Philosophical research -- Hegel and Nietzsche

 
Equality：Slaves develop themselves in the process of labor
↓
Attitudes towards violent death：Master-slave relationship formed
↓
Violent struggle：The desire for recognition
↓
Others orientation：Self-awareness
如果我们把上面这个连接关系，看作是尼采观点中的“骆驼狮子和孩子”理论，那么在黑格尔所构筑的世界中，奴隶已经开始从骆驼到狮子的转变了，但是他用的方法是平等。而这，就是尼采不认同的地方。
 
尼采反对“平等意识“，他认为人的“创造性”无法从平等意识中生出来，人的创造性来源于优越意识。人们发明新的产品来代替旧的产品，人之所以会创造出什么，根本的动机就是现有的旧东西不够用了。

那么人们凭什么认为自己能做出不同于现有的东西呢？因为人们相信他们有这个能力，不是和别人一样优秀的能力，而是别人不具备的能力，得比别人更优秀。人只有发自内心的觉得自己比别人更好，哪怕只是比别人更好的欲望，创造才会发生。缺乏这种自认天选的锐气和雄心，人会缺乏创造性反而变得怠惰，最后摆烂 自由与平等，一直是政治学上被反复拉扯的两端。举个例子，作为一个领导，你引领10个人，这十个人中有5个是公司的老手，有更多的工作经验和更强的工作能力，而另外5个是新来的，对公司的业务和市场环境知之甚少。领导为了让团队更高效的工作，创造更大的效益，最佳的策略是什么呢。
 
第一种：承认能力和经验上的差距，将更多的资源给到优秀的员工，让他们创造更大的价值，但新员工便会因此而感到不被重视，团队会因此丧失活力。第二种：对每个员工一视同仁，新员工会得到心理上的满足，但是老员工会认为不公平，凭什么新来的啥都没干就拥有和我一样的机会，老员工会因此觉得努力的不必要性，团队还是会失去活力。
 
以上这个场景就是一个极端自由的社会和绝对平等的社会的缩影。极端的自由会破坏平等，但也因此爆发出更多的创造力，绝对的平等能够保证每位成员获得同等的尊重和待遇，但也会使得所有人更为低效的工作。黑格尔和尼采的观点冲突正在于此。
 
黑格尔愿意牺牲一点自由，因为他认为平等不会损害创造性，“奴隶“在劳动的过程中逐渐发展出自己的创造性，停滞不前毫无进步的是“主人“。而尼采愿意为了自由牺牲平等，因为他完全不认为平等和创造性之间有任何关系，创造性纯粹的来自于拥有和维护优越意识的”主人“。
两边的立场没有对错，都能够自圆其说，都可以找到很多例证：前者来看，中国的戏曲和相声都来自民间，如今的网络时代更是把全世界民众的创造力推向了新的高度，人们每天刷到和看到的视频，少有的来自社会精英，很多都是普通人的作品。后者来看，所谓的“主人“也不全都是废人，他们并不甘心纯躺平啥也不干，他们作为上层阶级，却选择创造价值，著名科学家牛顿就出身贵族阶级，拿尼采自己举例，他也出身贵族，父亲曾担任四位公主的教师，自己祖上也是波兰贵族血统，而这种出身的尼采在哲学思想方面的穿透力和创造力毋庸置疑。
 
平等与自由，大众与精英，政治从来都是平衡的艺术。


​Equality：Slaves develop themselves in the process of labor
↓
Attitudes towards violent death：Master-slave relationship formed
↓
Violent struggle：The desire for recognition
↓
Others orientation：Self-awareness
If we think of this connection as Nietzsche's "camel lion and child" theory, then Hegel has constructed a world in which the slave has already made the transition from camel to lion, but by means of equality. And this is where Nietzsche disagrees.

Nietzsche opposes "equality consciousness". He believes that human creativity cannot be born from equality consciousness and human creativity comes from superiority consciousness. People invent new products to replace old ones. The fundamental motivation for people to create anything is that the existing old things are not enough.

So what makes people think they can make anything different than what they already have? Because people believe they have the ability, not the ability to be as good as others, but the ability that others do not have, to be better than others. Creativity only happens when people have a visceral desire to feel better than others, even if only better than others. Without this sense of ambition and determination, a man becomes inert instead of creative, and ends up with the tug of war between liberty and equality that has long been the subject of political science. For example, as a leader, you lead 10 people, 5 of the 10 people are old hands in the company with more work experience and stronger working ability, while the other 5 are newcomers who know little about the company's business and market environment. What is the best strategy for leaders to make the team work more efficiently and create greater benefits?

The first is to admit the gap in ability and experience and allocate more resources to excellent employees so that they can create greater value. However, new employees will feel undervalued and the team will lose energy. The second way is to treat every employee equally. The new employees will get psychological satisfaction, but the old employees will think it unfair that the new employee has the same opportunity as me without doing anything. Therefore, the old employees will think it is not necessary to work hard, and the team will still lose vitality.

The scene above is a microcosm of a society of extreme freedom and absolute equality. Extreme freedom destroys equality, but it also explodes more creativity. Absolute equality ensures that everyone gets the same respect and treatment, but it also makes everyone work less efficiently. This is where the views of Hegel and Nietzsche collide.

Hegel was willing to sacrifice a little freedom because he believed that equality did not harm creativity, that the "slave" gradually developed his own creativity in the process of labor, and that the "master" stagnated and made no progress. Nietzsche was willing to sacrifice equality for freedom because he did not think that equality had anything to do with creativity, which came purely from the "master" who possessed and maintained a sense of superiority.
On both sides of the position is right or wrong, to be able to justify, can find a lot of examples: the former view, Chinese traditional opera and crosstalk are from folk, today's network times is the world people's creativity into a new level, people brush every day to see video, one of the social elite, many of them are ordinary people. That perspective, the so-called "owner" are all handicapped, they are not willing to pure lie flat what also not stem, as the upper class, they chose to create value, the famous scientist Isaac Newton was born to the purple class, Nietzsche himself, for example, he is a man of noble birth, his father, a former four princess teachers, their ancestors and polish aristocratic descent, However, Nietzsche's penetration and creativity in philosophical thinking from this background are beyond doubt.

Equality and liberty, mass and elite, politics has always been the art of balance.