Notes on Nietzsche 11: The Aftermath of the Death of God

Book V, We Fearless Ones, The Joyful Wisdom

"The most important of more recent events—that "God is dead," that the belief in the Christian God has become unworthy of belief—already begins to cast its first shadows over Europe. To the few at least whose eye, whose suspecting glance, is strong enough and subtle enough for this drama, some sun seems to have set, some old, profound confidence seems to have changed into doubt: our old world must seem to them daily more darksome, distrustful, strange and "old."”

Though one will come across the condescending modern reader (with or without the occasional nihilistic tilt) who brands Nietzsche’s stance about religion, or more specifically, Christianity, as the ultimate atheistic one, such a reader does him an immense disservice, for his views are far too nuanced for that kind of careless summarising. That being said, there is no doubt that Nietzsche was a harsh critic of Christianity, especially as it came to be practised in his time, but he seems to have penned down the strongest arguments against religious faith, which is of course, what one must do when addressing truths that do not make themselves obvious. We must attempt to argue out of existence tenets of religious wisdom, for there is much to be learnt while caught in the tussle with faith. And we must attempt to see whether our arguments are sufficient to make faith disappear. And this is not about winning the argument or (dis)proving. It is not about arriving here or there, to be able to claim that one “believes in God” or doesn’t, by straw-manning one’s opponent. It is about giving the devil his due, and by letting him assume his strongest form, and contending with it in the hope of real learning. 

“In the main, however, one may say that the event itself is far too great, too remote, too much beyond most people's power of apprehension, for one to suppose that so much as the report of it could have reached them; not to speak of many who already knew what had really taken place, and what must all collapse now that this belief had been undermined,—because so much was built upon it, so much rested on it, and had become one with it: for example, our entire European morality.”

If only my peers would read Nietzsche carefully, not to justify their intellectual condescension but to hear the agony in his declaration that “God is dead”, the nuance in his views would make itself inescapable! We stand tall and rush to claim all credit for our thoughts and philosophies, when in reality, we are encircled by our community, our state and our country, each of which has its laws (many predicated on religious beliefs). We stand protected beneficiaries of those laws of land and the morality of our civilisation, and in our arrogance, divorce ourselves from it all and claim to be disbelievers. Atheism renounces faith in the divine, which makes every action intrinsically meaningless (unless of course, you happen to be one of those who believe we assign meaning to life), so it does not make a difference how one acts. But they still seem to act as if everything matters, they still seem to live out a religious narrative, to treat themselves as if they matter, their views matter, their votes matter and so do their acts. 

“Even we, the born riddle-readers, who wait as it were on the mountains posted 'twixt to-day and to-morrow, and engirt by their contradiction, we, the firstlings and premature children of the coming century, into whose sight especially the shadows which must forthwith envelop Europe should already have come—how is it that even we, without genuine sympathy for this period of gloom, contemplate its advent without any personal solicitude or fear? Are we still, perhaps, too much under the immediate effects of the event—and are these effects, especially as regards ourselves, perhaps the reverse of what was to be expected—not at all sad and depressing, but rather like a new and indescribable variety of light, happiness, relief, enlivenment, encouragement, and dawning day?”

Let us even for a moment give credence to the view that one is mighty enough to make one’s own morals (although I find that laughably facile if one has ever really been face to face with the wickedest part of oneself). Even keeping morality aside, so much of our economics, political science and law is derived from religion! Consider for instance, the legal principle of being “innocent until proven guilty”, or the principle wherein the perpetrator of a crime (alleged or otherwise) is given a fair trial. This is predicated on the Christian belief that we are made in God’s image, and have a spark of divinity in us, deserving of a chance to redeem ourselves. Consider the constitutional checks and balances that are predicated on the Christian belief that “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God”. Consider the concept of political representatives assuming the role of public servants not coveters of political power. Consider the practice of depositing wages in bank accounts instead of spending them all as soon as one received them. We essentially sacrifice the pleasure of the present for that of the future; the idea of sacrifice has religious roots. Exactly where do we draw the lines regarding where religion ends? And how do we discard something that is so deeply embedded in our culture, moral principles and laws of land? Or do we give the half-hearted, but naive reply of “keep this, get rid of that”? Or do we give the historically uninformed and selectively visual view that religion has brought forth nothing but tyranny and massacre, for why else would religious fanatics kill in the name of God? Is the blood that wet the sands of the Marxist-Leninist states forgotten already? Or we somehow assume that people would automatically turn to science and rationality the minute belief in the divine is demolished, would replace all the values derived from religious roots with egalitarian rational values, assuming that there even is such a thing?

“In fact, we philosophers and "free spirits" feel ourselves irradiated as by a new dawn by the report that the "old God is dead"; our hearts overflow with gratitude, astonishment, presentiment and expectation. At last the horizon seems open once more, granting even that it is not bright; our ships can at last put out to sea in face of every danger; every hazard is again permitted to the discerner; the sea, our sea, again lies open before us; perhaps never before did such an "open sea" exist.”

Armed with a few centuries worth of objective thought, we presumed ourselves mighty enough to no longer have any need for God, so we drove him out of the cosmos, and filled the void with our rationales, believing that this would deliver us. Shaken in our belief that God did not save us from the tragedy of existence, we forgot, that this time, we had to save him. Perhaps the monstrosity of our action will continue to escape us, as long as we get to say that we are the proud atheists of today, floating on the raft of science in the boundless “open sea” of Chaos, gleeful that that which drowned our Gods did not engulf us. Yet.