On The Genealogy of Morals by Nietzsche. This is my first time reading Nietzsche. I may have come across his name in high school, but this is the first time I’ve actually read one of his books. I’ve heard that his major works can be difficult to understand, which is why I tried to start with something more approachable. This book, along with Beyond Good and Evil, is often recommended as a good entry point.
The aim of The Genealogy of Morals is to explore the origins and nature of moral values and moral behavior. This is a subject I’ve always found fascinating. In the past, I’ve reviewed contemporary perspectives on morality, such as those presented by Jonathan Haidt, but what stands out in Nietzsche’s work is his willingness to ask questions that few dare to: What is good? What is bad?
Most of us grow up with a Christian understanding of morality, what Nietzsche calls the “morality of pity”, which teaches us to be kind, gentle, and humble. It draws a sharp line between good and evil. But Nietzsche argues that this is only one way of looking at morality. There was a different moral framework before Christianity: the morality of the strong, the warriors, the noble class. In that worldview, good and bad were defined not by kindness or humility, but by strength, capability, and excellence. Those who could act, who could achieve, who rejected mediocrity, these were considered good. The weak and the unaccomplished were simply bad.
For Nietzsche, Christianity represents the morality of the slaves, of the herd. It appealed to the weak and powerless. In contrast, the Roman aristocrats and warriors imposed their will through strength. In Christian morality, every soul is equal before God, regardless of ability or achievement. Nietzsche sees this as a mistake. He views Christianity as a kind of revenge by the weak and powerless.
If we want to create great things, Nietzsche says, we must abandon the idea that everyone matters equally. He sees this belief as a barrier to greatness. In his view, Christianity supresses genius and creativity. We need to free ourselves from ideas like divine judgment, heaven, and hell. Humanity should be judged not by its average members, but by its greatest individuals. The ordinary person doesn’t define what humans can be.
In some ways, Nietzsche’s thinking is naturalistic. In nature, animals aren’t judged as good or evil. A tiger isn’t bad because it hunts weaker animals. Predators and prey simply exist, that’s the way of the world. Christian morality, on the other hand, reflects the values of the herd, the weak majority. From this perspective, even cruelty isn’t necessarily evil, and pity may actually be a mistake. Nietzsche asks: why should the weak have the right to define what’s moral?
We can still see traces of this older way of thinking in language. For example, the word “noble” comes from the aristocracy, the class that originally made the distinction between good and bad. The noble were “good,” and the peasants were considered “bad.” Nietzsche argues that the concept of “evil” was invented by the weak as a way to morally attack those who were stronger and more capable.
One of Nietzsche’s most provocative ideas concerns the origin of conscience. Humans are animals, and animals don’t have conscience. They hunt and kill without guilt. Nietzsche believes that in our early history, we acted the same way: violent and predatory. But as society developed and rules were imposed, it became harder to hurt others. The natural impulse to express aggression had to be repressed. That inner repression, the pain of holding back, gave rise to what we now call conscience. Since people could no longer direct their violence outward, they turned it inward, and began to judge themselves.
Nietzsche also argues that punishment originally served a different purpose. It wasn’t about justice or morality; it was about enforcing memory. By punishing someone, you create a powerful association: “I must not do this again.” This early form of conditioning eventually evolved into our moral codes. In the warrior society, one could impose one’s will through direct violence. Over time, as that became less acceptable, the urge to punish others was internalized.
This reminds me of Freud’s theory about mental health: that civilization suppresses natural desires, especially sexual ones, and this repression causes neuroses. Similarly, Nietzsche believes that our suppressed aggression gives rise to moral guilt and inner conflict.
Ultimately, Nietzsche sees Christian morality as an obstacle to human flourishing. If we want to create a higher kind of person—a stronger, freer, more creative human being—we need to reject the values of Christianity. That’s why he calls himself the Antichrist: not in a religious sense, but as someone who opposes the morality of weakness in favor of strength. He rejects the glorification of suffering, because suffering has no cosmic meaning. The world is chaotic and indifferent. Nietzsche stands as a precursor to existentialism, confronting a world without ultimate purpose, and urging us to create our own values.