Philosophical research -- Hegel and Nietzsche II

在阶级固化的社会中，相对被奴役的阶级做的事情大部分都是一样的，尽可能地消灭统治地位的“主人”阶级。这不代表他们要建立一个把主人踩在脚底下的世界，而是一个与主人平等的世界。对于不同的人从不同的视角下看会有不同的感触，如果你心中的理想社会更倾向于平等，那么奴隶道德就是值得被歌颂的。相反，如果更倾向于自由，则会选择主人道德。
 
尼采认为主人道德被定义为鼓励人们特立独行，追求创新的道德。其要义在于自由创造。而奴隶道德，被定义成弱者发明出来限制强者的工具，强调同情和分享，要求强者给弱者分一杯羹，要求社会去限制强者的能力，因为弱者没有什么能力可以被限制。尼采觉得奴隶道德不专注于强健自己让自己成为主人，它只关注如何去限制主人。
 
尼采向往的自由世界，是一个部分人相对更强，而大部分人相对更弱的世界，每个人都可能成为弱者，但弱者并没有什么大不了的，重要的是作为弱者应该如何做，最高要求便是如何努力成为强者，去努力，去经历精神的三个阶段，去完成人生的跃升。尼采的这些话不是说给强者听的，因为强者已经在路上了，他是说给还没能跟上步伐的弱者听的。同时尼采也给了一个最低要求那就是不要妨碍别人，如果自己不奋进还拖别人后退，那这就是尼采在“市场的苍蝇“中提到的”苍蝇“和”末等人“。
 
弱者之弱不在于弱本身，而在于把激情用错了地方，寻求承认也可以通过自我完成自我圆满来实现。对社会的不平等，主奴强弱秩序表示不满很正常，就应该不满，不满就去超越，但超越不等同于破坏秩序，超越是重构秩序
 
尼采与黑格尔的分歧，来自于他们对于人的定义，黑格尔笔下的原始人是他人导向的，寻求他人的承认来获得自尊感。尼采认为，人之所以为人在于创造性，取的成就的困难越大，一个人的自尊感就越强烈。两人的观点都必要但也都不完整，人离不开他人的承认，但过分依赖别人的承认会迷失自我，当弱者把视线从获得强者的承认转换到对于自我的关注和突破，会轻松很多。但同样的，强者的道路注定孤独，尼采本人就一生孤独，他没有结婚，朋友较少，授课的能力不够吸引人也没有太多追随他的学生。他的一生幸福吗，我们不能给出答案。
 
正是因为黑格尔和尼采的这两种观点对立，它们能在不同的情况下慰藉我们。

​In class-hardened societies, the relative enslaved classes mostly do the same thing, trying to eliminate the dominant "master" class as much as possible. This does not mean that they want to build a world where they can keep their masters under their feet, but a world where they are equal to their masters. For different people from different perspectives will have different feelings, if your ideal society is more inclined to equality, then slave morality is worthy of praise. On the other hand, if they prefer freedom, they prefer master morality.

Nietzsche thinks that master morality is defined as the morality that encourages people to be different and to pursue innovation. Its essence lies in the freedom to create. Slave morality is defined as the tool invented by the weak to limit the strong. It emphasizes sympathy and sharing, requires the strong to share a piece of the pie with the weak, and requires the society to limit the ability of the strong, because the weak have no ability to be restricted. Nietzsche feels that slave morality is not focused on strengthening oneself to become master, it's focused on limiting the master.

Nietzsche yearns for a free world in which some people are relatively stronger and most are relatively weaker. Everyone may become weak, but weak is not a big deal, the important thing is how to do as a weak, the highest requirement is how to strive to become strong, to work, to go through the three stages of spirit, to complete the leap of life. Nietzsche's words are not addressed to the strong, for the strong are already on their way, but to the weak, who have not yet been able to keep pace. At the same time Nietzsche also sets a minimum requirement which is not to interfere with others. If you do not advance and drag others back, then this is the "fly" and "the last man" that Nietzsche refers to in the "Flies of the Market".

The weakness of the weak is not in itself, but in the misdirected passion, seeking recognition can also be achieved through self-fulfillment. To express dissatisfaction with social inequality and the order of master and slave. This is normal, people should be dissatisfied, since dissatisfied to go beyond, but beyond is not equal to destroy the order, beyond is the reconstruction of order

The difference between Nietzsche and Hegel comes from their definition of man. The primitive man in Hegel's description is other-oriented and seeks recognition from others to gain a sense of self-esteem. Nietzsche believed that creativity is what makes a person human, and the greater the difficulty of achieving an achievement, the greater one's sense of self-esteem. Both views are necessary but incomplete. People cannot live without the recognition of others, but relying too much on the recognition of others will lose themselves. When the weak shift their focus from obtaining the recognition of the strong to self-attention and breakthrough, it will be much easier. But in the same way, the path of the strong is doomed to loneliness. Nietzsche himself was a lonely man. He never married, he had few friends, his teaching ability was not very attractive and he did not have many students who followed him. Was he happy in his life? We can't answer that.

It is precisely because these two views of Hegel and Nietzsche are opposed that they can comfort us in different circumstances.