Quantum Drummer

On his book, Beyond Good and Evil, Nietzsche (2020) starts a discussion on the opposites by introducing the idea that humans see themselves as being polarized between a worldly humanity and some “beyond” where there is something higher that “transcends ordinary transient desires and practices.” (p. xxiv), making the division between regular human beings and God, but expressing the view that in reality there is no dichotomy to seek between humans and something “higher”. Basically he believes that humanity belongs to nature, (homo natura) which is one level of being, and “Translating humanity back into nature involves being ‘deaf to the enticements of old metaphysical bird-catchers, who have piped to him far too long: Thou art more! Thou are higher! Thou hast a different origin!” (p. xxv). Meaning that humans and “the higher” are different elements, and they cannot be considered opposites that are part of the same category.

In other writings, like Human, All Too Human, Nietzsche (1995) is basically presenting the view that there are no opposites to begin with, when he rejects metaphysics in general. Nietzsche writes: “There are no opposites, except in the customary exaggeration of popular or metaphysical interpretations, and…a mistake in reasoning lies at the bottom of this antithesis.” (p.12)

Also, in the book, The Will to Power, Nietzsche writes:

“Opposites…do not exist in themselves and…actually express only variations in degree that from a certain perspective appear to be opposites. There are no opposites: only from those of logic do we derive the concept of opposites-and falsely transfer it to things.” (Drob, 2017, p. 241).

If we follow the way that Nietzsche analyzes the opposites, we might consider that he provides very valid arguments. By proposing that the opposites do not exist in reality, but conditions are a continuum of different levels of a given characteristic, Nietzsche is making a conclusion that is worth considering.

We can observe that human nature’s tendency is to categorize the world and build structures and frameworks around phenomena and all things in order to be able to explain, manage and behave in the world. We do this automatically, based in our mental models, paradigms, prejudices, etc. As an example, if we look at the framework of day ~ night, we can see that in reality this description helps us deal with an infinite continuum of levels of light and darkness that occurs on a 24-hour cycle. It is much easier for us to manage this 24-hour continuum in two blocks, which for our general purposes is approximately two divisions of the same amount of time, one half being dark and the other half being illuminated. Even if we understand that the amounts of light and darkness change according to the seasons and they are not exactly divided in halves. In reality the amounts of light and darkness are constantly changing to fill the 24 hour cycle, and each day has its unique amount of either. Unless we use the day ~ night phenomena for some specific practical purpose in our activities, for most people is sufficiently accurate to believe that the day ~ night is an either ~ or relationship of two divisions of time having approximately the same amount of dark and light. 

This is a simple example, but it describes how we structure the world in frameworks to make it simpler and avoid complications. However, in many cases, this approach can simplify our individual view of things, but at the same complicate our engagement with others, since everybody will build their framework with basis on their own biases, paradigms, experiences, cultures, etc. The tendency to dichotomize is in reality one of the main, if not the main basis to generate conflict between individuals, communities, countries and cultures. If we were to agree, as Nietzsche proposes, that rather than pairs of opposites we should see the world in structures of infinite continuums of possibilities, perhaps we would end up with less polarization of views, and less conflict in general.

Probably the pair of opposites that generates more polarization and conflict is the pair of good ~ bad (or good ~ evil). First of all, our tendency to dichotomize builds up an individual mental model in us that gives us the illusion that we know what is good and what is bad in absolute terms. And we use this framework to judge everything and everybody around us. The problem is that, like in any other set of characteristics, there is no absolute good or bad, but we create our individual illusion that there is. While we can keep in mind that there are clear “good” actions and “bad” actions that most everybody would agree on, it is important to be mindful of the reality that in general these are relative terms, and everybody has a different scale to measure good and bad. Our cultures, communities, races and levels of education might generate that the groups we belong maintain more or less homogeneous agreement of what is good and bad, but these levels are also relative, and we should recognize the need to have context and understanding of the points of view before generating judgement. The problem is that we don’t rationalize before judging: We all tend to defend our “right to be right”, meaning, if others do not agree with me they are wrong. And unfortunately is not only that, but also: I am right, meaning “I am good” and if others do not agree with me they are not only wrong, but they are also “bad” and even “evil”. My religion is the only right one and the “good” one, all others are wrong, and not only that, but they are also “evil”, my color of skin is the only right one and the “good” one, all others are “evil”, my political party is the only “good” one, all other parties are “evil” and even such trivial things like: my favorite sports team is the right one and the “good” one, all others are “bad”.

In the name of “being right” and being the “good ones”, there have been constant wars, social conflicts, unfair policies, political polarization, lost relationships, and all kinds of human conflicts. So, it might not be a bad idea to take a serious look at Nietzsche’s views, and try to apply some of his rationale in our lives.

As we have mentioned before, the roots of these tendencies to polarize seem to be found in the human need for power, but this need for power, that results in the domination and exploitation of others, appears to be founded in fear. The fear of whatever is different from us, and that could represent a risk to us, and in our deep thoughts, a risk to our existence and the existence of our people, seems to be an instinctual leftover from our evolutionary history. A leftover that is present in our psyche either consciously or unconsciously. The “fear of the other” seems to be the source that makes us develop power as a defensive reaction to what we believe to be “bad” and “evil”, while for the others, we are the ones that are “bad” and “evil”.

In the next sections we will analyze the conditions of power and fear, and how these have been present in the history of civilization and influence human behavior, both individually and collectively.

For now, going back to Nietzsche’s observations on his thesis that opposites do not exist, he mentions: “Between good and evil actions there is no difference in kind, but at the most one of degree. Good actions are sublimated evil ones; evil actions are coarsened brutalized good ones.” (Nietzsche, 1995, p. 48)

It is no surprise to learn that Nietzsche warns us in his writings about the great danger of our tendency to think in opposites, when he mentions:

“An unspeakable amount of painfulness, arrogance, harshness, estrangement, frigidity has entered into human feelings because we think we see opposites instead of transitions.” (Nietzsche, 1995, p. 326).

If we look at history, and analyze the rise and demise of civilizations, we can conclude that every time a new culture becomes dominant in the world, rather than evolving into a less polarizing and wiser society, the tendency is to develop more polarization and conflict, which ends up diminishing their power in the world. We have seen this phenomena many times in examples like the Greek, Roman, and Egyptian empires, and later with the examples of Napoleon, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, which in every case resulted in their loss of power and influence in the world.

Given the recent history, the lessons of the past don’t seem to have been learned, since this condition unfortunately repeats itself with every new world power, no balance of opposites has been possible at the level of countries, cultures, religions and races.

Perhaps individual change could still be possible, and the integration of more and more balanced individuals could result in a better future for the world. The teachings of Jung, Nietzsche and others should not be lost, as they are very much relevant today.