The Normative Limitations of Nietzschean Ethics Compared to Buddhist Perspectives

Published on September 30, 2024

Ethics, as a normative discipline, transcends individual judgments of right and wrong to establish societal standards that govern interactions and responsibilities towards others. Friedrich Nietzsche’s ethical framework, rooted in concepts such as the "Will to Power" and "eternal recurrence," emphasises personal strength and the glorification of individual struggle. This self-centric approach prioritises the pursuit of personal greatness and resilience, potentially neglecting the broader ethical obligations individuals have towards society. In contrast, Buddhist ethics prioritise compassion and active efforts to alleviate suffering inflicted upon ourselves and others, addressing both personal and systemic sources of distress. This fundamental divergence raises critical questions about the adequacy of Nietzschean ethics in fostering a morally cohesive and compassionate society.

Nietzsche’s philosophy extols the virtues of relentless personal excellence and the assertion of one’s will, advocating for an individual-centric approach to ethics. While this can inspire remarkable personal growth and resilience, it often overlooks the systemic and structural causes of widespread suffering inflicted upon others, such as oppression, inequality, patriarchy, caste systems, war, genocide, and military-industrial complexes. By focusing solely on individual struggle and the elevation of personal power, Nietzschean ethics fail to interrogate and address the root causes of suffering that arise from societal and institutional injustices. This limited scope becomes starkly evident when considering the appropriation of Nietzsche’s ideas during the Nazification of Germany, where the emphasis on personal greatness was co-opted to justify collective atrocities, highlighting a fundamental flaw in neglecting ethical responsibilities towards others.

In conclusion, while Nietzschean ethics offer a robust framework for individual empowerment and resilience, they fall short in addressing the normative ethical responsibilities towards others that are essential for a just and compassionate society. The emphasis on personal struggle and the pursuit of greatness, without a corresponding focus on alleviating systemic suffering, can lead to the perpetuation of social injustices and collective harm. Buddhist ethics, with their focus on compassion and the active elimination of suffering inflicted upon ourselves and others, provide a more balanced and inclusive moral framework. This comparison underscores the necessity of integrating individual empowerment with profound ethical responsibility towards others, ensuring that the pursuit of personal excellence does not come at the expense of societal well-being and justice.