Book Two: A Criticism of the Highest Values That Have Prevailed Hitherto
III: General Remarks on Morality§298 “Morality for its own sake” — an important step in the denaturalisation of morals: in itself it appears as a final value. In this phase religion has generally become saturated with it: as, for instance, in the case of Judaism. It likewise goes through a phase in which it separates itself from religion and in which no God is “moral” enough for it: it then prefers the impersonal ideal –. This is how the case stands at present.
“Art for Art’s sake”: this is a similarly dangerous principle: by this means a false contrast is lent to things, it culminates in the slander of reality (“idealising” into the hateful). When an ideal is severed from reality, the latter is debased, impoverished and slandered. “Beauty for Beauty’s sake”, “Truth for Truth’s sake”, “Goodness for Goodness sake” -— these are three forms of an evil eye for reality.
Art, knowledge and morality are means: instead of recognising a life-promoting tendency in them, they have been associated with the opposite of Life, with “God” -— they have also been regarded as revelations of a higher world, which here and there transpires through them -—
“Beautiful” and “ugly”, “true” and “false”, “good” and “evil” -— these things are distinctions and antagonisms which betray the preservative and enhancing measures of Life, not necessarily of man alone, but of all stable and enduring organisms which take up a definite stand against their opponents. The war which thus ensues is the essential factor: it is a means of separating things, leading to stronger isolation -—
Once again, a passage that I don’t recall ever seeing in any of the finished books, but very perceptive. I am put in mind of Winston Churchill’s famous remark, “In wartime, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies.” Everything that is has a context.