Book Two: A Criticism of the Highest Values That Have Prevailed Hitherto
III: General Remarks on Morality§288 Morality regarded as an attempt at establishing human pride. The “Free will” theory is antireligious. Its ultimate objective is to bestow the right upon man to regard himself as the cause of his highest states and actions: it is a form of the growing feeling of pride.
Man feels his power, his “happiness,” as they say: there must be a will behind these states otherwise they do not belong to him. Virtue is an attempt at postulating a modicum of will, past or present, as the necessary antecedent to every exalted and strong feeling of happiness: if the will to certain actions is regularly present in consciousness, a sensation of power may be interpreted as its result. This is a merely psychological point of view based upon the false assumption that nothing belongs to us which we have not consciously willed. The whole of the teaching of responsibility relies upon the ingenuous psychological rule that the will is the only cause and that one must have been aware of having willed in order to be able to regard one’s self as a cause.
Then comes the counter-movement — that of the moral-philosophers. These men still labour under the delusion that a man is responsible only for what he has willed. The value of man is then made a moral value: thus morality becomes a causa prima; for this there must be some kind of principle in man and “free will” is posited as prima causa. The idea behind it is always this: If man is not a causa prima through his will, he must be irresponsible, therefore he does not come within the jurisdiction of morals, virtue or vice is automatic and mechanical -—
In short: in order that man may respect himself he must be capable of doing evil.