Menu
Language
EnglishPolish
The book read aloud
Live voiceRecordings
Footnotes
ShownHidden
You
Sign in with Google
About
Thus Spake ZarathustraIdeasLibrary
criticism · An Essay on Aristocratic Radicalism

Will to power replaces will to life

Brandes reports that for Nietzsche there is no right or wrong in itself, since life is essentially exploitation aimed at power, and that he replaces Schopenhauer's will to life and Darwin's struggle for existence with the will to power, life seeking self-increase rather than preservation; Brandes objects that there is no difference of principle, since the struggle for existence necessarily becomes a fight for power.

Nor can there be serious question of any real injustice committed by this caste. For there is no such thing as right or wrong in itself. The infliction of an injury, forcible subjection, exploitation or annihilation is not in itself a wrong, cannot be such, since life in its essence, in its primary functions, is nothing but oppression, exploitation and annihilation. Conditions of justice can never be anything but exceptional conditions, that is, as limitations of the real desire of life, the object of which is power.

Nietzsche replaces Schopenhauer's Will to Life and Darwin's Struggle for Existence by the Will to Power. In his view the fight is not for life--bare existence--but for power. And he has a great deal to say--somewhat beside the mark--of the mean and paltry conditions those Englishmen must have had in view who set up the modest conception of the struggle for life. It appears to him as if they had imagined a world in which everybody is glad if he can only keep body and soul together. But life is only an expression for the minimum. In itself life seeks, not self-preservation alone, but self-increase, and this is precisely the "will to power." It is therefore obvious that there is no difference of principle between the new catchword and the old; for the struggle for existence necessarily leads to the conflict of forces and the fight for power. Now a system of justice, seen from this standpoint, is a factor in the conflict of forces. Conceived as supreme, as a remedy for every kind of struggle, it would be a principle hostile to life and destructive of the future and progress of humanity.