Every action that expresses the will to power positively is “moral,” while one that negates it is not.
Slave morality is morality that goes against the will to power.
Slave morality is a negation of anything outside the self, “no” is its creative deed.
Socrates bad because Nietzsche thinks that the tradition he started results in people be unable to “just act.” I.e. warriors et al cannot just do shit, cannot exercise their will to power without long consideration.
Socrates started doing negative morals. “What you’re doing is wrong because x and y, do this instead!”
The “slave” does not have the power to actually express themselves, rather, they can only accuse others of being wrong. The affirmation of themselves comes after the negation.
The master, meanwhile is a stand-up comedian, and “yes ands” whatever he or she wants, and lives accordingly.
Slave morality causes ressentiment, which is a negative feeling/suspicion against the strong and praise/love for the weak.
Perspectivism:
“Will to Power” = being is One, but being is always Different.
Will to Power = not something identical in all different living beings:
- is different in different things
- can be different to itself in one and the same thing
- affirmation of being’s multiplicity
- affirmation of the multiplicity of truth
Language homogenizes reality (by abstracting different things behind the same word). I.e. leaves: no leaf is identical to another, but they still use the same word.