Nietzsche, in his writings, attacks the fundamental principles on which society, through history, has built its moral

system. Firstly, he criticizes the universal application of moral principles. In his view grounding of moral principles hinders individuality. For living by a singular moral codes encourages similar thoughts and actions among people so that they can live up to the standards that the code promises. It makes us followers instead of thinkers ( the sole attribute that differentiates us from other living beings). It makes us functions of a single herd. Nietzsche is also opposed to the imperative nature of a moral code which is a consequence of their universal application. Ethics and morals are what makes us better people, they are something we accept and foster. Grounding moral principles makes them imposing, an obligation to live by; completely defeating the purpose of morality. In this way it restricts our thoughts, our actions and our potential for we have a constant fear of failing to abide by the moral code that is placed above all else. Worst of all we begin to live life through others eyes and become someone we're not. Secondly, Nietzsche denounces selflessness , a value that our moral system holds as the epitome of goodness. Nietzsche says that selflessness is in principle impossible for we all constantly act out of our own self-interest. In his opinion, our actions and the thought process behind it is inevitably influenced by our history, culture and experiences . From the onset of our thought process to the moment we act, we constantly make choices that effect our final decision and for each choice we make we draw back on our own experiences and what we have learned from our history and culture. This train of thought is enough proof for the fact that selflessness is just a figment of our imagination, created to make us think of ourselves as better human being. But reality demands our selfishness that we must learn to appreciate for we act not for others but for ourselves. Then only shall we expand the horizons of our knowledge,our values and seek to become what we are. Thirdly, Nietzsche attacks the institution of sympathy and kindness. According to him, these feelings can never be genuine for they are almost always born out of pity or arrogance. For example, seeing a beggar on the street we give him money not because we care about him but because we are saddened

by his desperate condition. Thus, is it pity and empathy that compels us to help him. In another sense, sympathy accounts for nothing for we can never truly understand somebody's adversity and the only reason we offer help is to live up to a moral standard so as to not be judged crude by society or because it makes us feel better about ourselves. Lastly, sympathy in a way puts a taboo on suffering. However, suffering is what makes us stronger and makes us better human beings. Its essential for survival. Suffering and pleasure are two sides of the same coin for without one we can never truly appreciate the other.

Nietzsche's views, though unique, are very contradicting to how the real world functions. Moral principles are relative and innately a universal function: of a society, a culture, even a country The absence of a grounded moral system implies a world where each one has their own perspective of moral principles and thus everything we know of morality would lose meaning all together. In order for moral principles to make sense we must have a standard to compare our actions to and without such a standard morality cannot exist. Observing the world around us, it is hard to believe that selflessness does not exist. For we know that it is possible for people to put other people and causes before themselves and we have seen this . They can act outside their own person towards something else. A very simple but relevant example is that of a soldier. Men and women who dedicate their lives to service for their country. Who leave their homes and families ready to lay down their lives in the front lines of battle. To say that people like this act purely out self-interest is not just ignorant but almost definitely misguided. Lastly, Nietzsche's view of sympathy and kindness are so convoluted that they completely contradict entire institutions in the real world built on those very same principles: philanthropy and volunteerism . These were born out of the need to help others, out of a goal to achieve equality and not out of arrogance or pity. Suffering is important but not debilitating suffering. For example, there are entire societies in the world that live in extreme poverty without basic sustenance; there are people suffering

from genetic disorders resulting from the Chernobyl or Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear disasters. Such people desperately need a start and it is general empathy towards others that every human feels which compels us to help them. Nietzsche would respond to the objections in the following way. Nietzsche is not against morality but against grounding of moral principles. He does not criticize moral principles but the way society views and applies them. In his view, a singular moral code is not practical due to historical and cultural differences that have existed and will always exist in various societies. It is restricting and sets standards that are impossible to live up to. He has an appreciation for morality like every other existentialist but what he wants is a more flexible view on morality that will help us a achieve a higher humanity. To a layman , the actions in the objection above might give the illusion of selflessness but through less than a careful analysis it is easy to observe the absolute selfish motives behind them .It is true that a soldier fighting for his country makes incomparable, selfless sacrifices but these are a consequence of his decision to join the army, not the reason that determined his decision. He may have chosen the army because it provides sustenance for him and his family, because there is no other service more honorable than fighting for ones country or even out of fear of being ostracized by society for not being patriotic. None of these are motivated by, a non-existent selflessness, but a truly innate selfish desire. Whenever we think of improving somebody's condition we first have to look down upon them, consider them below us. Hence that need to help others ( the principle on which philanthropy and volunteerism are born out off)and the actions that we perform on that basis may portray kindness and sympathy but what really drives them is our pity . For without that pity the will to help would never exist. I think Nietzsche's response succeeds for he is able to justify that we can exist as moral beings sans a moral code. He is also able to sufficiently prove that selflessness and sympathy are fictitious instruments of our own creation. What really exits, what really defines our actions is a pretext built on our inherent selfishness and pity.