2023/08/29

Morality as a Sign Language of the Emotions

In a passage from Beyond Good and Evil, Friedrich Nietzsche (1886) argues that systems of morality are not objective truths, but rather expressions of the emotions of the people who create them. He says that there are many different systems of morality and that each one is designed to serve a different purpose.

Some systems of morality are meant to justify the author in the eyes of others. For example, a person who believes that they are superior to others might create a system of morality that emphasizes the importance of obedience. This system of morality would help the author to feel good about themselves and to make themselves feel like they are in control (Nietzsche 1886).

Other systems of morality are meant to tranquilize the author and make them feel self-satisfied. For example, a person who is afraid of death might create a system of morality that emphasizes the importance of avoiding pain and suffering. This system of morality would help the author to feel safe and secure and to avoid thinking about their own mortality (Nietzsche 1886).

Nietzsche (1886)
also argues that systems of morality can be used to express anger, revenge, or a desire for power. For example, a person who has been wronged by someone else might create a system of morality that emphasizes the importance of punishment. This system of morality would help the author to feel like they are getting revenge on the person who wronged them.

Nietzsche (1886) concludes by saying that systems of morality are nothing more than a "sign language of the emotions." They are not objective truths, but rather expressions of the values and beliefs of the people who create them.

Nietzsche's view of morality is controversial, but it is also thought-provoking. It challenges us to think critically about our own moral beliefs, and to question where they come from. It also reminds us that morality is not always easy or straightforward and that there is no single "right" way to live.

References

Nietzsche, F. W. (1886). Beyond Good and Evil. Hayes Barton Press. https://bookshelf.vitalsource.com/books/L-999-71494

The Problem with the "Science of Morals"

In his book Beyond Good and Evil,
Friedrich Nietzsche argues that the "Science of Morals" is a recent and presumptuous undertaking. He argues that philosophers have been too focused on providing a foundation for morality, rather than on describing the different forms of morality that have existed throughout history.

Nietzsche argues that there is no single "true" morality and that different moralities have evolved to meet the needs of different cultures and societies. He also argues that morality is not something that is "given" to us, but something that we create.

Nietzsche's critique of the "Science of Morals" is still relevant today. Many people still believe that there is a single "true" morality and that this morality can be objectively determined. However, Nietzsche's work shows that morality is a complex and ever-evolving phenomenon. There is no single "right" way to live, and what is considered moral in one culture may be considered immoral in another.

Nietzsche's work challenges us to think critically about our own moral beliefs. It forces us to ask ourselves where our moral beliefs come from, and whether they are really serving us in the best way possible.
In the CHAPTER: THE NATURAL HISTORY OF MORALS, Nietzsche (1886) specifically criticizes the philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer for his views on morality. Schopenhauer argued that the fundamental principle of morality is to "harm no one, and to help everyone as much as you can." Nietzsche argues that this principle is absurd and sentimental in a world where the essence is Will to Power. He also points out that Schopenhauer himself did not live up to this principle, as he enjoyed playing the flute after dinner.

Nietzsche's critique of Schopenhauer is a reminder that morality is not always easy or straightforward. It is also a reminder that we should not blindly accept the moral beliefs that we are taught. We should always be critical of our own moral beliefs, and be willing to question them if necessary.

References
Nietzsche, F. W. (1886). Beyond Good and Evil. Hayes Barton Press. https://bookshelf.vitalsource.com/books/L-999-71494

Dreams and the 'Either/Or' Fallacy

Dreams and the 'Either/Or' Fallacy

Freud (1913) believed that dreams could show cause and effect in a few ways. Sometimes they show the same thing from different perspectives and other times they will have a short dream first and then a longer dream which may show a cause-and-effect relationship. Dreams can also show cause and effect by changing one image into another.

However, most of the time cause and effect is not shown in dreams, instead it is mixed up with other things in the dream. Freud (1913) believed that dreams cannot show the alternative "eithor/or" but instead they show both possibilities as if they are both possible.

A dream might show the cause of someone's pain as:

their resistance to accepting a solution
their unfavorable sexual conditions
that their pain is not hysterical but organic

The dream would show all of these possibilities and add a fourth solution that comes from the dreamer's wishes (Freud 1913).
When someone tells you about their dream and uses the alternative "either/or," it doesn't mean that the dream has two mutually exclusive possibilities. It means that the dreamer was thinking about both possibilities.

Dreams often ignore the rules of logic. They can change things that are opposite, like "No" to "Yes." They can also show things as both themselves and their opposite. For example, a dream might show someone being happy and sad at the same time.
Dreams also use a technique called "condensation" to show similarity, agreement, or contiguity. This means that they can combine two or more things into one image. For example, a dream might show a person who looks like both their mother and their father.

Condensation can help dreams to avoid censorship. Censorship is the process of blocking out thoughts and feelings that are too painful or disturbing to think about. By combining two or more things into one image, dreams can get around censorship and express these thoughts and feelings in a disguised way.

Dreams are often about the dreamers themselves. They can show the dreamer's thoughts, feelings, and experiences. They can also show the dreamer's wishes and desires. By understanding dreams, we can learn more about ourselves and our unconscious minds.

References

Freud, S. (1911). The Interpretation of Dreams (3rd ed.). Hayes Barton Press. https://bookshelf.vitalsource.com/books/L-999-74204

Prologue to a Dream??

Prologue to a Dream

Dream combinations are made up of elements that are closely connected in the dreamer's thoughts, and to represent causal relationships Freud states that they use two methods (Freud, 1911):

They can present the subordinate clause as a preliminary dream and then attach the main clause to it as the main dream.

In this method, the dream first presents a situation that sets the stage for the main event. For example, a dream about being lost in a forest might be followed by a dream about being attacked by a bear. The forest represents the dreamer's feeling of being lost and confused, while the bear represents the dreamer's fear of being harmed (Freud, 1911).

Dreams can reverse the order of events

In this method, the dream presents the main event first and then the subordinate event. A dream about getting married might be followed by a dream about meeting the person that you are going to marry. The marriage represents the dreamer's desire for commitment, while the meeting represents the dreamer's first steps toward achieving that goal.

Freud suggests that these are just two of the many ways that dreams can represent causal relationships. If this is true then we gain a deeper understanding of our thoughts and feelings by understanding how dreams work. Freud (1911) gives another example of "such a representation of causality":

Flowery Language

The reported dream is divided into two parts which are a short prologue and a longer more detailed dream composition. The prologue involves the dreamer scolding two maids for taking too long to prepare food and seeing heavy kitchen utensils turned upside down to drain. Then the maids go to fetch water and have to climb into a river that reaches up to the house courtyard.
This division of the dream does not necessarily indicate a causal relationship between the thoughts of the two parts (Freud 1911). There are some possible connections that could be made:

The dreamer's anger at the maids for taking too long to prepare the food could be related to the dreamer's fear of being left without food.
The image of the heavy kitchen utensils turned upside down to drain may symbolize the patient's feelings of being overwhelmed or weighted down.
The maids' journey to fetch water from a river that reaches up to the house could represent the dreamer's struggle to meet their basic needs.

According to Freud (1913), the meaning of the dream can only be determined by considering the dreamer's individual thoughts, feelings, and experiences. The division of the dream into two parts and the use of certain symbols may provide clues to the dreamer's unconscious mind: