Notes on Nietzsche 01: When Freedom Goes Too Far

Chapter 5: The Natural History of Morals, Beyond Good and Evil

“In contrast to laisser-aller (unrestrained freedom), every system of morals is a sort of tyranny against "nature" and also against "reason", that is, however, no objection, unless one should again decree by some system of morals, that all kinds of tyranny and unreasonableness are unlawful.”

Given that Nietzsche has made previous assertions about the ruthless and wanton ways of Nature and its transcendence of its own “laws”, it stands to reason that anything that seeks to bring order to a vast and unrestrained force such as Nature would be a “tyranny” against it.

“...one should remember the constraint under which every language has attained to strength and freedom—the metrical constraint, the tyranny of rhyme and rhythm.”

Our speech progressed from animal sounds into systematic languages capable of articulating a range of emotions and experiences. Without established sets of rules of morphology, phonetics and syntax, i.e., without rhyme and rhythm, we would be incapable of producing the great literature of our times; literature that has brought about revolutions, elevated mindsets and facilitated the transformation of our souls. We would be unable to organise our thoughts and value hierarchies. We would be unable to organise our religions and philosophies that remind us how to interpret the world we live in. We would be unable to strike trade deals and peace negotiations that help us to cooperate and compete. We would be unable to codify the laws that give us our freedoms. In short, without the constraints of language, we would not be able to negotiate our freedoms.

“How much trouble have the poets and orators of every nation given themselves!—not excepting some of the prose writers of today, in whose ear dwells an inexorable conscientiousness—"for the sake of a folly," as utilitarian bunglers say, and thereby deem themselves wise—"from submission to arbitrary laws," as the anarchists say, and thereby fancy themselves "free," even free-spirited. The singular fact remains, however, that everything of the nature of freedom, elegance, boldness, dance, and masterly certainty, which exists or has existed, whether it be in thought itself, or in administration, or in speaking and persuading, in art just as in conduct, has only developed by means of the tyranny of such arbitrary law, and in all seriousness, it is not at all improbable that precisely this is "nature" and "natural"—and not laisser-aller!”

On multiple occasions throughout the book, Nietzsche has criticised utilitarians as a mediocre brand of men whose philosophy adopts a low-resolution view of the world where error may simply be “avoided” for it does nobody any good. “For the sake of a folly”, an utterance likely to be made by utilitarians, brings out their hypocrisy - even an act of folly needs a purpose. “From submission to arbitrary laws”, an utterance likely to be made by anarchists, brings out their myopia - to them, laws seem arbitrary and/ or produced by politically motivated agendas that seek to uphold power hierarchies. Just like a game of chess, allows the players to make a large number of moves within the constraints of the rules of the game, the laws of land and life allow us to act in a variety of ways within context-specific constraints. This is not bondage; it is freedom from chaos. We exercise bouts of free will in a deterministic universe.

“The essential thing "in heaven and in earth" is, apparently (to repeat it once more), that there should be long OBEDIENCE in the same direction, there thereby results, and has always resulted in the long run, something which has made life worth living; for instance, virtue, art, music, dancing, reason, spirituality—anything whatever that is transfiguring, refined, foolish, or divine.”

Obedience is not restraining; obedience is liberating. It is only when we formulate rules of a game and establish familiarity with those rules, that we are able to play. Life is about playing many such games. Without the rules that provide a set of possible actions for us to perform, we would be paralyzed by inaction and indecisiveness. This is very often the case, in families where children are given too much “freedom” and too few rules; they fail to make the most of it. And the consequences of the sins of omission are less discernible.

“That for centuries European thinkers only thought in order to prove something—nowadays, on the contrary, we are suspicious of every thinker who "wishes to prove something"—that it was always settled beforehand what was to be the result of their strictest thinking, as it was perhaps in the Asiatic astrology of former times, or as it is still at the present day in the innocent, Christian-moral explanation of immediate personal events "for the glory of God," or "for the good of the soul":—this tyranny, this arbitrariness, this severe and magnificent stupidity, has educated the spirit; slavery, both in the coarser and the finer sense, is apparently an indispensable means even of spiritual education and discipline.”

One of the great truths Nietzsche has touched upon in these lines is how education requires one to discipline one’s mind. Even the most creative pursuits such as dance, art and music strove to achieve unmatched levels of excellence with strictest obedience to a thousand implicit rules. 

"One may look at every system of morals in this light: it is "nature" therein which teaches to hate the laisser-aller, the too great freedom, and implants the need for limited horizons, for immediate duties—it teaches the narrowing of perspectives, and thus, in a certain sense, that stupidity is a condition of life and development. "Thou must obey some one, and for a long time; otherwise thou wilt come to grief, and lose all respect for thyself"—this seems to me to be the moral imperative of nature, which is certainly neither "categorical," as old Kant wished (consequently the "otherwise"), nor does it address itself to the individual (what does nature care for the individual!), but to nations, races, ages, and ranks; above all, however, to the animal "man" generally, to mankind.”

Our visual systems are extensively developed to take in every bit of objective reality before us, but we choose what we see. We select what is relevant to us. This narrowing of perspectives is important, for without it, we would be overwhelmed with the vast swathes of information that inundates our senses. This is the purpose of religion, of philosophy, of education - it teaches us what to look at, rather than what exists. It selects a sub-strata of information and draws our attention to it. Much as we may choose to scorn these religious, philosophical or cultural perspectives, we do rely on science and logic for the same purpose - to show us a kind of truth. This blocking of peripheral realities is crucial for us to keep moving forward. To keep going, to keep acting without rules would require a superhuman sort of willpower indeed. We are not as mighty as all that.