that naturally sustain positive valuing – beauty, strength, pleasure, the ‘good things in life’.

Yes.

We need new, better Christs. We need Christs that affirm valuation itself, for its own sake, and not for the sake of otherworldly metaphysics. Granted, humans have only recently attained the psychological complexity and conscious awareness necessary to will affirmative values without appeal to otherworldliness - Christ had no choice but to teach from the context he did, whereas we are "luckier" as we sit in a new context where valuing absent God becomes possible.
Indeed, it is crucial to realize that time has progressed, that circumstances are more favorable. Nihilism is unable to do this, so is pessimism, and these two account for the great majority of thinkers these days. It is true that there is much foulness and danger in our time, but this only overshadows the surplus value when this value is not 'capitalized' on. And nihilism/pessimism prevent from capitalizing -- in short, power is left for those without a social conscience, because power is regarded as corrupting. A more dangerous belief than "power corrupts" is hardly thinkable. In fact, real power (not an automatons place in the hierarchy of a machine) cultivates responsibility.

Quote :
Quote :
It seems that ultimately such a reverse valuing must come to an end, as the acting consciousness of resentment erodes the unconscious self-valuing on wich it rests to such a point that it can no longer be sustained. Physical reserves are exhausted, the psychological driving force is no longer sustained sufficiently to act aggressively-destructively, the active anti-ethics are no longer possible, nihilism is the result. Depending on the circumstances in wich the organism finds itself, this may lead to, in natural, nurturing conditions of culture, a gradual recovery of natural, positive valuation, conscious self-valuation, master morality – in less favorable circumstances, death seems the only outcome.

Death, or a constant ever-present decaying that never quite leads to death. A stasis of decay and destitution, perhaps. This would be a relative loss of almost all emotional and conscious potency, imagining, will, and the adoption of a more mechanical and closed pathos that literally drowns itself in distraction and mindless, soul-less work. Corporate CEO's come to mind here, as does the typical wage-slave worker who goes every day to the factory, mindlessly performs the same tasks without feeling or hope, and returns home to drink himself into a stupor or turn off to TV or other useful distractions, only to repeat this cycle without end or fail. This sort would be an example where a relative stasis has been attained, self-valuation perhaps cannot realisticaly sink any lower, or rather the separation between self-valuings and consciousness cannot get any larger, so the body-mind effects a certain 'balance', this gap rests on the relative consistency of one's life-situations and the lack of anything which might shake or disrupt this stagnant consistency.
Another useful insight, applying value-ontology to understand the dire state of things we seek to improve. The subconscious self-valuing persists on an animal/reptile level, the superior faculties of awareness are exhausted, sabotaged, or put to use against the interests of the entity.

Quote :
But I am more interested in how a master-ethics perspective might be regained after long periods of its loss to slave-morality. It would seem that society could be designed with mechanisms build-in for promoting this change. I think some such mechanisms must already exist, Yoga, self-help groups, etc. come to mind. But these are perhaps not strong or fully conscious enough, not forceful enough, not imposing enough on the "normal" status quo. Society needs to develop and further IMPOSE these mechanisms upon people. Along with this would be a way for identifying where and more precisely how these mechanisms might be best applied to people's benefit, since not all people would have need for such imposition, and those who are in need of it would have this need in varying sort of ways.
This is an extremely interesting suggestion.
We might do well to put some work in developing such programs conceptually.

Quote :
Quote :
Now the will to power is dependent on self-valuing (the standard-setting interpreted as the root/ground of the subject), so where self-valuing is sabotaged by consciousness, as is the case where slave-morality takes hold, will to power remains operative only until it exhausts its resources, it wills the entity to death. The energy is transferred to vital subjects / structures. In such a case the will to power is not aimed at power of the subject, but rather at a transferring of power from the subject. The subject wills himself

Did you mean to add something here after "The subject wills himself ..." ?
Ah yes, I was going to say "The subject wills himself into oblivion" but actually meant to erase the entire phrase, because it presents some un-clarities.

Quote :
In any case, this perspective indeed explains willing to power, that some willings are more self-oriented and leading to health than others. An even subtler take here on this relationship and explanation of self-valuing activity goes further to explain how narcissistic and ego-driven perspectives that lack proper appreciation and cultivation of relations-to-otherness also fail to lead to more powerful, comprehensive and healthy willing.
Exactly. The difference between "stealing" / isolating power versus investing / sharing-reaping power is made clearer.


Quote :
Quote :
Can the will of an entity possessed of a slave morality still be called a will to power? Can it still be called a will? What is more, can we still speak an entity? I think that the answer is: only in as far as it is unconscious. And this makes it clear how (and that, which is a departure from Nietzsches “all is blood” dogma) we may begin to dispel slave-morality.

Yes, absolutely. This insight is crucial. Nietzsche's approach is hereby rescued and resuscitated.
Let us work on this angle, vis a vis the idea of communicating value-ontology on different levels, besides directly/conceptually also indirectly/symbolically.

 

___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 4153
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Will to Power

PostSubject: Re: An explanation of slave morality as dislocated self-valuing   Wed Nov 23, 2011 7:14 pm

a comment on the occupy movement as (yet) dominated / signified by slave-morality, but representing desire for a master-morality. Taken from here.

__________________
The problem the Occupy movement is facing is a classical case of slave-morality versus master-morality.
Holding a slave-morality means to not have ones natural self-valuing produce a conscious notion of self-value self-value. It means to adopt a conscious self-value by the negative valuation of the/an Other.

The Occupy movement has a lot of vitality and good will, but is not able to formulate its values beyond "away with the evil X". It is not able to posit a value in its stead. It does not have its own value, for its value it is entirely dependent on the thing it is protesting against. As long as this is the case, it will have no effect, it could not possibly have an effect.

There is of course a lot of self-valuing going on within the movement, i.e. people, organisms. But all these are subjecting themselves to what is, thusfar, a slave-revolt. Nothing wrong with a slave revolt, but it will not see any of its demands realized if these demands are not formulated as positives, meaning formula's capable of replacing the "evil" ones.

This is the finest tip of the iceberg of what can be said of Occupy in terms of value-ontology. The bulk of it would come down to actually formulate a (possible) philosophy for it, to forge it into a "Master Signifier" - an authentic, original voice. Of course value-ontology pertains quite acutely to the financial world and what is wrong with it. To begin with, all of the disasters and exorbitant payments to the masters of these disasters, are based on disregarding, or rather violating, the concept of value. In short: speculative value has replaced functional value. That which is of value to value-determining institutions (Moody's, etc) does not have anything whatsoever to do to what is of value to a human.

Value needs to be restored in its definition. The speculative market will have to be dramatically curbed and reformed, rationalized. Without joking, we now have the tools to do this. A thorough understanding of the concept value was lacking. This is how it could be diffused through focusing on very conditional/context bound derivatives as if they are the actual concept, thereby gradually disconnecting the notion value from its conceptual root, which is actual, real-world value, i.e. that which is valuable to (a) (human) life.

This is where the Occupy movement may look for its signifier (instead of bloody-faced idiotic grins) - to collect/assemble around it those things which are of real value to the participating people. To create/build a "mountain of wealth" in human terms -- that is to say not hummers, prostitutes and dollar bills, but -- the diversity of real-world value coming together wherever many people are assembled for a long time, which translates into 'culture'.

 

___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: An explanation of slave morality as dislocated self-valuing   

Back to top Go down
 
An explanation of slave morality as dislocated self-valuing
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Before The Light :: Crown :: Production-
Jump to: