[Your full name]
[Course name and code]
May, 21st, 2011
Necessity of Natural Expression Restrictions
Being the esoteric moralist Nietzsche is, there are doubtless persuasive reasons to stand his ground. However, it is inevitable to take on challenges from experts with various mentalities. Assuming that Nietzsche being the “higher man” he is, would he be convincing enough to conquer the debate of Natural Expression Restriction versus Anti-Morality? It can be considerably difficult for Nietzsche to compile facts about how natural expression is insulting the purity of humanity. As a matter of fact, majority of the moralists would believe that it is mandatory to adequately restrict human natural express such as violence, sexual impulses, and religious faith. On the other hand, without limitation to the natural expression will result in a society of disarray.
It is the duty of instinct to act out natural expressions. Diversity of expressions can be categorized and indicated with specific restrictions due to the inconsistent level of social tolerance. Laws exist to prohibit social disorder caused by improper natural expressions especially but not limited to violence. It is necessary to reduce violence in society although eliminating violent action is nearly impossible to execute. Human beings being the fittest of survival on earth have developed capital punishments to restrict this harmful action. Nietzsche believes that no restriction should be capped onto any natural expression including violence, which means capital punishment will be indefinitely eliminated in his theory and allow no room for its development. Nietzsche’s theory would not survive; because no person would yearn to allow a chaos community due to the fact that it violates the human survival instinct. Therefore, capital punishment is necessary to limit the natural express of violence. Capital punishment usually associates with ignorance as well as intolerance....
Please join StudyMode to read the full document