I ask my students not merely to learn about but to do<\/i> philosophy; I thus ask them to be willing to disagree. For disagreements to be profitable, though, we need to try to see the issue from the standpoint of those with whom we disagree. When we do, we may realize that we are the ones who are mistaken; or, we can learn something about the foundations of our beliefs. My scholarly work is centered on a philosopher with whom I disagree about almost everything: Friedrich Nietzsche. Nietzsche\u2019s atheism has not led me to renounce my belief in God, and yet he is someone from whom I continue to learn a great deal.<\/p>\n
When Nietzsche railed against the slavishness of Christians and bestowed upon himself the title of \u201cAntichrist,\u201d I could be sure he took Christian belief seriously. His proclamation that \u201cGod is dead\u201d was warning as much as invitation; before walking along the philosopher\u2019s path, Nietzsche asks that we count the costs.<\/p>\n
Nietzsche thought something like Christian belief is needed to make sense of the idea that moral laws are absolute and objective, not relative and subjective. Therefore, when religion falls, morality falls. We might wonder whether this is such a bad thing. Shouldn\u2019t we stop being so judgmental and respect everyone as an equal?<\/p>\n
It\u2019s at this point that Nietzsche\u2019s challenge becomes clear. For he asks: Why should we <\/span>think everyone is to be respected as an equal? The only viable answer, he says, is one that invokes God: All human beings have an immortal soul. Following this line of logic, when God dies, so, too, does the conceit of basic, equal human worth.<\/p>\n It is undeniable that religious language is often invoked to defend the notion of basic human worth. My own Catholic faith tells me that all humans bear the image of God. America\u2019s founding document speaks of our being \u201ccreated equal.\u201d But why think the commitment to basic human equality only makes sense or has grounding if one believes in God?<\/p>\n To answer that question, first consider another: What is it about human beings that would make us all of equal basic worth? A satisfying response, according to Nietzsche, would need to cite a characteristic that is (1) shared equally by all human beings and that (2) confers substantial worth upon us. Now, it\u2019s easy to find characteristics of the first sort; for example, being a member of the species homo sapiens<\/i>. And it\u2019s equally easy to find properties of the second sort; for example, having the ability to think abstractly, work creatively, love selflessly.<\/p>\n But it is difficult \u2014 Nietzsche thought it was impossible \u2014 to find a suitably secular property with both these characteristics. (Consider: Not all members of the species homo sapiens<\/i> are equal in their ability to think, work, and love in these ways.) Given the impossibility of justifying equality in this way, Nietzsche concludes that human beings are not equal; some are higher, and others lower. <\/span><\/p>\n Not many of us will agree with Nietzsche\u2019s rejection of basic human equality. In our day of increasing intolerance and division, though, his challenge is timely: What grounds basic human equality? Christian belief provides an answer \u2014 one that Nietzsche rejected. Does the rejection of God lead to Nietzsche\u2019s conclusions? My journey with Nietzsche continues, but that is not a path I plan to take.<\/p>\n